CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 49Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum Information and CryptographyQuantum many-body systems

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Quantum algorithms: A survey of applications and end-to-end complexities

Open access
Dalzell, Alexander M., McArdle, Sam, Berta, Mario, Bienias, Przemyslaw, Chen, Chi-Fang, Gilyén, András, Hann, Connor T., Kastoryano, Michael J., Khabiboulline, Emil T., Kubica, Aleksander, Salton, Grant, Wang, Samson, Brandão, Fernando G. S. L.·2023·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2310.03011arXiv 2310.03011

Preprint — published as 10.1017/9781009639651

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The anticipated applications of quantum computers span across science and industry, ranging from quantum chemistry and many-body physics to optimization, finance, and machine learning. Proposed quantum solutions in these areas typically combine multiple quantum algorithmic primitives into an overall quantum algorithm, which must then incorporate the methods of quantum error correction and fault tolerance to be implemented correctly on quantum hardware. As such, it can be difficult to assess how much a particular application benefits from quantum computing, as the various approaches are often sensitive to intricate technical details about the underlying primitives and their complexities. Here we present a survey of several potential application areas of quantum algorithms and their underlying algorithmic primitives, carefully considering technical caveats and subtleties. We outline the challenges and opportunities in each area in an "end-to-end" fashion by clearly defining the problem being solved alongside the input-output model, instantiating all "oracles," and spelling out all hidden costs. We also compare quantum solutions against state-of-the-art classical methods and complexity-theoretic limitations to evaluate possible quantum speedups. The survey is written in a modular, wiki-like fashion to facilitate navigation of the content. Each primitive and application area is discussed in a standalone section, with its own bibliography of references and embedded hyperlinks that direct to other relevant sections. This structure mirrors that of complex quantum algorithms that involve several layers of abstraction, and it enables rapid evaluation of how end-to-end complexities are impacted when subroutines are altered.

Overview

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.2310.03011

Cites

Statistics

Verification

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?

Self-check

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

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

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 1072

  1. Aaronson, S. (2015). Read the fine print. Nat. Phys., 11, 291-293. doi:10.1038/nphys3272. · DOI · Paper page
  2. Aaronson, S. (2018). Shadow tomography of quantum states. Pages 325-338 of: STOC. doi:10.1145/3188745.3188802. arXiv:1711.01053. · DOI
  3. Aaronson, S. (2021). Open problems related to quantum query com- plexity. ACM Trans. Quantum Comput., 2. doi:10.1145/3488559. arXiv:2109.06917. · DOI
  4. Aaronson, S., and Gottesman, D. (2004). Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits. Phys. Rev. A, 70, 052328. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.70.052328. arXiv:quant-ph/0406196. · DOI · Paper page
  5. Aaronson, S., Chen, X., Hazan, E., et al. (2019). Online learn- ing of quantum states. J. Stat. Mech. Theory Exp., 2019, 124019. doi:10.1088/1742-5468/ab3988. arXiv:1802.09025. · DOI
  6. Abbas, A., Ambainis, A., Augustino, B., et al. (2024). Challenges and opportunities in quantum optimization. Nat. Rev. Phys., 6, 718-735. doi:10.1038/s42254-024-00770-9. arXiv:2312.02279. · DOI · Paper page
  7. Adachi, S. H., and Henderson, M. P. (2015). Application of quantum annealing to training of deep neural networks. arXiv:1510.06356. · arXiv
  8. Aggarwal, D., Brennen, G., Lee, T., et al. (2018). Quantum attacks on bitcoin, and how to protect against them. Ledger, 3. doi:10.5195/ledger.2018.127. arXiv:1710.10377. · DOI · Paper page
  9. Agrawal, A. A., Wilson, T. L., Saadatmand, S., et al. (2024). Quantifying fault tolerant simulation of strongly correlated systems using the Fermi-Hubbard model. arXiv:2406.06511. · arXiv
  10. Aharonov, D., and Ben-Or, M. (2008). Fault-tolerant quantum com- putation with constant error rate. SIAM J. Comp., 38, 1207-1282. doi:10.1137/S0097539799359385. Earlier version in STOC'97. arXiv:quant-ph/9906129. · DOI · Paper page
  11. Aharonov, D., and Ta-Shma, A. (2007). Adiabatic quantum state generation. SIAM J. Comp., 37, 47-82. doi:10.1137/060648829. Earlier version in STOC'03. arXiv:quant-ph/0301023. · DOI
  12. Aharonov, D., Ben-Or, M., Impagliazzo, R., and Nisan, N. (1996). Limitations of noisy reversible computation. arXiv:quant-ph/9611028. · arXiv
  13. Akhalwaya, I. Y., Ubaru, S., Clarkson, K. L., et al. (2022). Exponential advan- tage on noisy quantum computers. arXiv:2209.09371. · arXiv
  14. Akhalwaya, I. Y., Connolly, A., Guichard, R., et al. (2023). A modular engine for quantum Monte Carlo integration. arXiv:2308.06081. · arXiv
  15. Alagic, G., Apon, D., Cooper, D., et al. (2022). Status report on the third round of the NIST post-quantum cryptography standardization process. Tech. rept. NISTIR 8413. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD. doi:10.6028/NIST.IR.8413-upd1. · DOI · Paper page
  16. Albash, T., and Lidar, D. A. (2018). Adiabatic quantum computation. Rev. Mod. Phys., 90, 015002. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.90.015002. arXiv:1611.04471. · DOI · Paper page
  17. Alexis, M., Lin, L., Mnatsakanyan, G., et al. (2024). Infinite quantum signal processing for arbitrary Szegő functions. arXiv:2407.05634. · arXiv
  18. Alexis, M., Mnatsakanyan, G., and Thiele, C. (2024). Quantum signal pro- cessing and nonlinear Fourier analysis. Rev. Mat. Complut., 37, 655-694. doi:10.1007/s13163-024-00494-5. arXiv:2310.12683. · DOI
  19. Aliferis, P., Gottesman, D., and Preskill, J. (2006). Quantum accuracy thresh- old for concatenated distance-3 codes. Quantum Inf. Comput., 6, 97-165. doi:10.26421/QIC6.2-1. arXiv:quant-ph/0504218. · DOI · Paper page
  20. Aliferis, P., Gottesman, D., and Preskill, J. (2008). Accuracy threshold for postselected quantum computation. Quantum Inf. Comput., 8, 181-244. doi:10.26421/QIC8.3-4-1. arXiv:quant-ph/0703264. · DOI
  21. Altaisky, M. (2001). Quantum neural network. arXiv:quant-ph/0107012. · arXiv
  22. Altshuler, B., Krovi, H., and Roland, J. (2010). Anderson localization makes adiabatic quantum optimization fail. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 107, 12446-12450. doi:10.1073/pnas.1002116107. arXiv:0912.0746. · DOI
  23. Ambainis, A. (2004). Quantum search algorithms. SIGACT News, 35, 22-35. doi:10.1145/992287.992296. arXiv:quant-ph/0504012. · DOI
  24. Ambainis, A. (2007). Quantum walk algorithm for element distinctness. SIAM J. Comp., 37, 210-239. doi:10.1137/S0097539705447311. Earlier version in FOCS'04. arXiv:quant-ph/0311001. · DOI
  25. Ambainis, A. (2012). Variable time amplitude amplification and quan- tum algorithms for linear algebra problems. Pages 636-647 of: STACS. doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2012.636. arXiv:1010.4458. · DOI
  26. Ambainis, A., and Kokainis, M. (2017). Quantum algorithm for tree size esti- mation, with applications to backtracking and 2-player games. Pages 989-1002 of: STOC. doi:10.1145/3055399.3055444. arXiv:1704.06774. · DOI
  27. Ambainis, A., Balodis, K., Iraids, J., et al. (2019). Quantum speedups for exponential-time dynamic programming algorithms. Pages 1783-1793 of: SODA. doi:10.1137/1.9781611975482.107. arXiv:2104.14384. · DOI
  28. Ambainis, A., Kokainis, M., and Vihrovs, J. (2023). Improved algorithm and lower bound for variable time quantum search. arXiv:2302.06749. · arXiv
  29. Amin, M. H., Andriyash, E., Rolfe, J., et al. (2018). Quantum Boltzmann machine. Phys. Rev. X, 8, 021050. doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.8.021050. arXiv:1601.02036. References · DOI · Paper page
  30. An, D., and Lin, L. (2022). Quantum linear system solver based on time- optimal adiabatic quantum computing and quantum approximate optimiza- tion algorithm. ACM Trans. Quantum Comput., 3. doi:10.1145/3498331. arXiv:1909.05500. · DOI
  31. An, D., and Trivisa, K. (2023). Quantum algorithms for linear and non-linear fractional reaction-diffusion equations. arXiv:2310.18900. · arXiv
  32. An, D., Linden, N., Liu, J.-P., et al. (2021). Quantum-accelerated mul- tilevel Monte Carlo methods for stochastic differential equations in math- ematical finance. Quantum, 5, 481. doi:10.22331/q-2021-06-24-481. arXiv:2012.06283. · DOI
  33. An, D., Fang, D., and Lin, L. (2021). Time-dependent unbounded Hamiltonian simulation with vector norm scaling. Quantum, 5, 459. doi:10.22331/q-2021-05-26-459. arXiv:2012.13105. · DOI
  34. An, D., Liu, J.-P., Wang, D., and Zhao, Q. (2022). A theory of quantum differ- ential equation solvers: Limitations and fast-forwarding. arXiv:2211.05246. · arXiv
  35. An, D., Liu, J.-P., and Lin, L. (2023). Linear combination of Hamilto- nian simulation for nonunitary dynamics with optimal state preparation cost. Phys. Rev. Lett., 131, 150603. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.150603. arXiv:2303.01029. · DOI
  36. An, D., Childs, A. M., and Lin, L. (2023). Quantum algorithm for lin- ear non-unitary dynamics with near-optimal dependence on all parameters. arXiv:2312.03916. · arXiv
  37. Andersen, E. D., and Andersen, K. D. (2000). The Mosek interior point optimizer for linear programming: An implementation of the homo- geneous algorithm. Pages 197-232 of: High Performance Optimization. doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3216-0_8. · DOI · Paper page
  38. Anschuetz, E., Olson, J., Aspuru-Guzik, A., and Cao, Y. (2019). Variational quantum factoring. Pages 74-85 of: Quantum Technology and Optimization Problems. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-14082-3_7. arXiv:1808.08927. · DOI · Paper page
  39. Anschuetz, E. R., and Cao, Y. (2019). Realizing quantum Boltzmann machines through eigenstate thermalization. arXiv:1903.01359. · arXiv
  40. Anschuetz, E. R., and Kiani, B. T. (2022). Quantum variational algorithms are swamped with traps. Nat. Commun., 13, 7760. doi:10.1038/s41467-022-35364-5. arXiv:2205.05786. · DOI
  41. Anwar, H., Brown, B. J., Campbell, E. T., and Browne, D. E. (2014). Fast decoders for qudit topological codes. New J. Phys., 16, 063038. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/6/063038. arXiv:1311.4895. · DOI
  42. Aoki, H., Tsuji, N., Eckstein, M., et al. (2014). Nonequilibrium dynami- cal mean-field theory and its applications. Rev. Mod. Phys., 86, 779-837. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.86.779. arXiv:1310.5329. · DOI
  43. Aoki, Y., Blum, T., Colangelo, G., et al. (2022). FLAG review 2021. Eur. Phys. J. C, 82, 869. arXiv:2111.09849. · arXiv
  44. van Apeldoorn, J., and Gilyén, A. (2019). Improvements in quan- tum SDP-solving with applications. Pages 99:1-99:15 of: ICALP. doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2019.99. arXiv:1804.05058. · DOI
  45. van Apeldoorn, J., and Gilyén, A. (2019). Quantum algorithms for zero-sum games. arXiv:1904.03180. · arXiv
  46. van Apeldoorn, J., Gilyén, A., Gribling, S., and de Wolf, R. (2020). Convex optimization using quantum oracles. Quantum, 4, 220. doi:10.22331/q-2020-01-13-220. arXiv:1809.00643. · DOI
  47. van Apeldoorn, J., Gilyén, A., Gribling, S., and de Wolf, R. (2020). Quantum SDP-solvers: Better upper and lower bounds. Quantum, 4, 230. doi:10.22331/q-2020-02-14-230. Earlier version in FOCS'17. arXiv:1705.01843. · DOI
  48. van Apeldoorn, J., Cornelissen, A., Gilyén, A., and Nannicini, G. (2023). Quan- tum tomography using state-preparation unitaries. Pages 1265-1318 of: SODA. doi:10.1137/1.9781611977554.ch47. arXiv:2207.08800. · DOI
  49. Apers, S., and de Wolf, R. (2020). Quantum speedup for graph sparsifica- tion, cut approximation and Laplacian solving. Pages 637-648 of: FOCS. doi:10.1109/FOCS46700.2020.00065. arXiv:1911.07306. · DOI
  50. Apers, S., and Gribling, S. (2023). Quantum speedups for linear programming via interior point methods. arXiv:2311.03215. · arXiv
  51. Apers, S., Gilyén, A., and Jeffery, S. (2021). A unified frame- work of quantum walk search. Pages 6:1-6:13 of: STACS. doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.STACS.2021.6. arXiv:1912.04233. · DOI
  52. Apers, S., Gribling, S., Sen, S., and Szabó, D. (2023). A (simple) classical algorithm for estimating Betti numbers. Quantum, 7, 1202. doi:10.22331/q-2023-12-06-1202. arXiv:2211.09618. · DOI
  53. Arad, I., and Landau, Z. (2010). Quantum computation and the evaluation of tensor networks. SIAM J. Comp., 39, 3089-3121. doi:10.1137/080739379. arXiv:0805.0040. · DOI
  54. Argüello-Luengo, J., González-Tudela, A., Shi, T., et al. (2019). Analogue quantum chemistry simulation. Nature, 574, 215-218. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1614-4. arXiv:1807.09228. · DOI · Paper page
  55. Arora, S., and Kale, S. (2007). A combinatorial, primal-dual approach to semidefinite programs. Pages 227-236 of: STOC. doi:10.1145/1250790.1250823. · DOI
  56. Arora, S., Hazan, E., and Kale, S. (2005). Fast algorithms for approximate semidefinite programming using the multiplicative weights update method. Pages 339-348 of: FOCS. doi:10.1109/SFCS.2005.35. · DOI
  57. Arora, S., Hazan, E., and Kale, S. (2012). The multiplicative weights up- date method: a meta-algorithm and applications. Theory Comput., 8, 121-164. doi:10.4086/toc.2012.v008a006. · DOI
  58. Arovas, D. P., Berg, E., Kivelson, S. A., and Raghu, S. (2022). The Hubbard model. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys., 13, 239-274. doi:10.1146/annurev-conmatphys-031620-102024. arXiv:2103.12097. · DOI
  59. Arrasmith, A., Holmes, Z., Cerezo, M., and Coles, P. J. (2022). Equiva- lence of quantum barren plateaus to cost concentration and narrow gorges. Quantum Sci. Technol., 7, 045015. doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ac7d06. arXiv:2104.05868. · DOI
  60. Arrazola, J. M., Delgado, A., Bardhan, B. R., and Lloyd, S. (2020). Quantum-inspired algorithms in practice. Quantum, 4, 307. doi:10.22331/q-2020-08-13-307. arXiv:1905.10415. · DOI
  61. Arunachalam, S., Gheorghiu, V., Jochym-O'Connor, T., et al. (2015). On the robustness of bucket brigade quantum RAM. New J. Phys., 17, 123010. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/17/12/123010. arXiv:1502.03450. · DOI
  62. Arute, F., Arya, K., Babbush, R., et al. (2019). Quantum supremacy us- ing a programmable superconducting processor. Nature, 574, 505-510. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1666-5. · DOI · Paper page
  63. Arute, F., Arya, K., Babbush, R., et al. (2020). Observation of separated dy- namics of charge and spin in the Fermi-Hubbard model. arXiv:2010.07965. · arXiv
  64. Ashikhmin, A., Lai, C. Y., and Brun, T. A. (2020). Quantum data-syndrome codes. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., 38, 449-462. doi:10.1109/JSAC.2020.2968997. arXiv:1907.01393. · DOI
  65. Aspuru-Guzik, A., Dutoi, A. D., Love, P. J., and Head-Gordon, M. (2005). Sim- ulated quantum computation of molecular energies. Science, 309, 1704-1707. doi:10.1126/science.1113479. arXiv:0604193. · DOI · Paper page
  66. Atas, Y. Y., Zhang, J., Lewis, R., et al. (2021). SU(2) hadrons on a quantum computer via a variational approach. Nat. Commun., 12, 6499. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-26825-4. arXiv:2102.08920. · DOI
  67. Augustino, B., Leng, J., Nannicini, G., et al. (2023). A quantum central path algorithm for linear optimization. arXiv:2311.03977. · arXiv
  68. Augustino, B., Nannicini, G., Terlaky, T., and Zuluaga, L. F. (2023). Quan- tum interior point methods for semidefinite optimization. Quantum, 7, 1110. doi:10.22331/q-2023-09-11-1110. arXiv:2112.06025. · DOI
  69. Augustino, B., Nannicini, G., Terlaky, T., and Zuluaga, L. (2023). Solving the semidefinite relaxation of QUBOs in matrix multiplication time, and faster with a quantum computer. arXiv:2301.04237. · arXiv
  70. Babbush, R., McClean, J., Wecker, D., et al. (2015). Chemical basis of Trotter- Suzuki errors in quantum chemistry simulation. Phys. Rev. A, 91, 022311. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.91.022311. arXiv:1410.8159. · DOI · Paper page
  71. Babbush, R., Berry, D. W., Kivlichan, I. D., et al. (2016). Exponentially more precise quantum simulation of fermions in second quantization. New J. Phys., 18, 033032. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/18/3/033032. arXiv:1506.01020. · DOI · Paper page
  72. Babbush, R., Berry, D. W., Sanders, Y. R., et al. (2017). Expo- nentially more precise quantum simulation of fermions in the config- uration interaction representation. Quantum Sci. Technol., 3, 015006. doi:10.1088/2058-9565/aa9463. arXiv:1506.01029. · DOI
  73. Babbush, R., Gidney, C., Berry, D. W., et al. (2018). Encoding electronic spec- tra in quantum circuits with linear T complexity. Phys. Rev. X, 8, 041015. doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.8.041015. arXiv:1805.03662. · DOI · Paper page
  74. Babbush, R., Wiebe, N., Mcclean, J., et al. (2018). Low-depth quantum simulation of materials. Phys. Rev. X, 8, 011044. doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.8.011044. arXiv:1706.00023. · DOI · Paper page
  75. Babbush, R., Berry, D. W., McClean, J. R., and Neven, H. (2019). Quantum simulation of chemistry with sublinear scaling in basis size. npj Quant. Inf., 5, 92. doi:10.1038/s41534-019-0199-y. arXiv:1807.09802. · DOI
  76. Babbush, R., Berry, D. W., and Neven, H. (2019). Quantum simulation of the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev model by asymmetric qubitization. Phys. Rev. A, 99, 040301. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.99.040301. arXiv:1806.02793. · DOI
  77. Babbush, R., McClean, J. R., Newman, M., et al. (2021). Focus beyond quadratic speedups for error-corrected quantum advantage. PRX Quantum, 2, 010103. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.010103. arXiv:2011.04149. · DOI · Paper page
  78. Babbush, R., Berry, D. W., Kothari, R., et al. (2023). Exponential quantum speedup in simulating coupled classical oscillators. arXiv:2303.13012. · arXiv
  79. Babbush, R., Huggins, W. J., Berry, D. W., et al. (2023). Quantum simula- tion of exact electron dynamics can be more efficient than classical mean-field methods. Nat. Commun., 14, 4058. doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39024-0. arXiv:2301.01203. · DOI · Paper page
  80. Bagherimehrab, M., Sanders, Y. R., Berry, D. W., et al. (2022). Nearly opti- mal quantum algorithm for generating the ground state of a free quantum field theory. PRX Quantum, 3, 020364. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.3.020364. arXiv:2110.05708. · DOI
  81. Bagherimehrab, M., Nakaji, K., Wiebe, N., and Aspuru-Guzik, A. (2023). Fast quantum algorithm for differential equations. arXiv:2306.11802. · arXiv
  82. Baiardi, A., Stein, C. J., Barone, V., and Reiher, M. (2017). Vibrational den- sity matrix renormalization group. J. Chem. Theory Comput., 13, 3764-3777. doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.7b00329. arXiv:1703.09313. · DOI
  83. Baker, J. S., and Radha, S. K. (2022). Wasserstein solution quality and the quantum approximate optimization algorithm: A portfolio optimization case study. arXiv:2202.06782. · arXiv
  84. Bakshi, A., and Tang, E. (2024). An improved classical singular value transformation for quantum machine learning. Pages 2398-2453 of: SODA. doi:10.1137/1.9781611977912.86. arXiv:2303.01492. · DOI
  85. Banaszek, K., Cramer, M., and Gross, D. (2013). Focus on quantum tomogra- phy. New J. Phys., 15, 125020. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/15/12/125020. · DOI · Paper page
  86. Banchi, L., Pereira, J., and Pirandola, S. (2021). Generalization in quantum ma- chine learning: A quantum information standpoint. PRX Quantum, 2, 040321. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.040321. arXiv:2102.08991. · DOI
  87. Banegas, G., and Bernstein, D. J. (2018). Low-communication parallel quan- tum multi-target preimage search. Pages 325-335 of: SAC. ePrint:2017/789.
  88. Banuls, M.-C., Pérez-García, D., Wolf, M. M., et al. (2008). Sequentially gener- ated states for the study of two-dimensional systems. Phys. Rev. A, 77, 052306. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.77.052306. arXiv:0802.2472. · DOI
  89. Banuls, M. C., Cichy, K., Cirac, J. I., et al. (2019). Tensor net- works and their use for lattice gauge theories. Page 022 of: LATTICE. doi:10.22323/1.334.0022. arXiv:1810.12838. · DOI
  90. Bañuls, M. C., Blatt, R., Catani, J., et al. (2020). Simulating lattice gauge theories within quantum technologies. Eur. Phys. J. D, 74, 165. doi:10.1140/epjd/e2020-100571-8. arXiv:1911.00003. · DOI
  91. Bao, N., Hayden, P., Salton, G., and Thomas, N. (2015). Universal quantum computation by scattering in the Fermi-Hubbard model. New J. Phys., 17, 093028. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/17/9/093028. arXiv:1409.3585. References · DOI
  92. Barahona, F. (1982). On the computational complexity of Ising spin glass mod- els. J. Phys. A, 15, 3241-3253. doi:10.1088/0305-4470/15/10/028. · DOI
  93. Barker, E. (2020). Recommendation for key management: Part 1-general. Tech. rept. SP 800-57 Part 1 Rev. 5. National Institute of Standards and Tech- nology, Gaithersburg, MD. doi:10.6028/NIST.SP.800-57pt1r5. · DOI · Paper page
  94. Barker, E., and Dang, Q. (2015). Recommendation for key management, part 3: Application-specific key management guidance. Tech. rept. SP 800-57 Part 3 Rev. 1. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD. doi:10.6028/NIST.SP.800-57pt3r1. · DOI
  95. Barone, V., Alessandrini, S., Biczysko, M., et al. (2021). Compu- tational molecular spectroscopy. Nat. Rev. Methods Primers, 1, 38. doi:10.1038/s43586-021-00034-1. · DOI
  96. Barrett, B. R., Navratil, P., and Vary, J. P. (2013). Ab initio no core shell model. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys., 69, 131-181. doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2012.10.003. · DOI
  97. Bärtschi, A., Caravelli, F., Coffrin, C., et al. (2024). Potential applications of quantum computing at Los Alamos National Laboratory. arXiv:2406.06625. · arXiv
  98. Bauer, B., Bravyi, S., Motta, M., and Chan, G. K.-L. (2020). Quantum algo- rithms for quantum chemistry and quantum materials science. Chem. Rev., 120, 12685-12717. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00829. arXiv:2001.03685. · DOI · Paper page
  99. Bauer, C. W., Nachman, B., and Freytsis, M. (2021). Simulating collider physics on quantum computers using effective field theories. Phys. Rev. Lett., 127, 212001. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.212001. arXiv:2102.05044. · DOI
  100. Bauer, C. W., Davoudi, Z., Balantekin, A. B., et al. (2023). Quan- tum simulation for high-energy physics. PRX Quantum, 4, 027001. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.027001. arXiv:2204.03381. · DOI
  101. Bauer, C. W., Davoudi, Z., Klco, N., and Savage, M. J. (2023). Quantum simulation of fundamental particles and forces. Nat. Rev. Phys., 5, 420-432. doi:10.1038/s42254-023-00599-8. · DOI
  102. Bausch, J. (2022). Fast black-box quantum state preparation. Quantum, 6. doi:10.22331/q-2022-08-04-773. arXiv:2009.10709. · DOI
  103. Bausch, J., Senior, A. W., Heras, F. J. H., et al. (2023). Learning to de- code the surface code with a recurrent, transformer-based neural network. arXiv:2310.05900. · arXiv
  104. Beane, S., Detmold, W., Orginos, K., and Savage, M. (2011). Nu- clear physics from lattice QCD. Prog. Part. Nuc. Phys., 66, 1-40. doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2010.08.002. arXiv:1004.2935. · DOI
  105. Beauregard, S. (2003). Circuit for Shor's algorithm using 2n+3 qubits. Quantum Inf. Comput., 3, 175-185. doi:10.26421/QIC3.2-8. arXiv:quant-ph/0205095. · DOI · Paper page
  106. Beck, D., Carlson, J., Davoudi, Z., et al. (2023). Quantum information science and technology for nuclear physics: Input into U.S. long-range planning, 2023. arXiv:2303.00113. · arXiv
  107. Beckman, D., Chari, A. N., Devabhaktuni, S., and Preskill, J. (1996). Ef- ficient networks for quantum factoring. Phys. Rev. A, 54, 1034-1063. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.54.1034. arXiv:quant-ph/9602016. · DOI · Paper page
  108. Beer, K., Bondarenko, D., Farrelly, T., et al. (2020). Train- ing deep quantum neural networks. Nat. Commun., 11, 808. doi:10.1038/s41467-020-14454-2. arXiv:1902.10445. · DOI · Paper page
  109. Bellonzi, N., Kunitsa, A., Cantin, J. T., et al. (2024). Feasibility of acceler- ating homogeneous catalyst discovery with fault-tolerant quantum computers. arXiv:2406.06335. · arXiv
  110. Ben-Or, M., Gottesman, D., and Hassidim, A. (2013). Quantum refrigerator. arXiv:1301.1995. · arXiv
  111. Bender, M., Bernard, R., Bertsch, G., et al. (2020). Future of nuclear fis- sion theory. J. Phys. G, 47, 113002. doi:10.1088/1361-6471/abab4f. arXiv:2005.10216. · DOI
  112. Benedetti, M., Realpe-Gómez, J., Biswas, R., and Perdomo-Ortiz, A. (2017). Quantum-assisted learning of hardware-embedded probabilistic graphical models. Phys. Rev. X, 7, 041052. doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.7.041052. arXiv:1609.02542. · DOI
  113. Benedetti, M., Garcia-Pintos, D., Perdomo, O., et al. (2019). A generative mod- eling approach for benchmarking and training shallow quantum circuits. npj Quant. Inf., 5, 1-9. doi:10.1038/s41534-019-0157-8. arXiv:1801.07686. · DOI · Paper page
  114. Benedetti, M., Lloyd, E., Sack, S., and Fiorentini, M. (2019). Parameter- ized quantum circuits as machine learning models. Quantum Sci. Technol., 4, 043001. doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ab4eb5. arXiv:1906.07682. · DOI
  115. Benedetti, M., Fiorentini, M., and Lubasch, M. (2021). Hardware-efficient vari- ational quantum algorithms for time evolution. Phys. Rev. Res., 3, 033083. doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.3.033083. arXiv:2009.12361. · DOI
  116. Benioff, P. (1980). The computer as a physical system: A microscopic quan- tum mechanical Hamiltonian model of computers as represented by Turing ma- chines. J. Stat. Phys., 22, 563-591. doi:10.1007/BF01011339. · DOI · Paper page
  117. Bennett, C. H., and Brassard, G. (2014). Quantum cryptography: Pub- lic key distribution and coin tossing. Theor. Comput. Sci., 560, 7-11. doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2014.05.025. arXiv:2003.06557. · DOI · Paper page
  118. Bennett, C. H., Bernstein, E., Brassard, G., and Vazirani, U. (1997). Strengths and weaknesses of quantum computing. SIAM J. Comp., 26, 1510-1523. doi:10.1137/S0097539796300933. arXiv:quant-ph/9701001. · DOI · Paper page
  119. Bergholm, V., Izaac, J., Schuld, M., et al. (2018). Pennylane: Automatic dif- ferentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations. arXiv:1811.04968. https://pennylane.ai/codebook, accessed: 2024-12-01. References · arXiv
  120. van den Berg, E., and Temme, K. (2020). Circuit optimization of Hamiltonian simulation by simultaneous diagonalization of Pauli clusters. Quantum, 4, 322. doi:10.22331/q-2020-09-12-322. arXiv:2003.13599. · DOI
  121. Bermudez, A., Xu, X., Nigmatullin, R., et al. (2017). Assessing the progress of trapped-ion processors towards fault-tolerant quantum computation. Phys. Rev. X, 7, 041061. doi:10.1103/physrevx.7.041061. arXiv:1705.02771. · DOI
  122. Bernstein, D. J., and Lange, T. (2017). Post-quantum cryptography. Nature, 549, 188-194. doi:10.1038/nature23461. ePrint:2017/314. · DOI · Paper page
  123. Bernstein, D. J., Biasse, J.-F., and Mosca, M. (2017). A low- resource quantum factoring algorithm. Pages 330-346 of: PQCrypto. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-59879-6_19. ePrint:2017/352. · DOI
  124. Bernstein, E., and Vazirani, U. (1997). Quantum complexity theory. SIAM J. Comp., 26, 1411-1473. doi:10.1137/S0097539796300921. Earlier version in STOC'93. · DOI · Paper page
  125. Berntson, B. K., and Sünderhauf, C. (2024). Complementary polynomials in quantum signal processing. arXiv:2406.04246. · arXiv
  126. Berry, D. W. (2014). High-order quantum algorithm for solv- ing linear differential equations. J. Phys. A, 47, 105301. doi:10.1088/1751-8113/47/10/105301. · DOI · Paper page
  127. Berry, D. W., and C. S. Costa, P. (2024). Quantum algorithm for time- dependent differential equations using Dyson series. Quantum, 8, 1369. doi:10.22331/q-2024-06-13-1369. arXiv:2212.03544. · DOI
  128. Berry, D. W., and Childs, A. M. (2012). Black-box Hamiltonian sim- ulation and unitary implementation. Quantum Inf. Comput., 12, 29-62. doi:10.26421/QIC12.1-2. arXiv:0910.4157. · DOI
  129. Berry, D. W., Ahokas, G., Cleve, R., and Sanders, B. C. (2007). Ef- ficient quantum algorithms for simulating sparse Hamiltonians. Com- mun. Math. Phys., 270, 359-371. doi:10.1007/s00220-006-0150-x. arXiv:quant-ph/0508139. · DOI · Paper page
  130. Berry, D. W., Childs, A. M., Cleve, R., et al. (2014). Exponential improvement in precision for simulating sparse Hamiltonians. Pages 283-292 of: STOC. doi:10.1145/2591796.2591854. arXiv:1312.1414. · DOI · Paper page
  131. Berry, D. W., Childs, A. M., and Kothari, R. (2015). Hamiltonian simulation with nearly optimal dependence on all parameters. Pages 792-809 of: FOCS. doi:10.1109/FOCS.2015.54. arXiv:1501.01715. · DOI · Paper page
  132. Berry, D. W., Childs, A. M., Cleve, R., et al. (2015). Simulating Hamilto- nian dynamics with a truncated Taylor series. Phys. Rev. Lett., 114, 090502. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.090502. arXiv:1412.4687. · DOI · Paper page
  133. Berry, D. W., Childs, A. M., Ostrander, A., and Wang, G. (2017). Quan- tum algorithm for linear differential equations with exponentially im- proved dependence on precision. Commun. Math. Phys., 356, 1057-1081. doi:10.1007/s00220-017-3002-y. arXiv:1701.03684. · DOI
  134. Berry, D. W., Kieferová, M., Scherer, A., et al. (2018). Improved techniques for preparing eigenstates of fermionic Hamiltonians. npj Quant. Inf., 4, 22. doi:10.1038/s41534-018-0071-5. arXiv:1711.10460. · DOI
  135. Berry, D. W., Gidney, C., Motta, M., et al. (2019). Qubitization of arbitrary basis quantum chemistry leveraging sparsity and low rank factorization. Quan- tum, 3, 208. doi:10.22331/q-2019-12-02-208. arXiv:1902.02134. · DOI · Paper page
  136. Berry, D. W., Childs, A. M., Su, Y., et al. (2020). Time-dependent Hamiltonian simulation with L 1 -norm scaling. Quantum, 4, 254. doi:10.22331/q-2020-04-20-254. arXiv:1906.07115. · DOI
  137. Berry, D. W., Rubin, N. C., Elnabawy, A. O., et al. (2023). Quantum simula- tion of realistic materials in first quantization using non-local pseudopotentials. arXiv:2312.07654. · arXiv
  138. Berry, D. W., Su, Y., Gyurik, C., et al. (2024). Analyzing prospects for quantum advantage in topological data analysis. PRX Quantum, 5, 010319. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.010319. arXiv:2209.13581. · DOI
  139. Berry, D. W., Tong, Y., Khattar, T., et al. (2024). Rapid initial state preparation for the quantum simulation of strongly correlated molecules. arXiv:2409.11748. · arXiv
  140. Beullens, W. (2022). Breaking rainbow takes a weekend on a lap- top. Pages 464-479 of: CRYPTO. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-15979-4_16. ePrint:2022/214. · DOI
  141. Beverland, M. E., Kubica, A., and Svore, K. M. (2021). Cost of universality: A comparative study of the overhead of state distillation and code switching with color codes. PRX Quantum, 2, 020341. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.020341. arXiv:2101.02211. · DOI · Paper page
  142. Beverland, M. E., Murali, P., Troyer, M., et al. (2022). Assessing requirements to scale to practical quantum advantage. arXiv:2211.07629. · arXiv
  143. Bharti, K., Cervera-Lierta, A., Kyaw, T. H., et al. (2022). Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms. Rev. Mod. Phys., 94, 015004. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.94.015004. arXiv:2101.08448. · DOI · Paper page
  144. Bhaskar, M. K., Hadfield, S., Papageorgiou, A., and Petras, I. (2016). Quantum algorithms and circuits for scientific computing. Quantum Inf. Comput., 16. doi:10.26421/QIC16.3-4-2. arXiv:1511.08253. · DOI
  145. Biamonte, J., and Bergholm, V. (2017). Tensor networks in a nutshell. arXiv:1708.00006. · arXiv
  146. Biamonte, J., Wittek, P., Pancotti, N., et al. (2017). Quantum machine learning. Nature, 549, 195-202. doi:10.1038/nature23474. arXiv:1611.09347. · DOI · Paper page
  147. Bilgin, E., and Boixo, S. (2010). Preparing thermal states of quan- tum systems by dimension reduction. Phys. Rev. Lett., 105, 170405. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.170405. arXiv:1008.4162. · DOI
  148. Binder, S., Ekström, A., Hagen, G., et al. (2016). Effective field theory in the harmonic oscillator basis. Phys. Rev. C, 93, 044332. doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.93.044332. arXiv:1512.03802. · DOI
  149. Bittel, L., and Kliesch, M. (2021). Training variational quan- tum algorithms is NP-hard. Phys. Rev. Lett., 127, 120502. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.120502. arXiv:2101.07267. · DOI · Paper page
  150. Blais, A., Grimsmo, A. L., Girvin, S. M., and Wallraff, A. (2021). Circuit quantum electrodynamics. Rev. Mod. Phys., 93, 025005. doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.93.025005. arXiv:2005.12667. References · DOI
  151. Blanchet, J., Szegedy, M., and Wang, G. (2024). Quadratic speed-up in infinite variance quantum Monte Carlo. arXiv:2401.07497. · arXiv
  152. Bloch, I., Dalibard, J., and Nascimbène, S. (2012). Quantum simulations with ultracold quantum gases. Nat. Phys., 8, 267-276. doi:10.1038/nphys2259. · DOI · Paper page
  153. Blunt, N. S., Camps, J., Crawford, O., et al. (2022). Perspective on the cur- rent state-of-the-art of quantum computing for drug discovery applications. J. Chem. Theory Comput., 18, 7001-7023. doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.2c00574. arXiv:2206.00551. · DOI · Paper page
  154. Blunt, N. S., Caune, L., Izsák, R., et al. (2023). Statistical phase estimation and error mitigation on a superconducting quantum processor. PRX Quantum, 4, 040341. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.040341. arXiv:2304.05126. · DOI
  155. Bogdanov, A., Khovratovich, D., and Rechberger, C. (2011). Bi- clique cryptanalysis of the full AES. Pages 344-371 of: ASIACRYPT. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-25385-0_19. ePrint:2011/449. · DOI · Paper page
  156. Boixo, S., and Somma, R. D. (2010). Necessary condition for the quantum adiabatic approximation. Phys. Rev. A, 81, 032308. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.81.032308. arXiv:0911.1362. · DOI
  157. Boixo, S., Knill, E., and Somma, R. D. (2010). Fast quantum algorithms for traversing paths of eigenstates. arXiv:1005.3034. · arXiv
  158. Bolte, J., Boustany, R., Pauwels, E., and Pesquet-Popescu, B. (2022). Non- smooth automatic differentiation: A cheap gradient principle and other com- plexity results. arXiv:2206.01730. · arXiv
  159. Bolusani, S., Besanc ¸on, M., Bestuzheva, K., et al. (2024). The SCIP optimiza- tion suite 9.0. arXiv:2402.17702. · arXiv
  160. Bombín, H. (2015). Gauge color codes: Optimal transversal gates and gauge fixing in topological stabilizer codes. New J. Phys., 17, 083002. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/17/8/083002. arXiv:1311.0879. · DOI · Paper page
  161. Bombín, H. (2015). Single-shot fault-tolerant quantum error correction. Phys. Rev. X, 5, 031043. doi:10.1103/physrevx.5.031043. arXiv:1404.5504. · DOI
  162. Bombín, H. (2018). 2D quantum computation with 3D topological codes. arXiv:1810.09571. · arXiv
  163. Bombín, H., and Martin-Delgado, M. (2007). Exact topological quantum order in d = 3 and beyond: Branyons and brane-net condensates. Phys. Rev. B, 75, 075103. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.75.075103. arXiv:cond-mat/0607736. · DOI
  164. Bombín, H., and Martin-Delgado, M. A. (2006). Topological quantum distilla- tion. Phys. Rev. Lett., 97, 180501. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.180501. arXiv:quant-ph/0605138. · DOI · Paper page
  165. Bombín, H., Dawson, C., Liu, Y.-H., et al. (2023). Modular decoding: Paral- lelizable real-time decoding for quantum computers. arXiv:2303.04846. · arXiv
  166. Bombín, H. G. D.-C., and Poulin, D. (2012). Universal topological phase of two-dimensional stabilizer codes. New J. Phys., 14, 073048. doi:10.1088/1367-2630/14/7/073048. arXiv:1103.4606. · DOI
  167. Bonfà, P., Frassineti, J., Isah, M. M., et al. (2021). UNDI: An open-source li- brary to simulate muon-nuclear interactions in solids. Comput. Phys. Commun., 260, 107719. doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2020.107719. · DOI
  168. Bonilla Ataides, J. P., Tuckett, D. K., Bartlett, S. D., et al. (2021). The XZZX surface code. Nat. Commun., 12, 2172. doi:10.1038/s41467-021-22274-1. arXiv:2009.07851. · DOI · Paper page
  169. Bosse, J. L., and Montanaro, A. (2022). Probing ground-state prop- erties of the kagome antiferromagnetic Heisenberg model using the variational quantum eigensolver. Phys. Rev. B, 105, 094409. doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.105.094409. arXiv:2108.08086. · DOI
  170. Boudot, F., Gaudry, P., Guillevic, A., et al. (2020). Comparing the difficulty of factorization and discrete logarithm: A 240-digit experiment. Pages 62-91 of: CRYPTO. doi:10.1007/978-3-030-56880-1_3. arXiv:2006.06197. · DOI · Paper page
  171. Bouland, A., van Dam, W., Joorati, H., et al. (2020). Prospects and challenges of quantum finance. arXiv:2011.06492. · arXiv
  172. Bouland, A., Dandapani, A., and Prakash, A. (2023). A quantum spectral method for simulating stochastic processes, with applications to Monte Carlo. arXiv:2303.06719. · arXiv
  173. Bouland, A., Getachew, Y. M., Jin, Y., et al. (2023). Quantum speedups for zero-sum games via improved dynamic Gibbs sampling. Pages 2932-2952 of: ICML. arXiv:2301.03763. · arXiv
  174. Boulebnane, S., and Montanaro, A. (2024). Solving Boolean satisfiability prob- lems with the quantum approximate optimization algorithm. PRX Quantum, 5, 030348. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.030348. arXiv:2208.06909. · DOI · Paper page
  175. Boyd, S., and Vandenberghe, L. (2004). Convex optimization. Cambridge Uni- versity Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511804441. · DOI · Paper page
  176. Brandão, F. G. S. L., and Svore, K. M. (2017). Quantum speed- ups for solving semidefinite programs. Pages 415-426 of: FOCS. doi:10.1109/FOCS.2017.45. arXiv:1609.05537. · DOI · Paper page
  177. Brandão, F. G. S. L., Kalev, A., Li, T., et al. (2019). Quantum SDP solvers: Large speed-ups, optimality, and applications to quantum learn- ing. Pages 27:1-27:14 of: ICALP. doi:10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2019.27. arXiv:1710.02581. · DOI
  178. Brandão, F. G. S. L., Kueng, R., and Franc ¸a, D. S. (2022). Faster quantum and classical SDP approximations for quadratic binary optimization. Quantum, 6, 625. doi:10.22331/q-2022-01-20-625. arXiv:1909.04613. · DOI
  179. Brandhofer, S., Braun, D., Dehn, V., et al. (2023). Benchmarking the perfor- mance of portfolio optimization with QAOA. Quantum Inf. Process., 22, 1-27. doi:10.1007/s11128-022-03766-5. arXiv:2207.10555. · DOI · Paper page
  180. van den Brand, J., Lee, Y. T., Sidford, A., and Song, Z. (2020). Solving tall dense linear programs in nearly linear time. Pages 775-788 of: STOC. doi:10.1145/3357713.3384309. arXiv:2002.02304. · DOI
  181. Brassard, G., Høyer, P., Mosca, M., and Tapp, A. (2002). Quan- tum amplitude amplification and estimation. Pages 53-74 of: Quantum computation and quantum information: A millennium volume, vol. 305. doi:10.1090/conm/305/05215. arXiv:quant-ph/0005055. · DOI · Paper page
  182. Bravo-Prieto, C., LaRose, R., Cerezo, M., et al. (2019). Variational quantum linear solver. arXiv:1909.05820. References · arXiv
  183. Bravyi, S. (2015). Monte Carlo simulation of stoquastic Hamiltonians. Quantum Inf. Comput., 15, 1122-1140. doi:10.26421/QIC15.13-14-3. arXiv:1402.2295. · DOI
  184. Bravyi, S., and Cross, A. (2015). Doubled color codes. arXiv:1509.03239. · arXiv
  185. Bravyi, S., and Kitaev, A. (2005). Universal quantum computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas. Phys. Rev. A, 71, 022316. doi:10.1103/physreva.71.022316. arXiv:quant-ph/0403025. · DOI · Paper page
  186. Bravyi, S., and Terhal, B. (2010). Complexity of stoquastic frustration-free Hamiltonians. SIAM J. Comp., 39, 1462-1485. doi:10.1137/08072689X. arXiv:0806.1746. · DOI
  187. Bravyi, S., Suchara, M., and Vargo, A. (2014). Efficient algorithms for max- imum likelihood decoding in the surface code. Phys. Rev. A, 90, 032326. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.90.032326. arXiv:1405.4883. · DOI · Paper page
  188. Bravyi, S., Englbrecht, M., König, R., and Peard, N. (2018). Cor- recting coherent errors with surface codes. npj Quant. Inf., 4. doi:10.1038/s41534-018-0106-y. · DOI · Paper page
  189. Bravyi, S., Kliesch, A., Koenig, R., and Tang, E. (2020). Obstacles to varia- tional quantum optimization from symmetry protection. Phys. Rev. Lett., 125, 260505. doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.125.260505. arXiv:1910.08980. · DOI · Paper page
  190. Bravyi, S., Chowdhury, A., Gosset, D., and Wocjan, P. (2022). Quantum Hamiltonian complexity in thermal equilibrium. Nat. Phys., 18, 1367-1370. doi:10.1038/s41567-022-01742-5. arXiv:2110.15466. · DOI
  191. Bravyi, S. B., and Kitaev, A. Y. (1998). Quantum codes on a lattice with bound- ary. arXiv:quant-ph/9811052. · arXiv
  192. Bravyi, S. B., and Kitaev, A. Y. (2002). Fermionic quantum com- putation. Ann. Phys., 298, 210-226. doi:10.1006/aphy.2002.6254. arXiv:quant-ph/0003137. · DOI · Paper page
  193. Brenner, S. C., and Scott, L. R. (2008). The mathematical theory of finite ele- ment methods. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-75934-0. · DOI
  194. Breuckmann, N. P., and Eberhardt, J. N. (2021). Balanced prod- uct quantum codes. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, 67, 6653-6674. doi:10.1109/tit.2021.3097347. arXiv:2012.09271. · DOI
  195. Breuckmann, N. P., Duivenvoorden, K., Michels, D., and Terhal, B. M. (2017). Local decoders for the 2D and 4D toric code. Quantum Inf. Comput., 17, 0181. doi:10.26421/QIC17.3-4-1. arXiv:1609.00510. · DOI
  196. Bridgeman, J. C., and Chubb, C. T. (2017). Hand-waving and interpretive dance: An introductory course on tensor networks. J. Phys. A, 50, 223001. doi:10.1088/1751-8121/aa6dc3. arXiv:1603.03039. · DOI
  197. Bridgeman, J. C., Kubica, A., and Vasmer, M. (2024). Lifting topo- logical codes: Three-dimensional subsystem codes from two-dimensional anyon models. PRX Quantum, 5. doi:10.1103/prxquantum.5.020310. arXiv:2305.06365. · DOI
  198. Browaeys, A., and Lahaye, T. (2020). Many-body physics with individually controlled Rydberg atoms. Nat. Phys., 16, 132-142. doi:10.1038/s41567-019-0733-z. arXiv:2002.07413. · DOI
  199. Brown, A. R., Gharibyan, H., Leichenauer, S., et al. (2023). Quantum gravity in the lab. I. Teleportation by size and traversable wormholes. PRX Quantum, 4, 010320. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.010320. arXiv:1911.06314. · DOI
  200. Brown, B. J. (2023). Conservation laws and quantum error correction: To- wards a generalised matching decoder. IEEE BITS Inf. Theory Mag., 1-12. doi:10.1109/MBITS.2023.3246025. arXiv:2207.06428. · DOI

200 of 1072 shown

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 49

Metadata

Authors
Dalzell, A. M., McArdle, S., Berta, M., Bienias, P., Chen, C.-F., Gilyén, A., Hann, C. T., Kastoryano, M. J., Khabiboulline, E. T., Kubica, A., Salton, G., Wang, S., & Brandão, F. G. S. L.
Affiliations
RWTH Aachen University (DE)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2310.03011
arXiv
2310.03011
OpenAlex
W4387390353
Cited by
49
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 5
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • Repository of the Academy's Library (Library of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • RWTH Publications (RWTH Aachen)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum many-body systems
Keywords
quantum algorithms, quantum advantage, quantum error correction, fault tolerance, quantum chemistry, quantum optimization, quantum machine learning, quantum finance, comparison with classical methods

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