Scalable Equivalence Checking and Verification of Shallow Quantum Circuits
Nengkun Yu, Xuan Du Trinh, Thomas Reps
Abstract
This paper concerns the problem of checking if two shallow (i.e., constant-depth) quantum circuits perform equivalent computations. Equivalence checking is a fundamental correctness question—needed, e.g., for ensuring that transformations applied to a quantum circuit do not alter its behavior. For quantum circuits, the problem is challenging because a straightforward representation on a classical computer of each circuit’s quantum state can require time and space that are exponential in the number of qubits n . The paper presents Projection-Based Equivalence Checking (PBEC), which provides decision procedures for two variants of the equivalence-checking problem. Both can be carried out on a classical computer in time and space that, for any fixed depth, is linear in n . Our key insight is that local projections can serve as constraints that fully characterize the output state of a shallow quantum circuit. The output state is the unique quantum state that satisfies all the constraints. Beyond equivalence checking, we show how to use the constraint representation to check a class of assertions, both statically and at run time. Our assertion-checking methods are sound and complete for assertions expressed as conjunctions of local projections. Our experiments showed that computing the constraint representation of a random 100-qubit 1D circuit of depth 6 takes 129.64 seconds. Equivalence checking between two random 100-qubit 1D circuits of depth 3 requires 4.46 seconds for fixed input | 0 〉 ⊗ 100 , and no more than 31.96 seconds for arbitrary inputs. Computing the constraint description for a random 100-qubit circuit of depth 3 takes 6.99 seconds for a 2D structure, compared to 10.67 seconds for a circuit with arbitrary connectivity. At depth 2, equivalence checking takes 0.20 seconds for fixed input and 0.44 seconds for arbitrary input, with similar performance for both 2D and arbitrary-connectivity circuits.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 9767cfe8-982c-421d-aaef-6c5ddcedb2c9Builds on15
- Silq: a high-level quantum language with safe uncomputation and intuitive semanticsBenjamin Bichsel, Maximilian Baader, Timon Gehr, Martin T. VechevPLDI 2020 · 145 citations
- Projection-based runtime assertions for testing and debugging Quantum programsGushu Li, Li Zhou, Nengkun Yu, Yufei Ding et al.OOPSLA 2020 · 120 citations
- A verified optimizer for Quantum circuitsKesha Hietala, Robert Rand, Shih-Han Hung, Xiaodi Wu et al.POPL 2021 · 111 citations
- Quantum abstract interpretationNengkun Yu, Jens PalsbergPLDI 2021 · 69 citations
- Quartz: superoptimization of Quantum circuitsMingkuan Xu, Zikun Li, Oded Padon, Sina Lin et al.PLDI 2022 · 57 citations
Related papers
- Equivalence checking paradigms in quantum circuit design: a case studyTom Peham, Lukas Burgholzer, Robert WilleDAC 2022 · 16 citations
- Quantum Depth in the Random Oracle ModelAtul Singh Arora, Andrea Coladangelo, Matthew Coudron, Alexandru Gheorghiu et al.STOC 2023 · 11 citations
- The Power of Simulation for Equivalence Checking in Quantum ComputingLukas Burgholzer, Robert WilleDAC 2020 · 25 citations
- Learning Shallow Quantum CircuitsHsin-Yuan Huang, Yunchao Liu, Michael Broughton, Isaac Kim et al.STOC 2024 · 21 citations
- Classical Simulation of Peaked Shallow Quantum CircuitsSergey Bravyi, David Gosset, Yinchen LiuSTOC 2024 · 4 citations
