Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper investigates the use of random quantum circuits as benchmarks for hypergraph partitioning, a key step in distributed quantum computing (DQC) compilers. They find that random circuits significantly distort partitioning performance evaluation compared to real algorithmic circuits and structured generated circuits, inflating cut costs, altering scaling trends, and changing the relative ranking of partitioning strategies. Structured generated circuits, on the other hand, more closely approximate real workload behavior.
Random quantum circuits, a common proxy for real workloads, can mislead the design of distributed quantum computing compilers by distorting hypergraph partitioning performance.
Hypergraph partitioning is a central component of distributed quantum computing (DQC) compilers. However, due to the limited size of available quantum benchmark suites, many partitioning studies rely on random quantum circuits as evaluation workloads. In this work, we investigate whether such benchmarking practices provide a faithful assessment of partitioner performance. We evaluate a diverse set of state-of-the-art hypergraph partitioning strategies across three circuit origins: real algorithmic circuits, structured generated circuits, and fully random circuits. Our results show that random circuits significantly distort partitioning evaluation. They inflate cut costs, alter scaling trends across QPU counts and circuit sizes, and change the relative ranking of partitioning strategies. In contrast, structured generated circuits exhibit substantially lower distortion, more closely approximating real workload behaviour in cost, scaling, and strategy rankings. These findings demonstrate that benchmark selection directly influences methodological conclusions in DQC research and that random circuits may provide misleading guidance for compiler design.
