CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 408Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum many-body systemsQuantum Mechanics and Applications

qubit-ADAPT-VQE: An adaptive algorithm for constructing hardware-efficient ansatze on a quantum processor

Open access
Tang, Ho Lun, Shkolnikov, V. O., Barron, George S., Grimsley, Harper R., Mayhall, Nicholas J., Barnes, Edwin, Economou, Sophia E.·2019·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1911.10205arXiv 1911.10205
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Quantum simulation, one of the most promising applications of a quantum computer, is currently being explored intensely using the variational quantum eigensolver. The feasibility and performance of this algorithm depend critically on the form of the wavefunction ansatz. Recently in Nat. Commun. 10, 3007 (2019), an algorithm termed ADAPT-VQE was introduced to build system-adapted ansätze with substantially fewer variational parameters compared to other approaches. This algorithm relies heavily on a predefined operator pool with which it builds the ansatz. However, Nat. Commun. 10, 3007 (2019) did not provide a prescription for how to select the pool, how many operators it must contain, or whether the resulting ansatz will succeed in converging to the ground state. In addition, the pool used in that work leads to state preparation circuits that are too deep for a practical application on near-term devices. Here, we address all these key outstanding issues of the algorithm. We present a hardware-efficient variant of ADAPT-VQE that drastically reduces circuit depths using an operator pool that is guaranteed to contain the operators necessary to construct exact ansätze. Moreover, we show that the minimal pool size that achieves this scales linearly with the number of qubits. Through numerical simulations on $\text{H}_4$, LiH and $\text{H}_6$, we show that our algorithm ("qubit-ADAPT") reduces the circuit depth by an order of magnitude while maintaining the same accuracy as the original ADAPT-VQE. A central result of our approach is that the additional measurement overhead of qubit-ADAPT compared to fixed-ansatz variational algorithms scales only linearly with the number of qubits. Our work provides a crucial step forward in running algorithms on near-term quantum devices.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1911.10205

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Both fermionic and qubit versions of ADAPT-VQE were able to generate optimized circuits with reduced depths and CNOT counts compared to previous ansatz construction and optimization methods.

    “Both versions of ADAPT-VQEs were able to generate optimized circuits with reduced depths and CNOT counts compared to previous ansatz construction and optimization methods.”

    From Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms (2022) · cites this paper as Tang et al., 2019

    The Introduction (page unavailable) says fermionic ADAPT-VQE has significantly less circuit depth than UCCSD, while the Introduction and Numerical simulations report that qubit-ADAPT further reduces depth and CNOT counts relative to fermionic-ADAPT. The paper does not establish that both versions reduce CNOT counts compared with previous ansatz methods generally; its explicit CNOT comparison is between the two ADAPT versions. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. W. Kohn and L. J. Sham, Self-consistent equations includ- ing exchange and correlation effects, Phys. Rev. 140, A1133 (1965). · DOI · Paper page
  2. P. Hohenberg and W. Kohn, Inhomogeneous electron gas, Phys. Rev. 136, B864 (1964). · DOI · Paper page
  3. A. Kovyrshin and M. Reiher, Self-adaptive tensor net- work states with multi-site correlators, J. Chem. Phys. 147, 214111 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  4. K. H. Marti, B. Bauer, M. Reiher, M. Troyer, and F. Verstraete, Complete-graph tensor network states: A new fermionic wave function ansatz for molecules, New J. Phys. 12, 103008 (2010). · DOI · Paper page
  5. V. Murg, F. Verstraete, R. Schneider, P. R. Nagy, and Ö. Legeza, Tree tensor network state with variable ten- sor order: An efficient multireference method for strongly correlated systems, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 11, 1027 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  6. S. Szalay, M. Pfeffer, V. Murg, G. Barcza, F. Verstraete, R. Schneider, and r. Legeza, Tensor product methods and entanglement optimization for ab initio quantum chemistry, Int. J. Quantum Chem. 115, 1342 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  7. K. Choo, A. Mezzacapo, and G. Carleo, arXiv:1909.12852 [cond-mat, physics:physics, physics:quant-ph] (2019). · arXiv
  8. S. R. White, Density Matrix Formulation for Quantum Renormalization Groups, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2863 (1992). · DOI · Paper page
  9. U. Schollwöck, The density-matrix renormalization group, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 259 (2005). · DOI · Paper page
  10. G. K.-L. Chan and S. Sharma, The density matrix renor- malization group in quantum chemistry, Ann. Rev. Phys. Chem. 62, 465 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  11. R. P. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 21, 467 (1982). · DOI · Paper page
  12. S. McArdle, S. Endo, A. Aspuru-Guzik, S. Benjamin, and X. Yuan, arXiv:1808.10402 (2018). · arXiv
  13. Y. Cao, J. Romero, J. P. Olson, M. Degroote, P. D. Johnson, M. Kieferová, I. D. Kivlichan, T. Menke, B. Peropadre, N. P. D. Sawaya, S. Sim, L. Veis, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, quan- tum chemistry in the age of quantum computing, Chem. Rev. 119, 10856 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  14. B. Bauer, S. Bravyi, M. Motta, and G. K.-L. Chan, arXiv:2001.03685 (2020). · arXiv
  15. A. Y. Kitaev, arXiv:quant-ph/9511026 (1995). · arXiv
  16. J. D. Whitfield, J. Biamonte, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Sim- ulation of electronic structure hamiltonians using quantum computers, Mol. Phys. 109, 735 (2011). · DOI · Paper page
  17. D. S. Abrams and S. Lloyd, Simulation of Many-Body Fermi Systems on a Universal Quantum Computer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 2586 (1997). · DOI · Paper page
  18. D. S. Abrams and S. Lloyd, Quantum Algorithm Providing Exponential Speed Increase for Finding Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 5162 (1999). · DOI · Paper page
  19. J. Preskill, Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  20. 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, 1 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  21. 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). · DOI · Paper page
  22. 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).
  23. 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 549, 242 EP (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  24. 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 (2017). · DOI
  25. 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 Chem- istry Calculations on a Trapped-Ion Quantum Simulator, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031022 (2018).
  26. B. T. Gard, L. Zhu, G. S. Barron, N. J. Mayhall, S. E. Economou, and E. Barnes, Efficient symmetry-preserving state preparation circuits for the variational quantum eigen- solver algorithm, npj Quantum Inf. 6, 10 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  27. R. J. Bartlett and M. Musiał, Coupled-cluster theory in quantum chemistry, Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 291 (2007). · DOI · Paper page
  28. M.-H. Yung, J. Casanova, A. Mezzacapo, J. McClean, L. Lamata, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and E. Solano, From transistor to trapped-ion computers for quantum chemistry, Sci. Rep. 4, 3589 EP (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  29. H. R. Grimsley, S. E. Economou, E. Barnes, and N. J. May- hall, An adaptive variational algorithm for exact molecular simulations on a quantum computer, Nat. Commun. 10, 3007 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  30. 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). · DOI · Paper page
  31. I. G. Ryabinkin, R. A. Lang, S. N. Genin, and A. F. Izmaylov, arXiv:1906.11192 (2019). · arXiv
  32. J. Lee, W. J. Huggins, M. Head-Gordon, and K. B. Wha- ley, Generalized unitary coupled cluster wave functions for quantum computation, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 15, 311 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  33. W. J. Huggins, J. Lee, U. Baek, B. O'Gorman, and K. B. Whaley, arXiv:1909.09114 (2019). · arXiv
  34. P.-L. Dallaire-Demers, J. Romero, L. Veis, S. Sim, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, arXiv:1801.01053 (2018). · arXiv
  35. J. Romero, R. Babbush, J. R. McClean, C. Hempel, P. J. Love, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Strategies for quantum com- puting molecular energies using the unitary coupled cluster ansatz, Quantum Sci. Technol. 4, 014008 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  36. Y. Matsuzawa and Y. Kurashige, arXiv:1909.12410 (2019). · arXiv
  37. F. A. Evangelista, G. Kin-Lic Chan, and G. E. Scuseria, arXiv:1910.10130 (2019). · arXiv
  38. H. R. Grimsley, D. Claudino, S. E. Economou, E. Barnes, and N. J. Mayhall, Is the trotterized UCCSD ansatz chemi- cally well-defined?, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 16, 1 (2020). · DOI
  39. J. R. McClean, S. Boixo, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Babbush, and H. Neven, Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes, Nat. Commun. 9, 4812 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  40. P. K. Barkoutsos, J. F. Gonthier, I. Sokolov, N. Moll, G. Salis, A. Fuhrer, M. Ganzhorn, D. J. Egger, M. Troyer, A. Mezzacapo, S. Filipp, and I. Tavernelli, Quantum algorithms for electronic structure calculations: Particle- hole hamiltonian and optimized wave-function expansions, Phys. Rev. A 98, 022322 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  41. M. Ganzhorn, D. Egger, P. Barkoutsos, P. Ollitrault, G. Salis, N. Moll, M. Roth, A. Fuhrer, P. Mueller, S. Woerner, I. Tavernelli, and S. Filipp, Gate-Efficient Simulation of Molecular Eigenstates on a Quantum Computer, Phys. Rev. Appl. 11, 044092 (2019). · DOI
  42. W. J. Huggins, J. McClean, N. Rubin, Z. Jiang, N. Wiebe, K. B. Whaley, and R. Babbush, arXiv e-prints (2019).
  43. S. B. Bravyi and A. Y. Kitaev, Fermionic quantum compu- tation, Ann. Phys. (N. Y.) 298, 210 (2002). · DOI · Paper page
  44. V. Havlíček, M. Troyer, and J. D. Whitfield, Operator local- ity in the quantum simulation of fermionic models, Phys. Rev. A 95, 032332 (2017). · DOI
  45. K. Setia and J. D. Whitfield, Bravyi-kitaev superfast sim- ulation of electronic structure on a quantum computer, J. Chem. Phys. 148, 164104 (2018). · DOI
  46. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cam- bridge University Press, New York, NY, USA, 2011), 2nd ed.
  47. M. Cerezo, A. Sone, T. Volkoff, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, arXiv:2001.00550 [quant-ph] (2020). · arXiv
  48. A. Skolik, J. R. McClean, M. Mohseni, P. van der Smagt, and M. Leib, Layerwise learning for quantum neural net- works, Quantum Mach. Intell. 3, 5 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  49. M. Bilkis, M. Cerezo, G. Verdon, P. J. Coles, and L. Cincio, arXiv:2103.06712 [quant-ph] (2021). · arXiv
  50. E. Grant, L. Wossnig, M. Ostaszewski, and M. Benedetti, An initialization strategy for addressing barren plateaus in parametrized quantum circuits, Quantum 3, 214 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  51. C. Rigetti and M. Devoret, Fully microwave-tunable uni- versal gates in superconducting qubits with linear couplings and fixed transition frequencies, Phys. Rev. B 81, 134507 (2010). · DOI
  52. J. M. Chow, A. D. Córcoles, J. M. Gambetta, C. Rigetti, B. R. Johnson, J. A. Smolin, J. R. Rozen, G. A. Keefe, M. B. Rothwell, M. B. Ketchen, and M. Steffen, Sim- ple All-Microwave Entangling Gate for Fixed-Frequency Superconducting Qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 080502 (2011). · DOI
  53. S. Sheldon, E. Magesan, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gam- betta, Procedure for systematically tuning up cross-talk in the cross-resonance gate, Phys. Rev. A 93, 060302 (2016). · DOI
  54. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supp lemental/10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.020310 for the qiskit code for circuit transpilation. · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tang, H. L., Shkolnikov, V. O., Barron, G. S., Grimsley, H. R., Mayhall, N. J., Barnes, E., & Economou, S. E.
Affiliations
Virginia Tech (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2019
Volume
2
Issue
2
ISSN
2691-3399 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1911.10205
arXiv
1911.10205
OpenAlex
W2990112601
Cited by
408
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 48 · 2025: 93 · 2024: 106 · 2023: 87 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 24
FWCI
23.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • PRX Quantum (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1839136)
  • U.S. Department of Energy (DESC0019199)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum many-body systems
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
Keywords
variational quantum eigensolver, hardware-efficient ansatz, quantum resource quantification, variational quantum algorithms

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review