arXiv AI By Takuya Isogawa, Ryotaro Okabe, Nutdech Phadetsuwannukun, Mingda Li, Paola Cappellaro

Agentic AI for Scientific Reasoning in Autonomous Quantum Sensing Experiments

Read the original on arXiv AI →

arXiv:2607. 25145v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We implement an agentic AI workflow built around a large language model (LLM) agent for autonomous experiments with nitrogen-vacancy (NV) centers in diamond.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv AI.

arXiv AI
Aug 11

QuantumMind: Constraint-Grounded Agentic Reasoning for Speedup Analysis in Quantum Computing

arXiv:2608. 07743v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Identifying a meaningful quantum speedup requires more than matching a classical problem to a familiar quantum primitive: the claim must preserve the task, respect access and output models, expose required promises, and remain within a defensible complexity scope.

By Yijing Zuo, Zhe Fu, Zihan Nie, Zhihui Zhu, Haohan Wang
arXiv AI
Jul 13

QAgent: An LLM-based Multi-Agent System for Autonomous OpenQASM programming

arXiv:2508. 20134v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Programming quantum circuits at the OpenQASM level is essential for achieving hardware-aware optimization and reliable execution on noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices, yet it remains challenging due to the need for domain-specific planning, iterative code synthesis, and low-level calibration.

By Zhenxiao Fu, Lei Jiang, Yilun Xu, Gang Huang, Fan Chen
arXiv AI
Sep 16

Evaluating Verified Autonomy in Quantum Engineering

The paper introduces Quantum‑Harbor, a virtual laboratory that lets AI agents interact with quantum systems in a controlled setting, enabling verification of their actions and conclusions. Using this platform, the authors created QIQCBench, a benchmark of 49 expert‑authored tasks covering calibration, control, error correction, compilation, sensing, and networking. Testing 17 state‑of‑the‑art agentic systems on QIQCBench revealed wide variation in verified performance, highlighting a gap between demonstrated capability and reliable operation and positioning Quantum‑Harbor as a foundation for measuring progress toward verified autonomy in quantum engineering.

By Naixu Guo, Changhao Li, Siyu Cheng, Qicheng Tang, Binzhao Luo, Bikun Li, Yuxuan Du, Shihao Ru, Jiaqi Cai
arXiv Machine Learning
Sep 18

QEncodeBench: Can Large Language Models Encode Classical Problems into Verified Quantum Oracles?

QEncodeBench evaluates whether large language models can translate classical constraint problems into verified quantum phase oracles. The benchmark measures the correctness of generated circuits using an adversarial self‑validated verifier that checks full solution‑set equivalence while enforcing resource limits. Results show that models lacking a reasoning mode perform poorly, whereas enabling native reasoning improves accuracy tenfold; semantic errors dominate, and neuro‑symbolic pipelines close most gaps by delegating critical composition to deterministic procedures.

By Xujun Che, Hanhan Wu, Yuchen Yuan, Chenyang Yu