- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

APS Open Science

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Ground-state energies of Ising models calculated using the samples from a quantum computer that simulates short-time evolution

John P. T. Stenger*, C. Stephen Hellberg, and Daniel Gunlycke

  • *Contact author: john.p.stenger2.civ@nrl.navy.mil
PDF

APS Open Sci. 1, 000166 – Published 8 October, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/tk2w-hwzh

Abstract

We find the ground-state energy of the Ising model using the cascaded variational quantum eigensolver algorithm with the guided-sampling ansatz using up to 63 qubits on a quantum computer. We study a heavy-hex lattice to match the qubit architecture, allowing us to perform calculations on a scale that is inaccessible to exact diagonalization. We study both a homogeneous and a random-coupling model. We locate the boundary of acceptable quantum errors as a function of the number of qubits and coupling strength. An entropic analysis is performed, giving insights into the quantum computing performance. A subspace analysis is performed, which suggests that the Ising model is especially suited for near-term quantum computing.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (52)

  1. R. P. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 21, 467 (1982).
  2. A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum measurements and the Abelian stabilizer problem, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex. TR96 (1995).
  3. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, J. Lapan, A. Lundgren, and D. Preda, A quantum adiabatic evolution algorithm applied to random instances of an NP-complete problem, Science 292, 472 (2001).
  4. V. N. Smelyanskiy, U. V. Toussaint, and D. A. Timucin, Simulations of the adiabatic quantum optimization for the set partition problem, arXiv:quant-ph/0112143.
  5. B. W. Reichardt, The quantum adiabatic optimization algorithm and local minima, in Proceedings of the Thirty-Sixth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’04 (ACM Press, New York, NY, 2004), pp. 502–510.
  6. A. Peruzzo, J. R. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M.-H. Yung, X.-Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. O’Brien, A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor, Nat. Commun. 5, 4213 (2014).
  7. P. J. J. O’Malley, R. Babbush, I. D. Kivlichan, J. Romero, J. R. McClean, R. Barends, J. Kelly, P. Roushan, A. Tranter, N. Ding, et al., Scalable quantum simulation of molecular energies, Phys. Rev. X 6, 031007 (2016).
  8. S. McArdle, S. Endo, A. Aspuru-Guzik, S. C. Benjamin, and X. Yuan, Quantum computational chemistry, Rev. Mod. Phys. 92, 015003 (2020).
  9. F. Jamet, A. Agarwal, C. Lupo, D. E. Browne, C. Weber, and I. Rungger, Krylov variational quantum algorithm for first principles materials simulations, arXiv:2105.13298.
  10. T. E. Baker, Block Lanczos method for excited states on a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. A 110, 012420 (2024).
  11. J. R. McClean, J. Romero, R. Babbush, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, The theory of variational hybrid quantum-classical algorithms, New J. Phys. 18, 023023 (2016).
  12. 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, Nature (London) 549, 242 (2017).
  13. D. Wang, O. Higgott, and S. Brierley, Accelerated variational quantum eigensolver, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 140504 (2019).
  14. F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, S. Boixo, M. Broughton, B. B. Buckley, D. A. Buell, et al., Hartree-Fock on a superconducting qubit quantum computer, Science 369, 1084 (2020).
  15. J. F. Gonthier, M. D. Radin, C. Buda, E. J. Doskocil, C. M. Abuan, and J. Romero, Measurements as a roadblock to near-term practical quantum advantage in chemistry: Resource analysis, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 033154 (2022).
  16. K. Head-Marsden, J. Flick, C. J. Ciccarino, and P. Narang, Quantum information and algorithms for correlated quantum matter, Chem. Rev. 121, 3061 (2021).
  17. M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, K. Fujii, J. R. McClean, K. Mitarai, X. Yuan, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Variational quantum algorithms, Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 625 (2021).
  18. D. Gunlycke, C. S. Hellberg, and J. P. T. Stenger, Cascaded variational quantum eigensolver algorithm, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013238 (2024).
  19. J. P. T. Stenger, C. S. Hellberg, and D. Gunlycke, Demonstration of the effectiveness of the cascaded variational quantum eigensolver using the Jastrow ansatz for molecular calculations, ACS Omega 9, 21353 (2024).
  20. D. Gunlycke, J. P. T. Stenger, A. Maksymov, A. Kaushik, M. Roetteler, and C. S. Hellberg, Guided sampling ansätzes for variational quantum computing, arXiv:2508.13926.
  21. R. M. Parrish and P. L. McMahon, Quantum filter diagonalization: Quantum eigendecomposition without full quantum phase estimation, arXiv:1909.08925.
  22. N. H. Stair, R. Huang, and F. A. Evangelista, A multireference quantum Krylov algorithm for strongly correlated electrons, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16, 2236 (2020).
  23. T. E. Baker, Lanczos recursion on a quantum computer for the Green's function and ground state, Phys. Rev. A 103, 032404 (2021).
  24. K. Bharti and T. Haug, Iterative quantum-assisted eigensolver, Phys. Rev. A 104, L050401 (2021).
  25. J. Cohn, M. Motta, and R. M. Parrish, Quantum filter diagonalization with compressed double-factorized Hamiltonians, PRX Quantum 2, 040352 (2021).
  26. F. Jamet, A. Agarwal, and I. Rungger, Quantum subspace expansion algorithm for Green's functions, arXiv:2205.00094.
  27. N. Yoshioka, M. Amico, W. Kirby, P. Jurcevic, A. Dutt, B. Fuller, S. Garion, H. Haas, I. Hamamura, A. Ivrii, R. Majumdar, Z. Minev, M. Motta, B. Pokharel, P. Rivero, K. Sharma, C. J. Wood, A. Javadi-Abhari, and A. Mezzacapo, Krylov diagonalization of large many-body Hamiltonians on a quantum processor, Nat. Commun. 16, 5014 (2025).
  28. J. R. McClean, M. E. Kimchi-Schwartz, J. Carter, and W. A. de Jong, Hybrid quantum-classical hierarchy for mitigation of decoherence and determination of excited states, Phys. Rev. A 95, 042308 (2017).
  29. J. I. Colless, V. V. Ramasesh, D. Dahlen, M. S. Blok, M. E. Kimchi-Schwartz, J. R. McClean, J. Carter, W. A. de Jong, and I. Siddiqi, Computation of molecular spectra on a quantum processor with an error-resilient algorithm, Phys. Rev. X 8, 011021 (2018).
  30. M. Urbanek, D. Camps, R. Van Beeumen, and W. A. de Jong, Chemistry on quantum computers with virtual quantum subspace expansion, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16, 5425 (2020).
  31. S. Endo, Z. Cai, S. C. Benjamin, and X. Yuan, Hybrid quantum-classical algorithms and quantum error mitigation, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 90, 032001 (2021).
  32. M. Motta, E. Ye, J. R. McClean, Z. Li, A. J. Minnich, R. Babbush, and G. K.-L. Chan, Low rank representations for quantum simulation of electronic structure, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 83 (2021).
  33. E. N. Epperly, L. Lin, and Y. Nakatsukasa, A theory of quantum subspace diagonalization, SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl. 43, 1263 (2022).
  34. M. Motta, W. Kirby, I. Liepuoniute, K. J. Sung, J. Cohn, A. Mezzacapo, K. Klymko, N. Nguyen, N. Yoshioka, and J. E. Rice, Subspace methods for electronic structure simulations on quantum computers, Electron. Struct. 6, 013001 (2024).
  35. C. Umeano, F. Jamet, L. P. Lindoy, I. Rungger, and O. Kyriienko, Quantum subspace expansion approach for simulating dynamical response functions of Kitaev spin liquids, Phys. Rev. Mater. 9, 034401 (2025).
  36. R. M. Parrish, E. G. Hohenstein, P. L. McMahon, and T. J. Martínez, Quantum computation of electronic transitions using a variational quantum eigensolver, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 230401 (2019).
  37. W. J. Huggins, J. Lee, U. Baek, B. O’Gorman, and K. B. Whaley, A non-orthogonal variational quantum eigensolver, New J. Phys. 22, 073009 (2020).
  38. S.-X. Zhang, Z.-Q. Wan, C.-K. Lee, C.-Y. Hsieh, S. Zhang, and H. Yao, Variational quantum-neural hybrid eigensolver, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128, 120502 (2022).
  39. J. Robledo-Moreno, M. Motta, H. Haas, A. Javadi-Abhari, P. Jurcevic, W. Kirby, S. Martiel, K. Sharma, S. Sharma, T. Shirakawa, I. Sitdikov, R.-Y. Sun, K. J. Sung, M. Takita, M. C. Tran, S. Yunoki, and A. Mezzacapo, Chemistry beyond the scale of exact diagonalization on a quantum-centric supercomputer, Sci. Adv. 11, 9991 (2025).
  40. F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. S. L. Brandao, D. A. Buell, et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature (London) 574, 505 (2019).
  41. S. Anand, K. Temme, A. Kandala, and M. Zaletel, Classical benchmarking of zero noise extrapolation beyond the exactly-verifiable regime, arXiv:2306.17839.
  42. T. A. Chowdhury, K. Yu, M. A. Shamim, M. L. Kabir, and R. S. Sufian, Enhancing quantum utility: Simulating large-scale quantum spin chains on superconducting quantum computers, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033107 (2024).
  43. Y. Kim, A. Eddins, S. Anand, K. X. Wei, E. van den Berg, S. Rosenblatt, H. Nayfeh, Y. Wu, M. Zaletel, K. Temme, and A. Kandala, Evidence for the utility of quantum computing before fault tolerance, Nature (London) 618, 500 (2023).
  44. R. Davis, What is quantum utility? (2023), https://www.ibm.com.
  45. J. P. T. Stenger, C. S. Hellberg, and D. Gunlycke, Hybrid VQE-CVQE algorithm using diabatic state preparation, New J. Phys. 28, 094505 (2026).
  46. M. Bernaschi, I. González-Adalid Pemartín, V. Martín-Mayor, and G. Parisi, The quantum transition of the two-dimensional Ising spin glass, Nature (London) 631, 749 (2024).
  47. E. Vincent, Spin glass experiments, in Encyclopedia of Condensed Matter Physics (Elsevier, 2024), pp. 371–387.
  48. R. Duan, Quantum adiabatic theorem revisited, arXiv:2003.03063.
  49. H. F. Trotter, On the product of semi-groups of operators, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 10, 545 (1959).
  50. M. Suzuki, Generalized Trotter's formula and systematic approximants of exponential operators and inner derivations with applications to many-body problems, Commun. Math. Phys. 51, 183 (1976).
  51. Y.-H. Lai, J. P. T. Stenger, G. Bazargan, I. V. Schweigert, and D. Gunlycke, Probability distribution analysis of the cascaded variational quantum eigensolver, Phys. Rev. A (2026), https://doi.org/10.1103/h17r-4ldq.
  52. ibm_torino, 2023, https://quantum.cloud.ibm.com/computers?system=ibm_torino.

Outline

Information

APS Open Sci. 1, 000166– Published 8 October, 2026
Vol. 1
  • Received 28 April 2026
  • Accepted 29 September 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation