Quick Navigation
Topics
Neutral Atom Rydberg Quantum Computing
Quantum Gate Fidelity Benchmarking
Quantum Simulation
Many-body Quantum Score: a scalable benchmark for digital and analog quantum processors and first test on a commercial neutral atom device
arXiv
Authors: Harold Erbin, Pierre-Louis Burdeau, Corentin Bertrand, Thomas Ayral, Grégoire Misguich
Year
2026
Paper ID
4151
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
119
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We propose the Many-body Quantum Score (MBQS), a practical and scalable application-level benchmark protocol designed to evaluate the capabilities of quantum processing units (QPUs)--both gate-based and analog--for simulating many-body quantum dynamics. MBQS quantifies performance by identifying the maximum number of qubits with which a QPU can reliably reproduce correlation functions of the transverse-field Ising model following a specific quantum quench. This paper presents the MBQS protocol and highlights its design principles, supported by analytical insights, classical simulations, and experimental data. It also displays results obtained with Ruby, an analog QPU based on Rydberg atoms developed by the Pasqal company. These findings demonstrate MBQS's potential as a robust and informative tool for benchmarking near-term quantum devices for many-body physics.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We propose the Many-body Quantum Score (MBQS), a practical and scalable application-level benchmark protocol designed to evaluate the capabilities of quantum processing units...
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.