- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Letters

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

Efficient Quantum Simulation for Translationally Invariant Systems

Joris Kattemölle and Guido Burkard

PDF

Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 010602 – Published 6 January, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/cswp-xy7k

Abstract

Discrete translational symmetry plays a fundamental role in condensed matter physics and lattice gauge theories, enabling the analysis of systems that would otherwise be intractable. Despite this, many open problems remain. Quantum simulation promises to offer new insights, but progress is often limited by device connectivity constraints, which lead to prohibitively long computation times. We extend the use of spatial symmetry from the systems to be simulated to the quantum circuits simulating them. One application is that it becomes possible to efficiently and optimally alleviate device connectivity constraints algorithmically. This leads to reductions in quantum computational time by several orders of magnitude even for moderate system sizes, making such simulations feasible, with even greater relative gains for larger systems. This substantially enhances the capabilities of quantum computers in the simulation of condensed matter systems and lattice gauge theories, even before hardware improvements. Our Letter forms the basis for using spatial symmetry of quantum circuits in other areas of quantum computation, such as in the design and implementation of quantum error correcting codes.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (64)

  1. R. P. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 21, 467 (1982).
  2. S. Lloyd, Universal quantum simulators, Science 273, 1073 (1996).
  3. C. J. van Diepen, T.-K. Hsiao, U. Mukhopadhyay, C. Reichl, W. Wegscheider, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, Quantum simulation of antiferromagnetic Heisenberg chain with gate-defined quantum dots, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041025 (2021).
  4. P. Frey and S. Rachel, Realization of a discrete time crystal on 57 qubits of a quantum computer, Sci. Adv. 8, eabm7652 (2022).
  5. 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).
  6. E. Rosenberg, T. I. Andersen, R. Samajdar, A. Petukhov, J. C. Hoke, D. Abanin, A. Bengtsson, I. K. Drozdov, C. Erickson, P. V. Klimov et al., Dynamics of magnetization at infinite temperature in a Heisenberg spin chain, Science 384, 48 (2024).
  7. X. Mi, A. A. Michailidis, S. Shabani, K. C. Miao, P. V. Klimov, J. Lloyd, E. Rosenberg, R. Acharya, I. Aleiner, T. I. Andersen et al., Stable quantum-correlated many-body states through engineered dissipation, Science 383, 1332 (2024).
  8. G. Burkard, Recipes for the digital quantum simulation of lattice spin systems, SciPost Phys. Core 8, 030 (2025).
  9. T. Hensgens, T. Fujita, L. Janssen, X. Li, C. J. Van Diepen, C. Reichl, W. Wegscheider, S. Das Sarma, and L. M. K. Vandersypen, Quantum simulation of a Fermi-Hubbard model using a semiconductor quantum dot array, Nature (London) 548, 70 (2017).
  10. E. Dagotto, Correlated electrons in high-temperature superconductors, Rev. Mod. Phys. 66, 763 (1994).
  11. C. Cade, L. Mineh, A. Montanaro, and S. Stanisic, Strategies for solving the Fermi-Hubbard model on near-term quantum computers, Phys. Rev. B 102, 235122 (2020).
  12. D. S. Rokhsar and S. A. Kivelson, Superconductivity and the quantum hard-core dimer gas, Phys. Rev. Lett. 61, 2376 (1988).
  13. J. Kogut and L. Susskind, Hamiltonian formulation of Wilson’s lattice gauge theories, Phys. Rev. D 11, 395 (1975).
  14. 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).
  15. D. Paulson, L. Dellantonio, J. F. Haase, A. Celi, A. Kan, A. Jena, C. Kokail, R. van Bijnen, K. Jansen, P. Zoller, and C. A. Muschik, Simulating 2D effects in lattice gauge theories on a quantum computer, PRX Quantum 2, 030334 (2021).
  16. M. Meth, J. F. Haase, J. Zhang, C. Edmunds, L. Postler, A. Steiner, A. J. Jena, L. Dellantonio, R. Blatt, P. Zoller, T. Monz, P. Schindler, C. Muschik, and M. Ringbauer, Simulating 2D lattice gauge theories on a qudit quantum computer, Nat. Phys. 21, 570 (2025).
  17. T. Pichler, M. Dalmonte, E. Rico, P. Zoller, and S. Montangero, Real-time dynamics in U(1) lattice gauge theories with tensor networks, Phys. Rev. X 6, 011023 (2016).
  18. T. Felser, P. Silvi, M. Collura, and S. Montangero, Two-dimensional quantum-link lattice quantum electrodynamics at finite density, Phys. Rev. X 10, 041040 (2020).
  19. A. Javadi-Abhari, M. Treinish, K. Krsulich, C. J. Wood, J. Lishman, J. Gacon, S. Martiel, P. D. Nation, L. S. Bishop, A. W. Cross et al., Quantum computing with Qiskit, arXiv:2405.08810.
  20. Cirq Developers, cirq, 2024, 10.5281/zenodo.4062499.
  21. R. Acharya, D. A. Abanin, L. Aghababaie-Beni, I. Aleiner, T. I. Andersen, M. Ansmann, F. Arute, K. Arya, A. Asfaw, N. Astrakhantsev et al., Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold, Nature (London) 638, 920 (2025).
  22. A. M. Childs, E. Schoute, and C. M. Unsal, Circuit transformations for quantum architectures, in 14th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography (TQC 2019), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs) Vol. 135, edited by W. van Dam and L. Mancinska (Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2019), pp. 3:1–3:24.
  23. A. Cowtan, S. Dilkes, R. Duncan, A. Krajenbrink, W. Simmons, and S. Sivarajah, On the qubit routing problem, in 14th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography (TQC 2019), Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs) Vol. 135, edited by W. van Dam and L. Mancinska (Schloss Dagstuhl–Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2019), pp. 5:1–5:32.
  24. B. Tan and J. Cong, Optimal layout synthesis for quantum computing, in Proceedings of the 39th International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, ICCAD ’20 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, USA, 2020).
  25. S. Ping, W.-H. Lin, D. Bochen Tan, and J. Cong, Assessing quantum layout synthesis tools via known optimal-SWAP cost benchmarks, arXiv:2502.08839.
  26. D. Maslov, S. M. Falconer, and M. Mosca, Quantum circuit placement, IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst. 27, 752 (2008).
  27. G. Nannicini, L. S. Bishop, O. Günlük, and P. Jurcevic, Optimal qubit assignment and routing via integer programming, ACM Trans. Quantum Comput. 4 (2022), 10.1145/3544563.
  28. W.-H. Lin, J. Kimko, B. Tan, N. Bjørner, and J. Cong, Scalable optimal layout synthesis for NISQ quantum processors, in 2023 60th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) (2023), pp. 1–6, 10.1109/DAC56929.2023.10247760.
  29. A. M. Childs, D. Maslov, Y. Nam, N. J. Ross, and Y. Su, Toward the first quantum simulation with quantum speedup, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 115, 9456 (2018).
  30. Z. Zimborás, B. Koczor, Z. Holmes, E.-M. Borrelli, A. Gilyén, H.-Y. Huang, Z. Cai, A. Acín, L. Aolita, L. Banchi et al., Myths around quantum computation before full fault tolerance: What no-go theorems rule out and what they don’t, arXiv:2501.05694.
  31. G. Li, Y. Ding, and Y. Xie, Tackling the qubit mapping problem for NISQ-era quantum devices, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, ASPLOS ’19 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, USA, 2019), pp. 1001–1014.
  32. D. Kremer, V. Villar, H. Paik, I. Duran, I. Faro, and J. Cruz-Benito, Practical and efficient quantum circuit synthesis and transpiling with reinforcement learning, arXiv:2405.13196.
  33. J. Kattemölle, QuanTile, 2024, 10.5281/zenodo.14336692.
  34. T. Farrelly, A review of quantum cellular automata, Quantum 4, 368 (2020).
  35. S. Gopalakrishnan and B. Zakirov, Facilitated quantum cellular automata as simple models with non-thermal eigenstates and dynamics, Quantum Sci. Technol. 3, 044004 (2018).
  36. K. Klobas, B. Bertini, and L. Piroli, Exact thermalization dynamics in the “Rule 54” quantum cellular automaton, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 160602 (2021).
  37. C. Derby, J. Klassen, J. Bausch, and T. Cubitt, Compact fermion to qubit mappings, Phys. Rev. B 104, 035118 (2021).
  38. L. Clinton, T. Cubitt, B. Flynn, F. M. Gambetta, J. Klassen, A. Montanaro, S. Piddock, R. A. Santos, and E. Sheridan, Towards near-term quantum simulation of materials, Nat. Commun. 15, 211 (2024).
  39. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/cswp-xy7k. It includes the proof of Theorem 1, the explicit SMT formula for tileable routing, a detailed description of our implementation [24], and additional results. All basis graphs and tileable quantum circuits used in this Letter are given explicitly, which includes Refs. [40–47].
  40. P. V. Sriluckshmy, V. Pina-Canelles, M. Ponce, M. G. Algaba, F. Šimkovic IV, and M. Leib, Optimal, hardware native decomposition of parameterized multi-qubit Pauli gates, Quantum Sci. Technol. 8, 045029 (2023).
  41. Y. S. Yordanov, D. R. M. Arvidsson-Shukur, and Crispin H. W. Barnes, Efficient quantum circuits for quantum computational chemistry, Phys. Rev. A 102, 062612 (2020).
  42. D. Loss and D. P. DiVincenzo, Quantum computation with quantum dots, Phys. Rev. A 57, 120 (1998).
  43. G. Burkard, T. D. Ladd, A. Pan, J. M. Nichol, and J. R. Petta, Semiconductor spin qubits, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 025003 (2023).
  44. L. De Moura and N. Bjørner, Z3: An efficient SMT solver, in Proceedings of the Theory and Practice of Software, 14th International Conference on Tools and Algorithms for the Construction and Analysis of Systems, TACAS’08/ETAPS’08 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2008), pp. 337–340.
  45. A. V. Aho, J. E. Hopcroft, and J. D. Ullman, Data Structures and Algorithms, Computer Science and Information Processing (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1983).
  46. H. Zou, M. Treinish, K. Hartman, A. Ivrii, and J. Lishman, LightSABRE: A lightweight and enhanced SABRE algorithm, arXiv:2409.08368.
  47. J. Kattemölle and S. Hariharan, Line-graph qubit routing, ACM Trans. Quantum Comp. 6, 22 (2025).
  48. J. Kattemölle, Edge coloring lattice graphs, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 66, 051901 (2025).
  49. 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).
  50. M. Suzuki, General theory of fractal path integrals with applications to many-body theories and statistical physics, J. Math. Phys. (N.Y.) 32, 400 (1991).
  51. A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum measurements and the Abelian stabilizer problem, arXiv:quant-ph/9511026.
  52. D. Wecker, M. B. Hastings, and M. Troyer, Progress towards practical quantum variational algorithms, Phys. Rev. A 92, 042303 (2015).
  53. J. Kattemölle and J. van Wezel, Variational quantum eigensolver for the Heisenberg antiferromagnet on the kagome lattice, Phys. Rev. B 106, 214429 (2022).
  54. G. Vidal and C. M. Dawson, Universal quantum circuit for two-qubit transformations with three controlled-not gates, Phys. Rev. A 69, 010301(R) (2004).
  55. B. Foxen, C. Neill, A. Dunsworth, P. Roushan, B. Chiaro, A. Megrant, J. Kelly, Z. Chen, K. Satzinger, R. Barends et al. (Google AI Quantum), Demonstrating a continuous set of two-qubit gates for near-term quantum algorithms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 120504 (2020).
  56. 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).
  57. P. A. McClarty, M. Haque, A. Sen, and J. Richter, Disorder-free localization and many-body quantum scars from magnetic frustration, Phys. Rev. B 102, 224303 (2020).
  58. K. Lee, R. Melendrez, A. Pal, and H. J. Changlani, Exact three-colored quantum scars from geometric frustration, Phys. Rev. B 101, 241111(R) (2020).
  59. S. Bravyi, O. Dial, J. M. Gambetta, D. Gil, and Z. Nazario, The future of quantum computing with superconducting qubits, J. Appl. Phys. 132, 160902 (2022).
  60. D. Maslov, G. W. Dueck, D. M. Miller, and C. Negrevergne, Quantum circuit simplification and level compaction, IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst. 27, 436 (2008).
  61. C. Ryan-Anderson, N. Brown, C. Baldwin, J. Dreiling, C. Foltz, J. Gaebler, T. Gatterman, N. Hewitt, C. Holliman, C. Horst et al., High-fidelity teleportation of a logical qubit using transversal gates and lattice surgery, Science 385, 1327 (2024).
  62. G. Li, A. Wu, Y. Shi, A. Javadi-Abhari, Y. Ding, and Y. Xie, Paulihedral: A generalized block-wise compiler optimization framework for quantum simulation kernels, in Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems, ASPLOS ’22 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, USA, 2022), pp. 554–569.
  63. D. Bluvstein, S. J. Evered, A. A. Geim, S. H. Li, H. Zhou, T. Manovitz, S. Ebadi, M. Cain, M. Kalinowski, D. Hangleiter et al., Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays, Nature (London) 626, 58 (2024).
  64. D. B. Tan, D. Bluvstein, M. D. Lukin, and J. Cong, Compiling quantum circuits for dynamically field-programmable neutral atoms array processors, Quantum 8, 1281 (2024).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Lett. 136, 010602– Published 6 January, 2026
  • Received 15 April 2025
  • Revised 30 November 2025
  • Accepted 4 December 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.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation