literature
Literature
Authors
Jobs
Seminars
Conferences
DataBETA

ArtA: Automating Design Space Exploration of Spin Qubit Architectures

Jul 25, 2024
21 pages
e-Print:
View in:
pdf
reference search1 citation

Citations per year

20222023202401
Abstract: (arXiv)
In the fast-paced field of quantum computing, identifying the architectural characteristics that will enable quantum processors to achieve high performance across a diverse range of quantum algorithms continues to pose a significant challenge. Given the extensive and costly nature of experimentally testing different designs, this paper introduces the first Design Space Exploration (DSE) for quantum-dot spin-qubit architectures. Utilizing the upgraded SpinQ compilation framework, this study explores a substantial design space comprising 29,312 spin-qubit-based architectures and applies an innovative optimization tool, ArtA (Artificial Architect), to speed up the design space traversal. ArtA can leverage 17 optimization configurations, significantly reducing exploration times by up to 99.1% compared to a traditional brute force approach while maintaining the same result quality. After a comprehensive evaluation of best-matching optimization configurations per quantum circuit, ArtA suggests specific and universal architectural features that provide optimal performance across the examined circuits. Our work demonstrates that the synergy between DSE methodologies and optimization algorithms can effectively be deployed to provide useful suggestions to quantum processor designers.
Note:
  • 21 pages, 4 figures, 6 tables
  • of optimization methods
    • A. Comparison
    • In this first part of our results, we will address the third research question stated in Section III, which is about finding the best performant optimization method according to our
      • ArtA metrics defined in Section VI
        • B. The
        • (described in Appendix X B) with specific quantum circuits
          • As explained previously, the denominator of Equation 6 is obtained beforehand by measuring the time taken by the brute force approach. We observe overall that for each quantum circuit, on average, all optimization methods find the solution in less time than brute-forcing (values under 100). For a better interpretation of the numbers on the table, a 50 means the particular optimization configuration of ArtA takes half the time
            • [2]
              All time metrics were retrieved by running ArtA with Python 3.10.8 singlethreaded on aMacBook Pro, using a 3.1 GHz Quad Core Intel i7 processor and 16 GB of RAM. of brute forcing all architecture, and 100 means that it takes the same time
            • Multiple optimization methods greatly outperform the random sampling (RS column), as expected. The best performance is at 0.9% on average for QV10 with SA [20, 3], meaning that ArtA, with this optimization method configuration and quantum circuit, takes only 0.9% relative time-to-solution, on average, of the total brute force time to find the architecture with the highest ESP
              • We calculated based on Table III that, on average, for all optimization methods, ArtA was able to decrease the exploration time by 80.6%. Overall, different optimization methods clearly show varied performance across their respective columns. However, the performance differences among various hyper-parameter settings within a single optimization method are less distinct. In a performance order, we can observe GA being first, followed by BO, ACO, and, lastly, SA
                • More specifically, GA, with a population size of 50 and a mutation probability of 0.15, finds the highest ESP the fastest at 11.9% relative time-to-solution, on average, with BO [EI, MA] coming close at 12.1%. Lastly, in 86.7% of the cases, a top 5 optimization method configuration in the worst row is also a top 5 optimization method configuration in the mean row, which indicates the consistency of the results across the ten runs. To further support our findings, next, we will assess the relative calls-to-solution metric
                  • The results of the relative calls-to-solution metric for reaching the highest ESP are given in Table IV. We observe overall that for each quantum circuit, all optimization methods were able to find the highest ESP architecture in fewer compiler calls than brute-forcing through all 29, 312 architectures
                    • Once again, for a better interpretation of the numbers on the