Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Compilation Routing Architecture
Quantum Gate Fidelity Benchmarking
Superconducting Qubits
Inter-branch message transfer on superconducting quantum processors: a multi-architecture benchmark
arXiv
Authors: Cameron V. Cogburn
Year
2026
Paper ID
3255
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
158
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We treat inter-branch message transfer in a Wigner's-friend circuit as a practical benchmark for near-term superconducting quantum processors. Implementing Violaris' unitary message-transfer primitive, we compare performance across IBM Eagle, Nighthawk, and Heron (r2/r3) processors for message sizes up to n=32, without error mitigation. We study three message families - sparse (one-hot), half-weight, and dense - and measure conditional string success pall=Pr\(P=μmid R=0\), memory erasure after uncomputation, and correlation diagnostics (branch contrast and bitwise mutual information). The sparse family compiles to essentially constant two-qubit depth, yielding a depth-controlled probe of device noise: at n=32 we observe pall spanning approx0.07 to approx0.68 across backends. In contrast, half and dense messages incur rapidly growing routing overhead, and transpiler-seed variability becomes a practical limitation near the coherence frontier. We further report an amplitude sweep (no-amplification test) and a divergence "cousins" sweep that quantifies degradation with branch-conditioned complexity. All data and figure-generation scripts are released.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Superconducting Qubits research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We treat inter-branch message transfer in a Wigner's-friend circuit as a practical benchmark for near-term superconducting quantum processors.
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.