- 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

Adapting the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd algorithm to quantum many-body theory

Nishanth Baskaran1,*, Abhishek Singh Rawat1,*, Akshaya Jayashankar1,*, Dibyajyoti Chakravarti1, K. Sugisaki1,2,3, Shibdas Roy1, Sudhindu Bikash Mandal1, D. Mukherjee1, and V. S. Prasannaa1,†

  • 1Centre for Quantum Engineering, Research and Education, TCG CREST, Sector V, Salt Lake, Kolkata 700091, India
  • 2Graduate School of Science and Technology, Keio University, 7-1 Shinkawasaki, Saiwai-ku, Kawasaki, Kanagawa 212-0032, Japan
  • 3Quantum Computing Center, Keio University, 3-14-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama, Kanagawa 223-8522, Japan

  • *These authors contributed equally to this work.
  • †srinivasaprasannaa@gmail.com
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 5, 043113 – Published 3 November, 2023

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.043113

Abstract

Rapid progress in developing near- and long-term quantum algorithms for quantum chemistry has provided us with an impetus to move beyond traditional approaches and explore new ways to apply quantum computing to electronic structure calculations. In this work, we identify the connection between quantum many-body theory and a quantum linear solver, and implement the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd (HHL) algorithm to make precise predictions of correlation energies for light molecular systems via the (nonunitary) linearized coupled cluster theory, where the term “light molecular systems” refers to those molecules whose constituent atoms have low atomic number. For the purposes of practical computations, we make suitable changes to the HHL framework. This entails two aspects: (1) Adapt, prescribing a novel scaling approach that allows one to scale any arbitrary Hermitian matrix, A, that in turn dictates the controlled-rotation angles without having to precompute the eigenvalues of A, and yet achieve a reasonably high precision in |x〉, and (2) Lite, for which we devise techniques that reduce the depth of the relevant quantum circuit. In this context, we introduce the following variants of HHL for different eras of quantum computing: AdaptHHLite in its appropriate forms for noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ), late-NISQ, and the early fault-tolerant eras, as well as AdaptHHL for the fault-tolerant quantum computing era. We demonstrate the ability of the NISQ variant of AdaptHHLite to capture correlation energy precisely, while simultaneously being resource lean, using simulation as well as the 11-qubit IonQ quantum hardware.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (53)

  1. D. S. Abrams and S. Lloyd, Simulation of many-body Fermi systems on a universal quantum computer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 2586 (1997).
  2. A. Aspuru-Guzik, A. D. Dutoi, P. J. Love, and M. Head-Gordon, Simulated quantum computation of molecular energies, Science 309, 1704 (2005).
  3. B. P. Lanyon, J. D. Whitfield, G. G. Gillett, M. E. Goggin, M. P. Almeida, I. Kassal, J. D. Biamonte, M. Mohseni, B. J. Powell, M. Barbieri, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and A. G. White, Towards quantum chemistry on a quantum computer, Nat. Chem. 2, 106 (2010).
  4. J. Du, N. Xu, X. Peng, P. Wang, S. Wu, and D. Lu, NMR implementation of a molecular hydrogen quantum simulation with adiabatic state preparation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 030502 (2010).
  5. Y. Wang, F. Dolde, J. Biamonte, R. Babbush, V. Bergholm, S. Yang, I. Jakobi, P. Neumann, A. Aspuru-Guzik, J. D. Whitfield, and J. Wrachtrup, Quantum simulation of helium hydride cation in a solid-state spin register, ACS Nano 9, 7769 (2015).
  6. K. Sugisaki, C. Sakai, K. Toyota, K. Sato, D. Shiomi, and T. Takui, Bayesian phase difference estimation: A general quantum algorithm for the direct calculation of energy gaps, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 23, 20152 (2021).
  7. K. Sugisaki, C. Sakai, K. Toyota, K. Sato, D. Shiomi, and T. Takui, Quantum algorithm for full configuration interaction calculations without controlled time evolutions, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 12, 11085 (2021).
  8. D. Halder, V. S. Prasannaa, V. Agarawal, and R. Maitra, Iterative quantum phase estimation with variationally prepared reference state, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 123, e27021 (2023).
  9. 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).
  10. 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).
  11. Google AI Quantum et al., Hartree-Fock on a superconducting qubit quantum computer, Science 369, 1084 (2020).
  12. 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).
  13. Y. S. Yordanov, V. Armaos, C. H. W. Barnes, and D. R. M. Arvidsson-Shukur, Qubit-excitation-based adaptive variational quantum eigensolver, Commun. Phys. 4, 228 (2021).
  14. I. G. Ryabinkin, T.-C. Yen, S. N. Genin, and A. F. Izmaylov, Qubit coupled cluster method: A systematic approach to quantum chemistry on a quantum computer, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 14, 6317 (2018).
  15. H. G. A. Burton, D. Marti-Dafcik, D. P. Tew, and D. J. Wales, Exact electronic states with shallow quantum circuits from global optimisation, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 75 (2023).
  16. 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).
  17. A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd, Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 150502 (2009).
  18. I. Shavitt and R. J. Bartlett, Many-Body Methods in Chemistry and Physics: MBPT and Coupled-Cluster Theory (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2009).
  19. R. F. Bishop, An overview of coupled cluster theory and its applications in physics, Theor. Chim. Acta 80, 95 (1991).
  20. J. Čížek, On the correlation problem in atomic and molecular systems. Calculation of wavefunction components in Ursell-type expansion using quantum-field theoretical methods, J. Chem. Phys. 45, 4256 (1966).
  21. B. K. Sahoo, R. Chaudhuri, B. P. Das, and D. Mukherjee, Relativistic coupled-cluster theory of atomic parity nonconservation: Application to Ba+137, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 163003 (2006).
  22. B. K. Sahoo and B. P. Das, Relativistic normal coupled-cluster theory for accurate determination of electric dipole moments of atoms: First application to the Hg199 atom, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 203001 (2018).
  23. V. S. Prasannaa, A. C. Vutha, M. Abe, and B. P. Das, Mercury monohalides: Suitability for electron electric dipole moment searches, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 183001 (2015).
  24. M. Kállay, H. S. Nataraj, B. K. Sahoo, B. P. Das, and L. Visscher, Relativistic general-order coupled-cluster method for high-precision calculations: Application to the Al+ atomic clock, Phys. Rev. A 83, 030503(R) (2011).
  25. S. Das, M. Kállay, and D. Mukherjee, Inclusion of selected higher excitations involving active orbitals in the state-specific multireference coupled-cluster theory, J. Chem. Phys. 133, 234110 (2010).
  26. P. Jerabek, P. Schwerdtfeger, and J. K. Nagle, Static dipole polarizability of palladium from relativistic coupled-cluster theory, Phys. Rev. A 98, 012508 (2018).
  27. D. Chakravarti, K. Hazra, R. Kayal, S. Sasmal, and D. Mukherjee, Exploration of interlacing and avoided crossings in a manifold of potential energy curves by a unitary group adapted state specific multi-reference perturbation theory (UGA-SSMRPT), J. Chem. Phys. 155, 014101 (2021).
  28. R. F. Bishop, P. H. Y. Li, O. Götze, and J. Richter, Frustrated spin-12 Heisenberg magnet on a square-lattice bilayer: High-order study of the quantum critical behavior of the J1−J2−J1⊥ model, Phys. Rev. B 100, 024401 (2019).
  29. Y. Cao, A. Daskin, S. Frankel, and S. Kais, Quantum circuit design for solving linear systems of equations, Mol. Phys. 110, 1675 (2012).
  30. A. C. Vazquez, R. Hiptmair, and S. Woerner, Enhancing the quantum linear systems algorithm using Richardson extrapolation, ACM Trans. Quantum Comput. 3, 1 (2022).
  31. M. Zhang, L. Dong, Y. Zeng, and N. Cao, Improved circuit implementation of the HHL algorithm and its simulations on qiskit, Sci. Rep. 12, 13287 (2022).
  32. Y. Lee, J. Joo, and S. Lee, Hybrid quantum linear equation algorithm and its experimental test on IBM Quantum Experience, Sci. Rep. 9, 4778 (2019).
  33. Y. Kharkov, A. Ivanova, E. Mikhantiev, and A. Kotelnikov, Arline benchmarks: Automated benchmarking platform for quantum compilers, arXiv:2202.14025.
  34. S. Lloyd, M. Mohseni, and P. Rebentrost, Quantum principal component analysis, Nat. Phys. 10, 631 (2014).
  35. T. Monz, D. Nigg, E. A. Martinez, M. F. Brandl, P. Schindler, R. Rines, S. X. Wang, I. L. Chuang, and R. Blatt, Realization of a scalable Shor algorithm, Science 351, 1068 (2016).
  36. B. P. Lanyon, T. J. Weinhold, N. K. Langford, M. Barbieri, D. F. V. James, A. Gilchrist, and A. G. White, Experimental demonstration of a compiled version of Shor's algorithm with quantum entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 250505 (2007).
  37. A. Chefles, Quantum state discrimination, Contemp. Phys. 41, 401 (2000).
  38. S. M. Barnett and S. Croke, Quantum state discrimination, Adv. Opt. Photonics 1, 238 (2009).
  39. X. Cai, W.-H. Fang, H. Fan, and Z. Li, Quantum computation of molecular response properties, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033324 (2020).
  40. Y. Tong, D. An, N. Wiebe, and L. Lin, Fast inversion, preconditioned quantum linear system solvers, fast Green's-function computation, and fast evaluation of matrix functions, Phys. Rev. A 104, 032422 (2021).
  41. S.-H. Chiew and L.-C. Kwek, Scalable quantum computation of highly excited eigenstates with spectral transforms, arXiv:2302.06638.
  42. J. C. Garcia-Escartin and P. Chamorro-Posada, SWAP test and Hong-Ou-Mandel effect are equivalent, Phys. Rev. A 87, 052330 (2013).
  43. Y. Nam, N. J. Ross, Y. Su, A. M. Childs, and D. Maslov, Automated optimization of large quantum circuits with continuous parameters, npj Quantum Inf. 4, 23 (2018).
  44. K. Mizuta, Y. O. Nakagawa, K. Mitarai, and K. Fujii, Local variational quantum compilation of large-scale hamiltonian dynamics, PRX Quantum 3, 040302 (2022).
  45. M.-A. Filip, N. Fitzpatrick, D. Muñoz Ramo, and A. J. W. Thom, Reducing unitary coupled cluster circuit depth by classical stochastic amplitude prescreening, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023243 (2022).
  46. N. Khaneja and S. J. Glaser, Cartan decomposition of SU(2n) and control of spin systems, Chem. Phys. 267, 11 (2001).
  47. GitHub, IBM qiskit repository, https://github.com/Qiskit/qiskit (2022).
  48. GitHub, Cambridge Quantum Computing Pytket Repository, https://github.com/CQCL/pytket (2022).
  49. D. Maslov, Basic circuit compilation techniques for an ion-trap quantum machine, New J. Phys. 19, 023035 (2017).
  50. V. Shende, S. Bullock, and I. Markov, Synthesis of quantum-logic circuits, IEEE Trans. Comput.-Aided Des. Integr. Circuits Syst. 25, 1000 (2006).
  51. G. M. J. Barca, C. Bertoni, L. Carrington, D. Datta, N. De Silva, J. E. Deustua, D. G. Fedorov, J. R. Gour, A. O. Gunina, E. Guidez, T. Harville, S. Irle, J. Ivanic, K. Kowalski, S. S. Leang, H. Li, W. Li, J. J. Lutz, I. Magoulas, J. Mato et al., Recent developments in the general atomic and molecular electronic structure system, J. Chem. Phys. 152, 154102 (2020).
  52. D. Mukherjee, A note on the lower-bound nature of the linearized CPMET, Chem. Phys. Lett. 79, 559 (1981).
  53. K. Temme, S. Bravyi, and J. M. Gambetta, Error mitigation for short-depth quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 180509 (2017).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 5, 043113– Published 3 November, 2023
  • Received 6 June 2023
  • Accepted 12 September 2023
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