Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Quantum Chemistry
Evaluating energy differences on a quantum computer with robust phase estimation
arXiv
Authors: A. E. Russo, K. M. Rudinger, B. C. A. Morrison, A. D. Baczewski
Year
2020
Paper ID
22167
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
105
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We adapt the robust phase estimation algorithm to the evaluation of energy differences between two eigenstates using a quantum computer. This approach does not require controlled unitaries between auxiliary and system registers or even a single auxiliary qubit. As a proof of concept, we calculate the energies of the ground state and low-lying electronic excitations of a hydrogen molecule in a minimal basis on a cloud quantum computer. The denominative robustness of our approach is then quantified in terms of a high tolerance to coherent errors in the state preparation and measurement. Conceptually, we note that all quantum phase estimation algorithms ultimately evaluate eigenvalue differences.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Chemistry research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We adapt the robust phase estimation algorithm to the evaluation of energy differences between two eigenstates using a quantum computer.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.