Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Turning qubit noise into an advantage: Automatic state preparation and long-time dynamics for impurity models on quantum computers

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Natural qubit decay can be repurposed as the dissipative bath in impurity-model simulations, cutting the qubit count by an order of magnitude and removing ground-state preparation.

desk verdict A genuine fermionic extension of noise-harvesting for impurity models, with sound derivations and a credible resource advantage, but the practical case rests on an idealized T1-only noise model and a single non-interacting test. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.13711 v2 pith:GIFYOLKT submitted 2024-12-18 quant-ph cond-mat.str-el

Corentin Bertrand , Pauline Besserve , Michel Ferrero , Thomas Ayral This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcond-mat.str-el MSC 81P68 PACS 03.67.Lx03.65.Yz
keywords noiseharvestingamplitudedampingimpuritymodeldynamicalmeanfieldtheorypseudomodequantumsimulationLindbladdynamicsGreen'sfunctions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proposes a quantum algorithm that turns the dominant decoherence channel of T1-limited qubits, amplitude damping, into a computational resource. In dynamical mean field theory, an impurity model is a small system coupled to a dissipative bath; the authors engineer a circuit in which the bath's fermionic emission and absorption are mimicked by the natural relaxation of noisy qubits, while only a few noiseless qubits hold the impurity and ancilla modes. They claim three advantages: a reduction in the number of qubits by about an order of magnitude in their test case, access to longer-time dynamics without revivals, and automatic preparation of the steady state by relaxation. If the method works on hardware, it would make impurity-model Green's functions, the bottleneck of DMFT, accessible to near-term quantum processors with mixed-quality qubits.

What carries the argument

The pseudomode representation of the bath, in which fermionic bath modes are each coupled to a Markovian reservoir so that the hybridization function is fitted by Lorentzians instead of Dirac peaks, is the first step. The Lindblad jump operators are then mapped to qubit amplitude damping through three transformations: addition of ancilla fermionic modes to make jumps local, a fermion-to-qubit encoding, and a noise-encoding unitary that rotates each jump operator to the qubit operator S−. The dissipation rate is tuned by inserting a waiting time in the Trotter loop, satisfying a relation that matches the physical noise rate to the target dissipation rate. This combination of pseudomode fitting, noise encoding, and waiting-time dissipation carries the argument.

What would settle it

Run the resonant level model circuit on a device where the noisy qubits have a dephasing time T2 comparable to their relaxation time T1, with no mitigation. If the measured greater Green's function deviates from the exact result by more than the paper's predicted Trotter, fitting, and 1/T1 noise error, the core identification of waiting-time noise with the pseudomode jump operators is disproved for that hardware. A more direct test is quantum process tomography of a noisy qubit during the waiting window: if the channel contains a significant Z-type (dephasing) component, the construction breaks down.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the dissipative dynamics of a fermionic pseudomode bath can be identified exactly with the amplitude-damping channel of physical qubits, provided a waiting time is inserted after each Trotter step to match the dissipation rate. The paper constructs a noise-encoding unitary that transforms the fermionic jump operators, dressed by Jordan-Wigner strings, into the qubit amplitude-damping operator, so that during the waiting window the qubits' natural T1 decay implements precisely the Lindblad jumps of the pseudomode model. Because the bath is open, its steady state is reached automatically from simple product initial states, and the absence of revivals means a fixed, small number of bath modes suffices for arbitrarily long evolution. Numerically, the greater Green's function of the resonant level model computed with amplitude damping, using 8 bath modes plus one ancilla, agrees with the exact result while using only 11 qubits where a closed bath would need more than 120.

Load-bearing premise

The harvested channel is assumed to be dominated by amplitude damping, with impurity and ancilla qubits essentially noiseless, so that the waiting-time evolution is exactly the desired Lindblad dissipation; if pure dephasing or other decoherence is comparable on the noisy qubits, the identification fails unless mitigated.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For a T1-limited processor with a few clean ancilla qubits, computing impurity Green's functions consumes an order of magnitude fewer qubits than a closed-bath simulation at the same target time.
  • The gate count and total runtime grow only linearly with simulation time rather than quadratically, so long-time dynamics that would require more than 150 closed bath sites are captured with 8 to 32 pseudomodes.
  • State preparation is automatic: the open bath relaxes to its steady state exponentially fast, eliminating ground-state or Gibbs-state preparation circuits.
  • The method composes naturally with partial quantum error correction, since noisy qubits are used as a resource while impurity and ancilla qubits are protected.
  • With optimized Trotter step and bath size, the total error scales as t to the two-thirds, compared with t to the three-halves for closed baths, and the optimal bath size actually shrinks as the target time grows.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Because the construction works for any hybridization function and for interacting impurities, the same encoding should extend to the Anderson impurity model and multi-orbital DMFT baths by applying the pseudomode fit per spin species.
  • On hardware with appreciable pure dephasing, the waiting-time window would implement a mixture of amplitude damping and dephasing; the paper's own suggestion is zero-noise extrapolation, but a more direct design implication is to engineer qubits with T1-dominated noise so that the harvested channel is clean.
  • The minimum dissipation rate sets a resolution floor on bath features, suggesting a hardware-software co-design metric: faster gates or longer T1 both sharpen the accessible spectral features.
  • The revival-free nature of the open-bath representation implies that the qubit advantage grows with the longest time one wants to simulate, so the benefit is largest in weakly coupled or low-temperature regimes where closed baths need the most sites.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a quantum algorithm for impurity-model dynamics that uses qubit amplitude damping as a resource. The bath is first represented by dissipative pseudomodes, whose Lindblad jump operators are then mapped onto qubit amplitude damping through ancilla fermionic modes and a 'noise encoding' unitary. Waiting times are used to tune the effective dissipation rate. The authors argue that this approach reduces qubit count, reaches longer times than closed-bath representations, and avoids ground-state preparation because the open system relaxes to its steady state. The central demonstration is a numerical simulation of the resonant level model with Nb=8 noisy bath qubits and one ancilla, compared with exact and pseudomode dynamics.

Significance. If the proposal works as stated, it is a timely and conceptually interesting inversion of the usual treatment of hardware noise: instead of mitigating T1 decay, the algorithm converts it into the dissipative bath of a DMFT impurity model. The paper contains several careful supporting pieces: the fermionic quantum regression derivation in App. A2, the dilation argument justifying Markovian bath replacement in Apps. A3-A4, and the ancilla-invariance proof in App. C, all of which appear technically sound. The convex fitting of the hybridization function is also a solid, reproducible element. The main significance is conditional, however, on a hardware regime in which amplitude damping is the dominant decoherence channel on the bath qubits and the impurity/ancilla qubits are effectively noiseless, a regime that the paper acknowledges but does not demonstrate or quantify.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III.B and App. H, Eq. (H11)] The waiting-time calibration is stated in two incompatible ways. The main text requires (TTrotter + Twait)/T1 = Λτ, with Λmin = TTrotter/(T1τ), while App. H derives Twait = T1Λτ, which would give a total damping probability of Λτ + TTrotter/T1 per Trotter step. This distinction matters because App. H treats the TTrotter/T1 contribution as a separate noise error in Eq. (H15), whereas the main-text calibration appears to absorb it into the target dissipation rate. The numerical demonstration in Sec. IV does not state which convention was used. Please reconcile the two formulas and specify whether gate-time amplitude damping is counted as desired dissipation or as error; if it is error, the calibration in Sec. III.B should be Twait/T1 = Λτ, and if it is dissipation, Eq. (H15) overcounts the gate-time contribution.
  2. [Sec. IV and App. H] The central numerical evidence and all error scalings assume that the noisy bath qubits suffer only amplitude damping, with no pure dephasing, and that impurity and ancilla qubits are noiseless. The paper acknowledges in Sec. I and Sec. V that standard architectures have significant pure dephasing and suggests mitigation, but no mitigation is demonstrated or quantified. This is load-bearing because the waiting intervals are long, Twait ≈ T1Λτ - TTrotter, and a dephasing channel with time Tφ adds an error proportional to Twait/Tφ that cannot be removed by recalibrating Twait; in the encoded frame the dephasing operator is not one of the target fermionic jump operators. Please add a quantitative robustness analysis, for example a noise model with finite Tφ, or an explicit error-mitigation protocol, and state clearly that the claimed resource advantages hold only in the amplitude-damping-dominated regime.
  3. [App. H, Eqs. (H2)-(H3), (H16), Table I] The asymptotic claims in Sec. III.C and Table I rely on assumed error scalings: ε_Trotter = ατt, ε_noise = βT/T1, and especially ε_fit = γ/Nb. The first two are standard heuristic forms, but ε_fit = γ/Nb is introduced without derivation or numerical verification, and the constants α, β, γ are not estimated. The fixed-(Nb,τ) linear-in-t runtime and gate-count advantage is more robust, but the optimized t^{2/3} error scaling and the corresponding resource table should be presented as heuristic rather than established results unless the scalings are checked numerically for the models studied.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. IV] The text says T1 = 10^5 in units of the single-qubit gate duration and T2qb = 10, but it is unclear whether T1 applies to both single- and two-qubit gate durations and whether the waiting-time calibration uses the same T1; please clarify.
  2. [Fig. 4(c)] The axis labels in Fig. 4(c) are not fully specified; please state the units of the number of two-qubit gates per Trotter step and the definition of K on the horizontal axis.
  3. [App. A2] The sentence 'This derivation extends naturally to time-dependent Lindbladians' at the end of App. A2 is not obvious; a brief justification or reference would help the reader assess the scope of the fermionic quantum regression theorem used in the main text.
  4. [Throughout] There are several typographical errors, including 'Specificaly' in App. F, 'operaotrs' in App. A4, and 'Kramers-Kroenig' in App. B1; these should be corrected in a final revision.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the predicted Green's function is benchmarked against an external exact solution, and fitted parameters enter only via the hybridization function.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The target Green's function is defined by the original impurity model (Eq. 3), not by the simulation circuit. The pseudomode parameters Vp, ep, and Lambda are fitted to the model's hybridization function via the convex procedure in App. B1, then the Green's function is computed from the Lindblad dynamics (Apps. A5 and B3) and compared in Sec. IV with the exact original-model Green's function, which is an external benchmark. The noise-encoding step (Eq. 8) is an explicit unitary transformation: the circuit of Fig. 4(b) conjugates S^pm tensor product of Pauli operators to S^-, and App. G verifies the resulting channel, so this step is an operator identity rather than a fit to the output. The waiting-time calibration Twait/T1 = Lambda*tau maps a hardware parameter to an already-fitted model rate; it does not inject the predicted Green's function. The numerical demonstration includes only amplitude damping, and the paper explicitly acknowledges that pure dephasing would need mitigation, but this is a hardware-validity limitation, not circularity. The few self-citations (Refs. 1, 22, 59) are contextual and not load-bearing; no uniqueness or equivalence result is imported from the authors' own prior work to force the construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central algorithmic machinery rests on standard open-quantum-system results (fermionic QRT, bath replacement via Wick's theorem) that the paper largely proves in appendices, plus one freely chosen hardware postulate (amplitude-damping-dominated noisy qubits alongside noiseless impurity/ancilla qubits) and a handful of method parameters (Lambda, V_p, tau, K) fixed by fitting or hand. The most fragile input is the hardware noise model, which determines whether the waiting-time calibration actually produces the intended dissipation outside classical emulation.

free parameters (4)
  • Pseudomode hopping parameters V_p = Optimized numerically for each bath size (not tabulated)
    App. B1: the v_p = 2 V_p^2 Lambda are obtained by a convex quadratic fit of the hybridization function for each choice of Lambda and Nb; the central simulation depends on the quality of this fit.
  • Pseudomode dissipation rate Lambda = Optimized by gradient descent in App. B1; controls the Lorentzian width
    Lambda is a free parameter of the bath representation, fixed by fitting the target hybridization function, and all bath modes are constrained to the same Lambda. The method's accuracy inherits the fitting error.
  • Trotter step tau = 0.3 in the numerical illustration (Sec. IV)
    tau is a method parameter that sets the balance between Trotter error and gate-induced noise; the paper identifies tau_opt ≈ 0.3 for its parameters, so the headline error numbers depend on this choice.
  • Ancilla block size K and number of ancillas Nanc = K=3, Nanc=1 for Nb=8 in Fig. 5
    K and Nanc are chosen to trade off noiseless-qubit count against circuit depth and gate count (App. D); the numerical demonstration uses one particular point of this trade-off.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Fermionic quantum regression theorem: two-point Green's functions in a Markovian open fermionic system are computed from the Lindbladian with a parity-twisted superoperator L-tilde.
    Stated and proved in App. A1-A2; invoked in Eqs. (3), (A1) and throughout App. A5. The proof is included, so the axiom is mostly standard open-quantum-system machinery.
  • standard math A dissipative bath can be replaced by another bath if the two-point hybridization functions match; for quadratically dilated Markovian systems, Wick's theorem justifies this reduction.
    App. A3-A4, based on Refs. [32,49]: the bath replacement argument assumes free-fermion structure and Markovian jump operators linear in creation/annihilation operators. This is the theoretical foundation for the pseudomode approximation.
  • domain assumption Adding ancilla fermion modes with Majorana couplings to the jump operators leaves the system's reduced dynamics unchanged.
    Proved in App. C using the fermionic superselection rule. The proof is sound given the standard parity superselection assumption, so the subsystem dynamics is unchanged.
  • domain assumption The hardware noise on noisy qubits is dominated by amplitude damping during waiting times, with negligible pure dephasing and negligible noise on impurity and ancilla qubits.
    This is the physical postulate that makes the scheme work: Sec. III B sets the waiting-time calibration (TTrotter + Twait)/T1 = Lambda tau, and Sec. IV simulates only amplitude damping. On standard hardware this is violated by T2 dephasing, which the paper acknowledges and proposes to mitigate or avoid with T1-limited or erasure-converted qubits.
  • ad hoc to paper First-order Trotterization error and gate-induced noise error follow the heuristic scalings of App. H (epsilon_Trotter = alpha tau t, epsilon_noise = beta T/T1, epsilon_fit = gamma/Nb).
    The scaling analysis in App. H introduces constants alpha, beta, gamma, v, Tg without calibration. The asymptotic claims (t^3/2 vs t, and t^2/3 vs t^3/2) depend on these assumed error models and on the revival-time scaling Nb proportional to t for closed baths (Ref. [57]). These are plausible heuristics, not proven bounds.
invented entities (2)
  • Ancilla fermionic modes with Majorana operators gamma_alpha_p coupled to bath jump operators
    purpose: Make jump operators local (two-fermion) so that after fermion-to-qubit mapping the noise-encoding unitary is O(K)-local instead of acting on the whole register (Sec. III A, App. C).
    The ancillas are a theoretical construction that the paper proves does not alter the reduced dynamics (App. C). They have no observable signature outside the circuit construction, so they carry no independent falsifiable handle; their role is internal to the algorithm.
  • Noise-encoding unitary E (and E+ / E- variants)
    purpose: Unitary change of basis that maps Jordan-Wigner-string jump operators S± Z...Z X onto pure amplitude-damping S- while keeping the Hamiltonian local (Eq. (8), Fig. 4(b)).
    E is a circuit-level construction rather than a physical entity; it is a basis change, so it does not add dynamics. It is well motivated and its interpretation in terms of amplitude-damping trajectories is explained in App. G, but it has no independent evidence outside the paper's own definition.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Turning qubit noise into an advantage: Automatic state preparation and long-time dynamics for impurity models on quantum computers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GIFYOLKT

@misc{pith2026241213711,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Turning qubit noise into an advantage: Automatic state preparation and long-time dynamics for impurity models on quantum computers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GIFYOLKT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.13711}
}
read the original abstract

Noise is often regarded as a limitation of quantum computers. In this work, we show that in the dynamical mean field theory (DMFT) approach to strongly-correlated systems, it can actually be harnessed to our advantage. Indeed, DMFT maps a lattice model onto an impurity model, namely a finite system coupled to a dissipative bath. While standard approaches require a large number of high-quality qubits in a unitary context, we propose a circuit that harvests amplitude damping to reproduce the dynamics of this model with a blend of noisy and noiseless qubits. We find compelling advantages with this approach: a substantial reduction in the number of qubits, the ability to reach longer time dynamics, and no need for ground state search and preparation. This method would naturally fit in a partial quantum error correction framework.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.13711 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Summary: A lattice problem (a) is mapped onto an atomic problem (red dot) coupled to a bath (green cloud) (b), which is itself represented by dissipative fermionic modes (green dots) through a fit of the hybridization function (c). Through a fermion-qubit mapping using ancillas, we obtain a noiseless qubit (red square) coupled to noisy and noiseless qubits (green and blue squares) (d). The time evolution needed to c… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. From fermion dissipation to qubit noise. Three steps to map jump operators c (†) onto amplitude damping S −: addition of ancilla fermions (Eq. (6)) to make jump operators local; fermion-qubit encoding; mapping onto S − by noise encoding E. such as in Kondo physics [58], therefore requires many bath sites. For instance, in our RLM, we need no fewer than Nb ≈ 150 bath sites to capture the whole relax￾ation dynamics ( … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Open vs. closed bath representation. (a) GF in time domain obtained with large closed baths (Nb ≥ 50 plain lines, warm colors), and with a small open bath (Nb = 32, dashed blue line). (b) Emission spectral density obtained with a large closed bath (Nb = 50, yellow) and small open baths (Nb ≤ 32, blue lines). (c) Error on GF obtained with open baths of different sizes (dots, shades of blue) with state preparation tim… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Quantum circuit to harvest qubit noise. (a) Quan￾tum circuit reproducing the dynamics of Eq. (4) with Nb = 8 bath sites. Noisy qubits (purple wires) are encoded (green boxes) to interpret amplitude damping as fermion dissipa￾tion. The encoded Hamiltonian is Trotterized…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Dynamics obtained through noise harvesting. (a) GF of the RLM obtained with the circuit of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Relaxation rate in PM models. where G > tprep (t) is the greater Green’s function (GF) be￾tween times t + tprep and tprep. Since in the RLM un￾der study the relaxation is exponential and the relax￾ation rate is Γ ≈ 0.11 (see App. B 2), a relaxation time tprep = 100 can…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Quantum Assisted Ghost Gutzwiller Ansatz

    quant-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A quantum-assisted ghost Gutzwiller ansatz, using QSCI with LUCJ states and circuit cutting on 24-qubit IQM hardware, captures the Mott transition in the Bethe lattice Hubbard model with only about 1% of the CI basis states.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 62 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    fermions 2. + anc. fermions S− 1 S− 2 S− 4 imp bath Lp = √ Λ S− qp

  2. [2]

    Fermionic quantum regression theorem For completeness, we give a proof of the fermionic QRT, i.e. of Eq. (A1). It can also be found in Ref. [45, Ap- pendix B]. Assume the unitary time evolution between timest′ and t in the dilated spaceS ∪ Eis represented by the operator Ut−t′. The QRT states that, under the same assumptions that makes E Markovian, the re...

    work page

  3. [3]

    noise encoding

    qubits Jordan-Wigner (e.g)add ancilla modes noise encoding E Figure 3. From fermion dissipation to qubit noise. Three steps to map jump operators c(†) onto amplitude damping S−: addition of ancilla fermions (Eq. (6)) to make jump operators local; fermion-qubit encoding; mapping ontoS− by noise encoding E. such as in Kondo physics [58], therefore requires ...

  4. [4]

    qubits S− 1 Z2X3 S+ 2 X3 S+ 4 X5 imp bath Lp = √ Λ S± qpZqp+1 · · · Zap− 1Xap

  5. [5]

    A similar deriva- tion for bosons or spins can be found in standard text- books [64]

    Fermionic Green’s function in open quantum systems with Markovian environment In this section we recall the explicit expression of fermionic Green’s functions in open quantum systems coupled to a Markovian environment. A similar deriva- tion for bosons or spins can be found in standard text- books [64]. Correlation functions of an open quantum system S ca...

    work page

  6. [6]

    more compact) one with- out affecting the system’s dynamics

    Validity of bath switching The pseudomode (PM) representation relies on the im- portant idea that, in some conditions, a bath can be re- placed with a different (e.g. more compact) one with- out affecting the system’s dynamics. This was shown for bosonic [32] and fermionic [49] baths. Here we aim at summing up the argument for the fermionic case in a peda...

    work page

  7. [7]

    Dilation of Markovian system into a larger unitary system We now give a proof that an open quantum systemS fol- lowing Markovian dynamics can be dilated into a larger closed system following the Schrödinger equation. It will then be clear that if S is quadratic in (fermionic or bosonic) creation and annihilation operators, and if jump operators are linear...

    work page

  8. [8]

    These can be used to derive the form of HFs we use in our work, i.e

    Green’s functions in pseudomode models In this section we derive explicit expressions for Green’s functions in generic fermionic PM models. These can be used to derive the form of HFs we use in our work, i.e. Eq. (A42). Another derivation can also be found in Ref. [45]. Consider a quadratic Hamiltonian H = X kl hklc† kcl (A21) with ck and c† k fermionic a...

    work page

Show all 83 references
  1. [9]

    Details of the bath fitting procedure a. Closed bath To implement a thermal bath of spectral hybridization function (HF) ∆(ω) = − 1 π Im[∆R(ω)] and inverse tem- perature β with a closed bath, we discretizethefrequency axis into energies ϵ0, . . . , ϵNb−1, and associate each ϵp...

  2. [10]

    2 (c) varies slightly with the bath sizeNb, around the valueγ2/π, as shown in Fig

    Relaxation rate The relaxation rate observed in Fig. 2 (c) varies slightly with the bath sizeNb, around the valueγ2/π, as shown in Fig. 6. Since it follows a Lindblad equation of the form Eq. (4), the PM model relaxes exponentially quickly toward a steady state. For free fermi...

  3. [11]

    2 (c) is defined as sZ +∞ 0 dt G> tprep (t) − G> trelax=100 (t) 2 (B8) 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 Nb 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15relax / 2 = 0.6 = 0.2 Figure 6

    Definitions of errors The error shown in Fig. 2 (c) is defined as sZ +∞ 0 dt G> tprep (t) − G> trelax=100 (t) 2 (B8) 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 Nb 0.85 0.90 0.95 1.00 1.05 1.10 1.15relax / 2 = 0.6 = 0.2 Figure 6. Relaxation rate in PM models. where G> tprep (t) is the greater ...

  4. [12]

    Thismeans Nb = vt (H1) with v some velocity

    Closed bath method With a closed bath representation, the number of bath sites Nb must be proportional to the largest timet one wantstoreach, inordertoavoidrevivals[57]. Thismeans Nb = vt (H1) with v some velocity. There are two sources of error. One is the (total) Trotter err...

  5. [13]

    Assuming we need to cover the spectrum over an energy intervalD, we need D ≈ ΛNb

    Noise-harvesting method In our method, the hybridization functions (HFs) are fit with Nb Lorentzians of width Λ. Assuming we need to cover the spectrum over an energy intervalD, we need D ≈ ΛNb. Each Lorentzian corresponds to a bath site submitted to dissipation at a rate Λ. T...

  6. [14]

    Optimizing for long time dynamics Minimizing ε with respect toτ leads to εTrotter = εnoise, and minimizing it with respect toNb leads toεnoise = εfit (using the same property as used to obtain Eq. (H7)). 16 Therefore, the minimum is reached when the three errors are equal, giv...

  7. [15]

    Ayral, P

    T. Ayral, P. Besserve, D. Lacroix, and E. A. Ruiz Guzman, Quantum computing with and for many-body physics, The European Physical Journal A 59, 227 (2023), arXiv:2303.04850

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Tokura, M

    Y. Tokura, M. Kawasaki, and N. Nagaosa, Emergent functions of quantum materials, Nature Physics13, 1056 (2017), publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2017

  9. [17]

    Z. Cai, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, W. J. Hug- gins, Y. Li, J. R. McClean, and T. E. O’Brien, Quantum error mitigation, Reviews of Modern Physics95, 045005 (2023), arXiv:2210.00921

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    B. M. Terhal, Quantum error correction for quantum memories, Reviews of Modern Physics 87, 307 (2015), arXiv:1302.3428

    2015 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Pocklington, Y.-X

    A. Pocklington, Y.-X. Wang, Y. Yanay, and A. A. Clerk, Stabilizing volume-law entangled states of fermions and qubits using local dissipation, Physical Review B105, L140301 (2022), publisher: American Physical Society

    2022

  12. [20]

    P. M. Harrington, E. J. Mueller, and K. W. Murch, Engi- neered dissipation for quantum information science, Na- ture Reviews Physics 4, 660 (2022), number: 10 Pub- lisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2022

  13. [21]

    Chen, H.-Y

    C.-F. Chen, H.-Y. Huang, J. Preskill, and L. Zhou, Lo- cal minima in quantum systems (2023), arXiv:2309.16596 [cond-mat, physics:math-ph, physics:quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Leppäkangas, N

    J. Leppäkangas, N. Vogt, K. R. Fratus, K. Bark, J. A. Vaitkus, P. Stadler, J.-M. Reiner, S. Zanker, and M. Marthaler, A quantum algorithm for solving open sys- tem dynamics on quantum computers using noise (2023), arXiv:2210.12138 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    B. Rost, B. Jones, M. Vyushkova, A. Ali, C. Cullip, A. Vyushkov, and J. Nabrzyski, Simulation of Thermal Relaxation in Spin Chemistry Systems on a Quantum Computer Using Inherent Qubit Decoherence (2020), arXiv:2001.00794 [physics, physics:quant-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Sun, L.-C

    S. Sun, L.-C. Shih, and Y.-C. Cheng, Efficient Quantum Simulation of Open Quantum System Dynamics on Noisy Quantum Computers (2021), arXiv:2106.12882 [quant- ph]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Georges, G

    A. Georges, G. Kotliar, W. Krauth, and M. J. Rozen- berg, Dynamical mean-field theory of strongly correlated fermion systems and the limit of infinite dimensions, Re- views of Modern Physics68, 13 (1996)

    1996

  18. [26]

    E. Gull, A. J. Millis, A. I. Lichtenstein, A. N. Rubtsov, M. Troyer, and P. Werner, Continuous-time Monte Carlo methods for quantum impurity models, Reviews of Mod- ern Physics83, 349 (2011), publisher: American Physical Society

    2011

  19. [27]

    Simons Collaboration on the Many-Electron Problem, J. P. F. LeBlanc, A. E. Antipov, F. Becca, I. W. Bu- lik, G. K.-L. Chan, C.-M. Chung, Y. Deng, M. Ferrero, T. M. Henderson, C. A. Jiménez-Hoyos, E. Kozik, X.- W. Liu, A. J. Millis, N. V. Prokof’ev, M. Qin, G. E. Scuseria, H. S...

    2015

  20. [28]

    F. A. Wolf, I. P. McCulloch, and U. Schollwöck, Solving nonequilibrium dynamical mean-field theory using ma- trixproductstates,PhysicalReviewB 90,235131(2014), publisher: American Physical Society

    2014

  21. [29]

    Bauernfeind, M

    D. Bauernfeind, M. Zingl, R. Triebl, M. Aichhorn, and H. G. Evertz, Fork Tensor-Product States: Efficient Mul- tiorbital Real-Time DMFT Solver, Physical Review X7, 031013 (2017), publisher: American Physical Society

    2017

  22. [30]

    J. M. Kreula, S. R. Clark, and D. Jaksch, Non-linear quantum-classical scheme to simulate non-equilibrium strongly correlated fermionic many-body dynamics, Sci- entific Reports6, 32940 (2016), arXiv:1510.05703

    2016 arXiv

  23. [31]

    J. M. Kreula, L. García-Álvarez, L. Lamata, S. R. Clark, E. Solano, and D. Jaksch, Few-qubit quantum-classical simulation of strongly correlated lattice fermions, EPJ Quantum Technology3, 11 (2016), arXiv:1606.04839

    2016 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Bauer, D

    B. Bauer, D. Wecker, A. J. Millis, M. B. Hastings, and M. Troyer, Hybrid Quantum-Classical Approach to Cor- related Materials, Physical Review X6, 031045 (2016)

    2016

  25. [33]

    Rungger, N

    I. Rungger, N. Fitzpatrick, H. Chen, C. H. Alderete, H. Apel, A. Cowtan, A. Patterson, D. M. Ramo, Y. Zhu, N. H. Nguyen, E. Grant, S. Chretien, L. Wossnig, N. M. Linke,andR.Duncan,Dynamicalmeanfieldtheoryalgo- rithmandexperimentonquantumcomputers, ,1(2019), arXiv:1910.04735

    2019 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Y. Yao, F. Zhang, C.-Z. Wang, K.-M. Ho, and P. P. Orth, Gutzwillerhybridquantum-classicalcomputingapproach for correlated materials, Physical Review Research 3, 013184 (2021), arXiv:2003.04211

    2021 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Jaderberg, A

    B. Jaderberg, A. Agarwal, K. Leonhardt, M. Kiffner, and D. Jaksch, Minimum hardware requirements for hybrid quantum–classical DMFT, Quantum Science and Tech- nology 5, 034015 (2020), arXiv:2002.04612

    2020 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Besserve and T

    P. Besserve and T. Ayral, Unraveling correlated mate- rial properties with noisy quantum computers: Natural orbitalized variational quantum eigensolving of extended impurity models within a slave-boson approach, Physical Review B105, 115108 (2022), arXiv:2108.10780

    2022 arXiv

  29. [37]

    B.M.Garraway,Nonperturbativedecayofanatomicsys- tem in a cavity, Physical Review A55, 2290 (1997), pub- lisher: American Physical Society

    1997

  30. [38]

    Kakuyanagi, T

    K. Kakuyanagi, T. Meno, S. Saito, H. Nakano, K. Semba, H.Takayanagi, F.Deppe,andA.Shnirman,Dephasingof a Superconducting Flux Qubit, Physical Review Letters 98, 047004 (2007), publisher: American Physical Society

    2007

  31. [39]

    Kubica, A

    A. Kubica, A. Haim, Y. Vaknin, H. Levine, F. Brandão, and A. Retzker, Erasure Qubits: Overcoming the T1 Limit in Superconducting Circuits, Physical Review X 13, 041022 (2023), publisher: American Physical Soci- ety

    2023

  32. [40]

    Temme, S

    K. Temme, S. Bravyi, and J. M. Gambetta, Error Mitiga- tion for Short-Depth Quantum Circuits, Physical Review Letters 119, 180509 (2017), publisher: American Physi- cal Society

    2017

  33. [41]

    Bultrini, S

    D. Bultrini, S. Wang, P. Czarnik, M. H. Gordon, M. Cerezo, P. J. Coles, and L. Cincio, The battle of clean and dirty qubits in the era of partial error correction, Quantum 7, 1060 (2023), arXiv:2205.13454 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Koukoulekidis, S

    N. Koukoulekidis, S. Wang, T. O’Leary, D. Bultrini, L. Cincio, and P. Czarnik, A framework of partial er- ror correction for intermediate-scale quantum computers (2023), arXiv:2306.15531 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Kamenev, Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems , 2nd ed

    A. Kamenev, Field Theory of Non-Equilibrium Systems , 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2023)

    2023

  36. [44]

    V. J. Emery and S. Kivelson, Mapping of the two-channel Kondo problem to a resonant-level model, Physical Re- view B46, 10812 (1992), publisher: American Physical Society

    1992

  37. [45]

    Gramsch, K

    C. Gramsch, K. Balzer, M. Eckstein, and M. Kollar, Hamiltonian-based impurity solver for nonequilibrium dynamical mean-field theory, Physical Review B 88, 235106 (2013), publisher: American Physical Society

    2013

  38. [46]

    Tamascelli, A

    D. Tamascelli, A. Smirne, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Nonperturbative Treatment of non-Markovian Dynamics ofOpenQuantumSystems,PhysicalReviewLetters 120, 030402 (2018), publisher: American Physical Society

    2018

  39. [47]

    R.-X. Xu, Y. Liu, H.-D. Zhang, and Y. Yan, Theory of quantum dissipation in a class of non-Gaussian envi- ronments, Chinese Journal of Chemical Physics30, 395 (2017), arXiv:1608.07774 [physics]

    2017 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Lambert, S

    N. Lambert, S. Ahmed, M. Cirio, and F. Nori, Mod- elling the ultra-strongly coupled spin-boson model with unphysical modes, Nature Communications 10, 3721 (2019), number: 1 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2019

  41. [49]

    Pleasance, B

    G. Pleasance, B. M. Garraway, and F. Petruccione, Gen- eralized theory of pseudomodes for exact descriptions of non-Markovian quantum processes, Physical Review Re- search 2, 043058 (2020), publisher: American Physical Society

    2020

  42. [50]

    Pleasance and F

    G. Pleasance and F. Petruccione, Pseudomode descrip- tion of general open quantum system dynamics: non- perturbative master equation for the spin-boson model (2021), arXiv:2108.05755 [quant-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Chen and I

    X. Chen and I. Franco, Bexcitonics: Quasi-particle approach to open quantum dynamics (2024), arXiv:2401.11049 [physics, physics:quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Menczel, K

    P. Menczel, K. Funo, M. Cirio, N. Lambert, and F. Nori, Non-Hermitian Pseudomodes for Strongly Cou- pled Open Quantum Systems: Unravelings, Correlations and Thermodynamics (2024), arXiv:2401.11830 [cond- mat, physics:quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  45. [53]

    D.Lacroix, V.Sargsyan, G.Adamian,andN.Antonenko, Description of non-Markovian effect in open quantum system with the discretized environment method, The European Physical Journal B88, 89 (2015)

    2015

  46. [54]

    Lacroix, V

    D. Lacroix, V. V. Sargsyan, G. G. Adamian, N. V. Antonenko, and A. A. Hovhannisyan, Non-Markovian modeling of Fermi-Bose systems coupled to one or sev- eral Fermi-Bose thermal baths, Physical Review A102, 022209 (2020), publisher: American Physical Society

    2020

  47. [55]

    G. Park, Z. Huang, Y. Zhu, C. Yang, G. K.-L. Chan, and L. Lin, Quasi-Lindblad pseudomode theory for open quantum systems (2024), arXiv:2408.15529 [cond-mat, physics:physics, physics:quant-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Arrigoni, M

    E. Arrigoni, M. Knap, W. V. D. Linden, and W. Von Der Linden, Nonequilibrium Dynamical Mean-Field The- ory: An Auxiliary Quantum Master Equation Approach, Physical Review Letters110, 086403 (2013), publisher: American Physical Society, arXiv:arXiv:1210.4167v2

    2013 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Dorda, M

    A. Dorda, M. Nuss, W. von der Linden, and E. Ar- rigoni, Auxiliary master equation approach to nonequi- librium correlated impurities, Physical Review B 89, 165105 (2014), publisher: American Physical Society

    2014

  50. [58]

    Dorda, M

    A. Dorda, M. Ganahl, H. G. Evertz, W. von der Linden, and E. Arrigoni, Auxiliary master equation approach 18 within matrix product states: Spectral properties of the nonequilibrium Anderson impurity model, Physical Re- view B92, 125145 (2015), publisher: American Physical Society

    2015

  51. [59]

    Schwarz, M

    F. Schwarz, M. Goldstein, A. Dorda, E. Arrigoni, A. We- ichselbaum, and J. von Delft, Lindblad-driven discretized leads for nonequilibrium steady-state transport in quan- tum impurity models: Recovering the continuum limit, Physical Review B94, 155142 (2016), publisher: Amer- ...

    2016

  52. [60]

    Dorda, M

    A. Dorda, M. Sorantin, W. von der Linden, and E. Arrigoni, Optimized auxiliary representation of non- Markovian impurity problems by a Lindblad equation, New Journal of Physics 19, 063005 (2017), publisher: IOP Publishing, arXiv:1608.04632

    2017 arXiv

  53. [61]

    D. M. Fugger, A. Dorda, F. Schwarz, J. v. Delft, and E. Arrigoni, Nonequilibrium Kondo effect in a magnetic field: auxiliary master equation approach, New Journal of Physics20, 013030 (2018), publisher: IOP Publishing

    2018

  54. [62]

    Schwarz, I

    F. Schwarz, I. Weymann, J. von Delft, and A. Weichsel- baum, Nonequilibrium Steady-State Transport in Quan- tum Impurity Models: A Thermofield and Quantum Quench Approach Using Matrix Product States, Physical Review Letters121, 137702 (2018), publisher: American Physical Society

    2018

  55. [63]

    F. Chen, E. Arrigoni, and M. Galperin, Markovian treat- ment of non-Markovian dynamics of open Fermionic sys- tems, New Journal of Physics21, 123035 (2019), pub- lisher: IOP Publishing

    2019

  56. [64]

    F. Chen, G. Cohen, and M. Galperin, Auxiliary Master Equation for Nonequilibrium Dual-Fermion Approach, Physical Review Letters122, 186803 (2019), publisher: American Physical Society

    2019

  57. [65]

    M. E. Sorantin, D. M. Fugger, A. Dorda, W. von der Linden, and E. Arrigoni, Auxiliary master equation ap- proach within stochastic wave functions: Application to the interacting resonant level model, Physical Review E 99, 043303 (2019), publisher: American Physical Society

    2019

  58. [66]

    D. M. Fugger, D. Bauernfeind, M. E. Sorantin, and E. Arrigoni, Nonequilibrium pseudogap Anderson impu- rity model: A master equation tensor network approach, Physical Review B101, 165132 (2020), publisher: Amer- ican Physical Society

    2020

  59. [67]

    Lotem, A

    M. Lotem, A. Weichselbaum, J. von Delft, and M. Gold- stein, Renormalized Lindblad driving: A numerically ex- act nonequilibrium quantum impurity solver, Physical Review Research2, 043052 (2020), publisher: American Physical Society

    2020

  60. [68]

    Wójtowicz, J

    G. Wójtowicz, J. E. Elenewski, M. M. Rams, and M. Zwolak, Open System Tensor Networks and Kramers’ Crossover for Quantum Transport, Physical review. A 101, 10.1103/PhysRevA.101.050301 (2020)

    2020 doi

  61. [69]

    J. E. Elenewski, G. Wójtowicz, M. M. Rams, and M. Zwolak, Performance of Reservoir Discretizations in Quantum Transport Simulations, The Journal of Chemi- cal Physics155, 124117 (2021), arXiv:2105.01664 [cond- mat]

    2021 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Cirio, N

    M. Cirio, N. Lambert, P. Liang, P.-C. Kuo, Y.-N. Chen, P. Menczel, K. Funo, and F. Nori, Pseudofermion method for the exact description of fermionic environ- ments: From single-molecule electronics to the Kondo resonance, Physical Review Research5, 033011 (2023), publisher: Am...

    2023

  63. [71]

    de Vega, U

    I. de Vega, U. Schollwöck, and F. A. Wolf, How to dis- cretize a quantum bath for real-time evolution, Physical Review B92, 155126 (2015), publisher: American Phys- ical Society

    2015

  64. [72]

    A. C. Hewson,The Kondo Problem to Heavy Fermions , Cambridge Studies in Magnetism (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1993)

    1993

  65. [73]

    Besserve, M

    P. Besserve, M. Ferrero, and T. Ayral, Compact fermionic quantum state preparation with a natural- orbitalizing variational quantum eigensolving scheme 10.48550/arXiv.2406.14170 (2024), arXiv:2406.14170 [quant-ph]

    2024 doi arXiv

  66. [74]

    S. B. Bravyi and A. Y. Kitaev, Fermionic Quantum Com- putation, Annals of Physics298, 210 (2002)

    2002

  67. [75]

    Verstraete and J

    F. Verstraete and J. I. Cirac, Mapping local Hamiltoni- ans of fermions to local Hamiltonians of spins, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment2005, P09012 (2005)

    2005

  68. [76]

    S. Endo, I. Kurata, and Y. O. Nakagawa, Calculation of the Green’s function on near-term quantum computers, Physical Review Research 2, 033281 (2020), publisher: American Physical Society

    2020

  69. [77]

    Jamet, C

    F. Jamet, C. Lenihan, L. P. Lindoy, A. Agarwal, E. Fontana, B. A. Martin, and I. Rungger, Anderson im- purity solver integrating tensor network methods with quantum computing (2023), arXiv:2304.06587 [quant- ph], arXiv:2304.06587

    2023

  70. [78]

    Breuer, F

    H.-P. Breuer, F. Petruccione, H.-P. Breuer, and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford, New York, 2007)

    2007

  71. [79]

    Rammer, Quantum Field Theory of Non-equilibrium States (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007)

    J. Rammer, Quantum Field Theory of Non-equilibrium States (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007)

    2007

  72. [80]

    Boyd and L

    S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe,Convex Optimization, 1st ed. (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK ; New York, 2004)

    2004

  73. [81]

    Diamond and S

    S. Diamond and S. Boyd, CVXPY: A Python-embedded modeling language for convex optimization, Journal of Machine Learning Research17, 1 (2016)

    2016

  74. [82]

    Guo and D

    C. Guo and D. Poletti, Solutions for bosonic and fermionic dissipative quadratic open systems, Physical Review A95, 052107 (2017), publisher: American Phys- ical Society

    2017

  75. [83]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum computation and quantum information (Cambridge University Press, 2010)

    2010

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.