- 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
  • Open Access

Shearing approach to gauge-invariant Trotterization

Jesse R. Stryker*

  • *Contact author: jstryker@lbl.gov
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 014508 – Published 17 July, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/bkpq-166n

Abstract

Universal quantum simulations of gauge field theories are exposed to the risk of gauge symmetry violations when it is not known how to compile the desired operations exactly using the available gate set. In this article, we show how time evolution can be compiled in an Abelian gauge theory—if only approximately—without compromising gauge invariance, by graphically motivating a block-diagonalization procedure. When gauge-invariant interactions are associated with a “spatial network” in the space of discrete quantum numbers, it is seen that cyclically shearing the spatial network converts simultaneous updates to many quantum numbers into conditional updates of a single quantum number; ultimately, this eliminates any need to pass through (and acquire overlap onto) unphysical intermediate configurations. Shearing is explicitly applied to gauge-matter and magnetic interactions of lattice quantum electrodynamics. The features that make shearing successful at preserving Abelian gauge symmetry may also be found in non-Abelian theories, bringing one closer to gauge-invariant simulations of quantum chromodynamics.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (142)

  1. M. Luscher, Volume dependence of the energy spectrum in massive quantum field theories. II. Scattering states, Commun. Math. Phys. 105, 153 (1986).
  2. M. Luscher, Two particle states on a torus and their relation to the scattering matrix, Nucl. Phys. B354, 531 (1991).
  3. E. A. Martinez et al., Real-time dynamics of lattice gauge theories with a few-qubit quantum computer, Nature (London) 534, 516 (2016).
  4. N. Klco, E. F. Dumitrescu, A. J. McCaskey, T. D. Morris, R. C. Pooser, M. Sanz, E. Solano, P. Lougovski, and M. J. Savage, Quantum-classical computation of Schwinger model dynamics using quantum computers, Phys. Rev. A 98, 032331 (2018).
  5. C. Kokail et al., Self-verifying variational quantum simulation of lattice models, Nature (London) 569, 355 (2019).
  6. C. Schweizer, F. Grusdt, M. Berngruber, L. Barbiero, E. Demler, N. Goldman, I. Bloch, and M. Aidelsburger, Floquet approach to Z2 lattice gauge theories with ultracold atoms in optical lattices, Nature (London) Phys. Sci. 15, 1168 (2019).
  7. 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).
  8. B. Yang, H. Sun, R. Ott, H.-Y. Wang, T. V. Zache, J. C. Halimeh, Z.-S. Yuan, P. Hauke, and J.-W. Pan, Observation of gauge invariance in a 71-site Bose–Hubbard quantum simulator, Nature (London) 587, 392 (2020).
  9. M. Kreshchuk, S. Jia, W. M. Kirby, G. Goldstein, J. P. Vary, and P. J. Love, Light-front field theory on current quantum computers, Entropy 23, 597 (2021).
  10. N. Klco and M. J. Savage, Minimally entangled state preparation of localized wave functions on quantum computers, Phys. Rev. A 102, 012612 (2020).
  11. E. Gustafson, Y. Zhu, P. Dreher, N. M. Linke, and Y. Meurice, Real-time quantum calculations of phase shifts using wave packet time delays, Phys. Rev. D 104, 054507 (2021).
  12. C. W. Bauer, M. Freytsis, and B. Nachman, Simulating collider physics on quantum computers using effective field theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 212001 (2021).
  13. Y. Y. Atas, J. Zhang, R. Lewis, A. Jahanpour, J. F. Haase, and C. A. Muschik, SU(2) hadrons on a quantum computer via a variational approach, Nat. Commun. 12, 6499 (2021).
  14. S. A Rahman, R. Lewis, E. Mendicelli, and S. Powell, SU(2) lattice gauge theory on a quantum annealer, Phys. Rev. D 104, 034501 (2021).
  15. A. Ciavarella, N. Klco, and M. J. Savage, Trailhead for quantum simulation of SU(3) Yang-Mills lattice gauge theory in the local multiplet basis, Phys. Rev. D 103, 094501 (2021).
  16. E. Huffman, M. García Vera, and D. Banerjee, Toward the real-time evolution of gauge-invariant Z2 and U(1) quantum link models on noisy intermediate-scale quantum hardware with error mitigation, Phys. Rev. D 106, 094502 (2022).
  17. B. Xu and W. Xue, (3+1)-dimensional Schwinger pair production with quantum computers, Phys. Rev. D 106, 116007 (2022).
  18. A. N. Ciavarella and I. A. Chernyshev, Preparation of the SU(3) lattice Yang-Mills vacuum with variational quantum methods, Phys. Rev. D 105, 074504 (2022).
  19. N. H. Nguyen, M. C. Tran, Y. Zhu, A. M. Green, C. H. Alderete, Z. Davoudi, and N. M. Linke, Digital quantum simulation of the Schwinger model and symmetry protection with trapped ions, PRX Quantum 3, 020324 (2022).
  20. M. Illa and M. J. Savage, Basic elements for simulations of standard-model physics with quantum annealers: Multigrid and clock states, Phys. Rev. A 106, 052605 (2022).
  21. J. Mildenberger, W. Mruczkiewicz, J. C. Halimeh, Z. Jiang, and P. Hauke, Confinement in a Z2 lattice gauge theory on a quantum computer, Nat. Phys. 21, 312 (2025).
  22. G. Pardo, T. Greenberg, A. Fortinsky, N. Katz, and E. Zohar, Resource-efficient quantum simulation of lattice gauge theories in arbitrary dimensions: Solving for Gauss’s law and fermion elimination, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023077 (2023).
  23. R. C. Farrell, I. A. Chernyshev, S. J. M. Powell, N. A. Zemlevskiy, M. Illa, and M. J. Savage, Preparations for quantum simulations of quantum chromodynamics in 1+1 dimensions. I. Axial gauge, Phys. Rev. D 107, 054512 (2023).
  24. R. C. Farrell, I. A. Chernyshev, S. J. M. Powell, N. A. Zemlevskiy, M. Illa, and M. J. Savage, Preparations for quantum simulations of quantum chromodynamics in 1+1 dimensions. II. Single-baryon β-decay in real time, Phys. Rev. D 107, 054513 (2023).
  25. S. Gupta, Y. Javanmard, T. J. Osborne, and L. Santos, Simulation of a Rohksar–Kivelson ladder on a NISQ device, Sci. Rep. 14, 29276 (2024).
  26. Z. Davoudi, C.-C. Hsieh, and S. V. Kadam, Scattering wave packets of hadrons in gauge theories: Preparation on a quantum computer, Quantum 8, 1520 (2024).
  27. A. N. Ciavarella and C. W. Bauer, Quantum simulation of SU(3) lattice Yang-Mills theory at leading order in large-Nc expansion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 111901 (2024).
  28. A. Crippa, K. Jansen, and E. Rinaldi, Analysis of the confinement string in (2+1)-dimensional quantum electrodynamics with a trapped-ion quantum computer, arXiv:2411.05628.
  29. G. Zhang, X. Guo, E. Wang, and H. Xing (QuNu Collaboration), Quantum computing of chirality imbalance in SU(2) gauge theory, Phys. Rev. D 111, 056031 (2025).
  30. A. T. Than et al., The phase diagram of quantum chromodynamics in one dimension on a quantum computer, arXiv:2501.00579.
  31. J. Schuhmacher, G.-X. Su, J. J. Osborne, A. Gandon, J. C. Halimeh, and I. Tavernelli, Observation of hadron scattering in a lattice gauge theory on a quantum computer, arXiv:2505.20387.
  32. Z. Davoudi, C.-C. Hsieh, and S. V. Kadam, Quantum computation of hadron scattering in a lattice gauge theory, arXiv:2505.20408.
  33. S. P. Jordan, K. S. M. Lee, and J. Preskill, Quantum algorithms for quantum field theories, Science 336, 1130 (2012).
  34. S. P. Jordan, K. S. M. Lee, and J. Preskill, Quantum computation of scattering in scalar quantum field theories, Quantum Inf. Comput. 14, 1014 (2014).
  35. A. Bhattacharyya, A. Shekar, and A. Sinha, Circuit complexity in interacting QFTs and RG flows, J. High Energy Phys. 10 (2018) 140.
  36. N. Klco and M. J. Savage, Digitization of scalar fields for quantum computing, Phys. Rev. A 99, 052335 (2019).
  37. N. Klco and M. J. Savage, Systematically localizable operators for quantum simulations of quantum field theories, Phys. Rev. A 102, 012619 (2020).
  38. J. a. Barata, N. Mueller, A. Tarasov, and R. Venugopalan, Single-particle digitization strategy for quantum computation of a ϕ4 scalar field theory, Phys. Rev. A 103, 042410 (2021).
  39. J. Ignacio Cirac, P. Maraner, and J. K. Pachos, Cold atom simulation of interacting relativistic quantum field theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 190403 (2010).
  40. J. Casanova, L. Lamata, I. L. Egusquiza, R. Gerritsma, C. F. Roos, J. J. Garcia-Ripoll, and E. Solano, Quantum simulation of quantum field theories in trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 260501 (2011).
  41. S. P. Jordan, K. S. M. Lee, and J. Preskill, Quantum algorithms for fermionic quantum field theories, arXiv:1404.7115.
  42. A. Hamed Moosavian and S. Jordan, Faster quantum algorithm to simulate fermionic quantum field theory, Phys. Rev. A 98, 012332 (2018).
  43. H. Lamm, S. Lawrence, and Y. Yamauchi (NuQS Collaboration), Parton physics on a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013272 (2020).
  44. N. Mueller, A. Tarasov, and R. Venugopalan, Deeply inelastic scattering structure functions on a hybrid quantum computer, Phys. Rev. D 102, 016007 (2020).
  45. S. Harmalkar, H. Lamm, and S. Lawrence (NuQS Collaboration), Quantum simulation of field theories without state preparation, arXiv:2001.11490.
  46. D. E. Kharzeev and Y. Kikuchi, Real-time chiral dynamics from a digital quantum simulation, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023342 (2020).
  47. C. W. Bauer, W. A. de Jong, B. Nachman, and D. Provasoli, Quantum algorithm for high energy physics simulations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 062001 (2021).
  48. Z. Davoudi, N. M. Linke, and G. Pagano, Toward simulating quantum field theories with controlled phonon-ion dynamics: A hybrid analog-digital approach, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 043072 (2021).
  49. M. C. Bañuls et al., Simulating lattice gauge theories within quantum technologies, Eur. Phys. J. D 74, 165 (2020).
  50. T. Byrnes and Y. Yamamoto, Simulating lattice gauge theories on a quantum computer, Phys. Rev. A 73, 022328 (2006).
  51. J. R. Stryker, Oracles for Gauss’s law on digital quantum computers, Phys. Rev. A 99, 042301 (2019).
  52. H. Lamm, S. Lawrence, and Y. Yamauchi (NuQS Collaboration), General methods for digital quantum simulation of Gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 100, 034518 (2019).
  53. A. Alexandru, P. F. Bedaque, S. Harmalkar, H. Lamm, S. Lawrence, and N. C. Warrington (NuQS Collaboration), Gluon field digitization for quantum computers, Phys. Rev. D 100, 114501 (2019).
  54. E. Zohar and J. I. Cirac, Removing staggered fermionic matter in U(N) and SU(N) lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 99, 114511 (2019).
  55. A. F. Shaw, P. Lougovski, J. R. Stryker, and N. Wiebe, Quantum algorithms for simulating the lattice Schwinger model, Quantum 4, 306 (2020).
  56. B. Chakraborty, M. Honda, T. Izubuchi, Y. Kikuchi, and A. Tomiya, Classically emulated digital quantum simulation of the Schwinger model with a topological term via adiabatic state preparation, Phys. Rev. D 105, 094503 (2022).
  57. J. Liu and Y. Xin, Quantum simulation of quantum field theories as quantum chemistry, J. High Energy Phys. 12 (2020) 011.
  58. D. Paulson et al., Simulating 2D effects in lattice gauge theories on a quantum computer, PRX Quantum 2, 030334 (2021).
  59. Y. Ji, H. Lamm, and S. Zhu (NuQS Collaboration), Gluon field digitization via group space decimation for quantum computers, Phys. Rev. D 102, 114513 (2020).
  60. Z. Davoudi, I. Raychowdhury, and A. Shaw, Search for efficient formulations for Hamiltonian simulation of non-Abelian lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 104, 074505 (2021).
  61. J. Bender and E. Zohar, Gauge redundancy-free formulation of compact QED with dynamical matter for quantum and classical computations, Phys. Rev. D 102, 114517 (2020).
  62. 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).
  63. A. Kan, L. Funcke, S. Kühn, L. Dellantonio, J. Zhang, J. F. Haase, C. A. Muschik, and K. Jansen, Investigating a (3+1)D topological θ-term in the Hamiltonian formulation of lattice gauge theories for quantum and classical simulations, Phys. Rev. D 104, 034504 (2021).
  64. E. Zohar and B. Reznik, Confinement and lattice QED electric flux-tubes simulated with ultracold atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 275301 (2011).
  65. E. Zohar, J. I. Cirac, and B. Reznik, Quantum simulations of gauge theories with ultracold atoms: Local gauge invariance from angular momentum conservation, Phys. Rev. A 88, 023617 (2013).
  66. E. Zohar and M. Burrello, Formulation of lattice gauge theories for quantum simulations, Phys. Rev. D 91, 054506 (2015).
  67. E. Zohar, A. Farace, B. Reznik, and J. I. Cirac, Digital quantum simulation of Z2 lattice gauge theories with dynamical fermionic matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 070501 (2017).
  68. J. Bender, E. Zohar, A. Farace, and J. I. Cirac, Digital quantum simulation of lattice gauge theories in three spatial dimensions, New J. Phys. 20, 093001 (2018).
  69. Z. Davoudi, M. Hafezi, C. Monroe, G. Pagano, A. Seif, and A. Shaw, Towards analog quantum simulations of lattice gauge theories with trapped ions, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023015 (2020).
  70. A. Mil, T. V. Zache, A. Hegde, A. Xia, R. P. Bhatt, M. K. Oberthaler, P. Hauke, J. Berges, and F. Jendrzejewski, A scalable realization of local U(1) gauge invariance in cold atomic mixtures, Science 367, 1128 (2020).
  71. D. Banerjee, M. Dalmonte, M. Muller, E. Rico, P. Stebler, U. J. Wiese, and P. Zoller, Atomic quantum simulation of dynamical gauge fields coupled to fermionic matter: From string breaking to evolution after a quench, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 175302 (2012).
  72. L. Tagliacozzo, A. Celi, A. Zamora, and M. Lewenstein, Optical Abelian lattice gauge theories, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.) 330, 160 (2013).
  73. A. Mezzacapo, E. Rico, C. Sabín, I. L. Egusquiza, L. Lamata, and E. Solano, Non-Abelian SU(2) lattice gauge theories in superconducting circuits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 240502 (2015).
  74. T. V. Zache, F. Hebenstreit, F. Jendrzejewski, M. K. Oberthaler, J. Berges, and P. Hauke, Quantum simulation of lattice gauge theories using Wilson fermions, Quantum Sci. Technol. 3, 034010 (2018).
  75. E. Zohar, J. I. Cirac, and B. Reznik, Cold-atom quantum simulator for SU(2) Yang-Mills lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 125304 (2013).
  76. M. Mathur and T. P. Sreeraj, Lattice gauge theories and spin models, Phys. Rev. D 94, 085029 (2016).
  77. I. Raychowdhury and J. R. Stryker, Loop, string, and hadron dynamics in SU(2) Hamiltonian lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 101, 114502 (2020).
  78. I. Raychowdhury and J. R. Stryker, Solving Gauss’s law on digital quantum computers with loop-string-hadron digitization, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033039 (2020).
  79. R. Dasgupta and I. Raychowdhury, Cold-atom quantum simulator for string and hadron dynamics in non-Abelian lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. A 105, 023322 (2022).
  80. M. Kreshchuk, W. M. Kirby, G. Goldstein, H. Beauchemin, and P. J. Love, Quantum simulation of quantum field theory in the light-front formulation, Phys. Rev. A 105, 032418 (2022).
  81. A. J. Buser, H. Gharibyan, M. Hanada, M. Honda, and J. Liu, Quantum simulation of gauge theory via orbifold lattice, J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2021) 034.
  82. A. Kan and Y. Nam, Simulating lattice quantum electrodynamics on a quantum computer, Quantum Sci. Technol. 8, 015008 (2023).
  83. I. D’Andrea, C. W. Bauer, D. M. Grabowska, and M. Freytsis, New basis for Hamiltonian SU(2) simulations, Phys. Rev. D 109, 074501 (2024).
  84. H. Sukeno and T. Okuda, Measurement-based quantum simulation of Abelian lattice gauge theories, Proc. Sci. LATTICE2023 (2024) 232 [arXiv:2401.10259].
  85. C. W. Bauer, Z. Davoudi, N. Klco, and M. J. Savage, Quantum simulation of fundamental particles and forces, Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 420 (2023).
  86. R. P. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 21, 467 (1982).
  87. S. Lloyd, Universal quantum simulators, Science 273, 1073 (1996).
  88. F. Arute et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature (London) 574, 505 (2019).
  89. J. M. Chow et al., Universal quantum gate set approaching fault-tolerant thresholds with superconducting qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 060501 (2012).
  90. S. Debnath, N. M. Linke, C. Figgatt, K. A. Landsman, K. Wright, and C. Monroe, Demonstration of a small programmable quantum computer with atomic qubits, Nature (London) 536, 63 (2016).
  91. M. Reagor et al., Demonstration of universal parametric entangling gates on a multi-qubit lattice, Sci. Adv. 4, aao3603 (2018).
  92. U.-J. Wiese, Towards quantum simulating QCD, Nucl. Phys. A931, 246 (2014).
  93. E. Zohar, A. Farace, B. Reznik, and J. I. Cirac, Digital lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. A 95, 023604 (2017).
  94. D. B. Kaplan and J. R. Stryker, Gauss’s law, duality, and the Hamiltonian formulation of U(1) lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. D 102, 094515 (2020).
  95. Y. Meurice, R. Sakai, and J. Unmuth-Yockey, Tensor lattice field theory for renormalization and quantum computing, Rev. Mod. Phys. 94, 025005 (2022).
  96. Y. Meurice, A. Bazavov, P. Dreher, E. Gustafson, L. Hostetler, R. Sakai, S.-W. Tsai, J. Unmuth-Yockey, and J. Zhang, From tensors to qubits, Proc. Sci. LATTICE2021 (2022) 608 [arXiv:2112.10005].
  97. A. Ciavarella, N. Klco, and M. J. Savage, Some conceptual aspects of operator design for quantum simulations of non-Abelian lattice gauge theories, arXiv:2203.11988.
  98. R. Irmejs, M. C. Banuls, and J. I. Cirac, Quantum simulation of Z2 lattice gauge theory with minimal resources, Phys. Rev. D 108, 074503 (2023).
  99. S. V. Kadam, I. Raychowdhury, and J. R. Stryker, Loop-string-hadron formulation of an SU(3) gauge theory with dynamical quarks, Phys. Rev. D 107, 094513 (2023).
  100. G. Calajò, G. Magnifico, C. Edmunds, M. Ringbauer, S. Montangero, and P. Silvi, Digital quantum simulation of a (1+1)D SU(2) lattice gauge theory with ion qudits, PRX Quantum 5, 040309 (2024).
  101. A. Mariani, Almost gauge-invariant states and the ground state of Yang-Mills theory, Phys. Rev. D 109, 094508 (2024).
  102. M. Carena, H. Lamm, Y.-Y. Li, and W. Liu, Quantum error thresholds for gauge-redundant digitizations of lattice field theories, Phys. Rev. D 110, 054516 (2024).
  103. E. Mathew and I. Raychowdhury, Protecting gauge symmetries in the dynamics of SU(3) lattice gauge theories, arXiv:2404.12158.
  104. T. Li, Quantum simulations of quantum electrodynamics in Coulomb gauge, arXiv:2406.01204.
  105. S. V. Kadam, A. Naskar, I. Raychowdhury, and J. R. Stryker, Loop-string-hadron approach to SU(3) lattice Yang-Mills theory: Hilbert space of a trivalent vertex, Phys. Rev. D 111, 074516 (2025).
  106. D. M. Grabowska, C. F. Kane, and C. W. Bauer, A Fully Gauge-fixed SU(2) Hamiltonian for quantum simulations, Phys. Rev. D 111, 114516 (2025).
  107. R. Ma, Packaged quantum states for quantum simulation of lattice gauge theories, arXiv:2502.14654.
  108. J. C. Halimeh and P. Hauke, Staircase prethermalization and constrained dynamics in lattice gauge theories, arXiv:2004.07248.
  109. R. B. Jensen, S. P. Pedersen, and N. T. Zinner, Dynamical quantum phase transitions in a noisy lattice gauge theory, Phys. Rev. B 105, 224309 (2022).
  110. E. J. Gustafson and H. Lamm, Robustness of gauge digitization to quantum noise, arXiv:2301.10207.
  111. K. Stannigel, P. Hauke, D. Marcos, M. Hafezi, S. Diehl, M. Dalmonte, and P. Zoller, Constrained dynamics via the Zeno effect in quantum simulation: Implementing non-Abelian lattice gauge theories with cold atoms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 120406 (2014).
  112. J.-M. Raimond, C. Sayrin, S. Gleyzes, I. Dotsenko, M. Brune, S. Haroche, P. Facchi, and S. Pascazio, Phase space tweezers for tailoring cavity fields by quantum zeno dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 213601 (2010).
  113. J.-M. Raimond, P. Facchi, B. Peaudecerf, S. Pascazio, C. Sayrin, I. Dotsenko, S. Gleyzes, M. Brune, and S. Haroche, Quantum zeno dynamics of a field in a cavity, Phys. Rev. A 86, 032120 (2012).
  114. A. Signoles, A. Facon, D. Grosso, I. Dotsenko, S. Haroche, J.-M. Raimond, M. Brune, and S. Gleyzes, Confined quantum zeno dynamics of a watched atomic arrow, Nat. Phys. 10, 715 (2014).
  115. J. C. Halimeh, H. Lang, J. Mildenberger, Z. Jiang, and P. Hauke, Gauge-symmetry protection using single-body terms, PRX Quantum 2, 040311 (2021).
  116. J. C. Halimeh, L. Homeier, C. Schweizer, M. Aidelsburger, P. Hauke, and F. Grusdt, Stabilizing lattice gauge theories through simplified local pseudogenerators, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 033120 (2022).
  117. M. Van Damme, J. Mildenberger, F. Grusdt, P. Hauke, and J. C. Halimeh, Suppressing nonperturbative gauge errors in the thermodynamic limit using local pseudogenerators, Commun. Phys. 8, 106 (2025).
  118. J. C. Halimeh and P. Hauke, Stabilizing gauge theories in quantum simulators: A brief review, arXiv:2204.13709.
  119. C. Ball and T. D. Cohen, Zeno effect suppression of gauge drift in quantum simulations, Phys. Rev. A 110, 022417 (2024).
  120. M. M. Wauters, E. Ballini, A. Biella, and P. Hauke, Symmetry-protection Zeno phase transition in monitored lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. B 111, 094315 (2025).
  121. C. Ball, Suppressing gauge drift in quantum simulations with gauge transformations, Phys. Rev. A 111, 042428 (2025).
  122. F. M. Surace, P. Fromholz, N. Darkwah Oppong, M. Dalmonte, and M. Aidelsburger, Ab Initio derivation of lattice-Gauge-Theory dynamics for cold gases in optical lattices, PRX Quantum 4, 020330 (2023).
  123. L.-X. Cheng and D.-B. Zhang, Variational quantum simulation of ground states and thermal states for lattice gauge theory with multi-objective optimization, Phys. Lett. A 546, 130516 (2025).
  124. G. De Paciani, L. Homeier, J. C. Halimeh, M. Aidelsburger, and F. Grusdt, Quantum simulation of fermionic non-Abelian lattice gauge theories in (2+1)D with built-in gauge protection, arXiv:2506.14747.
  125. H. Lamm, S. Lawrence, and Y. Yamauchi (NuQS Collaboration), Suppressing coherent gauge drift in quantum simulations, arXiv:2005.12688.
  126. V. Kasper, T. V. Zache, F. Jendrzejewski, M. Lewenstein, and E. Zohar, Non-Abelian gauge invariance from dynamical decoupling, Phys. Rev. D 107, 014506 (2023).
  127. M. C. Tran, Y. Su, D. Carney, and J. M. Taylor, Faster digital quantum simulation by symmetry protection, PRX Quantum 2, 010323 (2021).
  128. H. Zhao, M. Bukov, M. Heyl, and R. Moessner, Making Trotterization adaptive and energy-self-correcting for NISQ devices and beyond, PRX Quantum 4, 030319 (2023).
  129. F. M. Surace, P. Fromholz, F. Scazza, and M. Dalmonte, Scalable, ab initio protocol for quantum simulating SU(N)×U(1) lattice gauge theories, Quantum 8, 1359 (2024).
  130. E. C. Domanti, D. Zappala, A. Bermudez, and L. Amico, Floquet-Rydberg quantum simulator for confinement in Z2 gauge theories, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L022059 (2024).
  131. T. Okuda, A. Parayil Mana, and H. Sukeno, Anomaly inflow, dualities, and quantum simulation of Abelian lattice gauge theories induced by measurements, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043018 (2024).
  132. T. Schmale and H. Weimer, Stabilizing quantum simulations of lattice gauge theories by dissipation, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033306 (2024).
  133. E. Ballini, J. Mildenberger, M. M. Wauters, and P. Hauke, Symmetry verification for noisy quantum simulations of non-Abelian lattice gauge theories, arXiv:2412.07844.
  134. H. F. Trotter, On the product of semi-groups of operators, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 10, 545 (1959).
  135. 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).
  136. A. M. Childs, Y. Su, M. C. Tran, N. Wiebe, and S. Zhu, Theory of Trotter error with commutator scaling, Phys. Rev. X 11, 011020 (2021).
  137. S. A. Cuccaro, T. G. Draper, S. A. Kutin, and D. P. Moulton, A new quantum ripple-carry addition circuit, arXiv:quant-ph/0410184.
  138. T. G. Draper, S. A. Kutin, E. M. Rains, and K. M. Svore, A logarithmic-depth quantum carry-lookahead adder, Quantum Inf. Comput. 6, 351 (2006).
  139. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2012), 10.1017/CBO9780511976667.
  140. J. B. Kogut and L. Susskind, Hamiltonian formulation of Wilson’s lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 11, 395 (1975).
  141. Z. Davoudi, A. F. Shaw, and J. R. Stryker, General quantum algorithms for Hamiltonian simulation with applications to a non-Abelian lattice gauge theory, Quantum 7, 1213 (2023).
  142. S. R. Beane, Z. Davoudi, and M. J. Savage, Constraints on the universe as a numerical simulation, Eur. Phys. J. A 50, 148 (2014).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 014508– Published 17 July, 2025
  • Received 12 July 2021
  • Revised 10 October 2021
  • Accepted 24 June 2025
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