Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 73 references

Offline recovery of magic and entanglement from noisy Pauli product states

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper connects the noise floor of a purified noisy quantum state to the magic inside it and shows that circuits generating magic and entanglement early carry a higher coherent mismatch throughout.

desk verdict Solid four-qubit empirical study showing purification can recover magic and entanglement from noisy Pauli product states, but the ordering claim and the central M=5 purification assumption need verification before the conclusions generalize. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.04743 v2 pith:SX6L76ZE submitted 2025-05-07 quant-ph

Erika Lloyd , Alexandre Fleury , Marc P. Coons , James Brown , Maritza Hernandez This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81P6881P45 PACS 03.67.Lx03.67.Mn
keywords magicstatesstabilizerRényientropyquantummutualinformationPauliproductformulaspurification-basederrormitigationnoisefloorclassicalshadowsHamiltoniandressing
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 show that low-fidelity noisy quantum states can still be useful: as long as the dominant eigenvector of the noisy density matrix approximates the intended state, classical purification recovers estimates of magic, entanglement, and ground-state energies from states produced by Pauli product formulas. Its central finding is that the post-purification noise floor is tied to the magic in the state and, more concretely, to when during circuit construction that magic and entanglement are generated. Two circuits that approximate the same target state to similar chemical accuracy can have very different noise floors: the one that generates resources early has a larger coherent mismatch at every step. In simulation and on ion-trap hardware, correlations prove more robust to noise than magic, and experimentally the authors use a single low-error circuit, with Hamiltonian dressing, to compute an entire dissociation curve while cutting the number of measured Hamiltonian terms.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a small set of quantum information metrics applied to states built from Pauli exponentials $e^{-i\theta P}$. Magic is quantified by the 2-stabilizer R\'enyi entropy $M_2 = -\log_2\left(\frac{1}{2^n}\sum_P \langle\psi|P|\psi\rangle^4\right) - S$, correlations by the multipartite quantum mutual information (QMI), and noise and recoverability by purity, the purified state $\rho^M_{\rm noisy}/\mathrm{tr}(\rho^M_{\rm noisy})$ that extracts the dominant eigenvector, and the coherent mismatch $c = 1 - |\langle\psi_{\rm ideal}|\psi_{\rm purified}\rangle|^2$. The purification step converts a low-overlap noisy state into a near-pure state whose resources and energies can be compared with theory, and the coherent mismatch is the quantity that ties the noise floor to the order of resource generation.

What would settle it

From the same classical-shadow density matrices, compute the dominant eigenvector's fidelity to the ideal state and the gap between the two largest eigenvalues: any data point where that fidelity is not close to one, or where purity after five purification steps stays well below one, would show that the recovered resource numbers describe the noisy state's principal mode rather than the target, and the noise-floor ordering conclusions would need to be revisited.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes a concrete relationship between the noise floor of a purified noisy state and the quantum resources inside it. For Pauli product states under depolarizing noise, the coherent mismatch after purification tracks the stabilizer entropy (magic) of the state in the low-noise regime, and at stronger noise it tracks errors in magic and correlations rather than state overlap. Given two unitaries that approximate the same linear H3 ground state with energy errors well below chemical accuracy, the path that generates magic and entanglement early has a higher coherent mismatch throughout, even at steps where the other path has more magic and more correlation; operator ordering therefore sets how recoverable a state is. On ion-trap hardware, density matrices reconstructed from postselected single-qubit classical shadows allow the same purification to recover magic, QMI, and chemically accurate energies from raw states whose overlap with the target is low and decreasing. The authors further show that dressing the Hamiltonian makes one low-error circuit compute an entire H2 dissociation curve, reducing measurement overhead.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the dominant eigenvector of each noisy density matrix still being the ideal target state; if hardware noise rotates that eigenvector away, the purified magic, correlations, and coherent mismatch stop describing the state the circuit was meant to create.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Circuit compilers and adaptive ansatz builders can lower the noise floor by ordering Pauli exponentials to defer magic and entanglement generation; the paper's H3 comparison shows the same six exponentials ordered differently change the coherent mismatch at every step.
  • Purification-based error mitigation can deliver chemically accurate energies from raw states whose overlap with the target is low and still falling, so overlap alone is an inadequate guide to state quality in noisy settings.
  • In the low-noise regime, the noise floor is set mainly by the state's magic, so algorithms requiring substantial magic should expect a higher floor and should budget more error mitigation for magic-bearing subroutines.
  • Simple hardware signals such as the postselection survival ratio correlate with purity and coherent mismatch, making them practical proxies for identifying the most recoverable circuits and, via Hamiltonian dressing, reusing one good state across many Hamiltonians.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the ordering sensitivity is a general feature of Pauli product formulas rather than a quirk of these two circuits, then Trotterization and adaptive ansatz searches could be augmented with a resource-deferral penalty: among sequences with comparable Trotter error, prefer the one that generates magic and entanglement latest; this is a testable extension the paper gestures toward but does not esta
  • The robustness gap between correlations and magic suggests a design heuristic for near-term algorithms: lean on correlation-heavy quantities and keep magic-hungry subroutines as short or as late as possible, since magic is the resource that hardware noise corrupts first.
  • Because the dominant-eigenvector assumption is checkable from the same shadow density matrices, one could verify the eigengap and the dominant eigenvector's fidelity to the ideal state at every data point; where that check fails, the recovered resource values should be read as properties of the noisy state's principal mode rather than of the intended computation.
  • The Hamiltonian dressing demonstration implies that the economic advantage of finding one robust circuit grows with the number of Hamiltonians to be processed, since the same expectation values are reused; this amortization argument is only implicit in the paper.
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

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies how magic (stabilizer Rényi entropy) and entanglement (multipartite QMI) in states generated by Pauli product formulas are affected by noise, and whether classical purification of noisy density matrices can recover these resources. The authors simulate depolarizing noise on random product-formula circuits and on two orderings of a six-unitary approximation to the H3 ground state, and run experiments on IonQ Aria using classical shadows and postselection. They report that coherent mismatch after purification tracks magic errors in low-noise regimes, that the ordering of unitaries affects the noise floor, and that a low-error circuit can be reused for a dressed H2 Hamiltonian across a dissociation curve. The central proposals are to design circuits that defer resource generation and to target states with low error rates.

Significance. The paper provides a plausible and timely connection between quantum resource theory and hardware noise: if the purification assumption holds, the results offer a practical heuristic for ordering Pauli exponentials and for reusing robust states. Strengths include the use of real hardware (IonQ Aria) with classical shadows and bootstrapped error bars, a concrete Hamiltonian-dressing demonstration, and an explicit statement of the purification assumption. The simulations use no fitted constants, and the correlation analyses are against independent metrics. The main value is the empirical demonstration that magic errors correlate with coherent mismatch and that resource generation order can affect recoverability in a specific example.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. II A 3, Eq. (6)] The purification protocol is load-bearing but its validity is not verified for any data point. Equation (6) returns the dominant eigenvector of rho_noisy only when lambda1^M dominates lambda2^M, and it describes the ideal state only if that eigenvector is close to |psi_ideal>. The text in Sec. II A 3 states this is the central assumption and asserts that M=5 yields pure states "to a high approximation", but no eigengap, post-purification purity, or dominant-eigenvector fidelity is reported for the simulated or experimental states. The two outlier points in Fig. 7 (theta=0.439 and 1.2) have anomalously low purity and are exactly where this assumption is most likely to fail. If at those points the purified object is still a mixture, the recovered QMI, SE, and coherent mismatch in Figs. 7-10 no longer refer to the target state, and the ordering conclusion expressed through coherent mismatch loses its well-defined object. Please report the spectral gap and the fidelity of the purified state to the ideal state for each data point, or restrict the conclusions to the region where this is verified.
  2. [Sec. II C 2, Fig. 4] The claim that operator ordering affects the noise floor is based on two specific orderings of a single H3 instance. The path U2 in Table II was selected because it "diverged most strongly" in resource generation while keeping reasonable Trotter error; this is a selection on the outcome, and no systematic sampling over random orderings or over different target states is provided. Without such sampling (or an analytic argument), the general statements in the Introduction ("product formulas... have a noise floor based on when they generate entanglement and magic") and in the Conclusions are not established beyond the chosen example. Please test the ordering effect on a random set of orderings and report how often the "defer resource generation" rule holds, and whether the effect size is stable.
  3. [Sec. II D 1, Fig. 8] The advantage of tailoring the H2 dissociation curve to the "best" circuit is demonstrated in-sample. The circuit angle theta=0.401 is selected as the one with the lowest ratio of postselected data in the same experimental dataset that is then used to compute the dressed dissociation curve and compare with the original VQE circuit. This selection bias could inflate the reported advantage. Please provide an out-of-sample evaluation (for example, selecting the angle from a calibration run and evaluating on a separate run) or report the variability of the conclusion across multiple repetitions of the selection procedure.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (3)] The definition of multipartite QMI is garbled: the sum over k_i is not defined clearly, the entropy arguments are written as X_{k1}, X_{k1}, ..., X_{kn}, and the overall formula appears to differ from the standard Watanabe formula in Ref. [35]. Please rewrite with explicit index notation or reproduce the definition from Ref. [35].
  2. [Table I] "2-Stabilizer Renyi entropy" should be "2-Rényi stabilizer entropy"; the definition in Eq. (4) uses alpha, but only M2 is used.
  3. [Sec. IV B 2] The circuit text contains typos: "e^{-i0.0.401YX}" and "e^{-i0.0.2007YZXZ}" should have single decimals (for example, e^{-i0.401 YX}).
  4. [Sec. IV B 1] "Bootstrapped the classical shadows 250 using the postselected data" should read "bootstrapped the classical shadows 250 times using the postselected data".
  5. [Sec. II C 1] The Pearson correlations in Fig. 3 b) are averaged over stratified subsets; it would help to report the number of circuits and the standard deviation on the correlation values explicitly in the text, since the figure alone does not show the spread across subsets.
  6. [References] Reference [27] is incomplete ("Nature 622, 481 (2023)" with no author list); please supply the full author list.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation found; the central correlations are measured against independent ideal-state metrics, and the only self-citation (Tangelo for circuit generation) is not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain does not reduce to its own inputs. The resource metrics (QMI, stabilizer entropy, purity) are independent, standard definitions, and the coherent mismatch in Eq. (7) is defined directly against the ideal state and the purified state; it is not algebraically identical to the SE or QMI errors it is correlated with. The connection between noise floor and magic/entanglement is established by simulation and experiment, not by construction. The operator-ordering study compares two decompositions built from the same Pauli exponentials, and the finding that one ordering has a higher coherent mismatch despite lower late-stage resources is an empirical observation, not an identity. Equation (6) is an external purification protocol, and the unverified M=5 assumption is a correctness/soundness concern about whether the purified object is the dominant eigenvector, not a circularity. The only self-citation is of Tangelo for defining molecular systems, encoding qubits, and generating circuits; it does not supply the noise-floor correlations or the resource metrics, so it does not bear the paper's central claims. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no known result is repackaged as new. Accordingly, no specific circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper does not fit any global constants to data; its conclusions rest on measurement choices and domain assumptions. The load-bearing assumptions are that purification's dominant eigenvector recovers the ideal state, that classical shadows give accurate 4-qubit density matrices, and that the stabilizer entropy formula, stated for pure states, can be applied to mixed noisy states. The ordering claim also relies on a small number of selected circuit paths. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Purification order M = 5
    Coherent mismatch and recovered resource values depend on the purification power; the paper sets M=5 and states it gives near-pure states to high approximation without quantifying convergence per data point.
  • Depolarizing noise strengths = 0.002 (Fig 2); 0.0005, 0.0008, 0.001 (Fig 5); 0.0005 per gi (Fig 4)
    Chosen by hand for simulations; the paper notes the correlation between noise floor and magic only holds below a noise threshold, so the numerical values affect the stated regime-dependent conclusions.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption The dominant eigenvector of the noisy state approximates the target state
    Explicitly stated in Section II A 3 as the central assumption for purification-based error mitigation; if false, purified states do not recover the ideal state.
  • domain assumption Classical shadows reconstruct the 4-qubit density matrix accurately enough for metric estimates
    Experimental metrics are computed from median-of-means shadow estimators with 1000 shots per Pauli basis; the paper relies on this without independent validation of the reconstructed density matrix.
  • domain assumption The stabilizer Renyi entropy formula extends to mixed shadow-reconstructed states
    Eq 5 is written for pure states with <psi|P|psi>, but is applied to raw noisy and purified density matrices; no mixed-state definition or citation is given.
  • domain assumption Depolarizing noise is representative for the simulation-based ordering conclusions
    Ordering and correlation results are first established with depolarizing noise; the authors later show hardware behaves differently (QMI is not underestimated), limiting generalization.
  • ad hoc to paper The tested orderings U1 and U2 are representative of general ordering effects
    The late-generation rule is inferred from two paths to one H3 target plus four paths in Fig 11; no systematic sampling of orderings is provided.
  • standard math Standard quantum-information formulas (von Neumann entropy, multipartite QMI) are correct
    Used without proof; standard background from Refs [34,35].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Offline recovery of magic and entanglement from noisy Pauli product states." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SX6L76ZE

@misc{pith2026250504743,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Offline recovery of magic and entanglement from noisy Pauli product states},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SX6L76ZE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.04743}
}
read the original abstract

The dependence of quantum algorithms on state fidelity is difficult to characterize analytically and is best explored experimentally as hardware scales and noisy simulations become intractable. While low fidelity states are often disregarded, they may still retain valuable information, as long as their dominant eigenvector approximates the target state. Through classical purification, we demonstrate the ability to recover resources specific to quantum computing such as magic and entanglement from noisy states generated by Pauli product formulas, which are common subroutines of many quantum algorithms. Additionally we show that the fidelity of the purified state is dependent on both the magnitude and order in which magic and entanglement are generated, which can be used to inform the order of operators within an ansatz. Consistent across simulation and experiment on IonQ's Aria quantum device, correlations within a state are found to be much more robust to noise than magic, and we show the advantage of designing algorithms targeting these low error states. This study uses quantum informatic tools for analyzing and optimizing quantum algorithms in a noisy framework.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.04743 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1: Quantum circuit implementation of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Simulations of circuit primitive with and without depolarization noise as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: Random circuit simulations. We simulate 10000 random 4 qubit circuits by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (9 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Metrics for two unitary approximations to the ground state of a linear [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Energy errors of purified states generated by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Pearson correlation matrix of selected results for all experiments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Experimental characterization of circuit primitive. a) Quantum mutual [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: Experimental measurements of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Experimental implementation of larger circuits targeting the ground state of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_9.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Experimental metrics for approaching the target state of the Be atom are shown [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_10.png]
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: Metrics for four unitary approximations to the ground state of a linear [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p026_11.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: Symmetry projection circuit used for postselection. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_12.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 49 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    In a noisy setting, entanglement can be destroyed, and additional correlations may be introduced

    Correlations and entanglement Entangling operations between qubits are a critical component in the design of quantum algorithms. In a noisy setting, entanglement can be destroyed, and additional correlations may be introduced. To study both the intended entanglement and the noise induced corre- lations, we quantify the total correlation of the quantum sta...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Stabilizer Renyi entropy and magic Beyond entanglement, useful quantum computation also requires magic, the measure of the nonstabilizerness of the quantum state. This resource is necessary for the quantum computation to be beyond the reach of polynomial time classical algorithms, and is also 6 the most costly resource to protect using quantum error corre...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Purity, defined as trρ2, measures the degree of mixedness of a quantum state

    Noise sensitivity and recovery metrics To capture the effect of noise on a given state, we track two noise-related metrics. Purity, defined as trρ2, measures the degree of mixedness of a quantum state. A pure state has a purity of 1, while mixed states have lower values. Considering the growing prevalence of purification based error mitigation strategies ...

    work page

  4. [4]

    1: Quantum circuit implementation of e−iθYXXX applied to the initial state |1100⟩

    Rx(−π 2 ) |1⟩ H H |0⟩ H H |0⟩ H Rz(θ) H FIG. 1: Quantum circuit implementation of e−iθYXXX applied to the initial state |1100⟩. 8 a) b) c) FIG. 2: Simulations of circuit primitive with and without depolarization noise as a function of circuit angle. a) The stabilizer entropy (SE) and quantum mutual information. b) The purity and coherent mismatch. c) The ...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Generating magic and entanglement with randomized Pauli product formulas In Fig.3 we explore the magic and entanglement that may be generated from circuits made of Pauli product formulas. We run 10000 random circuit simulations on 4 qubits, each with the number of Pauli productsN uniformly sampled from 2 and 30, and which acts on a random uncorrelated ref...

    work page

  6. [6]

    In this study, we further show that unitary ordering also influences the accumulation of noise and performance of a circuit

    Operator ordering and the accumulation of noise Trotterization studies on the unitary coupled cluster ansatz [38] demonstrate that the sequence in which unitaries are applied has a significant affect on energy estimations. In this study, we further show that unitary ordering also influences the accumulation of noise and performance of a circuit. To illust...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Experiment on circuit primitive The first set of experiments study the quantum resources measured on a quantum device, and compares them to theoretical values using the circuit primitive shown in Fig. 1. Fig 7 shows the measured qubit correlations and magic as functions of the circuit parameter θ, comparing the theoretical values (black line) with raw (re...

    work page

  8. [8]

    In this next experiment, magic and entanglement is increased by adding Pauli exponentials, rather than sweeping the parameter angles in the circuit

    Circuit path for Be atom To examine the noise resilience of quantum resource generation for more complex states, we increase the depth of the circuit. In this next experiment, magic and entanglement is increased by adding Pauli exponentials, rather than sweeping the parameter angles in the circuit. The target is to approach the ground state of the berylli...

    work page

Show all 73 references
  1. [9]

    Tailoring energy calculations to lowest error circuit The success of a quantum computation depends both on the quality of the computation and how information is extracted from that state. This section explores two key aspects; first is identifying the best state producible by ...

  2. [10]

    Each of these problems will be referred to as fragment in the following text, and they are computationally cheaper to treat via quantum chemistry

    Method of increments with frozen natural orbitals (MI-FNO) The method of increments (MI) [52] tackles a many-body problem by considering it as a summation of a collection of smaller n-body problems (generally up to 3-body problems are considered). Each of these problems will b...

  3. [11]

    We used the symmetry preserving Bravyi Kiteav [54, 55] fermion to qubit encoding which resulted in a 6 qubit system

    H3 unitary approximations The linear H3 molecule used an STO-3G basis, with a 2 Angstrom separation between each atom. We used the symmetry preserving Bravyi Kiteav [54, 55] fermion to qubit encoding which resulted in a 6 qubit system. In Table II we list four different unitar...

  4. [12]

    Tangelo [40] was used to define molecular systems, encoding them into qubits, and generate circuits

    Simulation backends and packages All simulations used cirq [56] density matrix simulator and QutTiP [57] was used to calculate overlaps and Von Neumann entropy. Tangelo [40] was used to define molecular systems, encoding them into qubits, and generate circuits. 25 FIG. 11: Met...

  5. [13]

    Randomized classical shadows The classical shadows method [44] was employed in the online portion of the experiment to gather data from the quantum computer. Specifically, we utilized the randomized classical shadows method, where the measurement bases were chosen randomly fro...

  6. [14]

    9 and 10, when the number of Pauli exponentials N is 1, the experiment was a two qubit circuit defined by e−i0.0.401YX|11⟩, and the other two qubits were simulated classically

    Experimental circuits For the deeper circuit results in Fig. 9 and 10, when the number of Pauli exponentials N is 1, the experiment was a two qubit circuit defined by e−i0.0.401YX|11⟩, and the other two qubits were simulated classically. When N = 2, the experiment run was the ...

  7. [15]

    J. F. Gonthier, M. D. Radin, C. Buda, E. J. Doskocil, C. M. Abuan, and J. Romero, Physical Review Research 4, 033154 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Cerezo, M

    M. Cerezo, M. Larocca, D. Garc´ ıa-Mart´ ın, N. L. Diaz, P. Braccia, E. Fontana, M. S. Rudolph, P. Bermejo, A. Ijaz, S. Thanasilp, et al. , arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.09121 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Babbush, D

    R. Babbush, D. W. Berry, R. Kothari, R. D. Somma, and N. Wiebe, Physical Review X 13, 041041 (2023)

    2023

  10. [18]

    G. H. Low and Y. Su, in 2024 IEEE 65th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS) (IEEE, 2024) pp. 1051–1062

    2024

  11. [19]

    Leimkuhler and K

    O. Leimkuhler and K. B. Whaley, arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.21041 (2025)

    2025

  12. [20]

    Bravyi, D

    S. Bravyi, D. Browne, P. Calpin, E. Campbell, D. Gosset, and M. Howard, Quantum 3, 181 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    Niroula, C

    P. Niroula, C. D. White, Q. Wang, S. Johri, D. Zhu, C. Monroe, C. Noel, and M. J. Gullans, Nature Physics , 1 (2024)

    2024

  14. [22]

    S. Chen, J. Cotler, H.-Y. Huang, and J. Li, Nature Communications 14, 6001 (2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    J. D. Whitfield, J. Biamonte, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Molecular Physics 109, 735 (2011). 28

    2011

  16. [24]

    Y. Cao, J. Romero, J. P. Olson, M. Degroote, P. D. Johnson, M. Kieferov´ a, I. D. Kivlichan, T. Menke, B. Peropadre, N. P. Sawaya, et al. , Chemical reviews 119, 10856 (2019)

    2019

  17. [25]

    S. Lee, J. Lee, H. Zhai, Y. Tong, A. M. Dalzell, A. Kumar, P. Helms, J. Gray, Z.-H. Cui, W. Liu, et al. , Nature communications 14, 1952 (2023)

    2023

  18. [26]

    Mukhopadhyay, N

    P. Mukhopadhyay, N. Wiebe, and H. T. Zhang, npj Quantum Information 9, 31 (2023)

    2023

  19. [27]

    H. L. Tang, V. Shkolnikov, G. S. Barron, H. R. Grimsley, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, PRX Quantum 2, 020310 (2021)

    2021

  20. [28]

    I. G. Ryabinkin, T.-C. Yen, S. N. Genin, and A. F. Izmaylov, Journal of chemical theory and computation 14, 6317 (2018)

    2018

  21. [29]

    Aliverti-Piuri, K

    D. Aliverti-Piuri, K. Chatterjee, L. Ding, K. Liao, J. Liebert, and C. Schilling, Faraday Dis- cussions (2024)

    2024

  22. [30]

    J. Chen, E. Stoudenmire, S. R. White, et al. , PRX Quantum 4, 040318 (2023)

    2023

  23. [31]

    Q. Zhao, Y. Zhou, and A. M. Childs, arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.02379 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Gross, S

    D. Gross, S. T. Flammia, and J. Eisert, Physical review letters 102, 190501 (2009)

    2009

  25. [33]

    Gottesman, arXiv preprint quant-ph/9807006 (1998)

    D. Gottesman, arXiv preprint quant-ph/9807006 (1998)

    1998 arXiv

  26. [34]

    G. E. Fux, E. Tirrito, M. Dalmonte, and R. Fazio, arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.02039 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Bejan, C

    M. Bejan, C. McLauchlan, and B. B´ eri, PRX Quantum 5, 030332 (2024)

    2024

  28. [36]

    A. Gu, S. Oliviero, and L. Leone, arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.19610

    arXiv

  29. [37]

    Liu and A

    Z.-W. Liu and A. Winter, PRX Quantum 3, 020333 (2022)

    2022

  30. [38]

    Turkeshi, Nature Physics , 1 (2024)

    X. Turkeshi, Nature Physics , 1 (2024)

    2024

  31. [39]

    Leone, S

    L. Leone, S. F. Oliviero, and A. Hamma, Physical Review Letters 128, 050402 (2022)

    2022

  32. [40]

    S. F. Oliviero, L. Leone, A. Hamma, and S. Lloyd, npj Quantum Information 8, 148 (2022)

    2022

  33. [41]

    Nature 622, 481 (2023)

    2023

  34. [42]

    W. J. Huggins, S. McArdle, T. E. O’Brien, J. Lee, N. C. Rubin, S. Boixo, K. B. Whaley, R. Babbush, and J. R. McClean, Physical Review X 11, 041036 (2021)

    2021

  35. [43]

    Koczor, Physical Review X 11, 031057 (2021)

    B. Koczor, Physical Review X 11, 031057 (2021)

    2021

  36. [44]

    T. E. O’Brien, G. Anselmetti, F. Gkritsis, V. Elfving, S. Polla, W. J. Huggins, O. Oumarou, K. Kechedzhi, D. Abanin, R. Acharya, et al. , Nature Physics 19, 1787 (2023)

    2023

  37. [45]

    Torlai, G

    G. Torlai, G. Mazzola, J. Carrasquilla, M. Troyer, R. Melko, and G. Carleo, Nature physics 14, 447 (2018)

    2018

  38. [46]

    V. Wei, W. Coish, P. Ronagh, and C. A. Muschik, Physical Review Research 6, 023250 (2024). 29

    2024

  39. [47]

    Kokaew, B

    W. Kokaew, B. Kulchytskyy, S. Matsuura, and P. Ronagh, arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.06864 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Watanabe, IBM Journal of Research and Development 4, 66 (1960)

    S. Watanabe, IBM Journal of Research and Development 4, 66 (1960)

    1960

  41. [49]

    Kumar, Physical Review A 96, 012332 (2017)

    A. Kumar, Physical Review A 96, 012332 (2017)

    2017

  42. [50]

    Koczor, New Journal of Physics 23, 123047 (2021)

    B. Koczor, New Journal of Physics 23, 123047 (2021)

    2021

  43. [51]

    A. J. McCaskey, Z. P. Parks, J. Jakowski, S. V. Moore, T. D. Morris, T. S. Humble, and R. C. Pooser, npj Quantum Information 5, 99 (2019)

    2019

  44. [52]

    H. R. Grimsley, D. Claudino, S. E. Economou, E. Barnes, and N. J. Mayhall, Journal of chemical theory and computation 16, 1 (2019)

    2019

  45. [53]

    I. G. Ryabinkin, A. J. Jena, and S. N. Genin, Journal of chemical theory and computation 19, 1722 (2023)

    2023

  46. [54]

    Senicourt, J

    V. Senicourt, J. Brown, A. Fleury, R. Day, E. Lloyd, M. P. Coons, K. Bieniasz, L. Huntington, A. J. Garza, S. Matsuura, et al. , arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.12424 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  47. [55]

    I. G. Ryabinkin, R. A. Lang, S. N. Genin, and A. F. Izmaylov, Journal of chemical theory and computation 16, 1055 (2020)

    2020

  48. [56]

    H. R. Grimsley, S. E. Economou, E. Barnes, and N. J. Mayhall, Nature communications 10, 3007 (2019)

    2019

  49. [57]

    Maksymov, J

    A. Maksymov, J. Nguyen, Y. Nam, and I. Markov, arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.07233 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Huang, R

    H.-Y. Huang, R. Kueng, and J. Preskill, Nature Physics 16, 1050 (2020)

    2020

  51. [59]

    Jnane, J

    H. Jnane, J. Steinberg, Z. Cai, H. C. Nguyen, and B. Koczor, PRX Quantum 5, 010324 (2024)

    2024

  52. [60]

    S. Chen, W. Yu, P. Zeng, and S. T. Flammia, PRX Quantum 2, 030348 (2021)

    2021

  53. [61]

    Huang, S

    H.-Y. Huang, S. Chen, and J. Preskill, arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.14894

    arXiv

  54. [62]

    J. J. Wallman and J. Emerson, Physical Review A 94, 052325 (2016)

    2016

  55. [63]

    Gunlycke, C

    D. Gunlycke, C. S. Hellberg, and J. P. Stenger, Physical Review Research 6, 013238 (2024)

    2024

  56. [64]

    Beguˇ si´ c, K

    T. Beguˇ si´ c, K. Hejazi, and G. K. Chan, arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.04797 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  57. [65]

    J. Liu, Z. Li, and J. Yang, Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation 18, 4795 (2022)

    2022

  58. [66]

    Nesbet, Physical Review 155, 51 (1967)

    R. Nesbet, Physical Review 155, 51 (1967)

    1967

  59. [67]

    Verma, L

    P. Verma, L. Huntington, M. P. Coons, Y. Kawashima, T. Yamazaki, and A. Zaribafiyan, The Journal of Chemical Physics 155 (2021)

    2021

  60. [68]

    Bravyi, J

    S. Bravyi, J. M. Gambetta, A. Mezzacapo, and K. Temme, arXiv preprint arXiv:1701.08213 (2017). 30

    2017 arXiv

  61. [69]

    J. T. Seeley, M. J. Richard, and P. J. Love, The Journal of chemical physics 137 (2012)

    2012

  62. [70]

    Developers, Cirq (Zenodo, 2024)

    C. Developers, Cirq (Zenodo, 2024)

    2024

  63. [71]

    J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, Computer physics communications 183, 1760 (2012)

    2012

  64. [72]

    Bonet-Monroig, R

    X. Bonet-Monroig, R. Sagastizabal, M. Singh, and T. O’Brien, Physical Review A 98, 062339 (2018)

    2018

  65. [73]

    Seif, Z.-P

    A. Seif, Z.-P. Cian, S. Zhou, S. Chen, and L. Jiang, PRX Quantum 4, 010303 (2023). 31

    2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.