Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 54 references

Mapping any quantum circuit to Feynman's clock lets a physics-informed sampler systematically reduce its measurement noise, with overheads that grow only polynomially.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-10 22:03 UTC pith:LRSICSZL

load-bearing objection Solid extension of their own BBGKY sampler to general circuits via Feynman clock; poly-overhead argument is essentially fine and the 2-qubit numerics show clear controllable reduction, but the demo never leaves the tiny-circuit regime. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.06752 v1 pith:LRSICSZL submitted 2026-07-07 quant-ph

Feynman's clock and hierarchy-informed sampling for quantum error mitigation

Theo Saporiti This is my paper
classification quant-ph
keywords quantum error mitigationFeynman's clockBBGKY hierarchyhierarchy-informed samplingNISQHadamard testBell state preparation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Near-term quantum computers still produce noisy answers, so any practical algorithm needs a way to clean those answers without waiting for full error correction. This paper shows how to turn an arbitrary circuit into the continuous-time evolution of a larger system whose Hamiltonian is Feynman's clock construction. That evolution obeys a BBGKY-like hierarchy of equations of motion; the hierarchy is then used as a soft constraint that tells a Markov-chain sampler which corrected trajectories are physically plausible. Because the clock register can be binary-encoded, both the quantum cost of the required Hadamard tests and the classical cost of the hierarchy remain polynomial in the number of gates and qubits. Numerical tests on two-qubit tunable Bell circuits under realistic IBM-level noise show that the residual error falls systematically as more of the hierarchy is kept, reaching essentially zero once the truncated system becomes self-consistent.

Core claim

Any quantum circuit can be recast as the unitary dynamics of Feynman's clock Hamiltonian; the resulting time series of Pauli expectations obey a BBGKY hierarchy that can be fed into the existing BBGKY-ISM sampler, yielding mitigated Z-measurements whose error decreases controllably with hierarchy radius and whose classical and quantum overheads scale only polynomially.

What carries the argument

Feynman's clock Hamiltonian (binary-encoded clock register) together with the BBGKY-ISM action that mixes the residual of a finite-radius hierarchy with the residual of the noisy measurements; the action defines the probability density from which corrected trajectories are sampled.

Load-bearing premise

A finite-radius slice of the BBGKY hierarchy, combined with the particular action that balances hierarchy residual against measurement residual, is still enough to pull the sampler toward the true noiseless trajectory once the circuit grows beyond two qubits and two gates.

What would settle it

Run the same protocol on a deeper circuit (for example a three-layer hardware-efficient ansatz or a small Grover instance) under the same noise model and check whether increasing the hierarchy radius continues to drive the mitigated Z-error to zero; if residual error plateaus or grows, the finite-radius claim fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a quantum error mitigation technique for arbitrary circuits by mapping circuit execution to the time evolution of Feynman’s clock Hamiltonian, reconstructing the relevant Pauli expectation values from Hadamard tests on partial circuit executions, and then applying the authors’ previously introduced BBGKY-ISM sampling procedure to those time series. Classical and quantum overheads are claimed to scale polynomially in the number of qubits N_Q and gates N_G. The method is demonstrated on classically simulated tunable Bell-state preparation circuits (N_Q = N_G = 2) under an IBM-Fez-level noise model, where residual error on the first-qubit Z measurement decreases monotonically with hierarchy radius r and vanishes once the truncated hierarchy becomes self-consistent (z = 1).

Significance. If the polynomial-overhead claim holds for the non-local clock Hamiltonian and if the finite-radius truncation continues to constrain samples usefully beyond the two-qubit example, the work would supply a post-processing mitigation scheme applicable to general circuits and combinable with existing techniques. Strengths that are already present include a clean binary-clock embedding that keeps the number of Hadamard tests polynomial, an explicit reconstruction of the Z measurements via Eqs. (5)–(9), and a clear numerical illustration (Fig. 3) of systematic, radius-tunable error reduction on a realistic noise model. The demonstration that the scheme recovers the exact noiseless value once z = 1 is a useful sanity check of the action functional.

major comments (3)
  1. Sec. II C asserts that |Q_r| ∼ N_Q poly(N_G) “using a result of [31]”. That result was derived for local spin-chain Hamiltonians. The Feynman-clock Hamiltonian (1) is non-local: after the Pauli decomposition (12) each term couples the entire binary clock register (N_C = ⌈log₂(N_G+1)⌉ qubits) to a data-register gate. The interaction graph that generates the BBGKY hierarchy is therefore denser than the graphs treated in [31]. Without an explicit bound or short re-derivation for this denser graph, the classical-overhead claim that appears in the abstract and in Sec. II B is not self-contained.
  2. Sec. III and Fig. 3 provide the only numerical evidence, and it is confined to N_Q = N_G = 2. At r = 4 one has z = 1, the quantum residual in the action (B1) is discarded, and BBGKY-ISM reduces to a classical ODE solver that recovers the exact cosine by construction. Consequently the controllable-mitigation regime (0 ≤ r ≤ 3) is never stress-tested on a circuit whose hierarchy remains incomplete or whose non-locality is more severe. A larger circuit (or an explicit statement that the present numerics only probe the toy regime) is needed to support the claim of systematic, controllable error reduction for general circuits.
  3. The free parameters of the annealing schedule (λ, Δλ, M, M_T, M_S) and of the time discretization (T, N_T) are fixed by “numerical experiments” (Sec. III) with no sensitivity analysis. Because the central claim is that the physics-informed PDF systematically drives samples toward the noiseless trajectory, at least a brief check that the reported Δ′ values are stable under modest changes of these hyperparameters would strengthen the result.
minor comments (5)
  1. Section headings contain spurious spaces (“MITIGA TION”, “F eynman’s”, “RESUL TS”); these appear to be extraction artifacts but should be cleaned in the source.
  2. Sec. II, first paragraph of the outline: “BBGK-ISM” is missing the final “Y”.
  3. Eq. (3) and the subsequent discussion of τ ≈ N_G/2 would benefit from a short remark on how T and N_T are chosen when α_{N_G}(t) is not periodic.
  4. Fig. 2 caption refers to “the first (5) quantity”; a more explicit label would improve readability.
  5. Appendix B assumes |x̄_qs| < 1 “for conceptual simplicity”; a one-sentence pointer to the |x̄_qs| = 1 treatment in [31] would make the letter self-contained.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Polynomial classical overhead for |Q_r| rests solely on unre-derived self-citation to [31] (local spin chains); Feynman-clock non-locality unaddressed, while mapping and numerics remain independent.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [Sec. II C, paragraph beginning “As studied in [31]” and ending with the |Q_r| claim]
    "Finally, since |Q_0| ∼ N_Q poly(N_G) and |B| ∼ poly(N_G), the efficient scaling of the BBGKY-ISM classical overhead is guaranteed in that, using a result of [31], it is |Q_r| ∼ N_Q poly(N_G)."

    The polynomial bound on |Q_r| is required for the abstract’s and Sec. II’s claim that classical overhead scales only polynomially for arbitrary circuits. It is justified solely by citation to the authors’ own prior work on local spin-chain Hamiltonians; no re-derivation or connectivity argument is given for the denser interaction graph of the binary-encoded Feynman clock (terms that couple the entire clock register). If the non-locality makes the r-ball super-polynomial, the overhead claim collapses. The citation is therefore load-bearing and unverified inside the present manuscript.

full rationale

The paper's new content—the Feynman-clock embedding (1)–(3), the Pauli decomposition of projectors (5)–(6), the Hadamard-test reconstruction of the quantities of interest (9)–(10), and the explicit poly(N_Q,N_G) quantum/classical cost of that reconstruction—is self-contained and non-circular. The subsequent application of BBGKY-ISM is a legitimate extension: the hierarchy equations (11) hold for any Pauli Hamiltonian, the action S is taken from the authors' prior work, and the numerical recovery of cos( heta) under IBM-Fez noise (Figs. 2–3) is an independent empirical check. The sole load-bearing circularity is the claim that the truncated hierarchy remains polynomial for arbitrary circuits. That claim is asserted by a single sentence that invokes “a result of [31]” without re-deriving the ball-size bound for the non-local clock terms (each of which acts on the entire N_C-qubit register). Because [31] treated local spin-chain Hamiltonians, the citation does not automatically transfer; the paper supplies no independent argument. This is classic self-citation load-bearing for one central efficiency claim, but does not force the error-reduction results themselves. Hence score 4 rather than higher.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the classical Feynman-clock construction, the authors' prior BBGKY-ISM sampling engine, a finite-radius truncation of the hierarchy, and a handful of hand-chosen numerical parameters. No new physical entities are postulated; the free parameters control only the classical post-processing stage.

free parameters (4)
  • hierarchy radius r
    Integer truncation depth of the BBGKY hierarchy; varied from 0 to 4 and shown to control residual error (Fig. 3). Chosen by numerical experiment.
  • annealing schedule (lambda, Delta lambda, M, M_T, M_S)
    Simulated-annealing parameters (M=2e4, Delta lambda=0.5, M_T=M/2, M_S=50) that generate the Markov chain of mitigation candidates; fixed by hand after numerical experiments (Sec. III).
  • time discretization (T, N_T)
    Evolution window T=4.5 and N_T=45 steps used to reconstruct the clock dynamics; chosen to cover one period of alpha_NG(t).
  • shot count N_S
    10^4 shots per Hadamard test; fixed for the numerical study.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Feynman's clock Hamiltonian (Eq. 1) correctly encodes the sequential application of the original circuit gates inside an enlarged Hilbert space.
    Standard construction (cited [41–43]); used throughout Sec. II A–B to justify the map from circuit to Hamiltonian dynamics.
  • domain assumption The BBGKY hierarchy of equations of motion for Pauli-string expectation values (Eq. 11) is satisfied by the noiseless clock dynamics.
    Taken from the authors' prior work [31] and applied after the clock embedding (Sec. II C).
  • ad hoc to paper A finite-radius truncation of the hierarchy plus the mixed action S (Appendix B) yields samples whose average converges to the true noiseless trajectory.
    Empirical working hypothesis of BBGKY-ISM; validated only for the N_Q=2 Bell family in the present letter.
  • domain assumption Hadamard tests on partial circuit executions (Eq. 10) produce less noisy estimates of the required correlators than Trotterized evolution of the clock Hamiltonian.
    Stated in Sec. II B as the practical motivation for the measurement strategy.
invented entities (1)
  • quantities of interest Q_0 (and the radius-r extensions Q_r) no independent evidence
    purpose: Finite set of Pauli strings whose expectation values determine the projected Z-measurements of the original circuit after the clock map.
    Defined in Sec. II B so that the BBGKY hierarchy can be applied; they are bookkeeping constructs rather than new physical objects.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 17096 in / 3049 out tokens · 47078 ms · 2026-07-10T22:03:25.126417+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Near-term physical implementations of quantum algorithms require efficient quantum error mitigation schemes to reduce quantum noise. In this letter we propose a new mitigation technique, by extending the applicability of our BBGKY-ISM scheme from quantum simulations of spin chains to arbitrary quantum circuits. We map executions of quantum circuits using Feynman's clock Hamiltonian to the Hamiltonian dynamics of a corresponding quantum system, whose time evolution obeys a BBGKY-like hierarchy of equations informing the BBGKY-ISM mitigation. We show that the method's classical and quantum overheads are polynomial in the circuit size and in the number of qubits. We apply our method to numerical simulations of tunable Bell state preparation circuits under state-of-the-art quantum noise, and numerically demonstrate its systematic and controllable quantum error reduction capability.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06752 by Theo Saporiti.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The tunable Bell state preparation circuit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Mitigation of the first ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Quantum error reduction of all first-qubit Z [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Hadamard test for the real part of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages · 19 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    L. K. Grover, A fast quantum mechanical algo- rithm for database search 10.1145/237814.237866 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9605043

    work page doi:10.1145/237814.237866 1996

  2. [2]

    Deutsch and R

    D. Deutsch and R. Jozsa, Rapid solution of problems by quantum computation — Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical and Physi- cal Sciences, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. AV olume 439, 553 (1992)

    work page 1992

  3. [3]

    Quantum Computing

    A. Steane, Quantum computing, Rept. Prog. Phys.61, 117 (1998), arXiv:quant-ph/9708022

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  4. [4]

    D. P. DiVincenzo, The Physical Implementation of Quantum Computation, Fortsch. Phys.48, 771 (2000), arXiv:quant-ph/0002077

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  5. [5]

    T. D. Ladd, F. Jelezko, R. Laflamme, Y. Nakamura, C. Monroe, and J. L. O’Brien, Quantum computers, Na- ture464, 45 (2010), arXiv:1009.2267 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  6. [6]

    I. M. Georgescu, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Quantum Simu- lation, Rev. Mod. Phys.86, 153 (2014), arXiv:1308.6253 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  7. [7]

    Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond

    J. Preskill, Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum2, 79 (2018), arXiv:1801.00862 [quant- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  8. [8]

    Quantum Prometheus: Defying Overhead with Recycled Ancillas in Quantum Error Correction

    A. Chatterjee, A. Ghosh, and S. Ghosh, Quantum Prometheus: Defying Overhead with Recycled Ancillas in Quantum Error Correction, (2024), arXiv:2411.12813

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    P. W. Shor, Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory, Phys. Rev. A52, R2493 (1995)

    work page 1995

  10. [10]

    A. M. Steane, Error Correcting Codes in Quantum The- ory, Phys. Rev. Lett.77, 793 (1996)

    work page 1996

  11. [11]

    A. R. Calderbank and P. W. Shor, Good quantum error- correcting codes exist, Phys. Rev. A54, 1098 (1996)

    work page 1996

  12. [12]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computa- tion and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edi- tion(Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    work page 2010

  13. [13]

    Ezzell, B

    N. Ezzell, B. Pokharel, L. Tewala, G. Quiroz, and D. A. Lidar, Dynamical decoupling for superconducting qubits: A performance survey, Phys. Rev. Appl.20, 064027 (2023)

    work page 2023

  14. [14]

    J. J. Wallman and J. Emerson, Noise tailoring for scalable quantum computation via randomized compiling, Phys. Rev. A94, 052325 (2016)

    work page 2016

  15. [15]

    van den Berg, Z

    E. van den Berg, Z. K. Minev, and K. Temme, Model-free readout-error mitigation for quantum expectation values, Phys. Rev. A105, 032620 (2022)

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    Temme, S

    K. Temme, S. Bravyi, and J. M. Gambetta, Error Mit- igation for Short-Depth Quantum Circuits, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 180509 (2017)

    work page 2017

  17. [17]

    Efficient variational quantum simulator incorporating active error minimisation

    Y. Li and S. C. Benjamin, Efficient Variational Quan- tum Simulator Incorporating Active Error Minimization, Phys. Rev. X7, 021050 (2017), arXiv:1611.09301 [quant- 7 ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  18. [18]

    Digital zero noise extrapolation for quantum error mitigation

    T. Giurgica-Tiron, Y. Hindy, R. LaRose, A. Mari, and W. J. Zeng, Digital zero noise extrapolation for quan- tum error mitigation, in2020 IEEE International Con- ference on Quantum Computing and Engineering(2020) arXiv:2005.10921 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  19. [19]

    S. Endo, S. C. Benjamin, and Y. Li, Practical Quantum Error Mitigation for Near-Future Applications, Phys. Rev. X8, 031027 (2018)

    work page 2018

  20. [20]

    Strikis, D

    A. Strikis, D. Qin, Y. Chen, S. C. Benjamin, and Y. Li, Learning-Based Quantum Error Mitigation, PRX Quan- tum2, 040330 (2021)

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    C. Kim, K. Park, and J. Rhee, Quantum error mitiga- tion with artificial neural network, IEEE Access8, 18853 (2020)

    work page 2020

  22. [22]

    Z. Cai, X. Xu, and S. C. Benjamin, Mitigating coherent noise using Pauli conjugation, npj Quantum Inf.6, 17 (2020)

    work page 2020

  23. [23]

    A. Mari, N. Shammah, and W. J. Zeng, Extending quantum probabilistic error cancellation by noise scaling, Phys. Rev. A104, 052607 (2021)

    work page 2021

  24. [24]

    A. Lowe, M. H. Gordon, P. Czarnik, A. Arrasmith, P. J. Coles, and L. Cincio, Unified approach to data-driven quantum error mitigation, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 033098 (2021)

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Sazonov and M

    V. Sazonov and M. Tamaazousti, Quantum error mitiga- tion for parametric circuits, Phys. Rev. A105, 042408 (2022)

    work page 2022

  26. [26]

    Error mitigation by training with fermionic linear optics

    A. Montanaro and S. Stanisic, Error mitigation by training with fermionic linear optics, (2021), arXiv:2102.02120 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  27. [27]

    Majumdar, P

    R. Majumdar, P. Rivero, F. Metz, A. Hasan, and D. S. Wang, Best practices for quantum error mitigation with digital zero-noise extrapolation, in2023 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineer- ing (QCE), Vol. 01 (2023) pp. 881–887

    work page 2023

  28. [28]

    Czarnik, A

    P. Czarnik, A. Arrasmith, P. J. Coles, and L. Cincio, Er- ror mitigation with clifford quantum-circuit data, Quan- tum5, 592 (2021)

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    BBGKY hierarchy for quantum error mitigation

    T. Saporiti, O. Kaikov, V. Sazonov, and M. Tamaa- zousti, Bogoliubov-Born-Green-Kirkwood-Yvon hierar- chy for quantum error mitigation, Phys. Rev. A112, 032409 (2025), arXiv:2502.21159 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Quantum Error Mitigation by Global Randomized Error Cancellation for Adiabatic Evolution in the Schwinger Model

    O. Kaikov, T. Saporiti, V. Sazonov, and M. Tamaazousti, Quantum Error Mitigation by Global Randomized Error Cancellation for Adiabatic Evolution in the Schwinger Model, (2025), arXiv:2507.06601 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    Saporiti, O

    T. Saporiti, O. Kaikov, V. Sazonov, and M. Tamaazousti, Quantum error mitigation by hierarchy-informed sam- pling: chiral dynamics in the Schwinger model, (2026), arXiv:2603.04339 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  32. [32]

    Takagi, S

    R. Takagi, S. Endo, S. Minagawa, and M. Gu, Funda- mental limits of quantum error mitigation, npj Quantum Information8, 114 (2022)

    work page 2022

  33. [33]

    Takagi, H

    R. Takagi, H. Tajima, and M. Gu, Universal sampling lower bounds for quantum error mitigation, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 210602 (2023)

    work page 2023

  34. [34]

    Y. Quek, D. Stilck Fran¸ ca, S. Khatri, J. J. Meyer, and J. Eisert, Exponentially tighter bounds on limitations of quantum error mitigation, Nature Physics20, 1648 (2024)

    work page 2024

  35. [35]

    Y. Kim, A. Eddins, S. Anand, K. Wei, E. Berg, S. Rosen- blatt, H. Nayfeh, Y. Wu, M. Zaletel, K. Temme, and A. Kandala, Evidence for the utility of quantum com- puting before fault tolerance, Nature618, 500 (2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    Bultrini, M

    D. Bultrini, M. H. Gordon, P. Czarnik, A. Arrasmith, M. Cerezo, P. J. Coles, and L. Cincio, Unifying and benchmarking state-of-the-art quantum error mitigation techniques, Quantum7, 1034 (2023)

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    Z. Cai, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, W. J. Hug- gins, Y. Li, J. R. McClean, and T. E. O’Brien, Quantum error mitigation, Rev. Mod. Phys.95, 045005 (2023)

    work page 2023

  38. [38]

    Suzuki, S

    Y. Suzuki, S. Endo, K. Fujii, and Y. Tokunaga, Quan- tum Error Mitigation as a Universal Error Reduction Technique: Applications from the NISQ to the Fault- Tolerant Quantum Computing Eras, PRX Quantum3, 010345 (2022)

    work page 2022

  39. [39]

    Myths around quantum computation before full fault tolerance: What no-go theorems rule out and what they don't

    Z. Zimbor´ aset al., Myths around quantum computation before full fault tolerance: What no-go theorems rule out and what they don’t, (2025), arXiv:2501.05694 [quant- ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Zhanget al., Demonstrating quantum error mitigation on logical qubits, (2025), arXiv:2501.09079 [quant-ph]

    A. Zhanget al., Demonstrating quantum error mitigation on logical qubits, (2025), arXiv:2501.09079 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  41. [41]

    R. P. Feynman, Quantum Mechanical Computers, Optics News11, 11 (1985)

    work page 1985

  42. [42]

    R. J. Costales, A. Gunning, and T. Dorlas, Efficiency of Feynman’s quantum computer, Phys. Rev. A111, 022615 (2025), arXiv:2309.09331 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    L. Caha, Z. Landau, and D. Nagaj, The Feynman- Kitaev computer’s clock: bias, gaps, idling and pulse tun- ing, Phys. Rev. A97, 062306 (2018), arXiv:1712.07395 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  44. [44]

    Variational dynamics as a ground-state problem on a quantum computer

    S. Barison, F. Vicentini, I. Cirac, and G. Carleo, Variational dynamics as a ground-state problem on a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Res.4, 043161 (2022), arXiv:2204.03454 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  45. [45]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum Computation and Quantum Information(Cambridge University Press, 2012)

    work page 2012

  46. [46]

    A. A. Avtandilyan and W. V. Pogosov, Optimal-order trotter–suzuki decomposition for quantum simulation on noisy quantum computers, Quantum Information Pro- cessing24, 10.1007/s11128-024-04627-z (2024)

    work page doi:10.1007/s11128-024-04627-z 2024

  47. [47]

    Lecture Notes on Quantum Algorithms for Scientific Computation

    L. Lin, Lecture Notes on Quantum Algorithms for Scien- tific Computation, (2022), arXiv:2201.08309 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  48. [48]

    A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum computations: algorithms and error correction, Russian Mathematical Surveys52, 1191 (1997)

    work page 1997

  49. [49]

    Hardware-efficient Variational Quantum Eigensolver for Small Molecules and Quantum Magnets

    A. Kandala, A. Mezzacapo, K. Temme, M. Takita, M. Brink, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Hardware- efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets, Nature549, 242 (2017), arXiv:1704.05018 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  50. [50]

    Meirom and S

    D. Meirom and S. H. Frankel, Pansatz: pulse-based ansatz for variational quantum algorithms, Frontiers in Quantum Science and TechnologyV olume 2 - 2023, 10.3389/frqst.2023.1273581 (2023)

    work page doi:10.3389/frqst.2023.1273581 2023

  51. [51]

    The online noise model snapshot was retrieved from the IBM Quantum Platform on June 30th 2026

    work page 2026

  52. [52]

    P. W. Shor, Algorithms for quantum computation: dis- crete logarithms and factoring (1994)

    work page 1994

  53. [53]

    P. W. Shor, Polynomial time algorithms for prime fac- torization and discrete logarithms on a quantum com- puter, SIAM J. Sci. Statist. Comput.26, 1484 (1997), arXiv:quant-ph/9508027

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  54. [54]

    The Variational Quantum Eigensolver: a review of methods and best practices

    J. Tillyet al., The Variational Quantum Eigensolver: A review of methods and best practices, Phys. Rept.986, 1 (2022), arXiv:2111.05176 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022