- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

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
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Quantum simulation of open quantum systems in heavy-ion collisions

Wibe A. de Jong1,*, Mekena Metcalf1,†, James Mulligan2,3,‡, Mateusz Płoskoń2,§, Felix Ringer2,∥, and Xiaojun Yao4,¶

  • 1Computational Research Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
  • 2Nuclear Science Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
  • 3Physics Department, University of California, Berkeley, California 94720, USA
  • 4Center for Theoretical Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA

  • *wadejong@lbl.gov
  • †mmetcalf@lbl.gov
  • ‡james.mulligan@berkeley.edu
  • §mploskon@lbl.gov
  • ∥fmringer@lbl.gov
  • xjyao@mit.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 104, L051501 – Published 7 September, 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.L051501

Abstract

We present a framework to simulate the dynamics of hard probes such as heavy quarks or jets in a hot, strongly coupled quark-gluon plasma (QGP) on a quantum computer. Hard probes in the QGP can be treated as open quantum systems governed in the Markovian limit by the Lindblad equation. However, due to large computational costs, most current phenomenological calculations of hard probes evolving in the QGP use semiclassical approximations of the quantum evolution. Quantum computation can mitigate these costs and offers the potential for a fully quantum treatment with exponential speed-up over classical techniques. We report a simplified demonstration of our framework on IBM Q quantum devices and apply the random identity insertion method to account for cnot depolarization noise, in addition to measurement error mitigation. Our work demonstrates the feasibility of simulating open quantum systems on current and near-term quantum devices, which is of broad relevance to applications in nuclear physics, quantum information, and other fields.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (126)

  1. M. Devoret and R. Schoelkopf, Superconducting circuits for quantum information: An outlook, Science 339, 1169 (2013).
  2. M. Kjaergaard, M. E. Schwartz, J. Braumller, P. Krantz, J. I.-J. Wang, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, Superconducting qubits: Current state of play, Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 11, 369 (2020).
  3. C. D. Bruzewicz, J. Chiaverini, R. McConnell, and J. M. Sage, Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges, Appl. Phys. Rev. 6, 021314 (2019).
  4. F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. S. L. Brandao, and D. A. Buell, Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature (London) 574, 505 (2019).
  5. 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).
  6. A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M.-H. Yung, X.-Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. OBrien, A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor, Nat. Commun. 5, 4213 (2014).
  7. 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).
  8. Google AI Quantum and Collaborators, Hartree-fock on a superconducting qubit quantum computer, Science 369, 1084 (2020).
  9. 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).
  10. F. T. Chong, D. Franklin, and M. Martonosi, Programming languages and compiler design for realistic quantum hardware, Nature (London) 549, 180 (2017).
  11. L. Bassman, K. Liu, A. Krishnamoorthy, T. Linker, Y. Geng, D. Shebib, S. Fukushima, F. Shimojo, R. K. Kalia, A. Nakano, and P. Vashishta, Towards simulation of the dynamics of materials on quantum computers, Phys. Rev. B 101, 184305 (2020).
  12. A. Smith, M. S. Kim, F. Pollmann, and J. Knolle, Simulating quantum many-body dynamics on a current digital quantum computer, npj Quantum Inf. 5, 106 (2019).
  13. J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the nisq era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
  14. S. P. Jordan, K. S. Lee, and J. Preskill, Quantum algorithms for quantum field theories, Science 336, 1130 (2012).
  15. D. B. Kaplan, N. Klco, and A. Roggero, Ground states via spectral combing on a quantum computer, arXiv:1709.08250.
  16. J. Preskill, Simulating quantum field theory with a quantum computer, Proc. Sci., LATTICE2018 (2018) 024.
  17. N. Klco and M. J. Savage, Digitization of scalar fields for quantum computing, Phys. Rev. A 99, 052335 (2019).
  18. E. Dumitrescu, A. McCaskey, G. Hagen, G. Jansen, T. Morris, T. Papenbrock, R. Pooser, D. Dean, and P. Lougovski, Cloud Quantum Computing of an Atomic Nucleus, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 210501 (2018).
  19. N. Klco, E. Dumitrescu, A. McCaskey, T. Morris, R. Pooser, M. Sanz, E. Solano, P. Lougovski, and M. Savage, Quantum-classical computation of Schwinger model dynamics using quantum computers, Phys. Rev. A 98, 032331 (2018).
  20. C. C. Chang, A. Gambhir, T. S. Humble, and S. Sota, Quantum annealing for systems of polynomial equations, Sci. Rep. 9, 10258 (2019).
  21. A. Roggero, A. C. Li, J. Carlson, R. Gupta, and G. N. Perdue, Quantum computing for neutrino-nucleus scattering, Phys. Rev. D 101, 074038 (2020).
  22. N. Klco, J. R. Stryker, and M. J. Savage, SU(2) non-Abelian gauge field theory in one dimension on digital quantum computers, Phys. Rev. D 101, 074512 (2020).
  23. A. Roggero and A. Baroni, Short-depth circuits for efficient expectation value estimation, Phys. Rev. A 101, 022328 (2020).
  24. I. C. Clot et al., Opportunities for nuclear physics & quantum information science, in Intersections between Nuclear Physics and Quantum Information, edited by I. C. Clot and M. R. Dietrich (2019), https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1523421-opportunities-nuclear-physics-amp-quantum-information-science.
  25. C. W. Bauer, W. A. De Jong, B. Nachman, and D. Provasoli, A Quantum Algorithm for High Energy Physics Simulations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 187603 (2021).
  26. N. Mueller, A. Tarasov, and R. Venugopalan, Deeply inelastic scattering structure functions on a hybrid quantum computer, Phys. Rev. D 102, 016007 (2020).
  27. A. Y. Wei, P. Naik, A. W. Harrow, and J. Thaler, Quantum algorithms for jet clustering, Phys. Rev. D 101, 094015 (2020).
  28. E. T. Holland, K. A. Wendt, K. Kravvaris, X. Wu, W. Erich Ormand, J. L. DuBois, S. Quaglioni, and F. Pederiva, Optimal control for the quantum simulation of nuclear dynamics, Phys. Rev. A 101, 062307 (2020).
  29. A. Avkhadiev, P. Shanahan, and R. Young, Accelerating Lattice Quantum Field Theory Calculations via Interpolator Optimization Using Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum Computing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 080501 (2020).
  30. A. F. Shaw, P. Lougovski, J. R. Stryker, and N. Wiebe, Quantum algorithms for simulating the lattice Schwinger Model, Quantum 4, 306 (2020).
  31. J. Liu and Y. Xin, Quantum simulation of quantum field theories as quantum chemistry, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2020) 011.
  32. M. Kreshchuk, W. M. Kirby, G. Goldstein, H. Beauchemin, and P. J. Love, Quantum simulation of quantum field theory in the light-front formulation, arXiv:2002.04016.
  33. D. E. Kharzeev and Y. Kikuchi, Real-time chiral dynamics from a digital quantum simulation, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 023342 (2020).
  34. N. Klco and M. J. Savage, Fixed-point quantum circuits for quantum field theories, Phys. Rev. A 102, 052422 (2020).
  35. O. Di Matteo, A. McCoy, P. Gysbers, T. Miyagi, R. Woloshyn, and P. Navrátil, Improving Hamiltonian encodings with the Gray code, Phys. Rev. A 103, 042405 (2021).
  36. Z. Davoudi, I. Raychowdhury, and A. Shaw, Search for efficient formulations for Hamiltonian simulation of non-abelian lattice gauge theories, arXiv:2009.11802.
  37. K. Bepari, S. Malik, M. Spannowsky, and S. Williams, Towards a quantum computing algorithm for helicity amplitudes and parton showers, Phys. Rev. D 103, 076020 (2021).
  38. A. Kossakowski, On quantum statistical mechanics of non-hamiltonian systems, Rep. Math. Phys. 3, 247 (1972).
  39. G. Lindblad, On the generators of quantum dynamical semigroups, Commun. Math. Phys. 48, 119 (1976).
  40. V. Gorini, A. Frigerio, M. Verri, A. Kossakowski, and E. Sudarshan, Properties of quantum Markovian master equations, Rep. Math. Phys. 13, 149 (1978).
  41. H. Wang, S. Ashhab, and F. Nori, Quantum algorithm for simulating the dynamics of an open quantum system, Phys. Rev. A 83, 062317 (2011).
  42. R. Sweke, I. Sinayskiy, D. Bernard, and F. Petruccione, Universal simulation of markovian open quantum systems, Phys. Rev. A 91, 062308 (2015).
  43. S.-J. Wei, D. Ruan, and G.-L. Long, Duality quantum algorithm efficiently simulates open quantum systems, Sci. Rep. 6, 30727 (2016).
  44. R. Cleve and C. Wang, Efficient Quantum Algorithms for Simulating Lindblad Evolution, in 44th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2017).
  45. A. Chenu, M. Beau, J. Cao, and A. del Campo, Quantum Simulation of Generic Many-Body Open System Dynamics Using Classical Noise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 140403 (2017).
  46. H.-Y. Su and Y. Li, Quantum algorithm for the simulation of open-system dynamics and thermalization, Phys. Rev. A 101, 012328 (2020).
  47. M. Metcalf, J. E. Moussa, W. A. de Jong, and M. Sarovar, Engineered thermalization and cooling of quantum many-body systems, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023214 (2020).
  48. Z. Hu, R. Xia, and S. Kais, A quantum algorithm for evolving open quantum dynamics on quantum computing devices, Sci. Rep. 10, 3301 (2020).
  49. J. D. Bjorken, Highly relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions: The central rapidity region, Phys. Rev. D 27, 140 (1983).
  50. I. Arsene et al. (BRAHMS Collaboration), Quark gluon plasma and color glass condensate at RHIC? The Perspective from the BRAHMS experiment, Nucl. Phys. A757, 1 (2005).
  51. K. Adcox et al. (PHENIX Collaboration), Formation of dense partonic matter in relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions at RHIC: Experimental evaluation by the PHENIX Collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A757, 184 (2005).
  52. B. Back et al. (PHOBOS Collaboration), The PHOBOS perspective on discoveries at RHIC, Nucl. Phys. A757, 28 (2005).
  53. J. Adams et al. (STAR Collaboration), Experimental and theoretical challenges in the search for the quark gluon plasma: The STAR Collaboration’s critical assessment of the evidence from RHIC collisions, Nucl. Phys. A757, 102 (2005).
  54. B. Müller, J. Schukraft, and B. Wysłouch, First Results from Pb+Pb Collisions at the LHC, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 62, 361 (2012).
  55. P. Braun-Munzinger, V. Koch, T. Schäfer, and J. Stachel, Properties of hot and dense matter from relativistic heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rep. 621, 76 (2016).
  56. W. Busza, K. Rajagopal, and W. van der Schee, Heavy Ion Collisions: The Big Picture, and the Big Questions, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 68, 339 (2018).
  57. S. Weinberg, The First Three Minutes. A Modern View of the Origin of the Universe (Bantam Books, 1977), ISBN: [Amazon][WorldCat].
  58. A. Adare et al. (PHENIX Collaboration), Heavy Quark Production in p+p and Energy Loss and Flow of Heavy Quarks in Au+Au Collisions at sNN=200  GeV, Phys. Rev. C 84, 044905 (2011).
  59. A. M. Sirunyan et al. (CMS Collaboration), Measurement of prompt and nonprompt charmonium suppression in PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 509 (2018).
  60. L. Adamczyk et al. (STAR Collaboration), Measurements of jet quenching with semi-inclusive hadron+jet distributions in Au+Au collisions at sNN=200  GeV, Phys. Rev. C 96, 024905 (2017).
  61. S. Acharya et al. (ALICE Collaboration), Measurements of inclusive jet spectra in pp and central Pb-Pb collisions at sNN=5.02  TeV, Phys. Rev. C 101, 034911 (2020).
  62. M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS Collaboration), Measurement of the nuclear modification factor for inclusive jets in Pb+Pb collisions at sNN=5.02  TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B 790, 108 (2019).
  63. P. Gossiaux and J. Aichelin, Towards an understanding of the RHIC single electron data, Phys. Rev. C 78, 014904 (2008).
  64. B. Schenke, C. Gale, and S. Jeon, MARTINI: An Event generator for relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 80, 054913 (2009).
  65. X.-N. Wang and Y. Zhu, Medium Modification of γ-Jets in High-Energy Heavy-Ion Collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 062301 (2013).
  66. S. Cao, T. Luo, G.-Y. Qin, and X.-N. Wang, Linearized Boltzmann transport model for jet propagation in the quark-gluon plasma: Heavy quark evolution, Phys. Rev. C 94, 014909 (2016).
  67. S. Cao, G.-Y. Qin, and S. A. Bass, Energy loss, hadronization and hadronic interactions of heavy flavors in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 92, 024907 (2015).
  68. X. Du, R. Rapp, and M. He, Color screening and regeneration of bottomonia in high-energy heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 96, 054901 (2017).
  69. W. Ke, Y. Xu, and S. A. Bass, Linearized Boltzmann-Langevin model for heavy quark transport in hot and dense QCD matter, Phys. Rev. C 98, 064901 (2018).
  70. X. Yao, W. Ke, Y. Xu, S. A. Bass, and B. Müller , Coupled Boltzmann transport equations of heavy quarks and quarkonia in quark-gluon plasma, J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2021) 046.
  71. J.-P. Blaizot and M. A. Escobedo, Quantum and classical dynamics of heavy quarks in a quark-gluon plasma, J. High Energy Phys. 06 (2018) 034.
  72. X. Yao and T. Mehen, Quarkonium semiclassical transport in quark-gluon plasma: Factorization and quantum correction, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2021) 062.
  73. C. Young and K. Dusling, Quarkonium above deconfinement as an open quantum system, Phys. Rev. C 87, 065206 (2013).
  74. Y. Akamatsu and A. Rothkopf, Stochastic potential and quantum decoherence of heavy quarkonium in the quark-gluon plasma, Phys. Rev. D 85, 105011 (2012).
  75. P. B. Gossiaux and R. Katz, Upsilon suppression in the Schrdinger–Langevin approach, Nucl. Phys. A956, 737 (2016).
  76. N. Brambilla, M. A. Escobedo, J. Soto, and A. Vairo, Heavy quarkonium suppression in a fireball, Phys. Rev. D 97, 074009 (2018).
  77. X. Yao and T. Mehen, Quarkonium in-medium transport equation derived from first principles, Phys. Rev. D 99, 096028 (2019).
  78. T. Miura, Y. Akamatsu, M. Asakawa, and A. Rothkopf, Quantum Brownian motion of a heavy quark pair in the quark-gluon plasma, Phys. Rev. D 101, 034011 (2020).
  79. R. Sharma and A. Tiwari, Quantum evolution of quarkonia with correlated and uncorrelated noise, Phys. Rev. D 101, 074004 (2020).
  80. N. Brambilla, M. A. Escobedo, M. Strickland, A. Vairo, P. Vander Griend, and J. H. Weber, Bottomonium suppression in an open quantum system using the quantum trajectories method, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 136.
  81. V. Vaidya and X. Yao, Transverse momentum broadening of a jet in quark-gluon plasma: An open quantum system EFT, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2020) 024.
  82. V. Vaidya, Effective field theory for jet substructure in heavy ion collisions, arXiv:2010.00028.
  83. A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich, and J. Stachel, Evidence for charmonium generation at the phase boundary in ultra-relativistic nuclear collisions, Phys. Lett. B 652, 259 (2007).
  84. A. Abada et al. (FCC Collaboration), FCC physics opportunities: Future circular collider conceptual design report Volume 1, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 474 (2019).
  85. S. P. Jordan, K. S. Lee, and J. Preskill, Quantum computation of scattering in scalar quantum field theories, Quantum Inf. Comput. 14, 1014 (2014).
  86. E. A. Martinez, C. A. Muschik, P. Schindler, D. Nigg, A. Erhard, M. Heyl, P. Hauke, M. Dalmonte, T. Monz, P. Zoller et al., Real-time dynamics of lattice gauge theories with a few-qubit quantum computer, Nature (London) 534, 516 (2016).
  87. J. F. Haase, L. Dellantonio, A. Celi, D. Paulson, A. Kan, K. Jansen, and C. A. Muschik, A resource efficient approach for quantum and classical simulations of gauge theories in particle physics, Quantum 5, 393 (2021).
  88. J. Casalderrey-Solana, E. Shuryak, and D. Teaney, Conical flow induced by quenched QCD jets, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 27, 22 (2005).
  89. J. Ruppert and B. Mller, Waking the colored plasma, Phys. Lett. B 618, 123 (2005).
  90. A. Chaudhuri and U. Heinz, Effect of Jet Quenching on the Hydrodynamical Evolution of QGP, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 062301 (2006).
  91. G.-Y. Qin, A. Majumder, H. Song, and U. Heinz, Energy and Momentum Deposited Into a QCD Medium by a Jet Shower, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 152303 (2009).
  92. B. Betz, J. Noronha, G. Torrieri, M. Gyulassy, and D. H. Rischke, Universal Flow-Driven Conical Emission in Ultrarelativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 222301 (2010).
  93. S. Floerchinger and K. C. Zapp, Hydrodynamics and jets in dialogue, Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 3189 (2014).
  94. W. Chen, S. Cao, T. Luo, L.-G. Pang, and X.-N. Wang, Effects of jet-induced medium excitation in γ-hadron correlation in A+A collisions, Phys. Lett. B 777, 86 (2018).
  95. L. Yan, S. Jeon, and C. Gale, Jet-medium interaction and conformal relativistic fluid dynamics, Phys. Rev. C 97, 034914 (2018).
  96. Y. Tachibana, C. Shen, and A. Majumder, Bulk medium evolution has considerable effects on jet observables!, arXiv:2001.08321.
  97. J. Casalderrey-Solana, J. G. Milhano, D. Pablos, K. Rajagopal, and X. Yao, Jet wake from linearized hydrodynamics, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2021) 230.
  98. S. Cao and X.-N. Wang, Jet quenching and medium response in high-energy heavy-ion collisions: A review, Rep. Prog. Phys. 84, 024301 (2021).
  99. P. Petreczky and D. Teaney, Heavy quark diffusion from the lattice, Phys. Rev. D 73, 014508 (2006).
  100. D. Banerjee, S. Datta, R. Gavai, and P. Majumdar, Heavy quark momentum diffusion coefficient from lattice QCD, Phys. Rev. D 85, 014510 (2012).
  101. A. Majumder, Calculating the jet quenching parameter q^ in lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. C 87, 034905 (2013).
  102. A. Francis, O. Kaczmarek, M. Laine, T. Neuhaus, and H. Ohno, Nonperturbative estimate of the heavy quark momentum diffusion coefficient, Phys. Rev. D 92, 116003 (2015).
  103. N. Brambilla, V. Leino, P. Petreczky, and A. Vairo, Lattice QCD constraints on the heavy quark diffusion coefficient, Phys. Rev. D 102, 074503 (2020).
  104. H. Liu, K. Rajagopal, and U. A. Wiedemann, Calculating the Jet Quenching Parameter from AdS/CFT, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 182301 (2006).
  105. H. Liu, K. Rajagopal, and U. A. Wiedemann, Wilson loops in heavy ion collisions and their calculation in AdS/CFT, J. High Energy Phys. 03 (2007) 066.
  106. J. Casalderrey-Solana and D. Teaney, Heavy quark diffusion in strongly coupled N=4 Yang-Mills, Phys. Rev. D 74, 085012 (2006).
  107. S. Caron-Huot and G. D. Moore, Heavy quark diffusion in QCD and N=4 SYM at next-to-leading order, J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2008) 081.
  108. J. Casalderrey-Solana, H. Liu, D. Mateos, K. Rajagopal, and U. A. Wiedemann, Gauge/String Duality, Hot QCD and Heavy Ion Collisions (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2014).
  109. N. Brambilla, M. A. Escobedo, A. Vairo, and P. Vander Griend, Transport coefficients from in medium quarkonium dynamics, Phys. Rev. D 100, 054025 (2019).
  110. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2010).
  111. A. Héctor Abraham et al., Qiskit: An open-source framework for quantum computing, 2019.
  112. E. Younis, K. Sen, K. Yelick, and C. Iancu, Qfast: Quantum synthesis using a hierarchical continuous circuit space, arXiv:2003.04462.
  113. M. G. Davis, E. Smith, A. Tudor, K. Sen, I. Siddiqi, and C. Iancu, Heuristics for quantum compiling with a continuous gate set, arXiv:1912.02727.
  114. T. E. Davis, A. Tudor, K. Sen, I. Siddiqi, and C. Iancu, Towards depth optimal topology aware quantum circuit synthesis, in IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE20) (2020).
  115. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevD.104.L051501 for further details of the quantum circuit and error mitigation method.
  116. 5-qubit backend: IBM Q team, IBM Q 5 Vigo backend specification v1.2.1 (2020) Retrieved from https://quantum-computing.ibm.com.
  117. A. He, B. Nachman, W. A. de Jong, and C. W. Bauer, Zero-noise extrapolation for quantum-gate error mitigation with identity insertions, Phys. Rev. A 102, 012426 (2020).
  118. 5-qubit backend: IBM Q team, IBM Q 5 Valencia backend specification v1.3.1 (2020) Retrieved from https://quantum-computing.ibm.com.
  119. 5-qubit backend: IBM Q team, IBM Q 5 Santiago backend specification v1.0.3 (2020) Retrieved from https://quantum-computing.ibm.com.
  120. A. Accardi et al., Electron ion collider: The next QCD frontier: Understanding the glue that binds us all, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, 268 (2016).
  121. M. Dasgupta and G. Salam, Resummation of nonglobal QCD observables, Phys. Lett. B 512, 323 (2001).
  122. A. Banfi, G. Marchesini, and G. Smye, Away from jet energy flow, J. High Energy Phys. 08 (2002) 006.
  123. Z. Nagy and D. E. Soper, Parton showers with quantum interference, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2007) 114.
  124. D. Neill, The edge of jets and subleading non-global logs, arXiv:1508.07568.
  125. N. Armesto, F. Dominguez, A. Kovner, M. Lublinsky, and V. Skokov, The color glass condensate density matrix: Lindblad evolution, entanglement entropy and Wigner functional, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2019) 025.
  126. M. Li and A. Kovner, JIMWLK evolution, Lindblad equation and quantum-classical correspondence, J. High Energy Phys. 05 (2020) 036.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 104, L051501– Published 7 September, 2021
  • Received 16 October 2020
  • Accepted 13 July 2021
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. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation