Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study investigates the challenges of quantum circuit synthesis for fault-tolerant computing, focusing on the limitations of a 44.8M-parameter encoder-decoder transformer in achieving exact functional equivalence while minimizing non-Clifford resources. The authors find that while a hybrid approach can achieve perfect fidelity on small parameterized circuits, the model's performance degrades sharply on larger Clifford+T circuits due to autoregressive drift, which leads to significant divergence in outputs. Despite implementing strategies to mitigate this drift, such as generating multiple candidates and scaling training data, the results reveal a persistent decline in exact equivalence as circuit complexity increases, highlighting the critical trade-off between approximate and exact outputs in quantum synthesis.
Autoregressive drift in transformer models leads to a dramatic drop in exact equivalence for complex quantum circuits, revealing a fundamental limitation in current synthesis methods.
Quantum circuit optimization for fault-tolerant computing requires exact functional equivalence while minimizing expensive non-Clifford resources such as T gates. We study this problem using a compact 44.8M-parameter encoder-decoder transformer with structured circuit tokenization, evaluating on parameterized circuits (2-6 qubits) and Clifford+T circuits (3-6 qubits). On parameterized circuits, a hybrid approach -- structure from the transformer, angles from classical optimization -- achieves median fidelity 1.000 on 3-6 qubit circuits. On Clifford+T circuits, where all gates are discrete and no post-processing is possible, the model learns valid syntax and accurate T-Count statistics, yet exact equivalence degrades sharply with target length -- from 88% on circuits with <=9 gates to near zero beyond 26 gates. We trace this failure to autoregressive drift: early-token divergence cascading irrecoverably through left-to-right decoding. Two levers partially mitigate the drift: inference-time strategies that generate multiple candidates and select via equivalence verification raise exact-match rates from 7% to 22.5%, while scaling training data by 2.5x pushes them to 39.5%. Yet the degradation with target length persists -- even with more data, exact equivalence drops from 94% on short circuits to under 4% beyond 26 gates. The contrast between settings is our central finding: when approximate outputs can be rescued by post-processing, the transformer succeeds; when exact discrete correctness is required, autoregressive drift limits reliability, with both inference-time search and data scaling as effective levers while training-side fine-tuning and model-level diversification are not.
