Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 77 references

Lattice stitching by eigenvector continuation for Holstein polaron

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that the ground state of the Holstein polaron, at the lowest phonon frequency considered numerically to date (ω/t = 0.1) and across weak to strong coupling, can be reconstructed from eigenvalue problems on small…

desk verdict A genuinely useful EC-based lattice-stitching method for Holstein polarons, with solid empirical support but one unproven representability assumption; worth refereeing. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.04500 v1 pith:YLUKI2PB submitted 2025-02-06 quant-ph cond-mat.other

Elham Torabian , Roman V. Krems This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.other PACS 71.38.-k03.67.Ac
keywords Holsteinpolaroneigenvectorcontinuationlatticestitchingvariationalquantumeigensolverelectron-phononcouplingadiabaticregimequbitreductionsmall-latticefragments
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper tries to establish that the Holstein polaron ground state on a large lattice is accurately contained in a low-dimensional subspace built from the ground states of much smaller lattice fragments. The assembly is done by eigenvector continuation: the full Hamiltonian is projected onto the span of tensor products of small-segment eigenvectors, and the resulting small effective matrix is diagonalized. Numerical tests show this reproduces reference polaron energies within about 5% at the low phonon frequency ω/t = 0.1 across the entire coupling range from weak to strong. If correct, the practical payoff is that a variational quantum eigensolver needs only 11 qubits for a 100-site lattice with 32 phonons per site, instead of the 507 qubits required for a direct encoding.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is eigenvector continuation, a projection method in which the unknown eigenvector of a target Hamiltonian is approximated as a linear combination of training eigenvectors of fixed Hamiltonians. What is new here is the choice of training vectors: ground states of small lattice segments, obtained by setting inter-segment hopping amplitudes to zero and embedded in the full Hilbert space by tensor products, with overlapping segments added to improve the subspace. Projecting the full Hamiltonian onto this span gives a small k × k effective Hamiltonian and overlap matrix; diagonalizing that matrix yields the approximate ground-state energy and wavefunction. This converts the exponentially large Hilbert space of dimension Ns × Np^Ns into a problem of size k × k, where k is a fraction of the lattice size set by the segment length.

What would settle it

For a moderate lattice such as 12 to 16 sites with 4 to 6 phonons per site at ω/t = 0.1 and coupling around λ = 0.5, compute the exact ground state by direct diagonalization and measure the squared overlap with the eigenvector-continuation subspace built from two- and four-site segments; if that overlap is significantly below 1 (for example, below 0.9), the subspace assumption fails, and the paper's energy accuracy would not be reproducible for larger systems.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a lattice stitching algorithm: the ground state of the full Holstein Hamiltonian can be obtained by first diagonalizing small decoupled segments of two, three, or four sites, then using eigenvector continuation to stitch those segment eigenvectors into the full lattice. Training vectors are generated by zeroing inter-segment hopping amplitudes, with additional overlapping segments improving accuracy, and the full Hamiltonian is projected onto this subspace to yield a small effective eigenvalue problem. The paper shows that for a 100-site lattice at ω/t = 0.1, this approach reproduces the ground-state energy within 5% of diagrammatic Monte Carlo and generalized Green's function cluster expansion results for coupling strengths λ from 0.15 to 1.8. Combining the same subspace reduction with a variational quantum eigensolver recovers the energy within 10% while using only 11 qubits and 11 to 22 rotation parameters for a system whose full Hilbert space would otherwise require 507 qubits.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the ground state of the 100-site Holstein lattice lies, to within a few percent, in the span of tensor products of low-energy eigenvectors of small decoupled two-to-four-site segments, with no proof that this subspace captures the polaron across all coupling strengths and phonon frequencies.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A 100-site Holstein lattice with 32 phonons per site can be solved by a variational quantum eigensolver with 11 qubits instead of 507, a resource reduction that follows directly from the qubit-count formula nEC = (log Nk + Nk log Np) / log 2.
  • At strong coupling (λ ≥ 1), two-site fragments alone are sufficient training points, while weak coupling requires four-site fragments, giving a concrete recipe for choosing segment sizes.
  • The overlap-enriched stitching procedure converges to the strong-coupling analytical energy at λ = 4 within about 2% relative error for a 100-site lattice.
  • The same training set and subspace construction work for both classical diagonalization and variational quantum eigensolvers, so the method transfers directly to near-term quantum hardware.
  • Because the qubit reduction ratio scales as nEC/n ≈ Nk/Ns, the savings grow with lattice size, making large-lattice polaron simulations increasingly practical.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The paper leaves untested whether the same subspace captures the ground state at phonon frequencies below ω/t = 0.1, so an immediate extension is to test stitching at ω/t = 0.05 or 0.01 against diagrammatic Monte Carlo.
  • A direct check of the load-bearing assumption would be to compute the squared overlap of the exact ground state with the eigenvector-continuation subspace for moderate lattices; the paper reports energies but not these overlaps.
  • The method should extend to two- and three-dimensional Holstein lattices if training segments include hopping bonds in all spatial directions, but that generalization is not demonstrated here.
  • The qubit-count reduction suggests that larger particle-phonon systems than the 100-site example, or systems with more phonons per site, may become accessible to quantum simulation, but only if the subspace accuracy persists in those regimes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a lattice-stitching algorithm based on eigenvector continuation (EC) for the Holstein polaron. The lattice is divided into small segments of Nk = 2, 3, or 4 sites; the exact ground states of the isolated segments (with some overlap segments) are used as a variational basis for the full Ns-site Hamiltonian. The authors report that for Ns = 100 this reproduces the strong-coupling analytical energy at λ = 4 within 2% (with Np = 38 phonons per site) and agrees with diagrammatic Monte Carlo and generalized Green's function cluster expansion references within 5% at ω/t = 0.1 for a range of couplings. The method is then combined with VQE, reducing the required qubit count from 507 to 11 for a 100-site, 32-phonon-per-site calculation.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the paper offers a notable reduction in the effective Hilbert space for polaron problems: a 100-site Holstein lattice is reduced to two- or four-site eigenproblems plus a small effective diagonalization, and the resulting 11-qubit EC-VQE resource estimate is concrete and easily checked. The numerical benchmarks against external references (Refs. [28,73]) and the analytic strong-coupling formula are appropriate, and no parameters are fitted to the target energies. The main weakness is the lack of a direct test of the representability assumption that underlies the method, together with some inconsistencies in the description of the training basis and the 'fully converged' claim. These issues are load-bearing because the entire method rests on the presumed accuracy of the truncated EC subspace.

major comments (4)
  1. [Method; Results (Fig. 2)] The central representability assumption — that the 100-site ground state is well approximated in the span of translated tensor products of ground states of isolated Nk-site segments — is never directly tested. The paper reports final energies that agree with Refs. [28,73], but it does not report the overlap between the EC state and an exact small-system ground state, nor any Nk→∞ or basis-size extrapolation. At ω/t=0.1, the polaron cloud can be several sites wide, and the frozen intra-segment wavefunctions may miss correlations across segment boundaries; the observed improvement from Nk=2 to Nk=4 is suggestive but does not by itself control this truncation error. Please add a direct benchmark (e.g., Ns=8 or 12 exact diagonalization for the same parameters) and a study of the projected-energy convergence with the number of training vectors.
  2. [Results (Figs. 2 and 5)] The claim in the Abstract and Conclusions that the method works "in the entire range of electron-phonon coupling, from weak to strong" at ω/t=0.1 exceeds the presented data. At ω/t=0.1, Fig. 2 covers λ∈[0.15,1.8] and Fig. 5 covers λ∈[0.1,2]; the only strong-coupling point, λ=4, is computed at ω/t=0.5 (Fig. 1). The adiabatic strong-coupling regime, where the polaron is large and the segment truncation is most risky, is therefore not tested. Either extend the benchmark to strong λ at low ω or restrict the claim accordingly.
  3. [Method; Fig. 1 caption] The size of the training basis is described inconsistently. The text says the lattice is appended by "all possible overlaps between the uncoupled segments", which for Nk=2 and Ns=100 would give 99 two-site fragments, yet the Fig. 1 caption states that the effective Hamiltonian diagonalization is 50×50. If only the Ns/Nk non-overlapping segments are used, the method is not the all-overlap version described in the text; if overlaps are included, the stated matrix size is wrong. Please specify exactly which fragments enter the training set for each figure.
  4. [Results (Figs. 1 and 4)] The meaning of "fully converged" is inconsistent. Fig. 1 reaches 2% relative error at λ=4 using Np=38 phonons per site, while Fig. 4 and the text use Np=32 and report 5% error, yet call it "fully converged". Because the 11-qubit resource claim is tied to Np=32, the paper should state clearly whether Np=32 is a converged phonon number or a practical truncation.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (8)] For Nk=4 and Np=32, Eq. (8) gives nEC=22, not 11; the text's 11-qubit claim corresponds to Nk=2. Please clarify which Nk is used for each VQE result.
  2. [Method, paragraph after Eq. (3)] The sentence "the entire set of training vectors can be constructed by a single exact diagonalization" is potentially misleading, because the translated tensor-product training states are not eigenstates of a single small matrix; only the segment wavefunctions come from one diagonalization. Please rephrase.
  3. [Eq. (4)] The generalized eigenvalue problem uses the overlap matrix S, but the paper does not discuss numerical issues if the training vectors become linearly dependent. A sentence on regularization or on how the EC subspace is made linearly independent would be helpful.
  4. [Figures 2, 3, and 5] The numerical values behind the relative-error curves are not provided; shaded areas and curves are difficult to reproduce from the plots. A supplementary table of energies for the reported parameter points would strengthen the paper.
  5. [Throughout] There are several typos and wording issues; for example, "Hamliltonian" appears in the first paragraph of the Method section. A careful proofread would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the EC energies are genuine variational estimates from decoupled-segment eigenvectors, benchmarked against independent external references.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is not circular. The training vectors are obtained by exact diagonalization of decoupled small-segment Hamiltonians (hopping within segments retained, inter-segment hopping set to zero), as described in the Method section. The target Hamiltonian is then projected onto the span of these training vectors via Eq. (3), and the generalized eigenvalue problem of Eq. (4) is solved. No parameter is fitted to the target 100-site energies; the effective Hamiltonian matrix elements are computed directly from the full target Hamiltonian. The reported results are compared with independent benchmarks: diagrammatic Monte Carlo and generalized Green's function cluster expansions [28,73], and an analytic strong-coupling formula [76]. The choices of segment size Nk and phonon number Np are convergence parameters, and the paper explicitly reports the resulting relative errors rather than claiming exactness. The self-citations (Refs. [29] and [75]) are not load-bearing for the physics claim: Ref. [75] is cited for the VQE circuit ansatz, alongside the external Ref. [74], and Ref. [29] is only context for prior low-phonon-frequency calculations. The main limitation is that the representability of the 100-site ground state in the span of decoupled-segment training vectors is assumed rather than proven; however, this is a variational-subspace accuracy assumption, not a circular definition. If the assumption failed, the method would simply be inaccurate, not circular. Therefore no circular step is present, and the paper's results stand as genuine numerical predictions benchmarked externally.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a representability assumption about the polaron wavefunction (that small decoupled segments span it well), a translational symmetry assumption for constructing training points, and the standard Rayleigh-Ritz variational principle. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Segment size Nk = 2, 3, 4
    Chosen by hand to balance accuracy and computational cost; affects results in Fig. 2.
  • Phonon number per site Np = Up to 38
    Convergence parameter; threshold chosen when energy change is small, not fitted to reference data.
  • Training set composition (including overlaps) = Varies (segments plus overlaps)
    The inclusion of overlapping segments is a heuristic that improves accuracy; not derived from theory.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The ground state of the full Holstein Hamiltonian is well approximated by the span of tensor products of ground states of decoupled lattice segments.
    Core representability assumption of the EC stitching; enters in the Method section where training vectors are generated by setting a subset of hopping amplitudes to zero.
  • domain assumption Translational symmetry of the lattice allows all training vectors to be generated from a single segment diagonalization.
    Used to construct the full set of training vectors for the 100-site lattice; requires periodic boundary conditions or negligible boundary effects.
  • standard math The Rayleigh-Ritz projection of the Hamiltonian onto the training subspace gives an upper bound that converges to the exact ground state as the subspace grows.
    Basis of eigenvector continuation; standard property of subspace diagonalization.
  • domain assumption The third-order strong-coupling analytical solution (Eq. 10) is accurate enough at λ=4 to serve as a convergence benchmark.
    Used to judge convergence in Fig. 1; the asymptotic expansion has unknown error at λ=4.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Lattice stitching by eigenvector continuation for Holstein polaron." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YLUKI2PB

@misc{pith2026250204500,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Lattice stitching by eigenvector continuation for Holstein polaron},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YLUKI2PB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.04500}
}
abstract

Simulations of lattice particle - phonon systems are fundamentally restricted by the exponential growth of the number of quantum states with the lattice size. Here, we demonstrate an algorithm that constructs the lowest eigenvalue and eigenvector for the Holstein model in extended lattices from eigenvalue problems for small, independent lattice segments. This leads to exponential reduction of the computational Hilbert space and allows applications of variational quantum algorithms to particle - phonon interactions in large lattices. We illustrate that the ground state of the Holstein polaron in the entire range of electron - phonon coupling, from weak to strong, and the lowest phonon frequency ($\omega/t = 0.1$) considered by numerical calculations to date can be obtained from a sequence of up to four-site problems. When combined with quantum algorithms, the present approach leads to a dramatic reduction of required quantum resources. We show that the ground state of the Holstein polaron in a lattice with 100 sites and 32 site phonons can be computed by a variational quantum eigensolver with 11 qubits.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2502.04500 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. examines the convergence of the present EC ap￾proach with the number of phonons to this energy at λ = 4. The calculations are for the lattice with Ns = 100 sites and ω/t = 0.5. In order to obtain the training points for these calculations, the lattice is split into two-site seg￾ments (Nk = 2). The lattice thus split is appended by segment overlaps, i.e. lattice sites 1–4 are represented by the following segments: (1… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    S. H. Simon,The Oxford Solid State Basics(OUP Ox- ford, 2013)

    2013

  2. [2]

    Holstein, Studies of polaron motion: Part ii

    T. Holstein, Studies of polaron motion: Part ii. the 5 0.25 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.25 1.50 1.75 5 6 7 8 9 10Relative Error (%) 0.5 1.0 1.5 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 GS Energy (unit of t) Reference energy EC-VQE energy FIG. 5:The relative error of the EC-VQE calculations of the Holstein polaron energy for a lattice withNs = 100 sites, ω/t = 0.1 and up to Np = 32 phonons p...

    work page 1959

  3. [3]

    Alexandrov and N

    A. Alexandrov and N. Mott, Bipolarons, Rep. Prog. Phys. 57, 1197 (1994)

    work page 1994

  4. [4]

    G. D. Scholes and G. Rumbles, Excitons in nanoscale systems, Nat. Mater.5, 683 (2006)

    work page 2006

  5. [5]

    S. H. Park, A. Roy, S. Beaupré, S. Cho, N. Coates, J. S. Moon, D. Moses, M. Leclerc, K. Lee, and A. J. Heeger, Bulk heterojunction solar cells with internal quantum ef- ficiency approaching 100%, Nat. photonics3, 297 (2009)

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    F. C. Spano, The spectral signatures of Frenkel polarons in H-and J-aggregates, Acc. Chem. Res.43, 429 (2010)

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Miyata, D

    K. Miyata, D. Meggiolaro, M. T. Trinh, P. P. Joshi, E. Mosconi, S. C. Jones, F. De Angelis, and X. Y. Zhu, Large polarons in lead halide perovskites, Sci. Adv. 3, e1701217 (2017)

    work page 2017

  8. [8]

    G. D. Scholes, G. R. Fleming, A. Olaya-Castro, and R. Van Grondelle, Lessons from nature about solar light harvesting, Nat. Chem.3, 763 (2011)

    work page 2011

Show all 77 references
  1. [9]

    Damjanović, I

    A. Damjanović, I. Kosztin, U. Kleinekathöfer, and K. Schulten, Excitons in a photosynthetic light- harvesting system: a combined molecular dynamics, quantum chemistry, and polaron model study, Phys. Rev. E 65, 031919 (2002)

    2002

  2. [10]

    J. Ye, K. Sun, Y. Zhao, Y. Yu, C. Kong Lee, and J. Cao, Excitonic energy transfer in light-harvesting complexes in purple bacteria, J. Chem. Phys.136, 245104 (2012)

    2012

  3. [11]

    Ferretti, R

    M. Ferretti, R. Hendrikx, E. Romero, J. Southall, R. J. Cogdell, V. I. Novoderezhkin, G. D. Scholes, and R. Van Grondelle, Dark states in the light-harvesting complex 2 revealed by two-dimensional electronic spec- troscopy, Sci. Rep.6, 20834 (2016)

    2016

  4. [12]

    Feist, J

    J. Feist, J. Galego, and F. J. Garcia-Vidal, Polaritonic chemistry with organic molecules, ACS Photonics5, 205 (2018)

    2018

  5. [13]

    Xiang, R

    B. Xiang, R. F. Ribeiro, M. Du, L. Chen, Z. Yang, J. Wang, J. Yuen-Zhou, and W. Xiong, Intermolecular vibrationalenergytransferenabled bymicrocavitystrong light-matter coupling, Science368, 665 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Schirotzek, C

    A. Schirotzek, C. H. Wu, A. Sommer, and M. W. Zwier- lein, Observation of Fermi polarons in a tunable Fermi liquid of ultracold atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett.102, 230402 (2009)

    2009

  7. [15]

    Koschorreck, D

    M. Koschorreck, D. Pertot, E. Vogt, B. Fröhlich, M. Feld, and M. Köhl, Attractive and repulsive Fermi polarons in two dimensions, Nature485, 619 (2012)

    2012

  8. [16]

    N. B. Jørgensen, L. Wacker, K. T. Skalmstang, M. M. Parish, J. Levinsen, R. S. Christensen, G. M. Bruun, and J. J. Arlt, Observation of attractive and repulsive polarons in a Bose-Einstein condensate, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 055302 (2016)

    2016

  9. [17]

    M. G. Hu, M. J. Van de Graaff, D. Kedar, J. P. Corson, E.A.Cornell,andD.S.Jin,Bosepolaronsinthestrongly interacting regime, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 055301 (2016)

    2016

  10. [18]

    Baggioli and O

    M. Baggioli and O. Pujolas, Electron-phonon interac- tions, metal-insulator transitions, and holographic mas- sive gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.114, 251602 (2015)

    2015

  11. [19]

    Sous and M

    J. Sous and M. Pretko, Fractons from frustration in hole-doped antiferromagnets, npj Quantum Mater.5, 81 (2020)

    2020

  12. [20]

    Sous and M

    J. Sous and M. Pretko, Fractons from polarons, Phys. Rev. B 102, 214437 (2020)

    2020

  13. [21]

    Bonča, S

    J. Bonča, S. A. Trugman, and I. Batistić, Holstein po- laron, Phys. Rev. B60, 1633 (1999)

    1999

  14. [22]

    Bonča, S

    J. Bonča, S. Maekawa, and T. Tohyama, Numerical ap- proach to the low-doping regime of thet−J model, Phys. Rev. B 76, 035121 (2007)

    2007

  15. [23]

    Bonča and S

    J. Bonča and S. A. Trugman, Dynamic properties of a polaroncoupledtodispersiveopticalphonons,Phys.Rev. B 103, 054304 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    Jeckelmann and S

    E. Jeckelmann and S. R. White, Density-matrix renormalization-group study of the polaron problem in the Holstein model, Phys. Rev. B57, 6376 (1998)

    1998

  17. [25]

    Zhang, E

    C. Zhang, E. Jeckelmann, and S. R. White, Dynamical properties of the one-dimensional Holstein model, Phys. Rev. B 60, 14092 (1999)

    1999

  18. [26]

    Dorfner, L

    F. Dorfner, L. Vidmar, C. Brockt, E. Jeckelmann, and F. Heidrich-Meisner, Real-time decay of a highly excited charge carrier in the one-dimensional Holstein model, Phys. Rev. B91, 104302 (2015)

    2015

  19. [27]

    Kloss, D

    B. Kloss, D. R. Reichman, and R. Tempelaar, Multiset matrix product state calculations reveal mobile Franck- Condon excitations under strong Holstein-type coupling, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 126601 (2019)

    2019

  20. [28]

    M. R. Carbone, D. R. Reichman, and J. Sous, Numer- ically exact generalized Green’s function cluster expan- sions for electron-phonon problems, Phys. Rev. B104, 035106 (2021)

    2021

  21. [29]

    Kairon, J

    P. Kairon, J. Sous, M. Berciu, and R. V. Krems, Extrap- olation of polaron properties to low phonon frequencies by Bayesian machine learning, arXiv:2312.09991 (2023). 6

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    J. Sous, M. Berciu, and R. V. Krems, Bipolarons bound by repulsive phonon-mediated interactions, Phys. Rev. A 96, 063619 (2017)

    2017

  23. [31]

    Berciu, Green’s function of a dressed particle, Phys

    M. Berciu, Green’s function of a dressed particle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 036402 (2006)

    2006

  24. [32]

    Berciu and G

    M. Berciu and G. L. Goodvin, Systematic improvement of the momentum average approximation for the Green’s function of a Holstein polaron, Phys. Rev. B76, 165109 (2007)

    2007

  25. [33]

    Ebrahimnejad, G

    H. Ebrahimnejad, G. A. Sawatzky, and M. Berciu, The dynamics of a doped hole in a cuprate is not controlled by spin fluctuations, Nat. Phys.10, 951 (2014)

    2014

  26. [34]

    B. Lau, M. Berciu, and G. A. Sawatzky, Single-polaron properties of the one-dimensional breathing-mode Hamil- tonian, Phys. Rev. B76, 174305 (2007)

    2007

  27. [35]

    Ebrahimnejad, G

    H. Ebrahimnejad, G. A. Sawatzky, and M. Berciu, Differ- ences between the insulating limit quasiparticles of one- band and three-band cuprate models, J. Phys. Condens. Matter 28, 105603 (2016)

    2016

  28. [36]

    Bieniasz, M

    K. Bieniasz, M. Berciu, M. Daghofer, and A. M. Oleś, Green’s function variational approach to orbital polarons in KCuF3, Phys. Rev. B94, 085117 (2016)

    2016

  29. [37]

    G. L. Goodvin, M. Berciu, and G. A. Sawatzky, Green’s functionoftheHolsteinpolaron,Phys.Rev.B 74,245104 (2006)

    2006

  30. [38]

    Berciu, Few-particle Green’s functions for strongly correlated systems on infinite lattices, Phys

    M. Berciu, Few-particle Green’s functions for strongly correlated systems on infinite lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 246403 (2011)

    2011

  31. [39]

    Bieniasz, M

    K. Bieniasz, M. Berciu, and A. M. Oleś, Orbiton-magnon interplay in the spin-orbital polarons of KCuF 3 and LaMnO3, Phys. Rev. B95, 235153 (2017)

    2017

  32. [40]

    N. V. Prokof’ev and B. V. Svistunov, Polaron problem by diagrammatic quantum Monte Carlo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 2514 (1998)

    1998

  33. [41]

    N. V. Prokof’ev and B. Svistunov, Fermi-polaron prob- lem: Diagrammatic Monte Carlo method for divergent sign-alternating series, Phys. Rev. B77, 020408 (2008)

    2008

  34. [42]

    A. S. Mishchenko, N. V. Prokof’ev, A. Sakamoto, and B. V. Svistunov, Diagrammatic quantum Monte Carlo study of the Fröhlich polaron, Phys. Rev. B 62, 6317 (2000)

    2000

  35. [43]

    J. T. Titantah, C. Pierleoni, and S. Ciuchi, Free energy of the Fröhlich polaron in two and three dimensions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 206406 (2001)

    2001

  36. [44]

    P. E. Kornilovitch, Continuous-time quantum Monte Carlo algorithm for the lattice polaron, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5382 (1998)

    1998

  37. [45]

    La Magna and R

    A. La Magna and R. Pucci, Variational study of the dis- crete holstein model, Phys. Rev. B53, 8449 (1996)

    1996

  38. [46]

    D. W. Brown, K. Lindenberg, and Y. Zhao, Variational energy band theory for polarons: mapping polaron struc- ture with the global-local method, J. Chem. Phys.107, 3179 (1997)

    1997

  39. [47]

    A. H. Romero, D. W. Brown, and K. Lindenberg, Self- trapping line of the Holstein molecular crystal model in one dimension, Phys. Rev. B60, 4618 (1999)

    1999

  40. [48]

    Y. Wang, I. Esterlis, T. Shi, J. I. Cirac, and E. Dem- ler, Zero-temperature phases of the two-dimensional Hubbard-Holstein model: A non-Gaussian exact diago- nalization study, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043258 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    Yang, Z.-H

    J. Yang, Z.-H. Cui, A. Mahajan, H. Zhai, D. R. Reich- man, and G. K. Chan, Benchmarking the exponential ansatz for the Holstein model, arXiv:2405.18771 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    E. Z. Kuchinskii and M. V. Sadovskii, Generalized Dy- namical Keldysh Model, arXiv:2401.08118 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Y. C. Yam, M. M. Moeller, G. A. Sawatzky, and M. Berciu, Peierls versus Holstein models for describing electron-phonon coupling in perovskites, Phys. Rev. B 102, 235145 (2020)

    2020

  44. [52]

    Peruzzo, J

    A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M. H. Yung, X. Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. O’brien, A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor, Nat. Commun.5, 4213 (2014)

    2014

  45. [53]

    M. M. Denner, A. Miessen, H. Yan, I. Tavernelli, T. Ne- upert, E. Demler, and Y. Wang, A hybrid quantum- classical method for electron-phonon systems, Commu- nications Physics 6, 233 (2023)

    2023

  46. [54]

    W. Li, J. Ren, S. Huai, T. Cai, Z. Shuai, and S. Zhang, Efficient quantum simulation of electron-phonon systems by variational basis state encoder, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023046 (2023)

    2023

  47. [55]

    Macridin, P

    A. Macridin, P. Spentzouris, J. Amundson, and R. Harnik, Digital quantum computation of fermion- boson interacting systems, Phys. Rev. A 98, 042312 (2018)

    2018

  48. [56]

    Frame, R

    D. Frame, R. He, I. Ipsen, D. Lee, D. Lee, and E. Rrapaj, Eigenvector continuation with subspace learning, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 032501 (2018)

    2018

  49. [57]

    Sarkar and D

    A. Sarkar and D. Lee, Convergence of eigenvector con- tinuation, Phys. Rev. Lett.126, 032501 (2021)

    2021

  50. [58]

    D. K. Frame,Ab initio simulations of light nuclear sys- tems using eigenvector continuation and auxiliary field Monte Carlo, PhD dissertation, Michigan State Univer- sity, Department of Physics (2019)

    2019

  51. [59]

    Duguet, A

    T. Duguet, A. Ekström, R. J. Furnstahl, S. König, and D. Lee, Colloquium: Eigenvector continuation and projection-based emulators, Rev. Mod. Phys.96, 031002 (2024)

    2024

  52. [60]

    König, A

    S. König, A. Ekström, K. Hebeler, D. Lee, and A. Schwenk, Eigenvector continuation as an efficient and accurate emulator for uncertainty quantification, Phys. Lett. B 810, 135814 (2020)

    2020

  53. [61]

    Ekström and G

    A. Ekström and G. Hagen, Global sensitivity analysis of bulk properties of an atomic nucleus, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 252501 (2019)

    2019

  54. [62]

    Demol, T

    P. Demol, T. Duguet, A. Ekström, M. Frosini, K. Hebeler, S. König, D. Lee, A. Schwenk, V. Somà, and A. Tichai, Improved many-body expansions from eigen- vector continuation, Phys. Rev. C101, 041302 (2020)

    2020

  55. [63]

    Yoshida and N

    S. Yoshida and N. Shimizu, Constructing approximate shell-model wavefunctions by eigenvector continuation, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys.2022, 053D02 (2022)

    2022

  56. [64]

    X.ZhangandR.J.Furnstahl,Fastemulationofquantum three-body scattering, Phys. Rev. C105, 064004 (2022)

    2022

  57. [65]

    Drischler, M

    C. Drischler, M. Quinonez, P. G. Giuliani, A. E. Lovell, and F. M. Nunes, Toward emulating nuclear reactions us- ing eigenvector continuation, Phys. Lett. B823, 136777 (2021)

    2021

  58. [66]

    J. A. Melendez, C. Drischler, A. J. Garcia, R. J. Furn- stahl, and X. Zhang, Fast & accurate emulation of two-body scattering observables without wave functions, Phys. Lett. B821, 136608 (2021)

    2021

  59. [67]

    Wesolowski, I

    S. Wesolowski, I. Svensson, A. Ekström, C. Forssén, R. J. Furnstahl, J. A. Melendez, and D. R. Phillips, Rigorous constraints on three-nucleon forces in chiral effective field theory from fast and accurate calculations of few-body observables, Phys. Rev. C104, 064001 (2021)

    2021

  60. [68]

    Eklind, Eigenvector continuation and strongly in- 7 teracting cold atom systems , Master’s dissertation, Chalmers University of Technology (2021)

    C. Eklind, Eigenvector continuation and strongly in- 7 teracting cold atom systems , Master’s dissertation, Chalmers University of Technology (2021)

    2021

  61. [69]

    M. C. Franzke, A. Tichai, K. Hebeler, and A. Schwenk, Excited states from eigenvector continuation: The an- harmonic oscillator, Phys. Lett. B830, 137101 (2022)

    2022

  62. [70]

    S. E. Schrader,Eigenvector continuation in chemistry on a quantum computer, Master’s dissertation, University of Oslo (2022)

    2022

  63. [71]

    Francis, A

    A. Francis, A. A. Agrawal, J. H. Howard, E. Kökcü, and A. Kemper, Subspace Diagonalization on Quantum Com- puters using Eigenvector Continuation, arXiv:2209.10571 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Mejuto-Zaera and A

    C. Mejuto-Zaera and A. F. Kemper, Quantum eigenvec- tor continuation for chemistry applications, Electronic Structure 5, 045007 (2023)

    2023

  65. [73]

    and the results of variational Green’s function calcu- lations [28] at arbitrary values ofλ. The objective of EC is to estimate an extreme eigenvalue corresponding to eigenvector |v(ct)⟩ of a parametrized Hamiltonian ˆH(ct), where ct denotes col- lectively the target parameter...

  66. [74]

    Macridin,Phonons, charge and spin in correlated sys- tems, PhD dissertation, University of Groningen (2003)

    A. Macridin,Phonons, charge and spin in correlated sys- tems, PhD dissertation, University of Groningen (2003)

    2003

  67. [75]

    Kandala, A

    A. Kandala, A. Mezzacapo, K. Temme, M. Takita, M. Brink, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Hardware- efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small moleculesandquantummagnets,nature 549,242(2017)

    2017

  68. [76]

    Asnaashari, D

    K. Asnaashari, D. Bondarenko, and R. V. Krems, Variational quantum computation with discrete vari- able representation for ro-vibrational calculations, arXiv:2303.09822 (2024)

    2024

  69. [77]

    Marchand,Polaron physics beyond the Holstein model, PhD dissertation, University of British Columbia (2011)

    D. Marchand,Polaron physics beyond the Holstein model, PhD dissertation, University of British Columbia (2011)

    2011

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.