You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Submit an ordered program list through one QDMI job without making batching wait for the unsettled execution-capability model. SDK users should benefit where providers support the aggregate contract and keep concurrent single-program execution elsewhere.
Current state
QDMI #509 is now independently based on v1.4 and retains the existing program-format enum. Core #2373 extracts the low-level adoption from #2226 onto v4.1. Qiskit and PennyLane consumers remain separate follow-ups; #2349 independently improves concurrent single-program PennyLane submission.
Work and decisions
QDMI #509 uses the existing program-format enum without a descriptor prerequisite.
Implement Qiskit and PennyLane consumers independently after the low-level contract is available.
Validate the provider contract in IQM and Braket; support may remain single-program when aggregate semantics cannot be preserved.
Preserve one shared optional shot setting, ordered result indices, aggregate lifecycle, and existing byte-exact submission. Atomic setter replacement does not imply atomic execution by remote hardware.
Each child has focused tests and can merge without payload-capability metadata.
Native batches and concurrent single-program fallback produce the same ordered SDK results.
A failed program, cancellation, retrieval, and unsupported cardinality have documented behavior.
Core 4.1 and provider releases use released QDMI dependencies; development pins are not release pins.
Non-goals
New format descriptors; payload/classical capability design; arbitrary per-program options or partial-result semantics; simulated native batching that violates the provider contract.
Provider contract evidence
Before accepting QDMI #509, link a working Core consumer plus at least one existing provider demonstration; prefer both where applicable. The evidence must cover aggregate identity/lifecycle, indexed results, cancellation, failure, and retrieval—not just submission of a list. Providers without that contract retain concurrent single-program fallback. An SDK batch convenience API alone is not proof of a native aggregate job.
🤖 AI text below 🤖
Elevator pitch
Submit an ordered program list through one QDMI job without making batching wait for the unsettled execution-capability model. SDK users should benefit where providers support the aggregate contract and keep concurrent single-program execution elsewhere.
Current state
QDMI #509 is now independently based on
v1.4and retains the existing program-format enum. Core #2373 extracts the low-level adoption from #2226 ontov4.1. Qiskit and PennyLane consumers remain separate follow-ups; #2349 independently improves concurrent single-program PennyLane submission.Work and decisions
Dependencies and release boundary
Standard: Munich-Quantum-Software-Stack/QDMI#509. Core implementation: #2373; extraction source: #2226. Preserve concurrency work in #2349. Release coordination: #2093.
Acceptance and validation
Non-goals
New format descriptors; payload/classical capability design; arbitrary per-program options or partial-result semantics; simulated native batching that violates the provider contract.
Provider contract evidence
Before accepting QDMI #509, link a working Core consumer plus at least one existing provider demonstration; prefer both where applicable. The evidence must cover aggregate identity/lifecycle, indexed results, cancellation, failure, and retrieval—not just submission of a list. Providers without that contract retain concurrent single-program fallback. An SDK batch convenience API alone is not proof of a native aggregate job.
Sub-issues