QuSema: Detecting Silent Bugs in Quantum Libraries via Quantum-knowledge-enhanced Agents
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Quantum libraries are now critical infrastructure for quantum algorithm development, yet their correctness remains difficult to test. Existing testing techniques mainly rely on failure-based or comparison-based oracles, exposing bugs only when executions fail, violate runtime checks, or disagree with another implementation. Their applicability is limited when suitable execution-based oracles are unavailable, leaving some silent bugs undetected. Such missed bugs can produce incorrect results that propagate into experimental conclusions, simulation studies, and algorithmic designs. Here we present QuSema, an autonomous testing agent for finding silent bugs in quantum libraries. QuSema uses constraints from quantum semantics and documentation as a source-level semantic oracle to assess whether implementation logic can produce invalid outputs from valid inputs. It operates through an agentic loop that repeatedly inspects library API documentation and source code, reasons about the intended behavior of quantum operations, identifies potential semantic deviations, and validates them by generating executable tests through library APIs. Guided by quantum-domain reasoning, QuSema turns high-level behavioral mismatches into concrete, user-triggerable bug reports, enabling it to uncover non-crash defects. We implement QuSema for Qiskit and PennyLane. On a benchmark of 20 historical silent bugs, QuSema achieves higher mean bug relocation counts than Claude Code and Codex, with the DeepSeek configuration costing less than Claude Code. QuSema also discovers 40 previously unknown bugs confirmed by the developers, including 30 silent bugs.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 9 of its 136 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Oct 2026.
Builds on
9 of 136 references.
References · 9
- 2025RFCAudit: An LLM Agent for Functional Bug Detection in Network Protocolscited by 7
- 2018PennyLane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computationscited by 6
- 2024A Survey on Testing and Analysis of Quantum Softwarecited by 4
- 2026FuzzingBrain V2: A Multi-Agent LLM System for Automated Vulnerability Discovery and Reproductioncited by 3
- 2026Understanding Bugs in Quantum Simulators: An Empirical Studycited by 2
- 2026QBugLM: An Agentic Benchmarking Framework for LLM-based Quantum Software Debuggingcited by 2
- 2025QITE: Assembly-Level, Cross-Platform Testing of Quantum Computing Platformscited by 1
- 2026QSPE: Enumerating Skeletal Quantum Programs for Quantum Library Testingcited by 1
- 2026KQFuzz: Knowledge-Guided Fuzzing for Quantum Libraries via Large Language Modelscited by 1
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026Lowering the implementation barrier of neutral-atom quantum computing with agentic workflows
- 2026Evaluating Verified Autonomy in Quantum Engineering
- 2025Enhancing LLM-based Quantum Code Generation with Multi-Agent Optimization and Quantum Error Correction
- 2026Leveraging LLM-Based Agentic Systems to Generate Quantum Applications for Test Optimization
- 2026Beyond Rules: LLM-Powered Linting for Quantum Programs ↗
- 2026QuantumMind: Constraint-Grounded Agentic Reasoning for Speedup Analysis in Quantum Computing
- 2025QHackBench: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Quantum Code Generation Using PennyLane Hackathon Challenges
- 2026Qiskit QuantumKatas: Adapting Microsoft's Quantum Computing exercises for LLM evaluation