Error mitigation with Clifford quantum-circuit data Piotr Czarnik, Andrew Arrasmith, Patrick J. Coles, and Lukasz Cincio Theoretical Division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM 87545, USA. Achieving near-term quantum advantage will require accurate estimation of quantum observ- ables despite significant hardware noise. For this purpose, we propose a novel, scalable error- mitigation method that applies to gate-based quantum computers. The method generates training noisy exact data fXi ;Xi g via quantum circuits composed largely of Clifford gates, which can be efficiently noisy exact simulated classically, where Xi and Xi are noisy and noiseless observables respectively. Fit- ting a linear ansatz to this data then allows for the prediction of noise-free observables for arbitrary circuits. We analyze the performance of our method versus the number of qubits, circuit depth, and number of non-Clifford gates. We obtain an order-of-magnitude error reduction for a ground-state energy problem on 16 qubits in an IBMQ quantum computer and on a 64-qubit noisy simulator. I. INTRODUCTION Currently, one of the great unsolved technological questions is whether near-term quantum computers will be useful for practical applications. These noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices do not have enough qubits or high enough gate fidelities for fault- tolerant quantum error correction [1]. Consequently, any observable measured on a NISQ device will have limited accuracy. However, candidate applications such as quan- tum chemistry require chemical accuracy to beat classi- cal methods [2,3]. Similarly quantum approximate opti- mization has the potential to beat classical optimization when high accuracy is achieved [4–6]. Hence, it is widely regarded that near-term quantum advantage will only be achieved through error mitiga- tion. Error mitigation (EM) is broadly defined as meth- ods that reduce the impact of noise, rather than directly correct it. EM includes efforts to optimize quantum cir- cuits with compiling and machine learning [7–9]. It also includes variational quantum algorithms [10–14], some of which can be used to remove the effects of incoherent noise [15–19]. A prominent EM approach is to perform classical post-processing of observable expectation val- ues. Perhaps the most widely used example is state-of- the-art zero-noise extrapolation (ZNE), which has shown great promise [20, 21]. ZNE involves collecting data at FIG. 1. Our proposed error mitigation method. For a set various levels of noise, achieved by stretching gate times of states that are classically simulable, one generates noisy or inserting identities, and using this noisy data to ex- and corresponding noise-free data on a quantum computer trapolate an observable’s expection value to the zero- and classical computer, respectively. One learns to correct arXiv:2005.10189v2 [quant-ph] 22 Feb 2021 noise limit [22–26]. It has been successfully employed on this training data by fitting the parameters of an ansatz. to correct ground-state energies for problem sizes up to Finally, one uses this ansatz with the fitted parameters to 4-qubits [20, 21, 27]. Among other approaches are quasi- predict noise-free observables for arbitrary quantum states. probabilistic error mitigation [22] and numerous appli- cation specific approaches leveraging symmetries and/or post-selection techniques to mitigate errors [28–31]. novel, scalable EM method that is applicable to all gate- A crucial requirement of any EM method is scalability. based quantum computers. The basic idea is shown in While it is relatively easy to develop EM methods for Fig.1. First we generate training data, of the form small qubit systems, EM methods that work effectively noisy exact noisy exact Xi ;Xi , where Xi and Xi are the noisy at the quantum supremacy scale (> 50 qubits) are much andf noiselessg versions of an observable’s expectation more challenging to construct. Even methods that are in value of interest. The noisy values are obtained directly principle scalable may not actually scale well in practice. from the quantum computer, while the noiseless values This work aims to address this issue by proposing a are simulated on a classical computer. Scalability is 2 achieved by generating the training data from quantum circuits composed largely of Clifford gates (gates that map Pauli operators to Pauli operators), and hence these circuits are efficiently classically simulable. Next we fit the training data with a model, and finally we use the fitted model to predict the noise-free observable. Our method is conceptually simple and could be re- fined with sophisticated model fitting methods offered by modern machine learning [32]. Nevertheless, even with simple linear-regression-based fitting, our method per- forms extremely well in practice. We consider the task of estimating the ground-state energy of an Ising spin chain by variationally training the Quantum Alternating Op- erator Ansatz (QAOA) [4,5]. For this task, our method reduces the error by an order-of-magnitude for both a 16- qubit problem solved on IBMQ quantum computer and FIG. 2. Correcting the ground-state energy of the 16-qubit a 64-qubit problem solved on a noisy simulator, though Ising model with our CDR method. The ground states were we expect that this improvement will generically vary de- prepared by optimizing a p = 2 QAOA circuit on IBM’s Al- pending upon the task considered. We also demonstrate maden quantum processor. (a) The relative energy error is the utility of our method for non-variational algorithms plotted for the noisy (red) and corrected (blue) results for such as quantum phase estimation. Finally we find that several optimization instances. (b) The inferred energy per our method appears to perform better than ZNE for the qubit, E=Q, is plotted, along with the exact values (black). The error bars are explained in the text. Here the mean rel- larger scale problems we consider. ative energy error is 0:409 for the noisy estimates and 0:028 for the corrected ones. II. OUR METHOD methods. In this article we use least square re- We refer to our method as Clifford Data Regression gression, with a linear ansatz (see AppendixA for (CDR). Let X be the observable of interest whose ex- discussion): exact pectation value X = X one wishes to estimate h jnoisyj i noisy noisy f(X ; a) = a1X + a2; (2) for a given state . Let X be the noisy version of this expectation valuej i obtained from the quantum com- puter. To remove the noise from this expectation value, obtaining parameters a1 and a2 by minimizing the CDR method involves the following steps: X exact noisy 2 C = X (a1X + a2) : (3) φi − φi 1. One chooses a set of states = φi that will be φi2S used to construct the trainingS datafj ig . Each φ T j ii state must satisfy the property that it is efficient to noisy 4. One uses the ansatz f(X ; a) with the fitted classically compute the expectation value of X for noisy this state. The CDR method ensures this property parameters to correct X . by constructing each φi state from a quantum cir- cuit composed largelyj ofi Clifford gates. We denote We now discuss several strategies for how to choose in Step 1. In general, we have found that it is advan- the number of non-Clifford gates used to prepare S tageous to tailor the set to the specific state ; in each φi as N, which (as shown below) plays the S j i role ofj ai refinement parameter. other words, to bias the training data towards the target state of interest. A simple strategy for this purpose is to exact 2. For each φi , one evaluates X = generate the state-preparation circuits for the φ states j i 2 S φi j ii φi X φi using a classical computer. One also eval- by replacing a subset of the gates in the circuit that pre- uatesh j j thei noisy version of this expectation value, pares with Clifford gates that are close in distance noisy, using the quantum computer of interest. to thej originali gates. An alternative strategy, which is Xφi These two quantities are incorporated into the used in our implementations, is to employ Markov Chain noisy exact training data set = X ;X . Monte Carlo (MCMC) to generate classically-simulable T f φi φi g states φi based on the values of their observables. (See 3. One constructs an ansatz or model for the noise- Appendixj iB for details.) free value of the observable in the vicinity of , In general, one may base the MCMC sampling on the j i noisy noisy exact noisy closeness of X to X . However, a potentially X = f(X ; a); (1) φi more efficient strategy exists for the specific application where a are free parameters. The parameters can of variational quantum algorithms [10, 11, 33]. When be found either by regression or machine-learning is a state that is meant to optimize a variational cost j i 3 function (e.g., the energy of a given Hamiltonian), then one can instead base the sampling on minimizing this cost function. In this way, one can employ MCMC to obtain classically-simulable states that are close to extremizing the variational cost function. III. NUMERICAL IMPLEMENTATIONS A. Implementation for QAOA A central application of error mitigation is to cor- rect the energies of Hamiltonian eigenstates prepared on a quantum computer. Here we illustrate this appli- cation with the Quantum Alternating Operator Ansatz (QAOA) [4,5], which can serve as an ansatz for Hamil- tonian ground states. We consider the transverse Ising FIG. 3. Correcting the ground-state energy of the Ising model model, given by with our CDR method. The ground states were prepared by optimizing a QAOA circuit on a noisy simulator.