Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 23 references

Quantum Simulation of Molecular Dynamics Processes -- A Benchmark Study Using Classical Simulator and Present-Day Quantum Hardware

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Grid-based split-operator quantum circuits reproduce classical wave-packet dynamics on emulators; real hardware still adds large errors.

desk verdict Clean simulator validation, credible but under-reported hardware comparisons; the Gaussian-init story needs to be nailed down before this benchmark is fully useful. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.21030 v1 pith:P2CE2LRM submitted 2025-07-28 quant-ph

Tamila Kuanysheva , Brian Kendrick , Lukasz Cincio , Dmitri Babikov This is my paper
classification quant-ph
keywords quantummoleculardynamicssplit-operatormethodFouriertransformwave-packetpropagationtunnelingharmonicoscillatorgrid-basedencodingNISQhardwarebenchmark
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

This paper tries to establish that the standard grid-based split-operator method for the time-dependent Schrödinger equation can be translated into quantum circuits that are numerically exact in the noiseless limit. It benchmarks three basic molecular-dynamics processes—free wave-packet spreading, tunneling through a double-well barrier, and harmonic-oscillator vibration—and finds agreement with traditional classical propagation at the level of $10^{-13}$ in averaged observables. The same circuits on present-day hardware deviate strongly, with older superconducting processors degrading after a single time step and newer hardware giving only semi-quantitative agreement. The paper also proposes a shallow circuit for preparing a Gaussian-like initial wave packet, replacing deep generic initialization circuits that fail under hardware noise.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing structure is the symmetrized split-operator propagator $e^{-i\hat H\Delta t}\approx e^{-i V\Delta t/2}e^{-i T\Delta t}e^{-i V\Delta t/2}$, with the kinetic term applied by transforming to momentum space with the quantum Fourier transform. Potential and kinetic phase factors are encoded through the binary expansion of the grid index $m=\sum_j q_j2^j$, which turns linear phases into single-qubit phase gates and quadratic phases (from $m^2$ in the harmonic potential and $p_m^2$ in the kinetic term) into controlled-phase gates; an $X$ gate (or a cQFT variant) corrects the bit-reversal effect of the QFT. A shallow circuit prepares a Gaussian-like initial packet with $n-1$ two-qubit gates, replacing the deep generic initialization that would destroy hardware results.

What would settle it

Run the Gaussian-initialization circuit from the supplementary material on a noiseless emulator and on a present-day processor, and compare the measured probabilities to the intended Gaussian-like distribution; if the hardware distribution deviates more than the propagation error, the hardware comparison has an additional error source not accounted for.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a split-operator implementation of quantum molecular dynamics on a grid can be encoded into quantum circuits that, run on a noiseless emulator, exactly reproduce classical DVR/FFT wave-packet propagation for three fundamental test problems. On present-day hardware the same circuits are the limiting factor: after one split-operator step on older superconducting processors the wavefunction collapses to a uniform distribution, while newer superconducting and trapped-ion processors give results that are semi-quantitatively close to the benchmark. The best hardware results come from a shallower approximate quantum Fourier transform and from using a single large time step instead of many small ones, indicating that circuit depth, not split-operator accuracy, dominates the error budget on current devices.

Load-bearing premise

The Gaussian-like initial state is prepared by a shallow circuit that appears only in the supplementary material, and the hardware claims assume that circuit prepares the intended state with sufficient fidelity.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The emulator results certify that the split-operator circuits are numerically correct, so disagreements seen on hardware are attributable to device noise rather than algorithm error.
  • Shallow Gaussian-like initialization is the workable route on present hardware; generic deep initialization circuits fail, making this construction a reusable primitive for near-term molecular-dynamics experiments.
  • A single large time step with approximate QFT beats many small steps on current hardware, indicating that gate count, not Trotter error, dominates the total error budget.
  • Older superconducting processors cannot implement the kinetic or harmonic-potential operators at the required circuit depth; progress requires either shallower operator circuits or better hardware.
  • Trapped-ion hardware with all-to-all connectivity gave the closest-to-benchmark results among the tested devices, suggesting that two-qubit gate fidelity and connectivity set the practical limit.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The authors leave the shallow Gaussian-initialization circuit in the supplementary material; if published as a standalone primitive with fidelity benchmarks against generic initialization, it could become a standard input state for near-term quantum-dynamics experiments.
  • Because the single-step approach sacrifices split-operator accuracy to shorten circuits, there is presumably an optimal intermediate number of steps that balances Trotter error against gate noise on a given device; the paper does not search for it.
  • The approximate-QFT strategy suggests a general NISQ-era rule: discard small-angle controlled rotations whose phase error is below a device's gate-error scale, and benchmark the trade-off per device.
  • The encoding of $m$ and $m^2$ into phase and controlled-phase gates can be reused for any diagonal potential expressed as a low-degree polynomial in the grid index, not just quadratic and square-well shapes.
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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript develops and benchmarks quantum circuits for grid-based wave-packet propagation using the split-operator method, applied to three model problems: free-particle propagation, tunneling through a double-well barrier, and harmonic-oscillator vibrations. The authors derive phase-shift circuits for the potential and kinetic operators, introduce a shallow circuit for preparing a Gaussian-like initial state, validate the circuits on a noiseless classical emulator against conventional FFT-based propagation, and then run the same circuits on IBM Brisbane, IBM Torino, IonQ Aria 1, and Rigetti Ankaa-3 hardware. The central claims are that the emulator results agree with classical results to numerical precision, while present-day hardware results deviate strongly, with newer devices performing better and the single-step propagation approach outperforming the multi-step approach on hardware.

Significance. If the emulator benchmark is taken at face value, the paper provides a useful, carefully derived set of quantum circuits for split-operator time propagation on a grid, including explicit phase-operator constructions that are mathematically clean and agree with independent FFT-based classical propagation to roughly 1e-13 for the reported observables. This is a valuable validation result for practitioners building quantum molecular dynamics simulations. The multi-platform hardware comparison, including tests of approximate QFT and single-step versus multi-step propagation, is also useful as a status report on present-day devices. However, the strength of the central emulator claim depends on details of the Gaussian-like initialization that are not presented in the main text, and the hardware conclusions lack statistical grounding.

major comments (3)
  1. [§II-F, §III-A, Fig. 9 and Fig. 10] The Gaussian-like initialization circuit is load-bearing for the central benchmark claim, but the main text does not provide the general-n circuit, does not define what 'Gaussian-like' means quantitatively, and does not state whether the emulator benchmark runs used this shallow circuit or Qiskit's exact initialize. A circuit with only n-1 two-qubit gates cannot prepare an arbitrary 2^n-point sampled Gaussian, so the 10^-13 agreement reported for the free-particle and harmonic-oscillator problems cannot be evaluated without knowing which initial state was actually used. Please present the general-n circuit, report the overlap or fidelity with the target Gaussian for the parameters used in Sections III-A and III-B, and specify explicitly which initialization produced the green benchmark curves in Fig. 10.
  2. [§III-B, Fig. 10] The hardware results are presented as single data points without shot counts, numbers of repetitions, error bars, or calibration details. Since the paper draws quantitative conclusions such as 'IonQ Aria 1 shows only half the deviation from the benchmark compared to IBM Torino,' these claims are not statistically supported. Please provide the number of shots, the number of independent repetitions, and standard errors or confidence intervals for the plotted observables, and state the measurement calibration procedures used on each device.
  3. [§III-B, Fig. 10 (dashed vs. solid lines)] The comparison between the single-step approach (dashed lines) and the multiple-step approach (solid lines) confounds two effects: circuit depth and time-step error. The text notes that the single-step approach sacrifices numerical accuracy, but it does not explicitly state whether the dashed green benchmark lines are classical split-operator results for the same large time steps or separate emulator runs of the single-step protocol. Without this information, the claimed hardware advantage of the single-step method cannot be separated from its reduced algorithmic accuracy. Please specify the emulator benchmark used for the dashed lines and report the corresponding classical propagation error.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§III-A] There is a typo: 'caried out' should read 'carried out.'
  2. [§II-F, Eq. (23)] The order of tensor products in Eq. (23) is potentially confusing given the little-endian convention stated in §II-A; please clarify the qubit ordering in the tensor product or label the circuit diagram explicitly.
  3. [Fig. 10] The legend states that filled symbols denote exact QFT and empty symbols denote approximate QFT, but the IonQ data appear only in one panel and it is unclear whether both variants were run; please clarify which QFT variant was used for each symbol color and panel.
  4. [§III-B (Rigetti)] The statement that Ankaa-3 results are 'comparable to those obtained on the Eagle processor' is not accompanied by a figure or quantitative comparison; please either include the data or remove the claim.
  5. [Supplementary Material] The manuscript repeatedly refers to the supplementary material for general-n circuits and Qiskit code, but the main text does not summarize the general-n Gaussian initialization circuit; please include at least a schematic or a pseudocode description in the main text so the central method is self-contained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the emulator benchmark is a self-contained code-validation exercise and the hardware measurements are empirical.

full rationale

The paper's central benchmark claim is that quantum circuits implemented in Qiskit reproduce the results of traditional split-operator propagation on classical computers. This is a verification of circuit construction, not a derivation of a new physical prediction from fitted inputs. The split-operator formulas in Eqs. (2)-(4) are standard independent inputs, and the circuits are explicitly designed to implement those same operators; agreement at the 10^-13 level confirms correct encoding, bit ordering, QFT phases, and gate synthesis. No parameter appearing in the reported comparisons is fitted to make the emulator data match the classical data, and the hardware results are direct measurements of device output rather than quantities derived from the paper's own assumptions. Although the shallow Gaussian-like initialization circuit is described only by reference to the supplementary material and is not validated against the exact Gaussian in the main text, that omission is a completeness or correctness concern, not a circularity: the circuit is an ansatz input, and no claim is made that its construction follows from the benchmark outcomes. Self-citations such as reference 63 are contextual and are not load-bearing for the central benchmark. Therefore the claimed agreement is not equivalent to its inputs by construction in any circular sense.

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

The central results rest on standard numerical methods and physical inputs. No parameters are fitted to data; all rotation angles are fixed by the model and grid. The only unsupported item is the shallow Gaussian initialization circuit, whose correctness is taken as an assumption for the hardware results.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The split-operator approximation, Eq. (4), is accurate to third order in dt and is used as the time propagation method.
    Standard numerical method cited to refs 51-53; convergence tests at dt=1.5-50 a.u. support its accuracy.
  • domain assumption A DVR grid representation with 2^n points is equivalent to a finite basis representation of sinc functions.
    Section II-A, citing refs 49, 10, 28.
  • domain assumption The QFT acts as the discrete Fourier transform on the chosen grid, and the bit-reversal correction via the X gate yields the standard momentum grid ordering.
    Section II-E, Eqs. (15)-(22); validated by emulator agreement.
  • ad hoc to paper The shallow Gaussian initialization circuit (with n-1 two-qubit gates) prepares the intended Gaussian-like state.
    Section II-F; the construction is not given in the main text and is only stated to be in the supplementary material, so its correctness is assumed for the hardware claims.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Simulation of Molecular Dynamics Processes -- A Benchmark Study Using Classical Simulator and Present-Day Quantum Hardware." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/P2CE2LRM

@misc{pith2026250721030,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Simulation of Molecular Dynamics Processes -- A Benchmark Study Using Classical Simulator and Present-Day Quantum Hardware},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/P2CE2LRM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.21030}
}
read the original abstract

We explore how the fundamental problems in quantum molecular dynamics can be modelled using classical simulators (emulators) of quantum computers and the actual quantum hardware available to us today. The list of problems we tackle includes propagation of a free wave packet, vibration of a harmonic oscillator, and tunneling through a barrier. Each of these problems starts with the initial wave packet setup. Although Qiskit provides a general method for initializing wavefunctions, in most cases it generates deep quantum circuits. While these circuits perform well on noiseless simulators, they suffer from excessive noise on quantum hardware. To overcome this issue, we designed a shallower quantum circuit for preparing a Gaussian-like initial wave packet, which improves the performance on real hardware. Next, quantum circuits are implemented to apply the kinetic and potential energy operators for the evolution of a wavefunction over time. The results of our modelling on classical emulators of quantum hardware agree perfectly with the results obtained using the traditional (classical) methods. This serves as a benchmark and demonstrates that the quantum algorithms and Qiskit codes we developed are accurate. However, the results obtained on the actual quantum hardware available today, such as IBM's superconducting qubits and IonQ's trapped ions, indicate large discrepancies due to hardware limitations. This work highlights both the potential and challenges of using quantum computers to solve fundamental quantum molecular dynamics problems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.21030 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Note that in this case the phase shift 𝜑 = −𝑉𝑚𝑖𝑛 ∆𝑡 should only be applied to those states of the quantum register where the second most significant qubit is in state 1 (indicated by green color in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. This operation effectively implements a pairwise reordering of the basis states |𝑚⟩, ensuring the correct mapping of the computational states. In the case of four qubits: (𝐼 ⊗ 𝐼 ⊗ 𝐼 ⊗ 𝑋) ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. a) A step-like initial wave packet in the case of four qubits, suitable for the double-well tunneling problem shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_8.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: a) Gaussian-like initial wave packet in the case of four qubits; b) Quantum circuit to initialize this probability distribution in the 4-qubit case. A Gaussian wave packet is commonly selected due to its mathematical convenience and physical significance. IBM’s Qiskit …
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Three panels illustrate results from three test problems described in the text: (a) Evolution of a free-particle wave packet, (b) Quantum tunneling through a barrier, and (c) Vibrations of a harmonic oscillator. Green symbols represent results from the classical emula…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

23 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    J.; Tacchino, F.; Tavernelli, I

    (1) Miessen, A.; Ollitrault, P. J.; Tacchino, F.; Tavernelli, I. Quantum Algorithms for Quantum Dynamics. Nat Comput Sci 2022, 3 (1), 25–37. (2) Tacchino, F.; Chiesa, A.; Carretta, S.; Gerace, D. Quantum Computers as Universal Quantum Simulators: State-of-the-Art and Perspectives. Adv Quantum Technol. 2020, 3, 1900052. (3) Cortes, C. L.; Gray, S. K. Quant...

    work page 2022

  2. [16]

    Dynamics of a Free Particle Using Classical Computing and Quantum Computing: Introducing Quantum Computing to Chemistry Students

    (45) Bhattacharya, A.; Dasgupta, K.; Paine, B. Dynamics of a Free Particle Using Classical Computing and Quantum Computing: Introducing Quantum Computing to Chemistry Students. J Chem Educ 2024, 101 (4), 1599–1609. (46) Gayday, I.; Teplukhin, A.; Babikov, D. Computational Analysis of Vibrational Modes in Tetra -Sulfur Using Dimensionally Reduced Potential...

    work page 2024

  3. [21]

    Accuracy of Gates in a Quantum Computer based on Vibrational Eigenstates

    (63) Babikov, D. Accuracy of Gates in a Quantum Computer based on Vibrational Eigenstates. J Chem Phys 2004, 121, 7577-7585. (64) Benhelm, J.; Kirchmair, G.; Roos, C. F.; Blatt, R. Towards Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing with Trapped Ions. Nat Phys 2008, 4 (6), 463–466. (65) Wright, K.; Beck, K. M.; Debnath, S.; Amini, J. M.; Nam, Y .; Grzesiak, N.; Chen...

    work page 2004

  4. [80]

    A.; Morris, J

    (53) Fleck, J. A.; Morris, J. R.; Feit, M. D. Time-Dependent Propagation of High Energy Laser Beams through the Atmosphere. Appl Phys 1976, 10, 129-160. (54) Zalka, C. Simulating Quantum Systems on a Quantum Computer. Proc R Soc A 1998, 454, 313−322. (55) Fillion-Gourdeau, F.; MacLean, S.; Laflamme, R. Algorithm for the Solution of the Dirac Equation on D...

    work page 1976

  5. [88]

    E.; Gujarati, T

    (16) Liepuoniute, I.; Motta, M.; Pellegrini, T.; Rice, J. E.; Gujarati, T. P.; Gil, S.; Jones, G. O. Simulation of a Diels-Alder Reaction on a Quantum Computer. Phys Chem Chem Phys 2024, 26, 25181-25191. (17) Gray, S. K.; Balint-Kurti, G. G. Quantum Dynamics with Real Wave Packets, Including Application to Three -Dimensional (J=0)D+H2→HD+H Reactive Scatte...

    work page 2024

  6. [106]

    (32) Wang, Y .; Krstic, P. S. Collisional S-Matrix for the Vibrational Dynamics of H+H2 by Quantum Computing. J Phys Commun 2022, 6 (11), 115005. (33) Bultrini, D.; Vendrell, O. Mixed Quantum-Classical Dynamics for near Term Quantum Computers. Commun Phys 2023, 6 (1),

    work page 2022

  7. [269]

    A.; Zhang, S.; Krakauer, H

    (13) Al-Saidi, W. A.; Zhang, S.; Krakauer, H. Bond Breaking with Auxiliary-Field Quantum Monte Carlo. J Chem Phys 2007, 127 (14), 144101. (14) Clary, J. M.; Jones, E. B.; Vigil-Fowler, D.; Chang, C.; Graf, P. Exploring the Scaling Limitations of the V ariational Quantum Eigensolver with the Bond Dissociation of Hydride Diatomic Molecules. Int J Quantum Ch...

    work page 2007

  8. [328]

    F.; Tscherbul, T

    (34) Xing, X.; Gomez Cadavid, A.; Izmaylov, A. F.; Tscherbul, T. V . A Hybrid Quantum -Classical Algorithm for Multichannel Quantum Scattering of Atoms and Molecules. J Phys Chem Lett 2023, 14 (27), 6224–6233. (35) Teplukhin, A.; Kendrick, B. K.; Mniszewski, S. M.; Zhang, Y .; Kumar, A.; Negre, C. F. A.; Anisimov, P . M.; Tretiak, S.; Dub, P. A. Computing...

    work page 2023

Show all 23 references
  1. [597]

    Variational Quantum Simulation of Chemical Dynamics with Quantum Computers

    (42) Lee, C.-K.; Hsief, C.-Y .; Zhang, S.; Shi, L. Variational Quantum Simulation of Chemical Dynamics with Quantum Computers. J Chem Theory Comput 2022, 18, 2105−2113. (43) Javadi-Abhari, A.; Treinish, M.; Krsulich, K.; Wood, C. J.; Lishman, J.; Gacon, J.; Martiel, S.; Nation...

    2022 arXiv

  2. [662]

    The Fourier Method

    (61) Ronnie, K. The Fourier Method. In Numerical Grid Methods and Their Application to Schrödinger’ s Equation; Springer, 1993; V ol. NATO ASI Ser. C 412, pp 175–194. (62) Press, W.; Flannery, B.; Teukolsky, S.; Vetterling, W. Numerical Recipes in FORTRAN 77: The Art of Scient...

    1993

  3. [1139]

    J.; Mazzola, G.; Tavernelli, I

    (39) Ollitrault, P . J.; Mazzola, G.; Tavernelli, I. Nonadiabatic Molecular Quantum Dynamics with Quantum Computers. Phys Rev Lett 2020, 125 (26), 260511. (40) Feng, G. R.; Lu, Y .; Hao, L.; Zhang, F. H.; Long, G. L. Experimental Simulation of Quantum Tunneling in Small System...

    2020

  4. [1500]

    (10) Chan, H. H. S.; Meister, R.; Jones, T.; Tew, D. P .; Benjamin, S. C. Grid -Based Methods for Chemistry Simulations on a Quantum Computer. Sci Adv 2023, 9 (9), eabo7484. (11) Rossmannek, M.; Pavošević, F.; Rubio, A.; Tavernelli, I. Quantum Embedding Method for the Simulati...

    2023

  5. [1516]

    (67) Babbush, R.; Wiebe, N.; McClean, J.; McClain, J.; Neven, H.; Chan, G. K. L. Low -Depth Quantum Simulation of Materials. Phys Rev X 2018, 8 (1), 011044. (68) Babbush, R.; Berry, D. W.; Sanders, Y . R.; Kivlichan, I. D.; Scherer, A.; Wei, A. Y .; Love, P . J.; Aspuru -Guzik...

    2018 arXiv

  6. [1996]

    P.; Love, P

    (58) Kassai, I.; Jordan, S. P.; Love, P. J.; Mohseni, M.; Aspuru - Guzik, A. Polynomial -time Quantum Algorithm for the Simulation of Chemical Dynamics. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2008, 105, 18681−18686. (59) Bravyi, S.; Kitaev, A. Universal Quantum Computation with Ideal Clifford...

    2008

  7. [2007]

    H.; Cerjan, C .; Feit, M

    (52) Leforestier, C.; Bisselinc, R. H.; Cerjan, C .; Feit, M . D.; Friesner, R .; Guldberg, A .; Hammerich, A .; Jolicard, G .; Karrlein W.; Meyer, H.-D.; Lipkin, N.; Roncero, O.; Kosloff, R. A Comparison of Different Propagation Schemes for the Time Dependent Schrodinger Equa...

    1991

  8. [2016]

    T.; Stancil, P .; Geller, M

    (31) Sornborger, A. T.; Stancil, P .; Geller, M. R. Toward Prethreshold Gate -Based Quantum Simulation of Chemical Dynamics: Using Potential Energy Surfaces to Simulate Few - Channel Molecular Collisions. Quantum Inf Process 2018, 17 (5),

    2018

  9. [2024]

    IBM Quantum Computers: Evolution, Performance, and Future Directions

    (44) AbuGhanem, M. IBM Quantum Computers: Evolution, Performance, and Future Directions. arXiv:2410.00916v1 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  10. [2232]

    (41) Sornborger, A. T. Quantum Simulation of Tunneling in Small Systems. Sci Rep 2012, 2,

    2012

  11. [4195]

    H.; Sajjan, M.; Oh, S.; Kais, S

    (23) Sureshbabu, S. H.; Sajjan, M.; Oh, S.; Kais, S. Implementation of Quantum Machine Learning for Electronic Structure Calculations of Periodic Systems on Quantum Computing Devices. J Chem Inf Model 2021, 61, 2667-2674. (24) Xia, R.; Kais, S. Qubit Coupled Cluster Singles an...

    2021

  12. [4213]

    (26) O’Malley, P . J. J.; Babbush, R.; Kivlichan, I. D.; Romero, J.; McClean, J. R.; Barends, R.; Kelly, J.; Roushan, P .; Tranter, A.; Ding, N. et al . Scalable Quantum Simulation of Molecular Energies. Phys Rev X 2016, 6 (3), 031007. (27) Aarabi, M.; Sarka, J.; Pandey, A.; N...

    2016

  13. [4950]

    S.; Rabitz, H

    (9) Judson, R. S.; Rabitz, H. Teaching Lasers to Control Molecules. Phys Rev Lett 1992, 68 (10),

    1992

  14. [5464]

    -S.; Nielsen, E.; Ebert, M.; Inlek , V .; Wright, K.; Chaplin, V .; Maksymov, A.; Páez, E.; Poudel, A.; Maunz, P

    (66) Chen, J. -S.; Nielsen, E.; Ebert, M.; Inlek , V .; Wright, K.; Chaplin, V .; Maksymov, A.; Páez, E.; Poudel, A.; Maunz, P. et al. Benchmarking a Trapped -Ion Quantum Computer with 30 Qubits. Quantum 2024, 8,

    2024

  15. [6399]

    Full -Dimensional Schrödinger Wavefunction Calculations Using Tensors and Quantum Computers: The Cartesian Component -Separated Approach

    (28) Poirier, B.; Jerke, J. Full -Dimensional Schrödinger Wavefunction Calculations Using Tensors and Quantum Computers: The Cartesian Component -Separated Approach. Phys Chem Chem Phys 2022, 24 (7), 4437–4454. (29) Gulania, S.; Gray, S. K.; Alexeev, Y .; Peng, B.; Govind, N. ...

    2022 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.