Research / Claims

Claims table

Every claim (C01–C13) from the original research brief, independently verified against primary sources.

Full detail for each claim, including every source URL opened, is in claims.md.

C01False / contradictedConfidence: High

MQT QCEC capabilities / overlap with proposed idea

FALSE (overlap claim); CONFIRMED (existence/capabilities)

Mature equivalence-checking library (decision-diagram / ZX-calculus engines), Qiskit + OpenQASM only. Its own CI is an OS/compiler matrix only — no SDK-version matrix, no CI/CD product for user projects.

Source: github.com/munich-quantum-toolkit/qcec (README + CI YAML); mqt.readthedocs.io verification handbook

C02False / contradictedConfidence: High

MQT Debugger capabilities / overlap with proposed idea

FALSE (overlap claim); CONFIRMED (existence/capabilities)

Assertion-based, single-run simulation debugger with DAP IDE integration, OpenQASM input. No cross-version or CI regression capability.

Source: github.com/munich-quantum-toolkit/debugger; arXiv:2412.12269

C03False / contradictedConfidence: High

“Q-Trace” / other quantum debugging systems overlap with proposed idea

FALSE (“Q-Trace” itself); real systems found operate at single-run fault-localization level only

“Q-Trace” is not a real named tool. QMon, TraceQ, the Microsoft QDK Trace Simulator, CUDA-Q statistical assertions, Proq, Bloq/AutoBloq, and MorphQ were all verified — none do cross-version/cross-SDK regression testing or CI integration.

Source: arxiv.org/html/2512.13422; arxiv.org/pdf/2508.14533; arxiv.org/abs/2507.16255; arxiv.org/abs/2506.18458; arxiv.org/pdf/2206.01111

C04ConfirmedConfidence: High

≈31% of quantum developers use quantum-specific testing tools (practitioner survey)

CONFIRMED

Exact quote “Only eight of 26 respondents (31%)…” verified in the full PDF text, Finding 2, Section 5.2, p.18. N=26 survey, IRB-approved, fielded in 2024. Authors flag the small-N limitation themselves.

Source: arXiv:2506.17306 (Zappin, Stalnaker, Chaparro, Poshyvanyk; to appear ACM TOSEM)

C05Partially confirmedConfidence: Medium

First alleged arXiv paper (evidence for the gap)

PARTIALLY CONFIRMED — no pre-given ID existed to check; best reconstructed candidate is highly material

No specific ID was supplied. Best candidate found: QUTest (arXiv:2605.19736) — a published cross-Qiskit-version regression-testing tool with CI-compatible (JUnit/xUnit) output. This partially contradicts the originally claimed gap rather than supporting it.

Source: arxiv.org/abs/2605.19736 (full HTML verified)

C06Partially confirmedConfidence: Medium

Second alleged arXiv paper (evidence for the gap)

PARTIALLY CONFIRMED (same caveat as C05)

Best candidates: the 31%-survey paper itself (arXiv:2506.17306, supports the need but is not a tool paper) and arXiv:2410.00650 (broad testing/analysis survey, no CI/CD content, general background only).

Source: arxiv.org/abs/2506.17306; arxiv.org/abs/2410.00650

C07False / contradictedConfidence: High

No dedicated standard bug corpus exists for quantum SDK versions / regression testing

FALSE

Bugs4Q (arXiv:2108.09744, JSS 2023) is a real, “widely used” 36+ bug corpus; arXiv:2606.27124 already ran it across 21 Qiskit versions / 77,700 executions and found reproducibility collapsed 62.2%→16.2%. QBugs, a 32,296-report mined dataset, and QBugLM also exist. No corpus is a universal standard, but the “none exists” framing is false.

Source: arXiv:2108.09744; arXiv:2606.27124; arXiv:2103.16968; arXiv:2512.24656; github.com/Z-928/Bugs4Q

C08Partially confirmedConfidence: High

An open-source pytest plugin already does full cross-SDK-version regression discovery/execution/comparison in CI

PARTIALLY CONFIRMED

pytest-quantum, qtest-quantum, and qc-assert are real, installable, but do framework-to-framework (not version-to-version) equivalence or single-run assertions only; all are under 9 months old, 0–2 stars. No plugin executes across multiple SDK versions with automated diffing.

Source: github.com/qbench/pytest-quantum; github.com/metin-5115/qtest; github.com/JMORAF87/qc-assert; PyPI release metadata

C09ConfirmedConfidence: High

Existing GitHub Actions products combine quantum SDKs with matrix builds / regression / equivalence testing

CONFIRMED (narrow)

Qiskit’s official ecosystem CI template (test_latest / development / minimum_versions.yml) is real, reusable, and active across ~8 repos — but only checks pass/fail of existing tests per version tier, it doesn’t diff behavior. Qiskit core’s qpy.yml does genuine but narrowly-scoped (serialization-only) cross-version regression testing, internal only.

Source: github.com/Qiskit/qiskit-addon-cutting; github.com/Qiskit/qiskit/blob/main/.github/workflows/qpy.yml

C10Partially confirmedConfidence: Medium-High

Cross-SDK or cross-version quantum regression testing already exists as reusable open tooling

PARTIALLY CONFIRMED

quantum-transpiler-regression-testing (“cart,” Zenodo DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21020113, June 2026) found 38% of real Qiskit transpiler bug-fixes are regressions invisible to equivalence oracles — single-SDK, CLI-based, brand-new, 0 stars. QUTest (C05) does cross-Qiskit-version testing with CI output. No cross-SDK tool of any kind was found.

Source: github.com/furqan-nr/quantum-transpiler-regression-testing; Zenodo 10.5281/zenodo.21020113; arXiv:2605.19736

C11Not found after searchConfidence: Medium

Other equivalence/regression tooling exists beyond MQT QCEC

NOT FOUND (beyond items already catalogued under C01/C05/C10)

GitHub search for “quantum equivalence checking” returned only unrelated/unverified SAT-solver student projects.

Source: gh search repos “quantum equivalence checking”

C12Not found after searchConfidence: Medium

A dedicated product combines quantum testing + state-awareness + autonomy + CI/CD + cross-version regression

NOT FOUND AFTER SEARCH

The individual pieces exist separately (QBugLM is agentic and quantum-specific but has no CI/CD or state-awareness; generic autonomous testing agents exist only for classical software). No system combines all elements.

Source: arXiv:2606.07314; general web search

C13Partially confirmedConfidence: Medium-High

Overall research gap: does a genuine, defensible gap remain?

PARTIALLY CONFIRMED — a gap exists but is much narrower than originally framed

The narrow, defensible gap is: pytest-native + cross-SDK (not just cross-version) + automated regression/equivalence detection (not hand-written assertions) + reusable drop-in GitHub Actions packaging. No single system combines all four; several systems solve one or two of the four pieces.

Source: Synthesis of C01–C12 — see the Gap Analysis page

Raw table with full per-claim source links: research/claims.md in the GitHub repository