Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
129 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
28 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
42 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

High-precision and low-depth eigenstate property estimation: theory and resource estimation (2406.04307v1)

Published 6 Jun 2024 in quant-ph, cond-mat.str-el, and physics.comp-ph

Abstract: Estimating the eigenstate properties of quantum many-body systems is a long-standing, challenging problem for both classical and quantum computing. For the task of eigenstate preparation, quantum signal processing (QSP) has established near-optimal query complexity $O( \Delta{-1} \log(\epsilon{-1}) )$ by querying the block encoding of the Hamiltonian $H$ where $\Delta$ is the energy gap and $\epsilon$ is the target precision. However, QSP is challenging for both near-term noisy quantum computers and early fault-tolerant quantum computers (FTQC), which are limited by the number of logical qubits and circuit depth. To date, early FTQC algorithms have focused on querying the perfect time evolution $e{-iHt}$. It remains uncertain whether early FTQC algorithms can maintain good asymptotic scaling at the gate level. Moreover, when considering qubit connectivity, the circuit depth of existing FTQC algorithms may scale suboptimally with system size. Here, we present a full-stack design of a random sampling algorithm for estimating the eigenenergy and the observable expectations on the eigenstates, which can achieve high precision and good system size scaling. The gate complexity has a logarithmic dependence on precision $ {O}(\log{1+o(1)} (1/\epsilon))$ for generic Hamiltonians, which cannot achieved by methods using Trottersiation to realise $e{-iHt}$ like in QETU. For $n$-qubit lattice Hamiltonians, our method achieves near-optimal system size dependence with the gate complexity $O(n{1+o(1)})$. When restricting the qubit connectivity to a linear nearest-neighbour architecture, The method shows advantages in circuit depth, with $O(n{o(1)})$ for lattice models and $O(n{2+o(1)})$ for electronic structure problems. We compare the resource requirements (CNOT gates, T gates and qubit numbers) by phase estimation, QSP, and QETU, in lattice and molecular problems.

Citations (3)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.