pith. sign in

arxiv: 2406.09340 · v2 · submitted 2024-06-13 · 🪐 quant-ph · physics.bio-ph· physics.chem-ph

Prospects for NMR Spectral Prediction on Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computers

Justin E. Elenewski , Christina M. Camara , Amir Kalev This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 00:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph physics.bio-phphysics.chem-ph
keywords NMRquantum computingfault tolerancespectral predictionqubitizationzero-field NMRquantum simulationprotein spectroscopy
0
0 comments X

The pith

Simulations of zero-field NMR spectra for small molecules and proteins are promising targets for fault-tolerant quantum computers.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that nuclear magnetic resonance spectra acquired in zero to ultralow magnetic fields require simulations that strain classical computers, but can be addressed using fault-tolerant quantum computation. Through examples of small-molecule and protein spectroscopy, it constructs qubitized quantum dynamics circuits that align with the input selection and system sizes needed in experiments. This approach leverages the advantages of zero-field NMR, such as compact instrumentation and reduced relaxation effects, while shifting the computational burden to quantum hardware. A sympathetic reader would care because it points to a concrete application where quantum computers could provide practical value in interpreting spectra that are otherwise hard to model classically. The analysis spans input selection through explicit circuit construction to show feasibility on early fault-tolerant architectures.

Core claim

Working by example for small-molecule and protein spectroscopy, the simulations of zero to ultralow field NMR spectra are demonstrated to be a promising target for fault-tolerant quantum computation through the construction of explicit circuits for qubitized quantum dynamics that maintain parity with experimental requirements for input selection and system size.

What carries the argument

Qubitized quantum dynamics circuits for simulating spin systems in NMR, constructed to match experimental constraints on system size and inputs.

If this is right

  • Explicit circuits allow resource estimates showing feasibility on early fault-tolerant devices for small molecules.
  • Protein NMR simulations become accessible without classical computational bottlenecks.
  • Zero-field NMR experiments can be interpreted using quantum resources that scale better than classical methods for certain cases.
  • The method preserves parity with experimental input selection, enabling direct application to real data.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Similar quantum simulation strategies could apply to other zero-field magnetic resonance techniques like electron paramagnetic resonance.
  • Hybrid quantum-classical algorithms might further reduce the requirements for these NMR predictions.
  • Advances in fault-tolerant hardware could make routine protein structure analysis via zero-field NMR feasible.
  • Resource scaling analysis here provides a benchmark for comparing to other quantum chemistry simulation targets.

Load-bearing premise

The constructed qubitized quantum dynamics circuits can be executed on early fault-tolerant architectures while maintaining parity with experimental requirements for input selection and system size.

What would settle it

A calculation of the required number of logical qubits and gate operations for a typical protein NMR simulation that exceeds the projected capabilities of near-term fault-tolerant quantum computers.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2406.09340 by Amir Kalev, Christina M. Camara, Justin E. Elenewski.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Advanced atomic magnetometers have made it possible to acquire nuclear magnetic resonance spectra in zero to ultralow magnetic fields. This regime carries the benefit of compact, low-cost instrumentation with reduced spin relaxation effects and the ability to probe phenomena that are inaccessible in conventional high-field experiments. A tradeoff is that the resulting spectra must be interpreted using simulations that are taxing for classical computation. Working by example for small-molecule and protein spectroscopy, we demonstrate that these simulations are a promising target for fault-tolerant quantum computation. Our holistic analysis spans from input selection to the construction of explicit circuits for qubitized quantum dynamics. By maintaining parity with experimental requirements, we demonstrate how certain cases might be especially promising for early fault-tolerant architectures.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper claims that NMR spectral simulations in zero to ultralow magnetic fields are taxing for classical computation but represent a promising target for fault-tolerant quantum computation. Working by example on small-molecule and protein spectroscopy, the authors construct explicit circuits for qubitized quantum dynamics and perform a holistic analysis from input selection to circuit construction that maintains parity with experimental requirements on qubit count, gate depth, and input-state preparation.

Significance. If the constructions and parity arguments hold, the work identifies a concrete, experimentally grounded use case for early fault-tolerant quantum computers beyond standard molecular energy simulations. The explicit circuit constructions and end-to-end accounting from Hamiltonian to circuit constitute a strength, supplying a starting point for resource estimates even in the absence of numerical benchmarks.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (final sentence): the assessment that 'certain cases might be especially promising for early fault-tolerant architectures' rests on the assumption that the qubitized circuits maintain parity with experimental requirements; however, the manuscript supplies no numerical resource estimates (T-gate counts, qubit overhead, or depth) or verification against classical methods for the protein spectroscopy example, leaving the executability claim unquantified and load-bearing for the central 'promising target' conclusion.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive evaluation of the explicit circuit constructions, holistic analysis, and identification of NMR zero-field simulations as a concrete use case. We respond to the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (final sentence): the assessment that 'certain cases might be especially promising for early fault-tolerant architectures' rests on the assumption that the qubitized circuits maintain parity with experimental requirements; however, the manuscript supplies no numerical resource estimates (T-gate counts, qubit overhead, or depth) or verification against classical methods for the protein spectroscopy example, leaving the executability claim unquantified and load-bearing for the central 'promising target' conclusion.

    Authors: The manuscript supplies an end-to-end analysis of qubit counts (set by the number of spins) and circuit depths (set by the number of Trotter steps or qubitized segments needed for the desired spectral resolution) that are shown to remain within experimental parity for the protein example. We agree that explicit T-gate counts are absent, because these depend on the choice of fault-tolerant gate set and synthesis method, which lies outside the scope of establishing the application as promising on structural grounds. We will revise the abstract's final sentence to state that the promise follows from the demonstrated parity in qubit number, depth, and state-preparation overhead rather than from complete fault-tolerant resource counts. Verification against classical methods for the protein case is not performed because the motivating premise (stated in the introduction) is that such simulations are already taxing for classical computers; a direct benchmark would require resources beyond the present work and can be noted as a limitation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity detected

full rationale

The manuscript supplies explicit qubitized circuit constructions for NMR Hamiltonians together with resource estimates (qubit count, gate depth, state preparation) that are directly compared against experimental requirements for small-molecule and protein systems. No derivation step reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-referential prediction, or load-bearing self-citation; the argument is a forward mapping from standard quantum-simulation primitives to concrete circuit resources and is therefore self-contained.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard assumptions of fault-tolerant quantum computation and the computational hardness of classical NMR simulation in the low-field regime; no free parameters, invented entities, or ad-hoc axioms are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Fault-tolerant quantum computers can implement qubitized quantum dynamics with overhead compatible with experimental system sizes
    Invoked in the final sentence when claiming promise for early fault-tolerant architectures.
  • domain assumption Classical simulation of the relevant spin dynamics is computationally taxing
    Stated as the motivation for seeking quantum alternatives.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5651 in / 1311 out tokens · 16701 ms · 2026-05-24T00:16:02.213263+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 119 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    No further optimizations were applied since these geometries are realistic targets for the proposed quantum al- gorithm workflow

    and established reference sets [78]. No further optimizations were applied since these geometries are realistic targets for the proposed quantum al- gorithm workflow. B. Classical Computation and Quantum Utility Thresholds Quantum utility is a moving target that is defined, in part, by the frontier of classical computation. In this section, we briefly rem...

    work page

  2. [2]

    This effort could be par- ticularly valuable since roughly 90% of marketed drugs are small molecules

    Small–Molecule Drug Discovery Pipelines The most straightforward use case is a small– molecule drug–discovery workflow, though similar considerations hold for molecular design across the broader chemical industry. This effort could be par- ticularly valuable since roughly 90% of marketed drugs are small molecules. We consider the utility of ZULF in replac...

    work page

  3. [3]

    This method can reveal molec- ular structures, map their dynamics, and quantify the response to a perturbation (e.g., drug binding) down to the atomic scale

    Protein Structure Elucidation Protein NMR is an extremely valuable technique in structural biology. This method can reveal molec- ular structures, map their dynamics, and quantify the response to a perturbation (e.g., drug binding) down to the atomic scale. However, these systems also require numerous time–consuming experiments to obtain a single structur...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Fault–Tolerant Layout A foundational and potentially rate–limiting re- quirement is the production of magic states. We ac- complish this using AutoCCZ factories, which can deliver |T ⟩ states by generating of an intermedi- ate |CCZ⟩ = CCZ|+⟩⊗3 and performing a catalytic |CCZ⟩ → 2|T ⟩ conversion [109, 110]. In brief, the entry point is an injection of T –s...

    work page

  5. [5]

    We then subdivide our total non– algorithmic error, ϵphys = DmeasNdataE(d2) + NT 2 ϵT2

    Error Budget Our foundational unit is the topological error per spacetime cell, E(d) = 0.1 pphys pthresh (d+1)/2 , (29) where d is the code distance for the underlying log- ical qubit, pthresh = 0 .01 is the code error thresh- old, and pphys is the physical error rate (e.g., for a two–qubit gate). We then subdivide our total non– algorithmic error, ϵphys ...

    work page

  6. [6]

    In this case, the wall runtime is effec- tively Twall = Dmeastreact

    Operation and Timing Our objective is to run calculations that are lim- ited by the reaction time treact for an error correc- tion cycle. In this case, the wall runtime is effec- tively Twall = Dmeastreact. We will require Nfact = NT Dfacttcycle/Twall magic state factories to maintain this rate by ensuring a consistent pool of T –states. This defines the ...

    work page

  7. [7]

    R. R. Ernst, G. Bodenhausen, and A. Wokaun, Principles of Nuclear Magnetic Resonance in One and Two Dimensions (Oxford University Press, 1990)

    work page 1990

  8. [8]

    Y. Hu, K. Cheng, L. He, X. Zhang, B. Jiang, L. Jiang, C. Li, G. Wang, Y. Yang, and M. Liu, NMR–Based Methods for Protein Analysis, Anal. Chem. 93, 1866 (2021)

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    Maruˇ siˇ c, M

    M. Maruˇ siˇ c, M. Toplishek, and J. Plavec, NMR of RNA — Structure and interactions, Cur. Opin. Struc. Biol. 79, 102532 (2023)

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Fontana and G

    C. Fontana and G. Widmalm, Primary Structure of Glycans by NMR Spectroscopy, Chem. Rev. 123, 1040 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    G. S. Rule and T. K. Hitchens, Fundamentals of Protein NMR Spectroscopy (Springer, 2006)

    work page 2006

  12. [12]

    Sprangers, A

    R. Sprangers, A. Velyvis, and L. E. Kay, Solution NMR of supramolecular complexes: providing new insights into function, Nat. Methods 4, 697 (2007)

    work page 2007

  13. [13]

    Weingarth and M

    M. Weingarth and M. Baldus, Solid–State NMR– Based Approaches for Supramolecular Structure Elucidation, Acc. Chem. Res. 46, 2037 (2013)

    work page 2037

  14. [14]

    Rosenzweig and L

    R. Rosenzweig and L. E. Kay, Solution NMR Spec- troscopy Provides an Avenue for the Study of Func- tionally Dynamic Molecular Machines: The Exam- ple of Protein Disaggregation, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138, 1466 (2016)

    work page 2016

  15. [15]

    Puthenveetil and O

    R. Puthenveetil and O. Vinogradova, Solution NMR: A powerful tool for structural and functional studies of membrane proteins in reconstituted en- vironments, J. Biol. Chem. 294, 15914 (2019)

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    Bayer, A

    P. Bayer, A. Matena, and C. Beuck, NMR Spec- troscopy of supramolecular chemistry on protein surfaces, Beilstein J. Org. Chem. 16, 2505 (2020)

    work page 2020

  17. [17]

    B. Reif, S. E. Ashbrook, L. Emsley, and M. Hong, Solid–state NMR spectroscopy, Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 1, 2 (2021)

    work page 2021

  18. [18]

    K. M. Cecil, Proton Magnetic Resonance Spec- troscopy: Technique for the Neuroradiologist, Neu- roimag. Clin. N. Am. 23, 381 (2013)

    work page 2013

  19. [19]

    ¨Oz, et al

    G. ¨Oz, et al. , Clinical Proton MR Spectroscopy in Central Nervous System Disorders, Radiology , 20 658

    work page

  20. [20]

    J. M. Tognarelli, M. Dawood, M. I. F. Sharif, V. P. B. Grover, M. M. E. Crossey, I. J. Cox, S. D. Taylor–Robinson, and M. J. W. McPhail, Magnetic Resonance Spectroscopy: Principles and Techniques: Lessons for Clinicians, J. Clin. Exp. Hepatol. 5, 320 (2015)

    work page 2015

  21. [21]

    R. W. Brown, Y.-C. N. Cheng, E. M. Haacke, M. R. Thompson, and R. Venkatesan, Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Physical Principles and Se- quence Design (Wiley, 2014)

    work page 2014

  22. [22]

    J. M. Soares, R. M. aes, P. S. Moreira, A. Sousa, E. Ganz, A. Sampaio, V. Alves, P. Marques, and N. Sousa, A Hitchhiker’s Gudie to Functional Mag- netic Resonance Imaging, Frot. Neurosci. 10, 515 (2016)

    work page 2016

  23. [23]

    Westbrook and J

    C. Westbrook and J. Talbot, MRI in Practice (Wi- ley, 2018)

    work page 2018

  24. [24]

    Bernarding, G

    J. Bernarding, G. Buntkowsky, S. Macholl, S. Hartwig, M. Burghoff, and L. Trahms, J– Coupling Nuclear Mangetic Resonance Spec- troscopy of Liquids in nT Fields, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 128, 714 (2006)

    work page 2006

  25. [25]

    J. W. Blanchard, D. Budker, and A. Trabesinger, Lower than low: Perspectives on zero– to ultralow– field nuclear magnetic resonance , J. Magn. Reson. 323, 106886 (2021)

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    S. J. DeVience, M. Greer, S. Mandal, and M. S. Rosen, Homonuclear J–Coupling Spectroscopy and Low Mangetic Fields using Spin-Lock Induced Crossing, ChemPhysChem 22, 2128 (2021)

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Theis, P

    T. Theis, P. Ganssle, G. Kervern, S. Knappe, J. Kitching, M. P. Ledbetter, D. Budker, and A. Pines, Parahydrogen–enhanced zero–field nu- clear magnetic resonance, Nat. Phys.7, 571 (2011)

    work page 2011

  28. [28]

    D. A. Barskiy, J. W. Blanchard, D. Bud- ker, J. Eills, S. Pustelny, K. F. Shebertsov, M. C. D. Tayler, and A. H. Trabesinger, Zero– to Ultralow–field Nuclear Magnetic Resonance, arXiv:2409.09048 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  29. [29]

    J. W. Blanchard, M. P. Ledbetter, T. Theis, M. C. Butler, D. Budker, and A. Pines, High– Resolution Zero–Field NMR J–Spectroscopy of Aromatic Compounds, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135, 3607 (2013)

    work page 2013

  30. [30]

    Emondts, M

    M. Emondts, M. P. Ledbetter, S. Pustelny, T. Theis, B. Patton, J. W. Blanchard, M. C. But- ler, D. Budker, and A. Pines, Long–Lived Het- eronuclear Spin–Singlet States in Liquids at a Zero Magnetic Field, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 077601 (2014)

    work page 2014

  31. [31]

    J. W. Blanchard, T. F. Sjolander, J. P. King, M. P. Ledbetter, E. H. Levine, V. S. Bajaj, D. Budker, and A. Pines, Measurement of untruncated nuclear spin interactions via zero– to ultralow–field nuclear magnetic resonance, Phys. Rev. B 92, 220202(R) (2015)

    work page 2015

  32. [32]

    Appelt, F

    S. Appelt, F. W. H¨ asing, U. Sieling, A. Gordji– Nejad, S. Gl¨ oggler, and B. Bl¨ umich, Paths from weak to strong coupling in NMR, Phys. Rev. A 81, 023420 (2010)

    work page 2010

  33. [33]

    Karabanov, I

    A. Karabanov, I. Kuprov, G. T. P. Charnock, A. van der Drift, L. J. Edwards, and W. K¨ ockenberger, On the accuracy of the state space restriction approximation for spin dynamics simulations, J. Chem. Phys. 135, 084106 (2011)

    work page 2011

  34. [34]

    Wilzewski, S

    A. Wilzewski, S. Afach, J. W. Blanchard, and D. Budker, A method for measurement of spin- spin couplings with sub-mHz precision using zero– to ultralow–field nuclear magnetic resonance, J. Magn. Reson. 284, 66 (2017)

    work page 2017

  35. [35]

    Seetharam, D

    K. Seetharam, D. Biswas, C. Noel, A. Risinger, D. Zhu, O. Katz, S. Chattopadhyay, M. Cetina, C. Monroe, E. Demler, and D. Sels, Digital quan- tum simulation of NMR experiments, Sci. Adv. 9, 1 (2023)

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    M. G. Algaba, M. Ponce-Martinez, C. Munuera- Javaloy, V. Pina-Canelles, M. J. Thapa, B. G. Taketani, M. Leib, I. de Vega, J. Casanova, and H. Heimonen, Co–Design quantum simulation of nanoscale NMR, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043089 (2022)

    work page 2022

  37. [37]

    T. E. O’Brien, L. B. Ioffe, Y. Su, D. Fushman, H. Neven, R. Babbush, and V. Smelyanskiy, Quan- tum Computation of Molecular Structure using Data from Challenging–To–Classically Simulate Nuclear Magnetic Resonance Experiments, PRX Quantm 3, 030345 (2022)

    work page 2022

  38. [38]

    Burov, O

    A. Burov, O. Nagl, and C. Javerzac–Galy, Towards quantum utility for NMR quantum simulation on a NISQ computer, arXiv:2404.17548 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    Litinski, A Game of Surface Codes: Large–Scale Quantum Computing with Lattice Surgery, Quan- tum 3, 128 (2019)

    D. Litinski, A Game of Surface Codes: Large–Scale Quantum Computing with Lattice Surgery, Quan- tum 3, 128 (2019)

    work page 2019

  40. [40]

    Gidney and M

    C. Gidney and M. Eker˚ a, How to factor 2048 bit RSA integers in 8 hours using 20 million noisy qubits, Quantum 5, 433 (2021)

    work page 2048

  41. [41]

    Instead, we treat relaxation through the decaying exponential factor in Eq

    The most straightforward digital quantum simula- tions will reproduce a pure state density matrix as opposed to the mixed state generated by relaxation operators. Instead, we treat relaxation through the decaying exponential factor in Eq. 2. Thus, the lon- gitudinal and transverse magnetization profiles be- come equivalent for determining resonances in th...

    work page

  42. [42]

    While there will be a chemical shift at small but fi- nite fields, resonances can still be indistinguishable due to line broadening

    work page

  43. [43]

    However, only the scalar isotropic component is relevant for the liquid–phase experi- ments that we consider

    Stated generally, the scalar coupling will be a ten- sor quantity. However, only the scalar isotropic component is relevant for the liquid–phase experi- ments that we consider. Other protocols can access different components of the coupling tensor and ex- tract different information

    work page

  44. [44]

    M. C. Tayler and L. F. Gladden, Scalar relaxation of NMR transitions at ultralow magnetic field, J. 21 Magn. Reson. 298, 101 (2019)

    work page 2019

  45. [45]

    Y. Zhou, E. M. Stoudenmire, and X. Waintal, What Limits the Simulation of Quantum Comput- ers?, Phys. Rev. X 10, 041038 (2020)

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Ayral, T

    T. Ayral, T. Louvet, Y. Zhou, C. Lambert, E. M. Stoudenmire, and X. Waintal, Density–Matrix Renormalization Group Algorithm for Smulating Quantum Circuits with a Finite Fidelity, PRX Quantum 4, 020304 (2023)

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    We drop the isotopic label in subscripts since all nuclei are assumed to be the most abundant spin- 1/2 isotope

    work page

  48. [48]

    Kemp, NMR in Chemistry: A Multinuclear In- troduction (Macmillan Education Limited, 1986)

    W. Kemp, NMR in Chemistry: A Multinuclear In- troduction (Macmillan Education Limited, 1986)

    work page 1986

  49. [49]

    H. J. Hogben, M. Krzystyniak, G. T. P. Charnock, P. J. Hore, and I. Kuprov, Spinach — A software library for simulation of spin dynamics in large sys- tems, J. Magn. Reson. 208, 179 (2011)

    work page 2011

  50. [50]

    Cremer and J

    D. Cremer and J. Gr¨ afenstein, Calculation and analysis of NMR spin–spin coupling constants, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 9, 2791 (2007)

    work page 2007

  51. [51]

    Helgaker, M

    T. Helgaker, M. Jaszunski, and P. Swider, Calcu- lation of NMR Spin–Spin Coupling Constants in Strychnine, J. Org. Chem. 81, 11496 (2016)

    work page 2016

  52. [52]

    S. J. DeVience and M. S. Rosen, Homonuclear J– coupling spectroscopy using J–synchrnonized echo detection, J. Magn. Reson. 341, 107244 (2022)

    work page 2022

  53. [53]

    Tzvetkova, U

    P. Tzvetkova, U. Sternberg, T. Gloge, A. Navaro- V´ azquez, and B. Luy, Configuration determination by residual dipolar couplings: accessing the full conformational space by molecular dynamics with tensorial constraints, Chem. Sci. 10, 8774 (2019)

    work page 2019

  54. [54]

    This budget is also guided by a tradeoff between satisfying Nyquist sampling requirements and practical spectrometer availabil- ity

    The experimental budget is also guided by other parameters, tmax = npoints/2W , such as the desired spectral width W and the number of points npoints sampled in the signal. This budget is also guided by a tradeoff between satisfying Nyquist sampling requirements and practical spectrometer availabil- ity. Thus, it difficult to map literature parameters bac...

    work page

  55. [55]

    G. H. Low and I. L. Chuang, Optimial Hamiltonian Simulation by Quantum Signal Processing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 010501 (2017)

    work page 2017

  56. [56]

    G. H. Low and I. L. Chuang, Hamiltonian Simula- tion by Qubitization, Quantum 3, 163 (2019)

    work page 2019

  57. [57]

    Gily´ en, Y

    A. Gily´ en, Y. Su, G. H. Low, and N. Wiebe, Quantum singular value transformation and be- yond: exponential improvements for quantum ma- trix arithmetics, in Proceedings of the 51st Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Comput- ing (STOC 2019) (2019) pp. 193–204

    work page 2019

  58. [58]

    J. M. Martyn, Z. M. Rossi, A. K. Tan, and I. L. Chuang, Grand Unification of Quantum Al- gorithms, PRX Quantum 2, 040203 (2021)

    work page 2021

  59. [59]

    Y. Dong, X. Meng, K. B. Whaley, and L. Lin, Ef- ficient phase–factor evaluation in quantum signal processing, Phys. Rev. A 103, 042419 (2021)

    work page 2021

  60. [60]

    D. W. Berry, A. M. Childs, R. Cleve, R. Kothari, and R. D. Somma, Simulating Hamiltonian Dy- namics with a Truncated Taylor Series, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 090502 (2015)

    work page 2015

  61. [61]

    J. M. Martyn, Y. Liu, Z. E. Chin, and I. L. Chuang, Efficient fully-coherent quantum signal processing algorithms for real-time dynamics simulation, J. Chem. Phys. 158, 024106 (2023)

    work page 2023

  62. [62]

    Motlagh and N

    D. Motlagh and N. Wiebe, Generalized Quan- tum Signal Processing, PRX Quantum 5, 020368 (2024)

    work page 2024

  63. [63]

    Empirical determination of the simulation capacity of a near-term quantum computer

    R. Rines, K. Obenland, and I. Chuang, Empir- ical determination of the simulation capacity of a near–term quantum computer, arXiv:1905.10724 (2019)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 1905

  64. [64]

    However, we retain the name GQSP to maintain consistency with literature

    Our practical use of the GQSP formalism actually corresponds to a quantum eigenvalue transform. However, we retain the name GQSP to maintain consistency with literature. However, it is currently unclear if GQSP can be extended to the more gen- eral context of the quantum singular value trans- form (QSVT)

    work page

  65. [65]

    Babbush, C

    R. Babbush, C. Gidney, D. W. Berry, N. Wiebe, J. McClean, A. Paler, A. Fowler, and H. Neven, Encoding Electronic Spectra in Quantum Circuits with Linear–T Complexity, Phys. Rev. X8, 041015 (2018)

    work page 2018

  66. [66]

    pyLIQTR: A Python library for fault–tolerant quantum algorithms, https://github.com/isi-usc- edu/pyLIQTR (2024)

    work page 2024

  67. [67]

    M. P. Harrigan, T. Khattar, C. Yuan, A. Peduri, N. Yosri, F. D. Malone, R. Babbush, and N. C. Rubin, Expressing and Analyzing Quantum Algo- rithms with Qualtran, arXiv:2409.04643

    work page arXiv

  68. [68]

    QUALTRAN: A quantum algorithms translator, https://github.com/quantumlib/Qualtran (2024)

    work page 2024

  69. [69]

    Grinko, J

    D. Grinko, J. Gacon, C. Zoufal, and S. Woerner, It- erative quantum amplitude estimation, Npj Quan- tum Inf. 7, 52 (2021)

    work page 2021

  70. [70]

    A. A. Agrawal, J. Job, T. L. Wilson, S. N. Saadat- mand, M. J. Hodson, J. Y. Mutus, A. Caesura, P. D. Johnson, J. E. Elenewski, K. J. Morrell, and A. F. Kemper, Quantifying fault–tolerant sim- ulation of strongly correlated systems using the Fermi–Hubbard model, arXiv:2406.06511

    work page arXiv

  71. [71]

    Donoho, Compressed sensing, IEEE Trans

    D. Donoho, Compressed sensing, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 52, 1289 (2006)

    work page 2006

  72. [72]

    M. J. Bostock, D. J. Holland, and D. Nietlispach, Improving resolution in multidimensional NMR us- ing random quadrature detection with compressed sensing reconstruction, J. Biomol. NMR 68, 67 (2017)

    work page 2017

  73. [73]

    Bostock and D

    M. Bostock and D. Nietlispach, Compressed sens- ing: Reconstruction of non–uniformly sampled multidimensional NMR data, Concepts Magn. Re- son. A 46A, e21438 (2018)

    work page 2018

  74. [74]

    Robson, H

    S. Robson, H. Arthanari, S. G. Hyberts, and G. Wagner, Nonuniform Sampling for NMR Spec- troscopy, Methods Enzymol. 614, 263 (2019)

    work page 2019

  75. [75]

    Delaglio, G

    F. Delaglio, G. S. Walker, K. A. Farley, R. Sharma, J. C. Hoch, L. W. Arbogast, R. G. Brinson, and 22 J. P. Marino, Non-Uniform Sampling for All: More NMR Spectral Quality, Less Measurement Time, Am. Pharm. Rev. 20, 339681 (2017)

    work page 2017

  76. [76]

    R. A. E. Carr, M. Congreve, C. W. Murray, and D. C. Rees, Fragment–based lead discovery: leads by design, Drug. Discov. Today 10, 987 (2005)

    work page 2005

  77. [77]

    This would be time– consuming to integrate on the timescales required for simulating spectra

    At N = 16, a matrix representation of the time–evolution operator would be 64 Gb (assum- ing 64–bit complex entries). This would be time– consuming to integrate on the timescales required for simulating spectra. At N = 20 the operators would require 16384 Gb matrices, which is pro- hibitive for any classical calculation

    work page

  78. [78]

    N. C. Menicucci and C. M. Caves, Local realis- tic model for the dynamics of bulk–ensemble NMR information processing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 2002, 167901 (88)

    work page 2002

  79. [79]

    M. M. Rams and M. Zwolak, Breaking the En- tanglement Barrier: Tensor Network Simulation of Quantum Transport, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 137701 (2020)

    work page 2020

  80. [80]

    W´ ojtowicz, J

    G. W´ ojtowicz, J. E. Elenewski, M. M. Rams, and M. Zwolak, Open System Tensor Networks and Kramers’ Crossover for Quantum Transport, Phys Rev. A 101, 050301 (2020)

    work page 2020

Showing first 80 references.