Advertisement

SAT-based {CNOT, T} Quantum Circuit Synthesis

  • Giulia Meuli
  • Mathias Soeken
  • Giovanni De Micheli
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11106)

Abstract

The prospective of practical quantum computers has lead researchers to investigate automatic tools to program them. A quantum program is modeled as a Clifford+T quantum circuit that needs to be optimized in order to comply with quantum technology constraints. Most of the optimization algorithms aim at reducing the number of T gates. Nevertheless, a secondary optimization objective should be to minimize the number of two-qubit operations (the CNOT gates) as they show lower fidelity and higher error rate when compared to single-qubit operations. We have developed an exact SAT-based algorithm for quantum circuit rewriting that aims at reducing CNOT gates without increasing the number of T gates. Our algorithm finds the minimum {CNOT, T} circuit for a given phase polynomial description of a unitary transformation. Experiments confirm a reduction of CNOT in T-optimized quantum circuits. We synthesize quantum circuits for all single-target gates whose control functions are one of the representatives of the 48 spectral equivalence classes of all 5-input Boolean functions. Our experiments show an average CNOT reduction of 26.84%.

Keywords

Quantum computing Clifford+T circuits SAT-based rewriting algorithm 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by H2020-ERC-2014-ADG 669354 CyberCare, the Swiss National Science Foundation (200021-169084 MAJesty), and the ICT COST Action IC1405.

References

  1. 1.
    Amy, M., Maslov, D., Mosca, M.: Polynomial-time \(T\)-depth optimization of Clifford+\(T\) circuits via matroid partitioning. IEEE Trans. CAD Integr. Circ. Syst. 33(10), 1476–1489 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Amy, M., Maslov, D., Mosca, M., Roetteler, M.: A meet-in-the-middle algorithm for fast synthesis of depth-optimal quantum circuits. IEEE Trans. CAD Integr. Circ. Syst. 32(6), 818–830 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Amy, M., Azimzadeh, P., Mosca, M.: On the CNOT-complexity of CNOT-phase circuits. arXiv preprint 1712.01859v1 (2017)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Biere, A., Heule, M., van Maaren, H., Walsh, T. (eds.): Handbook of Satisfiability. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boixo, S., et al.: Characterizing quantum supremacy in near-term devices. arXiv preprint arXiv:1608.00263v3 (2017)
  6. 6.
    Castelvecchi, D.: Quantum computers ready to leap out of the lab in 2017. Nat. News 541(7635), 9 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    de Moura, L., Bjørner, N.: Z3: an efficient SMT solver. In: Ramakrishnan, C.R., Rehof, J. (eds.) TACAS 2008. LNCS, vol. 4963, pp. 337–340. Springer, Heidelberg (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-78800-3_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    De Vos, A., Van Rentergem, Y.: Young subgroups for reversible computers. Adv. Math. Commun. 2(2), 183–200 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Edwards, C.R.: The application of the Rademacher-Walsh transform to Boolean function classification and threshold logic synthesis. IEEE Trans. Comput. 24(1), 48–62 (1975)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Harrow, A.W., Montanaro, A.: Quantum computational supremacy. Nature 549(7671), 203–209 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hill, S., Wootters, W.K.: Entanglement of a pair of quantum bits. Phys. Rev. Lett. 78(26), 5022 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    IBM: IBM builds its most powerful universal quantum computing processors (2017). Press release by IBM, posted online 17 May 2017Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Intel: Intel delivers 17-qubit superconducting chip with advanced packaging to QuTech (2017). Press release by Intel, posted online 10 October 2017Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kelly, J.: A preview of Bristlecone, Google’s new quantum processor. Google Research Blog (2018)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Knight, W.: IBM rasises the bar with a 50-qubit quantum computer. Sighted at MIT Review Technology (2017). https://www.technologyreview.com/s/609451/ibm-raises-the-bar-with-a-50-qubit-quantum-computer
  16. 16.
    Knuth, D.E.: The Art of Computer Programming, vol. 3, 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley, Redwood City (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Linke, N.M., Maslov, D., Roetteler, M., Debnath, S., Figgatt, C., Landsman, K.A., Wright, K.E., Monroe, C.: Experimental comparison of two quantum computing architectures. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 114(13), 3305–3310 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Meuli, G., et al.: Estimating single-target gate T-count using spectral classification. In: International Workshop on Logic and Synthesis (2018)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meuli, G., Soeken, M., Roetteler, M., Wiebe, N., De Micheli, G.: A best-fit mapping algorithm to facilitate ESOP-decomposition in Clifford+T quantum network synthesis. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Asia and South Pacific Design Automation Conference, pp. 664–669. IEEE Press (2018)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nam, Y.S., Ross, N.J., Su, Y., Childs, A.M., Maslov, D.: Automated optimization of large quantum circuits with continuous parameters. arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.07345 (2017)
  21. 21.
    Patel, K.N., Markov, I.L., Hayes, J.P.: Efficient synthesis of linear reversible circuits. arXiv preprint quant-ph/0302002 (2003)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Shende, V.V., Markov, I.L., Bullock, S.S.: Minimal universal two-qubit controlled-not-based circuits. Phys. Rev. A 69(6), 062321 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Soeken, M., Frehse, S., Wille, R., Drechsler, R.: RevKit: a toolkit for reversible circuit design. Multiple Valued Logic Soft Comput. 18(1), 55–65 (2012)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Soeken, M., Roetteler, M., Wiebe, N., De Micheli, G.: Design automation and design space exploration for quantum computers. In: Design, Automation and Test in Europe, pp. 470–475 (2017)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Soeken, M., Roetteler, M., Wiebe, N., De Micheli, G.: Hierarchical reversible logic synthesis using LUTs. In: Design Automation Conference, pp. 78:1–78:6 (2017)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giulia Meuli
    • 1
  • Mathias Soeken
    • 1
  • Giovanni De Micheli
    • 1
  1. 1.École polytechnique fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)LausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations