PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
April 7, 20260 citationsOpen Access

Large-Scale CL-QUBO Compiled Scaling and Backend Eligibility for Fault Tree Circuits Across IBM Proxy Backends

View Full Paper
DPDevin Peters

Key Points

  • The aim is to assess the compiled scaling behavior and eligibility of CL-QUBO fault tree circuits across various backends and sizes.
  • Evaluated scaling behavior of CL-QUBO circuits with sizes from 25 to 100 basic events.
  • Generated and classified 94 fault tree instances across target sizes.
  • Compiled instances across three IBM proxy backends with varying successes.
  • Implemented a four-stage topology recovery program to enhance instance generation.
  • 2,454 successful compile rows across three IBM backends.
  • FakeFez and FakeMarrakesh supported 70 of 94 instances; FakeTorino supported 66.
  • Compilation success was full at n = 25 to n = 45, with failures at larger sizes; complete failure at n = 75 and n = 100.

Abstract

This paper evaluates the compiled scaling behavior and multi-backend eligibility of constraint-level quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (CL-QUBO) fault tree circuits at target sizes from 25 to 100 basic events across three IBM proxy backends (FakeFez, FakeMarrakesh, and FakeTorino). The study extends the feasibility roadmap established through n = 20 basic events in prior work by generating, classifying, selecting, and compiling 94 fault tree instances across nine target sizes. Each compile row represents one (instance, backend, transpiler seed, QAOA depth) tuple that completed transpilation without error. The initial 270-instance generated pool produced only Class A (56) and Class D (214) topology instances, with Class B and Class C entirely absent and Class A missing at n = 75. A four-stage topology recovery program generated 2,124 additional instances through progressively targeted search strategies: balanced widening (v1, 288 instances), expanded parameter ranges (v2, 378 instances), OR-heavy restructuring (v3, 810 instances), and a final AND-heavy Class B closure sweep (v4, 648 instances). The OR-heavy v3 sweep recovered the first Class C instances (4) and several boundary Other cases (3), while the AND-heavy v4 sweep still produced only Class A (77) and Class D (571) with zero Class B. The merged selected cohort of 94 instances yielded 2,454 successful compile rows across the three backends. FakeFez and FakeMarrakesh each supported successful compilation for 70 of 94 selected instances, while FakeTorino supported 66 of 94. The compiled frontier exhibited a clean size-dependent pattern: full selected-instance success from n = 25 through n = 45, backend-specific failures emerging at n = 50 and n = 60, and complete compilation failure for all 23 selected instances at n = 75 and n = 100, where the CL-QUBO circuit qubit requirements exceeded the coupling map capacity of all three backends (133 qubits for FakeTorino, 156 for FakeFez and FakeMarrakesh). This paper does not claim quantum advantage.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Devin Peters (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d49f8ab33cc4c35a227f50https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19274062
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper