← All Projects

QCO-Integration: End-to-End Quantum Compilation Analysis

Quantum ComputingCompilersPythonHardware ValidationCross-Layer

Status: Submitted for publication

GitHub: github.com/rylanmalarchick/qco-integration

Paper: arXiv:2601.20871 — "End-to-End Fidelity Analysis of Quantum Circuit Optimization: From Gate-Level Transformations to Pulse-Level Control"

Overview

This project integrates my quantum-circuit-optimizer (C++) with QubitPulseOpt (Python) to analyze how gate-level optimization affects pulse-level fidelity across the full compilation stack. Unlike existing work that evaluates optimization passes in isolation, this framework measures end-to-end fidelity from OpenQASM input to simulated pulse execution.

Key Research Question: Do gate-level optimization metrics (gate count, circuit depth) reliably predict pulse-level fidelity? Our analysis reveals that pulse duration—not gate count—is the strongest fidelity predictor (r=-0.74).

Key Results

Metric Value
Circuits analyzed 371
Mean gate reduction 23.1%
Max gate reduction 96.2%
Mean process fidelity 0.680 ± 0.224
Hardware validation IQM Garnet (20 qubits)
Job success rate 100% (8/8)
Tests 252

Optimization Pass Effectiveness

Pass Gates Removed % Improved
Gate Cancellation 14,024 68%
Rotation Merging 6,512 29%
Identity Elimination 55 9%
Commutation 0 (enables others) 0%

Fidelity Correlations

Parameter Pearson r
Pulse duration -0.743 0.553
Input gates -0.606 0.368
Input depth -0.585 0.342
Input qubits -0.569 0.324

Architecture

Stage Description
1. Parse & Validate Extract initial metrics (gates, depth, qubits)
2. Optimize (C++) Apply configurable pass sequence, track per-pass gate changes
3. SABRE Routing Map to hardware topology, insert SWAP gates
4. Pulse Compilation Native gate decomposition, pulse schedule generation
5. Lindblad Noise Simulation T₁/T₂ decoherence modeling, process and state fidelity computation

Hardware Validation

Validated simulation results on the IQM Resonance Garnet 20-qubit superconducting processor:

Circuit Gates (Orig → Opt) Reduction Fidelity (Orig) Fidelity (Opt)
GHZ 4q 4 → 4 0% 0.494 0.469
GHZ 8q 8 → 8 0% 0.406 0.375
GHZ 12q 12 → 12 0% 0.256 0.288 (+12%)
QFT 4q 30 → 9 70% 0.100 0.088

Key Findings:

  • Optimizer correctly identifies GHZ circuits as already minimal (0% reduction)
  • QFT circuits achieve 70% gate reduction with significant rotation merging
  • 12-qubit GHZ showed 12% fidelity improvement after optimization

Benchmark Corpus

Circuit Type Qubit Range Description
GHZ states 2–12 Entanglement preparation
QFT 2–8 Quantum Fourier Transform
QAOA configurable MaxCut optimization
Random 4–8 qubits, depth 5–30 Stress testing

Technology Stack

Category Technology
Languages Python 3.11, C++17
Integration Subprocess via OpenQASM/JSON
Simulation Lindblad master equation (IQM Garnet params)
Hardware IQM Resonance (free tier cloud access)
Testing 252 tests, mypy, ruff
Principles AgentBible

Research Impact

This work provides actionable guidance for quantum compiler design:

  1. Prioritize cancellation: Gate cancellation provides the largest fidelity gains (68% improvement rate)
  2. Commutation enables cancellation: While commutation provides no direct reduction, it creates opportunities for subsequent passes
  3. Minimize pulse duration: The strong correlation (r=-0.74) emphasizes decoherence-aware optimization over pure gate count reduction
  4. Optimal pass sequence: cancel → commute → rotate

Links


This project completes my full-stack quantum compilation pipeline: from high-level circuits through optimization, routing, and noise-robust pulse synthesis.