3.8 Proceedings Paper

Functional simulation of real-time quantum control software

出版社

IEEE COMPUTER SOC
DOI: 10.1109/QCE53715.2022.00076

关键词

real-time control software; signal simulation; software testing; quantum computing

资金

  1. EPiQC, an NSF Expeditions in Computing [1832377]
  2. Office of the Director of National Intelligence -Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity through an ArmyResearch Office [W911NF-16-10082]
  3. NSF STAQ project [1818914]
  4. Division of Computing and Communication Foundations
  5. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr [1832377] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Modern quantum computers heavily rely on real-time control systems for operation. However, testing real-time control software is often complex, and existing simulation software is not practical for software testing. To address this issue, we developed an interactive simulator that can simulate signals at the application programming interface level. Our simulation infrastructure achieves an average 6.9 times faster simulation speed compared to hardware execution, with an average accuracy of 97.9% in simulating the position of the timeline cursor when the appropriate configuration is chosen.
Modern quantum computers rely heavily on real-time control systems for operation. Software for these systems is becoming increasingly more complex due to the demand for more features and more real-time devices to control. Unfortunately, testing real-time control software is often a complex process, and existing simulation software is not usable or practical for software testing. For this purpose, we implemented an interactive simulator that simulates signals at the application programming interface level. We show that our simulation infrastructure simulates kernels 6.9 times faster on average compared to execution on hardware, while the position of the timeline cursor is simulated with an average accuracy of 97.9% when choosing the appropriate configuration.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据