← Back to Dashboard

19. Quantum Chromodynamics

Stage C - Calibrated

Trotter lattice gauge with 20-run ensemble (Wilson=0.47 ± 0.066, 95% CI). 131k physical qubits, 9 logical.

Algorithm
Trotter Lattice Gauge Simulation
Logical Qubits
4
Framework
Modern QDK (qsharp 1.27+)

Resource Estimation (Azure Quantum RE)

Physical Qubits
131.1k
Logical Qubits
9
T-Gates
0
Rotations
9
Runtime
320.4μs

Resource Breakdown

Calibration Evidence (20-Run Ensemble)

Mean Value
0.470
95% CI
± 0.066
Runs
20
Std Dev
0.150

Noise Resilience (Depolarizing Simulation)

Ideal outcome: [Zero, Zero, Zero, Zero] (51% probability)

p = 0.001
83.3%
p = 0.01
79.9%
p = 0.05
51.4%

Cross-Platform Emulator Results (100 shots)

Quantinuum H2-1E
[0, 0, 0, 0]
49% of shots
Rigetti QVM
[0, 0, 0, 0]
46% of shots
✓ Cross-platform agreement: both simulators find the same dominant outcome
H2-1E Distribution
Rigetti QVM Distribution

Troyer Utility-Scale Classification

Quantum Simulation (Native Advantage Potential)
Quantum Speedup
Exponential for real-time dynamics (sign problem)
Classical Competitor
Lattice QCD (Euclidean, limited to static properties)
Honest Assessment (Troyer Framework)

Lattice gauge theory is arguably the strongest utility candidate. Classical lattice QCD cannot simulate real-time dynamics due to the sign problem. Quantum simulation of gauge theories could enable predictions impossible classically but requires millions of logical qubits for realistic lattice sizes.

Multi-Model Resource Comparison

Physical qubit requirements across 6 qubit technologies × 2 QEC schemes (inspired by Troyer Architecture Series, Part 3).

■ Gate-based + Surface (blue)■ Majorana + Surface (green)■ Majorana + Floquet (light green)
Qubit ModelQECPhysical QubitsLogical Qubits
Trapped Ion (μs, 1e-4)surface_code5509
Trapped Ion (μs, 1e-3)surface_code1,7829
Majorana (ns, 1e-6)surface_code7,3629
Superconducting (ns, 1e-4)surface_code20,4509
Majorana (ns, 1e-6) (Floquet)floquet_code25,4289
Superconducting (ns, 1e-3)surface_code131,0589
Majorana (ns, 1e-4)surface_code631,4589
Majorana (ns, 1e-4) (Floquet)floquet_code656,3889

Problem Documentation

Problem 19 · Quantum Chromodynamics

Overview

Nonperturbative quantum chromodynamics (QCD) remains one of the central frontiers in high-energy physics. This scaffold combines a reproducible classical baseline built on coarse lattice gauge theory energy estimation with a Q# project prepared for future Hamiltonian digitisation and quantum walk dynamics. The aim is to benchmark simple plaquette observables against quantum-inspired workflows that could capture confinement physics with reduced computational cost.

Directory Layout


19_quantum_chromodynamics/
├── estimates/                        # JSON artifacts from classical and quantum workflows
├── instances/                        # Lattice sizes, spacings, and coupling constants
├── plots/                            # Generated figures from analyze.py
├── python/
│   ├── classical_baseline.py         # Wilson plaquette energy estimator and string tension proxy
│   └── analyze.py                    # Visualization of plaquette energy and string tension trends
└── qsharp/
    ├── qsharp.json            # Modern QDK project file
    └── Program.qs                    # Stubbed quantum workflow

Quick Start


cd problems/19_quantum_chromodynamics

# Classical lattice baseline
python python/classical_baseline.py

# Plot plaquette energy and string tension behaviour
python python/analyze.py

# Quantum placeholder (uses modern QDK  qsharp Python package)
python -c "import qsharp; qsharp.init(project_root='qsharp'); print('Build OK')"
 python tooling/run_all_qsharp.py  # runs via qsharp Python package

Next Quantum Milestones

1. Hamiltonian Encoding – Map Kogut-Susskind Hamiltonians onto qubit registers with flux truncation.

2. Gauge Constraints – Integrate Gauss law projectors for SU(3) or SU(2) toy models.

3. Spectral Estimation – Prototype adiabatic state preparation and phase estimation for glueball spectra.

4. Resource Estimation – Track qubit counts and trotterisation depth as lattice volume scales.

This scaffold keeps the lattice baseline reproducible while setting up future quantum simulations of the strong force.

Objective Maturity Gate

  • **Current gate**: **Stage B complete** (classical baseline and Q# scaffold/build path are in place).
  • **Next gate target**: **Stage C** (hardware-aware validation with uncertainty-bounded comparisons).

Stage C exit criteria for this problem:

  • Execute at least one non-placeholder quantum workflow path tied to the problem objective.
  • Report uncertainty-bounded comparisons between classical and quantum outputs on `small` and `medium` instances.
  • Document transpilation/connectivity and backend assumptions used for reported quantum runs.
  • Add calibration/noise-sensitivity evidence for the reported quantum metrics.

DiVincenzo Readiness (Stage C/D Overlay)

| Criterion | Status | Evidence / Notes |

|---|---|---|

| Scalable qubit system | partial | Problem-scoped instance baselines are in place; full hardware-scale projections are tracked as Stage C work. |

| Initialization | partial | Input/state initialization path is defined for current workflows, with backend-ready loading fidelity still to be hardened. |

| Coherence vs gate time | not-yet | Backend-calibrated coherence-vs-depth evidence is pending and required for Stage C/D promotion. |

| Universal gate set | partial | Q# scaffold/build path exists; gate-basis decomposition and transpilation evidence remain Stage C tasks. |

| Qubit-specific measurement | partial | Measurement outputs are defined for current validation flows; hardware readout characterization is pending. |

Advantage Claim Contract

  • **Claim category (current)**: `theoretical`.
  • **Problem class and regime**: Problem-specific challenge instances defined in this directory.
  • **Fair baseline**: Problem-local classical baseline in `python/` outputs.
  • **Quantum resource scaling claim**: Expected asymptotic advantage depends on algorithm family and implementation assumptions; no hardware-demonstrated speedup claim yet.
  • **Data-loading and I/O assumptions**: Must be documented alongside future advantage claims.
  • **Noise/error model assumptions**: Backend-specific model and calibration assumptions to be added at Stage C.
  • **Confidence/uncertainty method**: To be reported using shot-based confidence intervals or equivalent statistical bounds.
  • **Residual risks**: Oracle/state-preparation/transpilation overhead may dominate for near-term instance sizes.

Reproduce It

cd problems/19_quantum_chromodynamics make classical # Run classical baseline make analyze # Generate plots make build # Validate Q# compilation make run # Run Q# entry point

Key Files

  • qsharp/src/Main.qs Quantum algorithm implementation
  • qsharp/HardwareKernel.qs Azure-submittable QIR kernel
  • python/classical_baseline.py Classical reference implementation
  • estimates/classical_baseline.json Baseline metrics
View on GitHub →