CyberIntel ⬡ News
★ Saved ◆ Cyber Reads
← Back ◌ Quantum Computing Mar 31, 2026

Benchmarking Quantum Computers via Protocols -- Comparing Superconducting and Ion-Trap Quantum Technology

arXiv Quantum Archived Mar 31, 2026 ✓ Full text saved

arXiv:2603.27397v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Superconducting and Ion-Trap quantum architectures are common in the current landscape of the quantum computing field, each with distinct characteristics and operational constraints. Understanding and measuring the underlying quantumness of these devices is essential for assessing their readiness for practical applications and guiding future progress and research. Building on earlier work (Meirom, Mor, Weinstein Arxiv 2505.12441), we utilize a benc

Full text archived locally
✦ AI Summary · Claude Sonnet


    Quantum Physics [Submitted on 28 Mar 2026] Benchmarking Quantum Computers via Protocols -- Comparing Superconducting and Ion-Trap Quantum Technology Nitay Mayo, Tal Mor, Yossi Weinstein Superconducting and Ion-Trap quantum architectures are common in the current landscape of the quantum computing field, each with distinct characteristics and operational constraints. Understanding and measuring the underlying quantumness of these devices is essential for assessing their readiness for practical applications and guiding future progress and research. Building on earlier work (Meirom, Mor, Weinstein Arxiv 2505.12441), we utilize a benchmarking strategy applicable for comparing these two architectures by measuring "quantumness" directly on optimal sub-chips. Distinct from existing metrics, our approach employs rigorous binary fidelity thresholds derived from the classical limits of state transfer. This enable us to definitively establish quantum advantage of a designated sub-region. We apply this quality assurance methodology to industry leading platforms from both technologies. This comparison provides a protocol-based evaluation of quantumness advantage, revealing not only the strengths and weaknesses of each tested chip and its sub-chips but also offering a common language for their assessment. By abstracting away technical differences in the final result, we demonstrate a benchmarking strategy that bridges the gap between disparate quantum-circuit technologies, enabling fair performance comparisons and establishing a critical foundation for evaluating future claims of quantum advantage. Comments: 33 pages, 31 figures Subjects: Quantum Physics (quant-ph) Cite as: arXiv:2603.27397 [quant-ph]   (or arXiv:2603.27397v1 [quant-ph] for this version)   https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.27397 Focus to learn more Submission history From: Nitay Mayo [view email] [v1] Sat, 28 Mar 2026 20:29:23 UTC (7,296 KB) Access Paper: HTML (experimental) view license Current browse context: quant-ph < prev   |   next > new | recent | 2026-03 References & Citations INSPIRE HEP NASA ADS Google Scholar Semantic Scholar Export BibTeX Citation Bookmark Bibliographic Tools Bibliographic and Citation Tools Bibliographic Explorer Toggle Bibliographic Explorer (What is the Explorer?) Connected Papers Toggle Connected Papers (What is Connected Papers?) Litmaps Toggle Litmaps (What is Litmaps?) scite.ai Toggle scite Smart Citations (What are Smart Citations?) Code, Data, Media Demos Related Papers About arXivLabs Which authors of this paper are endorsers? | Disable MathJax (What is MathJax?)
    💬 Team Notes
    Article Info
    Source
    arXiv Quantum
    Category
    ◌ Quantum Computing
    Published
    Mar 31, 2026
    Archived
    Mar 31, 2026
    Full Text
    ✓ Saved locally
    Open Original ↗