Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Multi-Modal Multi-Behavior Sequential Recommendation with Conditional Diffusion-Based Feature Denoising

T0 review · 5 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A quantum encoding method called turbuloscope can prepare a fully turbulent flow with only 30 qubits, using a linear-depth circuit and no auxiliary qubits.

desk verdict The submission is a broken artifact: the front matter advertises a recommendation paper, the body is a quantum turbulence paper, and the body's central scalability claim rests on an unproven linear ansatz plus a circular spectrum reproduction—but the underlying idea is worth engaging with if properly resubmitted. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.05352 v1 pith:GV7MYVHW submitted 2025-08-07 cs.IR cs.AI

Xiaoxi Cui , Weihai Lu , Yu Tong , Yiheng Li , Zhejun Zhao This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.IRcs.AI
keywords quantumstatepreparationturbulencemultiscaleencodingGraycodeHopffibrationamplitudeReynoldsnumberscalingintermittency
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 claims that quantum state preparation for turbulence does not have to be the exponential I/O bottleneck it is usually taken to be. It introduces turbuloscope, a three-stage geometric encoder that builds an instantaneous turbulent field directly from the self-similar, power-law structure of the energy cascade: a Gray-code basis makes conditional rotation angles smooth, a linear hyperplane fit sets them from $O(n^2)$ parameters, and a Hopf-fibration mapping turns quantum observables into vortex tubes. The resulting no-ancilla circuit has depth $\Theta(n)$, and the qubit count grows logarithmically with Reynolds number; the demonstration encodes a $1024^3$ field at $\mathrm{Re}\approx 35{,}000$ with 30 qubits, reproducing the $k^{-5/3}$ spectrum and intermittency statistics. If correct, this removes the main obstacle to using quantum simulation for high-Reynolds-number engineering flows and other multiscale systems.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the 'turbuloscope' encoding pipeline. Its algebraic core is the linear ansatz $\theta_j(\mathbf{q}) \approx b_j + \sum_{m<j} w_{jm} q_m$, which makes the exponential state-preparation problem polynomial by flattening the rotation-angle landscape in a Gray-code basis; the parameters are fixed by a closed-form amplitude-weighted ridge regression. The geometric core is the generalized Madelung transform together with the Hopf fibration, which sends the unit spin vector of the prepared quantum state to vorticity in physical space, with each point of the Bloch sphere corresponding to a vortex line and each patch to a vortex tube. These pieces combine into a three-sta

What would settle it

Encode a pure power-law spectrum with $n=51$ qubits using the linear-ansatz circuit, reconstruct the amplitudes of all basis states, and compare against the exact target $A(k)\propto k^{-5/3}$; if the weighted reconstruction error grows faster than polynomially in $n$, or if the recovered energy spectrum deviates from $k^{-5/3}$ across the inertial range, the central scaling claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the data-loading bottleneck for turbulent flows can be bypassed by exploiting scale invariance. For a target spectrum $E(k)\propto k^{-\gamma}$, the conditional rotation angles $\theta_j$ that build the amplitude distribution are approximated by a linear ansatz $\theta_j(\mathbf{q})\approx b_j+\sum_{m<j}w_{jm}q_m$ in Gray-code feature space, with parameters obtained in closed form by amplitude-weighted ridge regression. This compresses the exponential number of controlled rotations to $O(n^2)$ parameters and yields a linear-depth circuit that prepares a complex-valued turbulent state without ancillas. A phase-scrambling layer adds spatial correlations, and o

Load-bearing premise

All the claimed speedup rests on the assumption that the conditional rotation angles needed to build a power-law amplitude spectrum are a smooth, nearly linear function of the previously encoded bits in Gray-code order, so that a single closed-form linear regression captures the whole field; if that approximation degrades with grid size or fidelity, the claimed $\Theta(n)$ depth and logarithmic-in-Reynolds-number scaling collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Turbulent initial conditions for quantum PDE solvers can be prepared in $\Theta(n)$ depth, replacing the $\Theta(2^n/n)$ cost of optimal general data-loading.
  • Reynolds number scales as $\mathrm{Re}\sim 2^{4n/9}$: each additional qubit multiplies the accessible Reynolds number by a constant factor, so going from 30 to 51 qubits moves the reachable regime from $\mathrm{Re}\approx 35{,}000$ to beyond $10^7$.
  • The prepared state has coherent vortex tubes and reproduces both energy and vortex-surface spectral laws, so it can serve as a physically faithful initial condition for Hamiltonian simulation rather than a spectral fake.
  • The circuit parameters come from a one-shot closed-form regression, so the state-preparation protocol avoids iterative variational optimization and its convergence issues.
  • Because the primitive only exploits self-similarity and locality, the same method transfers to other power-law multiscale systems, including magnetohydrodynamic turbulence, cosmic structure, and reaction-diffusion patterns.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Document note: the metadata and abstract supplied with this text describe a different manuscript; the claims above follow the full text, which is the quantum geometric-encoding paper.
  • Editorial inference: the same Gray-code-plus-hyperplane recipe is also a classical compression algorithm—it produces a full turbulent field from $O(n^2)$ parameters—so the approach has value as a generative model even without quantum hardware.
  • Editorial inference: the fidelity of the linear ansatz is demonstrated for one spectrum exponent at one resolution; sweeping the exponent and the number of qubits while tracking reconstruction error would reveal how far the $\Theta(n)$ scaling extends.
  • Editorial inference: the practical near-term path may be hybrid—prepare or verify the initial field classically, then let a quantum processor evolve it—since direct execution today is constrained by all-to-all connectivity and coherence limits.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

5 major / 4 minor

Summary. The submitted front matter is internally inconsistent: the title and abstract describe a multi-modal multi-behavior sequential recommendation model (M^3BSR), whereas the body is a quantum-computing paper, “Geometric encoding of turbulence for end-to-end quantum simulation,” proposing a three-stage “turbuloscope” state-preparation protocol. I evaluate the body as the substantive scientific content. The paper claims a Θ(n)-depth quantum circuit with no ancillary qubits that encodes a k^{-5/3} turbulent field on a 1024^3 grid with 30 qubits (Re ≈ 35,000), with circuit depth scaling linearly in n and Reynolds number scaling logarithmically. The Methods combine Gray-code basis ordering, a linear ansatz for conditional rotation angles, random phase scrambling, a spectral convolution measurement, and a classical deconvolution step. The demonstration reports Kolmogorov k^{-5/3} energy scaling, a k^{-11/3} vortex-surface-field spectrum, a stretched-exponential vorticity PDF, and structure-function exponents close to SL94.

Significance. If the central claims held, the work would remove a recognized bottleneck in quantum fluid simulation: preparing a high-Reynolds-number turbulent initial state with shallow circuits and logarithmic qubit scaling. The manuscript includes useful elements: a closed-form, non-iterative parameter-fitting procedure; public code and data links; and a transpiled-depth scaling plot (Fig. 4c). However, the validity of the main claim is not currently established. The key compression assumption, Eq. (9), has no fidelity bound; the headline spectral law is an input of the construction rather than an emergent validation; the ancilla-free claim conflicts with the measurement protocol; and the statistical evidence rests on a single field with no error bars or DNS baseline. The significance is therefore potential rather than demonstrated.

major comments (5)
  1. [Methods, Eq. (9)] The Θ(n)-depth and O(n^2)-parameter claims collapse if the linear ansatz in Eq. (9) is not a sufficiently accurate approximation, yet no error bound is given relating the amplitude-weighted ridge-regression residual to the fidelity of the prepared state against the exact target A(k) ∝ k^{-γ}. The text states only that the manifold is “smooth” and that regression is amplitude-weighted; no analysis is provided for n → ∞, for different γ, or for the high-wavenumber modes that dominate the inertial range. Without such a bound, the exponential-to-polynomial parameter compression is unsupported.
  2. [Fig. 1e, Fig. 2b, Fig. 3c] The k^{-5/3} energy spectrum in Fig. 3c is not an emergent validation: the amplitude-encoding stage is explicitly designed to set a specified power-law spectrum (Results: “facilitates setting a specified power-law spectrum”; Fig. 1e fixes γ = 5/3), and Fig. 2b states that the convolution leaves the angle-averaged spectrum nearly unaffected. The reported E(k) ≈ k^{-5/3} is therefore a check on the input spectrum, not evidence that the protocol generates turbulent physics. The VSF k^{-11/3} scaling and the PDF/structure-function diagnostics are computed on the same generated field and inherit this limitation.
  3. [Abstract vs. Methods: Measurement of spectral observables] The headline claim that the algorithm “requires no ancillary qubits” is contradicted by the spectral measurement protocol, which uses an ancilla-assisted Hadamard test (Methods: “Measurement of spectral observables”) and a post-selection step in the complexity analysis (Results: “We analyze the computational complexity... a post-selection step with a success probability converging to 1”). If the no-ancilla statement is intended only for state preparation, that scope must be stated. Moreover, the convergence of the post-selection success probability to 1 is asserted without proof, and it directly affects the claimed end-to-end complexity.
  4. [Results: Quantum encoded instantaneous turbulent field, Fig. 3] The statistical validation is based on a single generated field. No error bars are provided for E(k), for the stretched-exponential PDF parameters (σ = 0.05, β = 0.5), or for the structure-function exponents; there is no comparison to a direct numerical simulation or to a classical synthetic field with the same energy spectrum. Consequently, the claims of “strong intermittency,” agreement with SL94, and statistical isotropy (anisotropy tensor of order 10^{-3}) are not quantitatively supported.
  5. [SI [46] and Methods, Eq. (5)] Core derivations are deferred to the Supplemental Information: the definitions of C, m(κ,κ′), n(κ′), the summation set in Eq. (5), the measurement oracles, the theoretical lower bound, and the proof of asymptotic optimality. As submitted, the main text does not contain a verifiable proof of the central Θ(n)-depth or log-Re scaling claims. The reader is asked to accept the central claim on the basis of deferred material and a small-scale classical simulation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Methods: Measurement of mean momentum] There is a typo in the text: “assess the the statistics” should be “assess the statistics.”
  2. [Fig. 4c] The distinction between “unoptimized CZ-gate count” and “transpiled circuit depth” needs clarification; provide the concrete gate count for n = 30 and the assumed connectivity, error model, and optimization settings used for transpilation.
  3. [Data and code availability] The GitHub links are welcome, but no version, license, or reproducibility instructions are given; a specific commit hash and environment description would help.
  4. [Front matter] The title and abstract of the submission do not match the body text. This is not a purely cosmetic issue; it makes the manuscript incoherent as a submission and must be resolved editorially.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The k^{-5/3} energy spectrum is an input to the amplitude encoder and is stated to be nearly unchanged by the later convolution, so reporting it as reproduced validation is circular; the linear-depth claim rests on the unproven Eq. (9) ansatz.

  1. self definitional [Fig. 1e; Results 'Method overview' and 'Quantum encoded instantaneous turbulent field' (Fig. 3c); Methods 'Encoding self-similar distribution']
    "First, we generate the initial quantum state using a hardware-efficient amplitude encoding protocol rooted in a linear ansatz [34], which facilitates setting a specified power-law spectrum for the synthetic multiscale field within a linear-depth circuit. ... In the shaded inertial range, the vortex-surface spectra E_s exhibit a k^{-11/3} scaling ... and the energy spectrum E_k displays Kolmogorov's k^{-5/3} scaling."

    The amplitude encoder's target is the power-law amplitude A(k) ~ k^{-γ} (Fig. 1e fixes γ=5/3 for classical turbulence). The convolution stage is stated to leave the angle-averaged spectrum 'nearly unaffected' (Fig. 2b). Therefore Fig. 3c's k^{-5/3} spectrum is the same input power law propagated through approximately spectrum-preserving operations. Reporting it as 'reproduced' validates the circuit only against its own fitting target; it is not an independent physical confirmation of Kolmogorov scaling.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Methods, 'Encoding self-similar distribution' (Eq. 9); Results, Fig. 3c]
    "To determine the optimal circuit parameters {w_j,b_j}, we employ an amplitude-weighted ridge regression that prioritizes accurate fitting of low-wavenumber modes with the target amplitude while suppressing numerical noise in the high-wavenumber region."

    The circuit parameters are obtained by regression onto the target self-similar spectrum, and the reported energy spectrum is computed from the state generated by those fitted parameters. Agreement with k^{-5/3} in the inertial range is therefore an in-sample property of the fit (weighted toward low wavenumbers), not a prediction derived from the physics. The demonstration does not provide an out-of-sample check or a fidelity bound connecting the regression loss to the final state.

full rationale

The paper's central complexity claims (Θ(n) depth, log-Re scaling, no ancillas) are not circularly derived in the text: they follow from the linear ansatz Eq. (9) and the transpiled circuit scaling in Fig. 4c, not from the target spectrum. However, Eq. (9) is an unsupported modeling precondition—no fidelity bound is given relating the ridge-regression approximation error to the exact target state, and the full proof is deferred to SI [46]. The main circularity is the validation of the k^{-5/3} spectrum: the power-law index is an input to the amplitude encoder, the convolution step is explicitly 'nearly unaffected' spectrally, and the ridge-regression parameters are fitted to that same target. Thus the reported agreement with Kolmogorov's law is by construction rather than emergent. The intermittency and structure-function comparisons are not demonstrably circular, though they are computed on a single generated field. Self-citations to the authors' prior Madelung-transform and quantum-simulation work are load-bearing but are published external results and are not counted as circular here.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are postulated. The spin-vector fluid representation (Eq. 2) comes from prior work (refs 27, 28, 43), and the turbuloscope is an algorithmic construction rather than a new entity with an independent falsifiable handle. The central encoding scheme depends on six fitted or hand-chosen parameters (notably the 5/3 spectral target and the ridge-regression weights), two ad hoc assumptions (the hyperplane ansatz and the invertibility of the convolution kernel), and standard or domain assumptions inherited from the authors' earlier papers.

free parameters (6)
  • Spectral exponent gamma of the amplitude target = 5/3
    Set by hand for classical turbulence (Fig. 1e); the amplitude distribution A(k) ~ k^{-gamma} is the encoding target, and the reported k^{-5/3} energy spectrum is governed by this input.
  • Ridge-regression parameters b_j and w_{j,m} = closed-form solution, values not reported
    Circuit rotation angles in Eq. (9) are fitted to the target power-law amplitudes via amplitude-weighted ridge regression; the spectral content of the generated field depends on this fit.
  • Random phase-scrambling angles phi_j and ZZ angles gamma_j = random
    Introduced ad hoc in U_p (Eq. 10) to create phase correlations and spatial isotropy; no physical or empirical constraint fixes them.
  • Stretched-exponential PDF parameters sigma and beta = sigma = 0.05, beta = 0.5
    Fitted to the vorticity PDF of the generated field (Fig. 3d) and then presented as the intermittency signature; the fit is to the demonstrated output itself.
  • Dissipation-scale ratio k_eta about 5 k_peak = 5
    Hand-chosen cutoff; the headline Reynolds number Re = (k_eta/k_L)^{4/3} = 35,000 is defined through this ratio, so it sets the claimed regime.
  • Structure-function exponents zeta_p = linear fits; consistent with SL94 for p up to 5
    Extracted by linear fits from the generated field (Fig. 3e) and compared with the SL94 model; used as validation but are fits to the demonstrated field.
assumptions (7)
  • standard math Gray-code encoding preserves topological locality with constant Hamming distance 1 between adjacent grid points (Eq. 6).
    Well-established property of Gray codes (ref 39); the basis for claiming the circuit avoids artificial spectral noise and for the smoothness of theta_j.
  • domain assumption The generalized Madelung transform maps spinor amplitudes to fluid density, momentum, and spin vector (Eqs. 2-4).
    Inherited from the authors' prior work (refs 27, 28, 43); if this mapping is not faithful, the generated vortex structures are not fluid vorticity.
  • domain assumption Hopf fibration preimages of Bloch-sphere patches correspond to vortex tubes whose area encodes circulation (Fig. 1c).
    Geometric identification drawn from refs 26, 35, 45; underpins the claim that the field contains coherent vortex structures rather than noise.
  • ad hoc to paper Conditional rotation angles theta_j for a power-law amplitude are smooth in Gray-code feature space and linearly approximable (Eq. 9).
    The load-bearing approximation behind the Theta(n) depth claim; no error bound versus the exact target state is provided, and validation is only on the paper's own fields.
  • ad hoc to paper The formal inverse of the convolution kernel rho exists, and the deconvolution u-hat = rho^{-1} dot J-hat yields a statistically isotropic velocity field.
    Third-stage deconvolution is performed without regularity analysis of rho^{-1}; supporting details are deferred to the SI.
  • ad hoc to paper Post-selection in the spectral measurement protocol succeeds with probability converging to 1 for large n.
    Assumed in the stage-2 complexity analysis (O(N_M poly(n)/epsilon)); no proof is given in the main text.
  • standard math Classical resolution of 3D turbulence requires N ~ Omega(Re^{9/4}) grid points, so n = Omega(log Re) qubits is the relevant lower bound.
    Standard resolution-counting stated in the introduction; the derived exact formula n = 3[log2(Re^{3/4}/5)+1] and the optimality proof are in the absent SI.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multi-Modal Multi-Behavior Sequential Recommendation with Conditional Diffusion-Based Feature Denoising." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GV7MYVHW

@misc{pith2026250805352,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multi-Modal Multi-Behavior Sequential Recommendation with Conditional Diffusion-Based Feature Denoising},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GV7MYVHW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.05352}
}
abstract

The sequential recommendation system utilizes historical user interactions to predict preferences. Effectively integrating diverse user behavior patterns with rich multimodal information of items to enhance the accuracy of sequential recommendations is an emerging and challenging research direction. This paper focuses on the problem of multi-modal multi-behavior sequential recommendation, aiming to address the following challenges: (1) the lack of effective characterization of modal preferences across different behaviors, as user attention to different item modalities varies depending on the behavior; (2) the difficulty of effectively mitigating implicit noise in user behavior, such as unintended actions like accidental clicks; (3) the inability to handle modality noise in multi-modal representations, which further impacts the accurate modeling of user preferences. To tackle these issues, we propose a novel Multi-Modal Multi-Behavior Sequential Recommendation model (M$^3$BSR). This model first removes noise in multi-modal representations using a Conditional Diffusion Modality Denoising Layer. Subsequently, it utilizes deep behavioral information to guide the denoising of shallow behavioral data, thereby alleviating the impact of noise in implicit feedback through Conditional Diffusion Behavior Denoising. Finally, by introducing a Multi-Expert Interest Extraction Layer, M$^3$BSR explicitly models the common and specific interests across behaviors and modalities to enhance recommendation performance. Experimental results indicate that M$^3$BSR significantly outperforms existing state-of-the-art methods on benchmark datasets.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Direct Measurement of the Effective Electronic Temperature in Organic Semiconductors

    cond-mat.dis-nn 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    A nanoscopic Seebeck measurement on a doped organic polymer is reported as the first direct proof that field-driven charge carriers can be hotter than the lattice, matching kinetic Monte Carlo predictions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

60 extracted references · 46 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Feynman, R

    R. Feynman, R. Leighton, and M. Sands,The Feynman Lec- tures on Physics, Vol. II: The New Millennium Edition: Mainly Electromagnetism and Matter(Basic Books, 2015)

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    Gourianov, M

    N. Gourianov, M. Lubasch, S. Dolgov, Q. Y. van den Berg, H. Babaee, P. Givi, M. Kiffner, and D. Jaksch, A quantum- inspired approach to exploit turbulence structures, Nat. Comput. Sci.2, 30 (2022)

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Succi, W

    S. Succi, W. Itani, K. Sreenivasan, and R. Steijl, Quantum com- puting for fluids: Where do we stand?, Europhys. Lett.144, 10001 (2023)

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Tennie, S

    F. Tennie, S. Laizet, S. Lloyd, and L. Magri, Quantum computing for nonlinear differential equations and turbulence, Nat. Rev. Phys.7, 220 (2025)

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Z. Wang, J. Zhong, K. Wang, Z. Zhu, Z. Bao, C. Zhu, W. Zhao, Y. Zhao, Y. Yang, C. Song,et al., Simulating fluid vortex interac- tions on a superconducting quantum processor, Nat. Commun. 17, 2602 (2026)

    work page 2026

  6. [6]

    P. W. Shor, Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete log- arithms and factoring, inProceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science(1994) pp. 124–134

    work page 1994

  7. [7]

    Y. S. Weinstein, M. A. Pravia, E. M. Fortunato, S. Lloyd, and D. G. Cory, Implementation of the quantum Fourier transform, Phys. Rev. Lett.86, 1889 (2001)

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd, Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 150502 (2009)

    2009

Show all 60 references
  1. [9]

    J.-P. Liu, H. O. Kolden, H. K. Krovi, N. F. Loureiro, K. Trivisa, and A. M. Childs, Efficient quantum algorithm for dissipative nonlinear differential equations, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 118, e2026805118 (2021)

    2021

  2. [10]

    A. M. Childs, J.-P. Liu, and A. Ostrander, High-precision quan- tum algorithms for partial differential equations, Quantum5, 574 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    An, J.-P

    D. An, J.-P. Liu, and L. Lin, Linear combination of Hamiltonian simulation for nonunitary dynamics with optimal state prepara- tion cost, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 150603 (2023)

    2023

  4. [12]

    Jaksch, P

    D. Jaksch, P. Givi, A. J. Daley, and T. Rung, Variational quantum algorithms for computational fluid dynamics, AIAA J.61, 1885 (2023)

    2023

  5. [13]

    S. Jin, N. Liu, and Y. Yu, Quantum simulation of partial dif- ferential equations via Schr¨odingerization, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 230602 (2024)

    2024

  6. [15]

    M ¨ott¨onen, J

    M. M ¨ott¨onen, J. J. Vartiainen, V. Bergholm, and M. M. Salomaa, Transformation of quantum states using uniformly controlled rotations, Quant. Inf. Comp.5, 467 (2005)

    2005

  7. [16]

    Kempe, A

    J. Kempe, A. Kitaev, and O. Regev, The complexity of the local Hamiltonian problem, SIAM J. Comput.35, 1070 (2006)

    2006

  8. [17]

    M. A. Nielsen, M. R. Dowling, M. Gu, and A. C. Doherty, Quantum computation as geometry, Science311, 1133 (2006)

    2006

  9. [18]

    Zhang, T

    X.-M. Zhang, T. Li, and X. Yuan, Quantum state preparation with optimal circuit depth: Implementations and applications, Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 230504 (2022)

    2022

  10. [19]

    X. Sun, G. Tian, S. Yang, P. Yuan, and S. Zhang, Asymptotically optimal circuit depth for quantum state preparation and general unitary synthesis, IEEE Trans. Comput-Aided Des. Integr. Cir- cuits Syst.42, 3301 (2023)

    2023

  11. [20]

    Ben-Dov, D

    M. Ben-Dov, D. Shnaiderov, A. Makmal, and E. G. D. Torre, Approximate encoding of quantum states using shallow circuits, npj Quantum Inform.10, 65 (2024)

    2024

  12. [21]

    Farhi, J

    E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, and M. Sipser, Quan- tum computation by adiabatic evolution (2000), arXiv:quant- ph/0001106

    2000

  13. [22]

    Cerezo, A

    M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, K. Fujii, J. R. McClean, K. Mitarai, X. Yuan, L. Cincio,et al., Variational quantum algorithms, Nat. Rev. Phys.3, 625 (2021)

    2021

  14. [23]

    McArdle, S

    S. McArdle, S. Endo, A. Aspuru-Guzik, S. C. Benjamin, and X. Yuan, Quantum computational chemistry, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 015003 (2020)

    2020

  15. [24]

    E. A. Martinez, C. A. Muschik, P. Schindler, D. Nigg, A. Erhard, 10 M. Heyl, P. Hauke, M. Dalmonte, T. Monz, P. Zoller,et al., Real-time dynamics of a lattice gauge theory with a few-qubit quantum computer, Nature534, 516 (2016)

    2016

  16. [25]

    Zhang, H

    K. Zhang, H. Li, P. Zhang, J. Yuan, J. Chen, W. Ren, Z. Wang, C. Song, D.-W. Wang, H. Wang,et al., Synthesizing five-body interaction in a superconducting quantum circuit, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 190502 (2022)

    2022

  17. [26]

    W. T. M. Irvine and D. Bouwmeester, Linked and knotted beams of light, Nat. Phys.4, 716 (2008)

    2008

  18. [27]

    Meng and Y

    Z. Meng and Y. Yang, Quantum computing of fluid dynamics using the hydrodynamic Schr ¨odinger equation, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 033182 (2023)

    2023

  19. [28]

    Meng and Y

    Z. Meng and Y. Yang, Quantum spin representation for the Navier-Stokes equation, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 043130 (2024)

    2024

  20. [29]

    Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

    J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

    2018

  21. [30]

    Xu, J.-J

    K. Xu, J.-J. Chen, Y. Zeng, Y.-R. Zhang, C. Song, W. Liu, Q. Guo, P. Zhang, D. Xu, H. Deng,et al., Emulating many-body localization with a superconducting quantum processor, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 050507 (2018)

    2018

  22. [31]

    Katabarwa, K

    A. Katabarwa, K. Gratsea, A. Caesura, and P. D. Johnson, Early fault-tolerant quantum computing, PRX Quantum5, 020101 (2024)

    2024

  23. [32]

    Z. Meng, C. Song, and Y. Yang, Challenges of simulating fluid flows on near-term quantum computer, Sci. China-Phys. Mech. Astron.68, 104705 (2025)

    2025

  24. [33]

    Gourianov, P

    N. Gourianov, P. Givi, D. Jaksch, and S. B. Pope, Tensor net- works enable the calculation of turbulence probability distribu- tions, Sci. Adv.11, eads5990 (2025)

    2025

  25. [34]

    Sarma, T

    A. Sarma, T. W. Watts, M. Moosa, Y. Liu, and P. L. McMahon, Quantum variational solving of nonlinear and multidimensional partial differential equations, Phys. Rev. A109, 062616 (2024)

    2024

  26. [35]

    Y. Yang, S. Xiong, and Z. Lu, Applications of the vortex-surface field to flow visualization, modelling and simulation, Flow3, E33 (2023)

    2023

  27. [36]

    W. Shen, J. Yao, and Y. Yang, Designing turbulence with entan- gled vortices, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A.121, e2405351121 (2024)

    2024

  28. [37]

    C. Zhu, Z. Wang, S. Xiong, Y. Zhao, and Y. Yang, Quantum implicit representation of vortex filaments in turbulence, J. Fluid Mech.1014, A31 (2025)

    2025

  29. [38]

    Z. Meng, J. Zhong, S. Xu, K. Wang, J. Chen, F. Jin, X. Zhu, Y. Gao, Y. Wu, C. Zhang,et al., Simulating unsteady flows on a superconducting quantum processor, Commun. Phys.7, 349 (2024)

    2024

  30. [39]

    R. A. Caruana and J. D. Schaffer, Representation and hidden bias: Gray vs. binary coding for genetic algorithms, inProceed- ings of the 5th International Conference on Machine Learning (Morgan Kaufmann, 1988) pp. 153–161

    1988

  31. [40]

    Alexakis and L

    A. Alexakis and L. Biferale, Cascades and transitions in turbu- lent flows, Phys. Rep.-Rev. Sec. Phys. Lett.767–769, 1 (2018)

    2018

  32. [41]

    She and E

    Z. She and E. Leveque, Universal scaling laws in fully developed turbulence, Phys. Rev. Lett.72, 336 (1994)

    1994

  33. [42]

    A. N. Kolmogorov, The local structure of turbulence in incom- pressible viscous fluid for very large Reynolds numbers, Proc. R. Soc. London Ser. A-Math. Phys. Eng. Sci.434, 9 (1991)

    1991

  34. [43]

    Meng and Y

    Z. Meng and Y. Yang, Lagrangian dynamics and regularity of the spin Euler equation, J. Fluid Mech.985, A34 (2024)

    2024

  35. [44]

    Yang and D

    Y. Yang and D. I. Pullin, On Lagrangian and vortex-surface fields for flows with Taylor-Green and Kida-Pelz initial conditions, J. Fluid Mech.661, 446 (2010)

    2010

  36. [45]

    Chern, F

    A. Chern, F. Kn¨oppel, U. Pinkall, P. Schr¨oder, and S. Weißmann, Schr¨odinger’s smoke, ACM Trans. Graphics35, 1 (2016)

    2016

  37. [46]

    See Supplemental Information for details about supplementary figures and data, generalized Madelung tranform in spectral space, measurement of observables in spectral space, and theo- retical lower bound of quantum encoding for a turbulent field

  38. [47]

    Fano, Description of states in quantum mechanics by density matrix and operator techniques, Rev

    U. Fano, Description of states in quantum mechanics by density matrix and operator techniques, Rev. Mod. Phys.29, 74 (1957)

    1957

  39. [48]

    Codes available at https://github.com/YYgroup/QEncodeTurb

  40. [49]

    Ishihara, T

    T. Ishihara, T. Gotoh, and Y. Kaneda, Study of high-Reynolds number isotropic turbulence by direct numerical simulation, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech.41, 165 (2009)

    2009

  41. [50]

    Vincent and M

    A. Vincent and M. Meneguzzi, The spatial structure and statis- tical properties of homogeneous turbulence, J. Fluid Mech.225, 1 (1991)

    1991

  42. [51]

    G. He, S. Chen, R. H. Kraichnan, R. Zhang, and Y. Zhou, Statis- tics of dissipation and enstrophy induced by localized vortices, Phys. Rev. Lett.81, 4636 (1998)

    1998

  43. [52]

    P. K. Yeung, K. Ravikumar, S. Nichols, and R. Uma- Vaideswaran, GPU-enabled extreme-scale turbulence simula- tions: Fourier pseudo-spectral algorithms at the exascale us- ing OpenMP offloading, Comput. Phys. Commun.306, 109364 (2025)

    2025

  44. [53]

    Y. Sato, R. Kondo, I. Hamamura, T. Onodera, and N. Yamamoto, Hamiltonian simulation for hyperbolic partial differential equa- tions by scalable quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 033246 (2024)

    2024

  45. [54]

    A. M. Turing, The chemical basis of morphogenesis, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci.237, 37 (1952)

    1952

  46. [55]

    Kardar, G

    M. Kardar, G. Parisi, and Y.-C. Zhang, Dynamic scaling of growing interfaces, Phys. Rev. Lett.56, 889 (1986)

    1986

  47. [56]

    M. J. Geller and J. P. Huchra, Mapping the Universe, Science 246, 897 (1989)

    1989

  48. [57]

    J. R. Bond, L. Kofman, and D. Pogosyan, How filaments of galaxies are woven into the cosmic web, Nature380, 603 (1996)

    1996

  49. [58]

    R. F. Voss, Evolution of long-range fractal correlations and 1/𝑓 noise in DNA base sequences, Phys. Rev. Lett.68, 3805 (1992)

    1992

  50. [59]

    Arneodo, E

    A. Arneodo, E. Bacry, P. V. Graves, and J. F. Muzy, Character- izing long-range correlations in DNA sequences from wavelet analysis, Phys. Rev. Lett.74, 3293 (1995)

    1995

  51. [60]

    P. Zhao, P. Xu, D. Lan, J. Chu, X. Tan, H. Yu, and Y. Yu, High-contrast𝑍𝑍interaction using superconducting qubits with opposite-sign anharmonicity, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 200503 (2020)

    2020

  52. [61]

    A. M. Childs and N. Wiebe, Hamiltonian simulation using linear combinations of unitary operations, Quantum Info. Comput.12, 901 (2012). ������������� ����������� ��� ���������� �������� �� ���������� ��� ���������� ������� ����������� �������� ����� �� � ��������� ������� ����...

    2012

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.