pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.16210 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-17 · 🪐 quant-ph · hep-lat

Preparation and detection of quasiparticles for quantum simulations of scattering

Mattia Morgavi , Peter Majcen , Marco Rigobello , Simone Montangero , Pietro Silvi This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-10 08:34 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph hep-lat
keywords quasiparticleswave packetsdressed operatorsWannier functionsquantum lattice modelsscattering simulationsmatrix product statesladder lattice
0
0 comments X

The pith

Dressed creation operators built from intermediate Wannier functions enable selective quasiparticle wave-packet preparation and detection in lattice models.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces a technique to prepare and detect specific quasiparticle excitations in (quasi-)one-dimensional quantum lattice theories by constructing local dressed operators from maximally localized Wannier functions. These functions are taken from quasiparticle bands computed at intermediate system sizes, allowing the operators to remain unitary and localized when applied to the full interacting system. The approach supports species-resolved handling of wave packets, which in turn separates contributions from known quasiparticles from unknown resonances during scattering. This matters for quantum simulations because it provides a practical way to initialize and measure targeted excitations on top of interacting vacua without relying on free-particle approximations.

Core claim

Maximally localized Wannier functions constructed from quasiparticle bands at intermediate system sizes yield unitary local dressed creation operators that generate localized excitations on interacting vacua; these operators support species-resolved wave-packet preparation and detection, enabling the isolation of known quasiparticle signals from unknown resonances in scattering processes, as demonstrated via matrix product state simulations of pure hardcore Hamiltonian QCD on a ladder lattice.

What carries the argument

Maximally localized Wannier functions (MLWFs) from quasiparticle bands at intermediate sizes, used to build unitary local dressed creation operators for selective wave-packet operations.

If this is right

  • Species-resolved preparation and detection of quasiparticle wave packets becomes possible on interacting vacua.
  • Known quasiparticle contributions can be separated from unknown resonances in scattering outputs.
  • Scattering processes and mass resonances can be detected in models such as hardcore Hamiltonian QCD on ladder lattices using matrix product states.
  • The method applies to selective excitation in (quasi-)one-dimensional quantum lattice theories for simulation purposes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same intermediate-size Wannier construction might reduce computational cost when extending the approach to larger or higher-dimensional lattices.
  • If the operators remain local, they could be combined with other tensor-network or quantum-circuit methods to simulate more complex scattering channels.
  • Detection of resonances could help identify new quasiparticle species in models where analytic band structures are unavailable.
  • The technique may generalize to other strongly interacting lattice systems beyond the hardcore QCD test case.

Load-bearing premise

Maximally localized Wannier functions from quasiparticle bands at intermediate system sizes produce unitary local dressed creation operators that remain accurate and local when applied to the full interacting system and larger lattices.

What would settle it

The prepared wave packets lose localization or unitarity when the operators are applied to larger lattices or the complete interacting Hamiltonian, or the scattering outputs fail to separate known quasiparticle contributions from detected mass resonances in the tested ladder model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.16210 by Marco Rigobello, Mattia Morgavi, Peter Majcen, Pietro Silvi, Simone Montangero.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic summary of the model-independent algorithm for generating the scattering input states. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: (a) OBC ladder with L plaquettes and L + 1 rungs (L in PBC); lattice spacing a = 1. (b) Notation: ↑, ↓, r for rails and rungs. (c) Link DoFs n ↑ j , n ↓ j , n r j , n r j−1 at plaquette j. (d) The nine ⊤-junction configurations compatible with Gauss’ law (Z3 or SU(3)1). (e) Examples of states in the n basis for the three polarization sectors n x = 0, 1, 2. (f) In the n x = 0 sector, both truncations map to… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A schematic representation of the low-energy glueball [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: First levels of the excitation spectrum, for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Infidelity 1 − F of the variational unitary creation operator ansatz (see Sec. I C) as a function of the coupling λ, for both Z3 and SU(3)1 across different glueball bands. ℓW = 5 has been chosen for all the subsequent wave-packet preparation protocols. by second-order perturbation theory (dashed black lines). However, as λ is decreased (g 2 → 0), the perturbative expansion clearly breaks down, while the c… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Energy density excess εj (Eq. (8)) for a time￾evolved MLWF e −iHt ˆ ϕˆ† j |ΩL⟩ on a lattice of L = 51 sites for different bands and groups. Energy is shown in units of 0 ++ 1 band centroid ⟨ω⟩ (Eq. (49)). The solid blue lines indicate the trajectories with maximum speed vmax computed from interpolation of the single-particle spectrum at an intermediate system size (l = 11, see [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/ful… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Heatmap of |∆˜ (ω, k)| in momentum space (see Eq. (53)) for the lightest glueball bands 0 ++ 1 , 0 −− 1 across different couplings λ = 0.1, 0.5, 0.9 in both the Z3 and SU(3)1 models. The densities ∆˜ are computed on a lattice of L = 51 sites using TDVP-evolved MLWFs ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: 0 ++–0 ++ glueball scattering on a ladder of L = 101 plaquettes. On the left column, results for the Abelian Z3 model are shown, while on the right column for the non￾Abelian SU(3)1 model. In both cases, we compare λ = 1/2 (intermediate regime, g = 1) and the small-g regime (λ = 0.1). Local energy excess εj (Eq. (8)) and entanglement entropy Sj of the spatial bipartition at site j are shown. Energy is exp… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Scattering simulations in the weak coupling regime: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The ⊤-junction basis for a single vertex, generated by assigning all allowed truncated link states and subsequently projecting onto the gauge-invariant singlet state. In this notation, r, g, b represent the basis states of the fundamental representation 3 of SU(3), while the states c, y, m are the basis states of the anti-fundamental representation 3¯. The state w is the unique state of the singlet repres… view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Non-vanishing expectation values of the corner operators for the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_13.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We introduce a method for the selective preparation and detection of quasiparticle wave packets, based on creation operators that generate dressed, localized excitations on top of interacting vacua of (quasi-)one-dimensional quantum lattice theories. This method exploits maximally localized Wannier functions (MLWFs) constructed from quasiparticle bands at intermediate system sizes, enabling the construction of unitary local dressed creation operators. The algorithm allows for species-resolved wave-packet preparation and detection, enabling the separation of known quasiparticle contributions from unknown resonances. We test this approach with matrix product states (MPS) on pure hardcore Hamiltonian QCD on a ladder lattice, detecting scattering outputs and mass resonances.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a method for selective preparation and detection of quasiparticle wave packets in (quasi-)one-dimensional quantum lattice theories. It constructs unitary local dressed creation operators from maximally localized Wannier functions (MLWFs) of quasiparticle bands computed at intermediate system sizes, then applies them to interacting vacua. This enables species-resolved operations that separate known quasiparticle contributions from unknown resonances. The approach is tested numerically with matrix product states (MPS) on a pure hardcore Hamiltonian QCD model on a ladder lattice, showing detection of scattering outputs and mass resonances.

Significance. If the central construction holds, the method would provide a practical, species-resolved tool for analyzing scattering in lattice gauge theories and other strongly interacting 1D systems simulated on quantum hardware or classical tensor networks. The explicit MPS demonstration on the hardcore QCD ladder is a concrete strength, as it applies the operators to a non-trivial interacting model and reports observable outputs. However, the overall significance remains provisional without quantitative validation of operator robustness under extrapolation.

major comments (2)
  1. [Method section (construction of dressed operators)] The construction of dressed creation operators from MLWFs at intermediate system sizes (described in the method section) assumes these operators remain unitary, local, and accurate when applied to the full interacting vacuum and larger lattices, but no explicit bounds, scaling analysis, or fidelity metrics versus system size or interaction strength are provided to support this extrapolation.
  2. [Numerical tests section] In the numerical tests with MPS on the hardcore ladder QCD model, the results demonstrate detection of scattering outputs and resonances, yet the section reports no quantitative error analysis, overlap fidelities, operator-norm deviations, or localization-length scaling with lattice size, leaving the key claim of reliable species separation unverified beyond the specific tested parameters.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract refers to 'pure hardcore Hamiltonian QCD on a ladder lattice' without a brief reference or citation to the specific model Hamiltonian, which would aid readers from outside lattice gauge theory.
  2. [Introduction/Method] Notation for the dressed operators and MLWFs could be introduced with a short table or explicit definition early in the text to improve readability for the general quantum simulation audience.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of the manuscript and for highlighting both the potential significance of the dressed-operator approach and the concrete value of the MPS demonstration on the hardcore QCD ladder. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Method section (construction of dressed operators)] The construction of dressed creation operators from MLWFs at intermediate system sizes (described in the method section) assumes these operators remain unitary, local, and accurate when applied to the full interacting vacuum and larger lattices, but no explicit bounds, scaling analysis, or fidelity metrics versus system size or interaction strength are provided to support this extrapolation.

    Authors: We agree that explicit quantitative support for the extrapolation would strengthen the presentation. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection that reports fidelity metrics, deviations from unitarity, and localization-length scaling of the dressed operators versus system size and interaction strength, computed from the existing MPS data on the ladder model. These results will provide concrete bounds for the regimes tested and thereby support the applicability of the construction beyond the intermediate sizes used to build the MLWFs. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Numerical tests section] In the numerical tests with MPS on the hardcore ladder QCD model, the results demonstrate detection of scattering outputs and resonances, yet the section reports no quantitative error analysis, overlap fidelities, operator-norm deviations, or localization-length scaling with lattice size, leaving the key claim of reliable species separation unverified beyond the specific tested parameters.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current numerical section would benefit from additional quantitative metrics. We will revise the section to include overlap fidelities between the states prepared by the dressed operators and the target quasiparticle eigenstates, operator-norm deviations from the ideal creation operators, and explicit localization-length scaling with lattice size. These additions will directly verify the reliability of species separation for the parameters already simulated and will quantify the robustness of the method within the tested regime. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; construction is self-contained

full rationale

The paper presents a method for quasiparticle wave-packet preparation using MLWFs from intermediate-size bands to build dressed creation operators, then applies them in MPS simulations on a specific hardcore ladder model. This follows standard Wannier and tensor-network techniques without any step that reduces the central claim to a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, a self-definitional loop, or a load-bearing self-citation whose content is unverified. The numerical test supplies independent evidence for the tested regime rather than defining the operators by construction. No ansatz is smuggled via citation, and no uniqueness theorem is invoked to force the choice. The derivation chain remains externally grounded in established MLWF and MPS methods.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard assumptions of lattice quantum field theory and tensor-network methods plus the domain-specific assumption that intermediate-size quasiparticle bands yield usable Wannier functions for the full system.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Quasiparticle bands exist and can be computed at intermediate system sizes in the models considered.
    Invoked to construct MLWFs for the dressed operators.
  • domain assumption Matrix product states can accurately represent the relevant states and dynamics in the ladder QCD model.
    Used for the numerical test of scattering outputs.
invented entities (1)
  • Dressed creation operators from MLWFs no independent evidence
    purpose: To generate localized quasiparticle wave packets on interacting vacua
    New construction introduced in the paper; no independent evidence provided in abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5414 in / 1447 out tokens · 57382 ms · 2026-05-10T08:34:52.594921+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

110 extracted references · 110 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Variational problem for the creation operator Given the vacuum state|Ω⟩and a MLWF state|ϕj⟩ centered at sitej, we want to find an operatorˆϕ† j such that ˆϕ† j|Ω⟩≃|ϕj⟩with maximum fidelity. This operator must be (a) localized in the Wannier supportW of length ℓW (this assumption enables the construction of wave- packets) and (b) unitary, so that it preser...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Wave packets from the creation operator Once the dressed creation operator ˆϕ† j is obtained, a generic single-quasiparticle wave packet can be con- structed as ˆΨ†= 1 N L∑ j=1 cj ˆϕ† j,(B9) where cj are generic complex coefficients and N =√∑ j|cj|2 is the normalization factor. The wave-packet state is then obtained by applying this operator to the vacuum...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Detection of resonances In this section, we describe the procedure to detect the presence of resonances and unknown quasiparticles in scattering simulations with a TN approach. To this aim, we introduce a nonlinear functional, designed to suppress contributions associated with known quasiparticles while isolating the residual contribution due to uncharact...

    work page

  4. [4]

    For numerical simulations with continuous gauge groups, the infinite-dimensional link Hilbert space associated with the gauge fields must be truncated

    Dressed site formalism In LGTs, by convention, matter DoFs are located on lattice sites, while gauge DoFs reside on the links. For numerical simulations with continuous gauge groups, the infinite-dimensional link Hilbert space associated with the gauge fields must be truncated. To implement the truncation of gauge DoFs, we work in the irrep basis, where t...

    work page

  5. [5]

    (43) with Eq

    Electric term operator mapping Starting from the expression for the electric energy ˆHE = ∑ j ˆE↑2 j + ∑ j ˆE↓2 j + ∑ j ˆEr2 j ,(E2) we represent the local link DoFs by ˆσℓ≡eiˆnℓφ=   1 ei2π/3 ei4π/3   .(E3) By combining Eq. (43) with Eq. (E3), one finds ˆE2 ℓ C2 =   0 1 1   ℓ = 2−ˆσℓ−ˆσ† ℓ 3 ,(E4) which gives the expression for the electric field ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    The⊤-junction basis, shown in Fig

    Plaquette operator matrix elements In this subsection, we outline the computation of matrix elementsoftheparalleltransporterinthe ⊤-junctionbasis. The⊤-junction basis, shown in Fig. 12, comprises all singlet states localized on a lattice site with three adjacent links and therefore satisfies Gauss’s law. These states include all possible assignments of ir...

    work page

  7. [7]

    G. S. Bali, QCD forces and heavy quark bound states, Physics Reports343, 1 (2001)

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    Greensite,An Introduction to the Confinement Prob- lem, Vol

    J. Greensite,An Introduction to the Confinement Prob- lem, Vol. 821 (Springer, 2011)

    work page 2011

  9. [9]

    Metz and A

    A. Metz and A. Vossen, Parton fragmentation functions, Progress in Particle and Nuclear Physics91, 136 (2016)

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    Albino, Hadronization of partons, Reviews of Modern Physics82, 2489 (2010)

    S. Albino, Hadronization of partons, Reviews of Modern Physics82, 2489 (2010)

    work page 2010

  11. [11]

    Berges, K

    J. Berges, K. Boguslavski, S. Schlichting, and R. Venu- gopalan, Turbulent thermalization process in heavy-ion collisions at ultrarelativistic energies, Physical Review D89, 074011 (2014)

    work page 2014

  12. [12]

    M. C. Bañuls, R. Blatt, J. Catani, A. Celi, J. I. Cirac, M. Dalmonte, L. Fallani, K. Jansen, M. Lewenstein, S. Montangero, C. A. Muschik, B. Reznik, E. Rico, L. Tagliacozzo, K. Van Acoleyen, F. Verstraete, U.-J. Wiese, M. Wingate, J. Zakrzewski, and P. Zoller, Simu- lating Lattice Gauge Theories within Quantum Technolo- gies, The European Physical Journal...

    work page 2020

  13. [13]

    Busza, K

    W. Busza, K. Rajagopal, and W. Van Der Schee, Heavy ion collisions: The big picture and the big questions, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science68, 339 21 ⟨ 1 3 3 ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ ˆC ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ 1 1 1 ⟩ = 1, ⟨ 3 3 1 ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ ˆC ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ 3 1 3 ⟩ = 1√ 3 , ⟨ 3 3 3 ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ ˆC ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ 3 1 3 ⟩ = 1 4√ 3 , ⟨ 3 3 3 ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ ˆC ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ 3 3 1 ⟩ = 1 4√ 3 , ⟨ 3 3 1 ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ ˆC ⏐⏐⏐⏐⏐ 3 3 3 ⟩ = 1...

    work page 2018

  14. [14]

    Gelis, E

    F. Gelis, E. Iancu, J. Jalilian-Marian, and R. Venu- gopalan, The color glass condensate, Annual Review of Nuclear and Particle Science60, 463 (2010)

    work page 2010

  15. [15]

    K. G. Wilson, Confinement of Quarks, Physical Review D10, 2445 (1974)

    work page 1974

  16. [16]

    H. J. Rothe,Lattice Gauge Theories: An Introduction (Fourth Edition)(World Scientific Publishing Company, 2012)

    work page 2012

  17. [17]

    Creutz, Monte Carlo Study of Quantized SU(2) Gauge Theory, Physical Review D21, 2308 (1980)

    M. Creutz, Monte Carlo Study of Quantized SU(2) Gauge Theory, Physical Review D21, 2308 (1980)

    work page 1980

  18. [18]

    Creutz, L

    M. Creutz, L. Jacobs, and C. Rebbi, Monte Carlo Com- putations in Lattice Gauge Theories, Physics Reports 95, 201 (1983)

    work page 1983

  19. [19]

    Metropolis, A

    N. Metropolis, A. W. Rosenbluth, M. N. Rosenbluth, A. H. Teller, and E. Teller, Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines, The journal of chemical physics21, 1087 (1953)

    work page 1953

  20. [20]

    E. Y. Loh, J. E. Gubernatis, R. T. Scalettar, S. R. White, D. J. Scalapino, and R. L. Sugar, Sign Problem in the Numerical Simulation of Many-Electron Systems, Physical Review B41, 9301 (1990)

    work page 1990

  21. [21]

    Troyer and U.-J

    M. Troyer and U.-J. Wiese, Computational Complexity and Fundamental Limitations to Fermionic Quantum Monte Carlo Simulations, Physical Review Letters94, 170201 (2005)

    work page 2005

  22. [22]

    Barbour, N.-E

    I. Barbour, N.-E. Behilil, E. Dagotto, F. Karsch, A. Moreo, M. Stone, and HW. Wyld, Problems with fi- nite density simulations of lattice QCD, Nuclear Physics B275, 296 (1986)

    work page 1986

  23. [23]

    L. V. Keldysh, Diagram technique for nonequilibrium processes, inSelected Papers of Leonid V Keldysh(World Scientific, 2024) pp. 47–55

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Polkovnikov, K

    A. Polkovnikov, K. Sengupta, A. Silva, and M. Vengalat- tore, Colloquium: Nonequilibrium dynamics of closed interactingquantumsystems,ReviewsofModernPhysics 83, 863 (2011)

    work page 2011

  25. [25]

    Fannes, B

    M. Fannes, B. Nachtergaele, and R. F. Werner, Finitely correlated states on quantum spin chains, Communica- tions in Mathematical Physics144, 443 (1992)

    work page 1992

  26. [26]

    Östlund and S

    S. Östlund and S. Rommer, Thermodynamic limit of density matrix renormalization, Physical Review Letters 75, 3537 (1995)

    work page 1995

  27. [27]

    S. R. White, Density Matrix Formulation for Quantum Renormalization Groups, Physical Review Letters69, 2863 (1992)

    work page 1992

  28. [28]

    S. Abel, M. Spannowsky, and S. Williams, Real-Time Scattering Processes with Continuous-Variable Quantum Computers, Physical Review A112, 012614 (2025)

    work page 2025

  29. [29]

    Schollwöck, The density-matrix renormalization group, Rev

    U. Schollwöck, The density-matrix renormalization group, Rev. Mod. Phys.77, 259 (2005)

    work page 2005

  30. [30]

    Haegeman, J

    J. Haegeman, J. I. Cirac, T. J. Osborne, I. Pižorn, H. Ver- 22 schelde, and F. Verstraete, Time-dependent variational principle for quantum lattices, Physical Review Letters 107, 070601 (2011)

    work page 2011

  31. [31]

    Haegeman, B

    J. Haegeman, B. Pirvu, D. J. Weir, J. I. Cirac, T. J. Osborne, H. Verschelde, and F. Verstraete, Variational matrix product ansatz for dispersion relations, Physical Review B85, 100408 (2012)

    work page 2012

  32. [32]

    R. P. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers, in Feynman and Computation(cRc Press, 2018) pp. 133– 153

    work page 2018

  33. [33]

    Lloyd, Universal quantum simulators, Science273, 1073 (1996)

    S. Lloyd, Universal quantum simulators, Science273, 1073 (1996)

    work page 1996

  34. [34]

    C. W. Bauer, Z. Davoudi, N. Klco, and M. J. Sav- age, Quantum Simulation of Fundamental Particles and Forces, Nature Reviews Physics5, 420 (2023)

    work page 2023

  35. [35]

    Kogut and L

    J. Kogut and L. Susskind, Hamiltonian Formulation of Wilson’s Lattice Gauge Theories, Physical Review D11, 395 (1975)

    work page 1975

  36. [36]

    J. B. Kogut, An Introduction to Lattice Gauge Theory and Spin Systems, Reviews of Modern Physics51, 659 (1979)

    work page 1979

  37. [37]

    Chandrasekharan and U

    S. Chandrasekharan and U. J. Wiese, Quantum Link Models: A Discrete Approach to Gauge Theories, Nu- clear Physics B492, 455 (1997)

    work page 1997

  38. [38]

    Zohar and M

    E. Zohar and M. Burrello, Formulation of Lattice Gauge Theories for Quantum Simulations, Physical Review D 91, 054506 (2015)

    work page 2015

  39. [39]

    Buyens, S

    B. Buyens, S. Montangero, J. Haegeman, F. Verstraete, and K. Van Acoleyen, Finite-Representation Approxima- tion of Lattice Gauge Theories at the Continuum Limit with Tensor Networks, Physical Review D95, 094509 (2017)

    work page 2017

  40. [40]

    Bañuls, K

    M. Bañuls, K. Cichy, J. Cirac, and K. Jansen, The Mass Spectrum of the Schwinger Model with Matrix Product States, Journal of High Energy Physics2013, 158 (2013)

    work page 2013

  41. [41]

    Buyens, J

    B. Buyens, J. Haegeman, K. Van Acoleyen, H. Ver- schelde, and F. Verstraete, Matrix Product States for Gauge Field Theories, Physical Review Letters113, 091601 (2014)

    work page 2014

  42. [42]

    M. C. Bañuls, K. Cichy, K. Jansen, and H. Saito, Chiral condensate in the Schwinger model with matrix product operators, Physical Review D93, 094512 (2016)

    work page 2016

  43. [43]

    Felser, P

    T. Felser, P. Silvi, M. Collura, and S. Montangero, Two- Dimensional Quantum-Link Lattice Quantum Electrody- namics at Finite Density, Physical Review X10, 041040 (2020)

    work page 2020

  44. [44]

    Magnifico, T

    G. Magnifico, T. Felser, P. Silvi, and S. Montangero, Lattice quantum electrodynamics in (3+1)-dimensions at finite density with tensor networks, Nature Commu- nications12, 3600 (2021)

    work page 2021

  45. [45]

    Cataldi, G

    G. Cataldi, G. Magnifico, P. Silvi, and S. Montangero, Simulating(2+1)DSU(2) yang-mills lattice gauge theory at finite density with tensor networks, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033057 (2024)

    work page 2024

  46. [46]

    Rigobello, G

    M. Rigobello, G. Magnifico, P. Silvi, and S. Montangero, Hadrons in (1+1)D hamiltonian hardcore lattice QCD (2023), arXiv:2308.04488

    work page arXiv 2023

  47. [47]

    Eisert, M

    J. Eisert, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Colloquium: Area Laws for the Entanglement Entropy, Reviews of Modern Physics82, 277 (2010)

    work page 2010

  48. [48]

    Vidal, Efficient Simulation of One-Dimensional Quan- tum Many-Body Systems, Physical Review Letters93, 040502 (2004)

    G. Vidal, Efficient Simulation of One-Dimensional Quan- tum Many-Body Systems, Physical Review Letters93, 040502 (2004)

    work page 2004

  49. [49]

    Rigobello, S

    M. Rigobello, S. Notarnicola, G. Magnifico, and S. Mon- tangero, Entanglement Generation in (1+1)D QED Scat- tering Processes, Physical Review D104, 114501 (2021)

    work page 2021

  50. [50]

    Belyansky, S

    R. Belyansky, S. Whitsitt, N. Mueller, A. Fahimniya, E. R. Bennewitz, Z. Davoudi, and A. V. Gorshkov, High- Energy Collision of Quarks and Mesons in the Schwinger Model: From Tensor Networks to Circuit QED, Physical Review Letters132, 091903 (2024)

    work page 2024

  51. [51]

    Byrnes and Y

    T. Byrnes and Y. Yamamoto, Simulating Lattice Gauge Theories on a Quantum Computer, Physical Review A 73, 022328 (2006)

    work page 2006

  52. [52]

    Zohar, J

    E. Zohar, J. I. Cirac, and B. Reznik, Quantum simu- lations of gauge theories with ultracold atoms: Local gauge invariance from angular momentum conservation, Physical Review A88, 023617 (2013)

    work page 2013

  53. [53]

    J. C. Halimeh, N. Mueller, J. Knolle, Z. Papić, and Z. Davoudi, Quantum simulation of out-of-equilibrium dynamics in gauge theories (2025), arXiv:2509.03586

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    M. V. Damme, L. Vanderstraeten, J. D. Nardis, J. Haege- man, and F. Verstraete, Real-time scattering of inter- acting quasiparticles in quantum spin chains, Physical Review Research3, 013078 (2021)

    work page 2021

  55. [55]

    Milsted, J

    A. Milsted, J. Liu, J. Preskill, and G. Vidal, Collisions of False-Vacuum Bubble Walls in a Quantum Spin Chain, PRX Quantum3, 020316 (2022)

    work page 2022

  56. [56]

    R. G. Jha, A. Milsted, D. Neuenfeld, J. Preskill, and P. Vieira, Real-Time Scattering in Ising Field Theory using Matrix Product States, Physical Review Research 7, 023266 (2025)

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    S. R. White, Site basis excitation ansatz for matrix product states (2026), arXiv:2509.06241 [cond-mat.str- el]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  58. [58]

    Pichler, M

    T. Pichler, M. Dalmonte, E. Rico, P. Zoller, and S. Mon- tangero, Real-Time Dynamics in U(1) Lattice Gauge Theories with Tensor Networks, Physical Review X6, 011023 (2016)

    work page 2016

  59. [59]

    F. M. Surace and A. Lerose, Scattering of mesons in quantum simulators, New Journal of Physics23, 062001 (2021)

    work page 2021

  60. [60]

    Davoudi, C.-C

    Z. Davoudi, C.-C. Hsieh, and S. V. Kadam, Scattering wave packets of hadrons in gauge theories: Preparation on a quantum computer, Quantum8, 1520 (2024)

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    Papaefstathiou, J

    I. Papaefstathiou, J. Knolle, and M. C. Bañuls, Real- time scattering in the lattice Schwinger model, Physical Review D111, 014504 (2025)

    work page 2025

  62. [62]

    Davoudi, C.-C

    Z. Davoudi, C.-C. Hsieh, and S. V. Kadam, Quantum computation of hadron scattering in a lattice gauge theory (2025), arXiv:2505.20408

    work page arXiv 2025

  63. [63]

    Barata and E

    J. Barata and E. Rico, Real-Time Simulation of Jet Energy Loss and Entropy Production in High-Energy Scattering with Matter (2025), arXiv:2502.17558

    work page arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Calliari, M

    G. Calliari, M. D. Liberto, H. Pichler, and T. V. Zache, Quantum simulating continuum field theories with large- spin lattice models, PRX Quantum6, 030304 (2025)

    work page 2025

  65. [65]

    G.-X. Su, J. J. Osborne, and J. C. Halimeh, Cold-Atom Particle Collider, PRX Quantum5, 040310 (2024)

    work page 2024

  66. [66]

    Joshi, J

    R. Joshi, J. C. Louw, M. Meth, J. J. Osborne, K. Mato, G.-X. Su, M. Ringbauer, and J. C. Halimeh, Probing Hadron Scattering in Lattice Gauge Theories on Qudit Quantum Computers (2025), arXiv:2507.12614

    work page arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Schuhmacher, G.-X

    J. Schuhmacher, G.-X. Su, J. J. Osborne, A. Gandon, J. C. Halimeh, and I. Tavernelli, Observation of hadron scattering in a lattice gauge theory on a quantum com- puter (2025), arXiv:2505.20387

    work page arXiv 2025

  68. [68]

    Y. Chai, A. Crippa, K. Jansen, S. Kühn, V. R. Pascuzzi, 23 F. Tacchino, and I. Tavernelli, Fermionic wave packet scattering: A quantum computing approach, Quantum 9, 1638 (2025)

    work page 2025

  69. [69]

    Y. Chai, Y. Guo, and S. Kühn, Scalable quantum al- gorithm for meson scattering in a lattice gauge theory (2025), arXiv:2505.21240

    work page arXiv 2025

  70. [70]

    Ingoldby, M

    J. Ingoldby, M. Spannowsky, T. Sypchenko, S. Williams, and M. Wingate, Real-time scattering on quan- tum computers via hamiltonian truncation (2025), arXiv:2505.03878

    work page arXiv 2025

  71. [71]

    Paveˇ si´ c, M

    L. Pavešić, M. D. Liberto, and S. Montangero, Scattering and induced false vacuum decay in the two-dimensional quantum ising model (2026), arXiv:2509.02702

    work page arXiv 2026

  72. [72]

    R. C. Farrell, N. A. Zemlevskiy, M. Illa, and J. Preskill, Digital quantum simulations of scattering in quantum field theories using w states (2025), arXiv:2505.03111

    work page arXiv 2025

  73. [73]

    Hadronic scattering in (1+1)D SU(2) lattice gauge theory from tensor networks

    J. Barata, J. Hormaza, Z.-B. Kang, and W. Qian, Hadronic scattering in (1+1)D SU(2) lattice gauge the- ory from tensor networks (2025), arXiv:2511.00154

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Turco, G

    M. Turco, G. m. c. Quinta, J. a. Seixas, and Y. Omar, Quantum simulation of bound state scattering, PRX Quantum5, 020311 (2024)

    work page 2024

  75. [75]

    Turco, G

    M. Turco, G. m. c. Quinta, J. a. Seixas, and Y. Omar, Creation of wave packets for quantum chromodynam- ics on quantum computers, Phys. Rev. D112, 034506 (2025)

    work page 2025

  76. [76]

    G. H. Wannier, The Structure of Electronic Excitation Levels in Insulating Crystals, Physical Review52, 191 (1937)

    work page 1937

  77. [77]

    Kohn, Analytic Properties of Bloch Waves and Wan- nier Functions, Physical Review115, 809 (1959)

    W. Kohn, Analytic Properties of Bloch Waves and Wan- nier Functions, Physical Review115, 809 (1959)

    work page 1959

  78. [78]

    Marzari and D

    N. Marzari and D. Vanderbilt, Maximally localized gen- eralized Wannier functions for composite energy bands, Physical Review B56, 12847 (1997)

    work page 1997

  79. [79]

    Marzari, A

    N. Marzari, A. A. Mostofi, J. R. Yates, I. Souza, and D. Vanderbilt, Maximally localized Wannier functions: Theory and applications, Reviews of Modern Physics84, 1419 (2012)

    work page 2012

  80. [80]

    Silvi, F

    P. Silvi, F. Tschirsich, M. Gerster, J. Jünemann, D. Jaschke, M. Rizzi, and S. Montangero, The Tensor Networks Anthology: Simulation Techniques for Many- Body Quantum Lattice Systems, SciPost Physics Lecture Notes , 008 (2019)

    work page 2019

Showing first 80 references.