Daniel Fortunato

Giordano d'Aloisio, Sophie Fortz, Carol Hanna et al.

Background: Quantum computing is a rapidly growing new programming paradigm that brings significant changes to the design and implementation of algorithms. Understanding quantum algorithms requires knowledge of physics and mathematics, which can be challenging for software developers. Aims: In this work, we provide a first analysis of how LLMs can support developers' understanding of quantum code. Method: We empirically analyse and compare the quality of explanations provided by three widely adopted LLMs (Gpt3.5, Llama2, and Tinyllama) using two different human-written prompt styles for seven state-of-the-art quantum algorithms. We also analyse how consistent LLM explanations are over multiple rounds and how LLMs can improve existing descriptions of quantum algorithms. Results: Llama2 provides the highest quality explanations from scratch, while Gpt3.5 emerged as the LLM best suited to improve existing explanations. In addition, we show that adding a small amount of context to the prompt significantly improves the quality of explanations. Finally, we observe how explanations are qualitatively and syntactically consistent over multiple rounds. Conclusions: This work highlights promising results, and opens challenges for future research in the field of LLMs for quantum code explanation. Future work includes refining the methods through prompt optimisation and parsing of quantum code explanations, as well as carrying out a systematic assessment of the quality of explanations.

Daniel Fortunato, José Campos, Rui Abreu

Coverage criteria play a central role in assessing test adequacy in classical software, yet their effectiveness for quantum programs remains poorly understood and largely unexplored. In this paper, we propose six quantum-tailored criteria - condition, decision, and path coverage, and their probabilistic variants - adapted from their classical counterparts. We present QaCoCo, a tool that computes these criteria for circuit-based quantum programs. We empirically evaluate these criteria on a large and diverse set of 540 circuits and analyze the coverage achieved. Our results show that while circuits frequently achieve high condition and decision coverage (97.56% and 97.63%, on average), path coverage remains limited (71.84%), particularly in the presence of multi-controlled gates, which induce extreme path explosion and coverage imbalance. Moreover, to account for the probabilistic nature of quantum circuits, we introduce probabilistic coverage, which augments structural coverage with a confidence measure (88.87%, 88.65%, and 37.18% for condition, decision, and path coverage, respectively, on average). Finally, through mutation testing, we find weak or no correlation between fault detection and structural coverage, consistent with observations in classical computing.