Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Benchmarking Quantum Computers via Protocols, Comparing IBM's Heron vs IBM's Eagle
arXiv
Authors: Nitay Mayo, Tal Mor, Yossi Weinstein
Year
2026
Paper ID
25817
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
141
Citations
N/A
Abstract
As quantum computing hardware rapidly advances, objectively evaluating the capabilities and error rates of new processors remains a critical challenge for the field. A clear and realistic understanding of current quantum performance is essential to guide research priorities and drive meaningful progress. In this work, we apply and extend a protocol-based benchmarking methodology (presented in arXiv:2505.12441) that utilizes well-defined quantumness thresholds. By evaluating performance at protocol level rather then the gate level, this approach provides a transparent and intuitive assessment of whether specific quantum processors, or isolated sub-chips within them, can demonstrate a practical quantum advantage. To illustrate the utility of this method, we compare two generations of IBM quantum computers: the older Eagle architecture and the newer Heron architecture. Our findings reveal the genuine operational strengths and limitations of these devices, demonstrating substantial performance improvements in the newer Heron generation.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- As quantum computing hardware rapidly advances, objectively evaluating the capabilities and error rates of new processors remains a critical challenge for the field.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.