Raymond G. Beausoleil

Masoud Mohseni, Artur Scherer, K. Grace Johnson et al.

In the span of four decades, quantum computation has evolved from an intellectual curiosity to a potentially realizable technology. Today, small-scale demonstrations have become possible for quantum algorithmic primitives on hundreds of physical qubits and proof-of-principle error-correction on a single logical qubit. Nevertheless, despite significant progress and excitement, the path toward a full-stack scalable technology is largely unknown. There are significant outstanding quantum hardware, fabrication, software architecture, and algorithmic challenges that are either unresolved or overlooked. These issues could seriously undermine the arrival of utility-scale quantum computers for the foreseeable future. Here, we provide a comprehensive review of these scaling challenges. We show how the road to scaling could be paved by adopting existing semiconductor technology to build much higher-quality qubits, employing system engineering approaches, and performing distributed quantum computation within heterogeneous high-performance computing infrastructures. These opportunities for research and development could unlock certain promising applications, in particular, efficient quantum simulation/learning of quantum data generated by natural or engineered quantum systems. To estimate the true cost of such promises, we provide a detailed resource and sensitivity analysis for classically hard quantum chemistry calculations on surface-code error-corrected quantum computers given current, target, and desired hardware specifications based on superconducting qubits, accounting for a realistic distribution of errors. Furthermore, we argue that, to tackle industry-scale classical optimization and machine learning problems in a cost-effective manner, heterogeneous quantum-probabilistic computing with custom-designed accelerators should be considered as a complementary path toward scalability.

Yequan Zhao, Xian Xiao, Xinling Yu et al.

Solving partial differential equations (PDEs) numerically often requires huge computing time, energy cost, and hardware resources in practical applications. This has limited their applications in many scenarios (e.g., autonomous systems, supersonic flows) that have a limited energy budget and require near real-time response. Leveraging optical computing, this paper develops an on-chip training framework for physics-informed neural networks (PINNs), aiming to solve high-dimensional PDEs with fJ/MAC photonic power consumption and ultra-low latency. Despite the ultra-high speed of optical neural networks, training a PINN on an optical chip is hard due to (1) the large size of photonic devices, and (2) the lack of scalable optical memory devices to store the intermediate results of back-propagation (BP). To enable realistic optical PINN training, this paper presents a scalable method to avoid the BP process. We also employ a tensor-compressed approach to improve the convergence and scalability of our optical PINN training. This training framework is designed with tensorized optical neural networks (TONN) for scalable inference acceleration and MZI phase-domain tuning for \textit{in-situ} optimization. Our simulation results of a 20-dim HJB PDE show that our photonic accelerator can reduce the number of MZIs by a factor of $1.17\times 10^3$, with only $1.36$ J and $1.15$ s to solve this equation. This is the first real-size optical PINN training framework that can be applied to solve high-dimensional PDEs.

Yequan Zhao, Xinling Yu, Xian Xiao et al.

Physics-informed neural networks (PINNs) have shown promise in solving partial differential equations (PDEs), with growing interest in their energy-efficient, real-time training on edge devices. Photonic computing offers a potential solution to achieve this goal because of its ultra-high operation speed. However, the lack of photonic memory and the large device sizes prevent training real-size PINNs on photonic chips. This paper proposes a completely back-propagation-free (BP-free) and highly salable framework for training real-size PINNs on silicon photonic platforms. Our approach involves three key innovations: (1) a sparse-grid Stein derivative estimator to avoid the BP in the loss evaluation of a PINN, (2) a dimension-reduced zeroth-order optimization via tensor-train decomposition to achieve better scalability and convergence in BP-free training, and (3) a scalable on-chip photonic PINN training accelerator design using photonic tensor cores. We validate our numerical methods on both low- and high-dimensional PDE benchmarks. Through circuit simulation based on real device parameters, we further demonstrate the significant performance benefit (e.g., real-time training, huge chip area reduction) of our photonic accelerator.

Yequan Zhao, Xian Xiao, Antoine Descos et al.

Partial differential equation (PDE) is an important math tool in science and engineering. This paper experimentally demonstrates an optical neural PDE solver by leveraging the back-propagation-free on-photonic-chip training of physics-informed neural networks.

Sean Hooten, Raymond G. Beausoleil, Thomas Van Vaerenbergh

We present a proof-of-concept technique for the inverse design of electromagnetic devices motivated by the policy gradient method in reinforcement learning, named PHORCED (PHotonic Optimization using REINFORCE Criteria for Enhanced Design). This technique uses a probabilistic generative neural network interfaced with an electromagnetic solver to assist in the design of photonic devices, such as grating couplers. We show that PHORCED obtains better performing grating coupler designs than local gradient-based inverse design via the adjoint method, while potentially providing faster convergence over competing state-of-the-art generative methods. As a further example of the benefits of this method, we implement transfer learning with PHORCED, demonstrating that a neural network trained to optimize 8$^\circ$ grating couplers can then be re-trained on grating couplers with alternate scattering angles while requiring >10$\times$ fewer simulations than control cases.