- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

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

Nonvariational ADAPT algorithm for quantum simulations

Ho Lun Tang1,2, Yanzhu Chen1,2,3,*, Prakriti Biswas4, Alicia B. Magann5, Christian Arenz4, and Sophia E. Economou1,2

  • *Contact author: yanzhu.chen@fsu.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 7, 023275 – Published 17 June, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/x8g1-7h1k

Abstract

We explore a nonvariational quantum state preparation approach combined with the ADAPT operator selection strategy in the application of preparing the ground state of a desired target Hamiltonian. In this algorithm, energy gradient measurements determine both the operators and the gate parameters in the quantum circuit construction. We compare this nonvariational algorithm with ADAPT-VQE and with feedback-based quantum algorithms in terms of the rate of energy reduction, the circuit depth, and the measurement cost in molecular simulation. We find that, despite using deeper circuits, this new algorithm reaches chemical accuracy at a similar measurement cost to ADAPT-VQE. Since it does not rely on a classical optimization subroutine, it may provide robustness against circuit parameter errors due to imperfect control or gate synthesis.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (60)

  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, arXiv:quant-ph/9511026.
  3. J. D. Whitfield, J. Biamonte, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Simulation of electronic structure hamiltonians using quantum computers, Mol. Phys. 109, 735 (2011).
  4. D. S. Abrams and S. Lloyd, Simulation of many-body Fermi systems on a universal quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 2586 (1997).
  5. D. S. Abrams and S. Lloyd, Quantum algorithm providing exponential speed increase for finding eigenvalues and eigenvectors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 5162 (1999).
  6. J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
  7. A. Peruzzo, J. 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).
  8. B. Bauer, D. Wecker, A. J. Millis, M. B. Hastings, and M. Troyer, Hybrid quantum-classical approach to correlated materials, Phys. Rev. X 6, 031045 (2016).
  9. X. Yuan, S. Endo, Q. Zhao, Y. Li, and S. C. Benjamin, Theory of variational quantum simulation, Quantum 3, 191 (2019).
  10. M. Motta, C. Sun, A. T. Tan, M. J. O'Rourke, E. Ye, A. J. Minnich, F. G. Brandao, and G. K.-L. Chan, Determining eigenstates and thermal states on a quantum computer using quantum imaginary time evolution, Nat. Phys. 16, 205 (2020).
  11. N. Gomes, A. Mukherjee, F. Zhang, T. Iadecola, C.-Z. Wang, K.-M. Ho, P. P. Orth, and Y.-X. Yao, Adaptive variational quantum imaginary time evolution approach for ground state preparation, Adv. Quantum Technol. 4, 2100114 (2021).
  12. 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).
  13. 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).
  14. 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).
  15. Y. Shen, X. Zhang, S. Zhang, J.-N. Zhang, M.-H. Yung, and K. Kim, Quantum implementation of the unitary coupled cluster for simulating molecular electronic structure, Phys. Rev. A 95, 020501(R) (2017).
  16. C. Hempel, C. Maier, J. Romero, J. McClean, T. Monz, H. Shen, P. Jurcevic, B. P. Lanyon, P. Love, R. Babbush, A. Aspuru-Guzik, R. Blatt, and C. F. Roos, Quantum chemistry calculations on a trapped-ion quantum simulator, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031022 (2018).
  17. H. R. Grimsley, S. E. Economou, E. Barnes, and N. J. Mayhall, An adaptive variational algorithm for exact molecular simulations on a quantum computer, Nat. Commun. 10, 3007 (2019).
  18. H. L. Tang, V. O. Shkolnikov, G. S. Barron, H. R. Grimsley, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, Qubit-ADAPT-VQE: An adaptive algorithm for constructing hardware-efficient ansätze on a quantum processor, PRX Quantum 2, 020310 (2021).
  19. P. G. Anastasiou, Y. Chen, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, TETRIS-ADAPT-VQE: An adaptive algorithm that yields shallower, denser circuit ansätze, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013254 (2024).
  20. C.-F. Chen, H.-Y. Huang, J. Preskill, and L. Zhou, Local minima in quantum systems, Nat. Phys. 21, 654 (2025).
  21. L. Bittel and M. Kliesch, Training variational quantum algorithms is NP-hard, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 120502 (2021).
  22. D. A. Mazziotti, Anti-Hermitian contracted Schrödinger equation: Direct determination of the two-electron reduced density matrices of many-electron molecules, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 143002 (2006).
  23. A. B. Magann, K. M. Rudinger, M. D. Grace, and M. Sarovar, Feedback-based quantum optimization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 250502 (2022).
  24. A. B. Magann, K. M. Rudinger, M. D. Grace, and M. Sarovar, Lyapunov-control-inspired strategies for quantum combinatorial optimization, Phys. Rev. A 106, 062414 (2022).
  25. S. A. Rahman, H. G. Clausen, O. Karabacak, and R. Wisniewski, Adaptive sampling noise mitigation technique for feedback-based quantum algorithms, in Computational Science ICCS 2024: 24th International Conference, Malaga, Spain, July 2–4, 2024, Proceedings, Part VI (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2024), pp. 321–329.
  26. G. E. L. Pexe, L. A. M. Rattighieri, A. L. Malvezzi, and F. F. Fanchini, Using a feedback-based quantum algorithm to analyze the critical properties of the Annni model without classical optimization, Phys. Rev. B 110, 224422 (2024).
  27. S. A. Rahman, Ö. Karabacak, and R. Wisniewski, Feedback-based quantum algorithm for constrained optimization problems, in Parallel Processing and Applied Mathematics, edited by R. Wyrzykowski, J. Dongarra, E. Deelman, and K. Karczewski (Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, 2025), pp. 277–289.
  28. S. A. Rahman, Ö. Karabacak, and R. Wisniewski, Feedback-based quantum algorithm for excited states calculation, arXiv:2404.04620.
  29. R. K. Malla, H. Sukeno, H. Yu, T.-C. Wei, A. Weichselbaum, and R. M. Konik, Feedback-based quantum algorithm inspired by counterdiabatic driving, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043068 (2024).
  30. D. Arai, K. N. Okada, Y. Nakano, K. Mitarai, and K. Fujii, Scalable circuit depth reduction in feedback-based quantum optimization with a quadratic approximation, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, 013035 (2025).
  31. L. T. Brady and S. Hadfield, FOCQS: Feedback optimally controlled quantum states, arXiv:2409.15426.
  32. P. Chandarana, K. Paul, K. Ranjan Swain, X. Chen, and A. del Campo, Lyapunov controlled counterdiabatic quantum optimization, arXiv:2409.12525.
  33. J. B. Larsen, M. D. Grace, A. D. Baczewski, and A. B. Magann, Feedback-based quantum algorithms for ground state preparation, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033336 (2024).
  34. T. Schulte-herbrüggen, S. J. Glaser, G. Dirr, and U. Helmke, Gradient flows for optimization in quantum information and quantum dynamics: Foundations and applications, Rev. Math. Phys. 22, 597 (2010).
  35. R. Wiersema and N. Killoran, Optimizing quantum circuits with riemannian gradient flow, Phys. Rev. A 107, 062421 (2023).
  36. A. B. Magann, S. E. Economou, and C. Arenz, Randomized adaptive quantum state preparation, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 033227 (2023).
  37. E. Malvetti, C. Arenz, G. Dirr, and T. Schulte-Herbrüggen, Randomized gradient descents on riemannian manifolds: Almost sure convergence to global minima in and beyond quantum optimization, arXiv:2405.12039.
  38. V. O. Shkolnikov, N. J. Mayhall, S. E. Economou, and E. Barnes, Avoiding symmetry roadblocks and minimizing the measurement overhead of adaptive variational quantum eigensolvers, Quantum 7, 1040 (2023).
  39. L. W. Bertels, H. R. Grimsley, S. E. Economou, E. Barnes, and N. J. Mayhall, Symmetry breaking slows convergence of the adapt variational quantum eigensolver, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 18, 6656 (2022).
  40. A. Warren, L. Zhu, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, Adaptive variational algorithms for quantum Gibbs state preparation, arXiv:2203.12757.
  41. A. M. Romero, J. Engel, H. L. Tang, and S. E. Economou, Solving nuclear structure problems with the adaptive variational quantum algorithm, Phys. Rev. C 105, 064317 (2022).
  42. H. Grimsley, G. Barron, E. Barnes, S. Economou, and N. Mayhall, Adaptive, problem-tailored variational quantum eigensolver mitigates rough parameter landscapes and barren plateaus, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 19 (2023).
  43. C. K. Long, K. Dalton, C. H. W. Barnes, D. R. M. Arvidsson-Shukur, and N. Mertig, Layering and subpool exploration for adaptive variational quantum eigensolvers: Reducing circuit depth, runtime, and susceptibility to noise, Phys. Rev. A 109, 042413 (2024).
  44. J. S. Van Dyke, K. Shirali, G. S. Barron, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, Scaling adaptive quantum simulation algorithms via operator pool tiling, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, L012030 (2024).
  45. M. Ramôa, L. Paulo Santos, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, Reducing measurement costs by recycling the hessian in adaptive variational quantum algorithms, Quantum Sci. Technol. 10, 015031 (2025).
  46. M. Ramôa, P. G. Anastasiou, L. P. Santos, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, Reducing the resources required by ADAPT-VQE using coupled exchange operators and improved subroutines, npj Quantum Info. 11, 86 (2025).
  47. R. C. Farrell, M. Illa, A. N. Ciavarella, and M. J. Savage, Scalable circuits for preparing ground states on digital quantum computers: The schwinger model vacuum on 100 qubits, PRX Quantum 5, 020315 (2024).
  48. A. Beck, First-Order Methods in Optimization (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, Philadelphia, PA, 2017), Chap. 5, https://epubs.siam.org/doi/pdf/10.1137/1.9781611974997.
  49. S. E. Smart and D. A. Mazziotti, Quantum solver of contracted eigenvalue equations for scalable molecular simulations on quantum computing devices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 070504 (2021).
  50. Y. Nakata, C. Hirche, C. Morgan, and A. Winter, Unitary 2-designs from random x- and z-diagonal unitaries, J. Math. Phys. 58, 052203 (2017).
  51. J.-N. Boyn, A. O. Lykhin, S. E. Smart, L. Gagliardi, and D. A. Mazziotti, Quantum-classical hybrid algorithm for the simulation of all-electron correlation, J. Chem. Phys. 155, 244106 (2021).
  52. T.-C. Yen, V. Verteletskyi, and A. F. Izmaylov, Measuring all compatible operators in one series of single-qubit measurements using unitary transformations, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16, 2400 (2020).
  53. A. Y. Kitaev, Quantum computations: Algorithms and error correction, Russ. Math. Surv. 52, 1191 (1997).
  54. C. M. Dawson and M. A. Nielsen, The Solovay-Kitaev algorithm, Quantum Inf. Comput. 6, 81 (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0505030.
  55. N. J. Ross and P. Selinger, Optimal ancilla-free clifford+t approximation of z-rotations, Quantum Inf. Comput. 16, 901 (2016).
  56. D. Mondal, D. Halder, S. Halder, and R. Maitra, Development of a compact ansatz via operator commutativity screening: Digital quantum simulation of molecular systems, J. Chem. Phys. 159, 014105 (2023).
  57. D. Halder, D. Mondal, and R. Maitra, Noise-independent route toward the genesis of a compact ansatz for molecular energetics: A dynamic approach, J. Chem. Phys. 160, 124104 (2024).
  58. J. W. Mullinax and N. M. Tubman, Large-scale sparse wave function circuit simulator for applications with the variational quantum eigensolver, Chem. Phys. 162, 074114 (2025).
  59. J. W. Mullinax, P. G. Anastasiou, J. Larson, S. E. Economou, and N. M. Tubman, Classical preoptimization approach for ADAPT-VQE: Maximizing the potential of high-performance computing resources to improve quantum simulation of chemical applications, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 21, 4006 (2025).
  60. S. E. Smart and D. A. Mazziotti, Accelerated convergence of contracted quantum eigensolvers through a quasi-second-order, locally parameterized optimization, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 18, 5286 (2022).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 7, 023275– Published 17 June, 2025
  • Received 1 December 2024
  • Accepted 12 May 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