Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Machine Learning
Faster and Better Quantum Software Testing through Specification Reduction and Projective Measurements
arXiv
Authors: Noah H. Oldfield, Christoph Laaber, Tao Yue, Shaukat Ali
Year
2024
Paper ID
67328
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
192
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Quantum computing promises polynomial and exponential speedups in many domains, such as unstructured search and prime number factoring. However, quantum programs yield probabilistic outputs from exponentially growing distributions and are vulnerable to quantum-specific faults. Existing quantum software testing (QST) approaches treat quantum superpositions as classical distributions. This leads to two major limitations when applied to quantum programs: (1) an exponentially growing sample space distribution and (2) failing to detect quantum-specific faults such as phase flips. To overcome these limitations, we introduce a QST approach, which applies a reduction algorithm to a quantum program specification. The reduced specification alleviates the limitations (1) by enabling faster sampling through quantum parallelism and (2) by performing projective measurements in the mixed Hadamard basis. Our evaluation of 143 quantum programs across four categories demonstrates significant improvements in test runtimes and fault detection with our reduction approach. Average test runtimes improved from 169.9s to 11.8s, with notable enhancements in programs with large circuit depths (383.1s to 33.4s) and large program specifications (464.8s to 7.7s). Furthermore, our approach increases mutation scores from 54.5% to 74.7%, effectively detecting phase flip faults that non-reduced specifications miss. These results underline our approach's importance to improve QST efficiency and effectiveness.
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.