Quantum Computing (QC) is undergoing a high rate of development, investment and research devoted to its improvement. However, there is little consensus in the industry and wider literature as to what improvement might consist of beyond ambiguous statements of “more qubits” and “fewer errors”. Before one can decide how to improve something, it is first necessary to define the criteria for success: what are the metrics or statistics that are relevant to the problem? The lack of clarity surrounding this question has led to a rapidly developing capability with little consistency or standards present across the board. This paper lays out a framework by which any user, developer or researcher can define, articulate and justify the success criteria and associated benchmarks that have been used to solve their problem or make their claim.
doi:10.1007/978-3-031-63742-1_3
@inproceedings(Park++:2024-UCNC-method, author = "Jessica Park and Susan Stepney and Irene d'Amico", title = "A methodology for comparing and benchmarking quantum devices", pages = "28-42", doi = "10.1007/978-3-031-63742-1_3", crossref = "UCNC-2024" ) @proceedings(UCNC-2024, title = "UCNC 2024, Pohang, South Korea, June 2024", booktitle = "UCNC 2024, Pohang, South Korea, June 2024", series = "LNCS", volume = 14776, publisher = "Springer", year = 2024 )