pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.25610 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-28 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: no theorem link

Optimizing ground state preparation protocols with autoresearch

Luis Mantilla Calder\'on , J\'er\^ome F. Gonthier , Ignacio Gustin , Varinia Bernales , Al\'an Aspuru-Guzik
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 02:05 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum ground state preparationcode mutation by agentsenergy proxy scoringprotocol optimizationquantum simulation automationvariational methodsrenormalization groupMonte Carlo sampling
0
0 comments X

The pith

Coding agents mutate basic quantum ground-state protocols into versions that yield better energy estimates under fixed computational budgets.

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

The paper tests whether language-model coding agents can automatically improve protocols for finding the lowest-energy states of quantum systems. Starting from simple baseline code for three standard preparation methods, the agent proposes mutations, runs the new versions, and keeps changes that produce lower energy proxies. This process runs on small spin models and molecular examples while staying inside preset limits on time and memory. If the approach holds, it reduces the need for manual expert tuning of simulation protocols.

Core claim

The agent starts with straightforward implementations of ground-state preparation routines and, through repeated cycles of code change, execution, and scoring by energy proxies, produces more elaborate protocols that reach lower estimated energies on both spin lattices and molecular Hamiltonians while respecting explicit space-time budgets.

What carries the argument

An iterative coding agent that proposes textual changes to simulation scripts, executes the revised code to obtain energy estimates, and retains mutations that improve the scalar score.

If this is right

  • The same mutation-and-score loop can be applied to any quantum routine that returns a single executable number for ranking candidate protocols.
  • Protocol complexity can increase automatically without exceeding preset computational limits on the test hardware.
  • The method works across variational, renormalization-group, and Monte Carlo families of ground-state algorithms.
  • Manual hyperparameter search is replaced by automated code evolution on the same class of models used for validation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If scalar scoring is available, the same agent loop could target other quantum tasks such as time evolution or state preparation for dynamics.
  • The approach opens a path to discovering protocol structures that human designers have not previously written down.
  • Success on small systems suggests the method scales to larger Hamiltonians provided the proxy evaluation itself remains cheap enough to run many times.

Load-bearing premise

Lower energy estimates from the evolved protocols reliably signal better ground-state convergence without separate human checks or additional metrics.

What would settle it

On a small system whose exact ground-state energy is known by direct diagonalization, an evolved protocol reports a lower proxy energy than the baseline but the prepared state fails to match the true ground state when measured by overlap or other independent diagnostics.

read the original abstract

Artificial intelligent language-model based coding agents have significantly changed the way we interact with computers in our day-to-day, as it is common to use them to create, improve, and run programming scripts only using natural language. Agent code updates can be better guided when such programs can be executed and scored automatically rather than judged by human preference. In quantum computing and classical quantum simulation settings, ground-state preparation has a parallel structure: candidate protocols can be ranked by estimated energies and other proxies indicating proper quantum-state convergence. In this work, we study how autoresearch, a code optimization strategy based on coding agents, can be used to optimize hyperparameter choices of different ground-state preparation and sampling protocols, including the variational quantum eigensolver (VQE), density matrix renormalization group (DMRG), and auxiliary-field quantum Monte Carlo (AFQMC). We validate the viability and capacity of this method on simple spin models and molecular Hamiltonians. Across all three settings, the agent mutates simple baselines into complex protocols with improved energy proxies while operating under constrained space-time computational budgets. We conclude with discussions of other quantum routines that support executable scalar scoring, enabling evolutionary coding agents to automate a substantial portion of the protocol-tuning work that would otherwise be required manually.

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

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper introduces autoresearch, an AI coding-agent framework that mutates and optimizes code for ground-state preparation protocols. It applies this to VQE, DMRG, and AFQMC on simple spin models and molecular Hamiltonians, claiming that the agent evolves baseline protocols into more complex ones that achieve improved energy proxies while respecting space-time computational budgets.

Significance. If the central claim holds with proper validation, the work could automate substantial portions of hyperparameter and protocol tuning in quantum simulation, where executable scalar scoring is feasible. It provides a concrete demonstration of evolutionary AI agents applied to quantum many-body methods, potentially freeing researchers from manual optimization loops.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results section (VQE experiments)] Results section (VQE experiments): The reported improvements in variational energies after mutation are not cross-validated against exact diagonalization on the small spin models employed. Without this, it is impossible to distinguish genuine protocol advances from scoring loopholes such as mutated ansatze that violate unitarity or symmetry constraints while still reporting lower proxy values.
  2. [AFQMC results] AFQMC results: The manuscript provides no details on how statistical error bars, population control, or sign-problem mitigation are incorporated into the scalar scoring function used by the agent. This leaves open the possibility that apparent energy improvements arise from fluctuations or artifacts rather than better state preparation.
  3. [Methods (scoring mechanism)] Methods (scoring mechanism): The paper does not specify the number of independent runs, statistical tests, or variance metrics used to establish that the mutated protocols consistently outperform baselines. The abstract's claim of improvement therefore lacks the quantitative support needed to substantiate robustness under constrained budgets.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Methods] The pseudocode or workflow diagram for the autoresearch loop should include explicit handling of execution timeouts and error recovery to clarify how the agent operates under the stated space-time constraints.
  2. [Throughout] Notation for energy proxies (e.g., distinction between variational energy, DMRG truncation error, and AFQMC mixed estimator) is used inconsistently across sections; a single table defining each proxy would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments, which highlight important aspects of validation and methodological transparency. We have revised the manuscript to address each point by adding explicit benchmarks, implementation details, and statistical reporting. Below we respond point by point.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Results section (VQE experiments): The reported improvements in variational energies after mutation are not cross-validated against exact diagonalization on the small spin models employed. Without this, it is impossible to distinguish genuine protocol advances from scoring loopholes such as mutated ansatze that violate unitarity or symmetry constraints while still reporting lower proxy values.

    Authors: We agree that direct comparison to exact diagonalization is necessary on small systems to rule out artifacts. In the revised manuscript we have added a dedicated validation subsection that reports exact ground-state energies for all spin models used in the VQE experiments. The evolved protocols are shown to reach energies closer to these exact values than the baselines, and we document explicit checks confirming that the mutated ansatze preserve unitarity and the symmetries of the Hamiltonian. revision: yes

  2. Referee: AFQMC results: The manuscript provides no details on how statistical error bars, population control, or sign-problem mitigation are incorporated into the scalar scoring function used by the agent. This leaves open the possibility that apparent energy improvements arise from fluctuations or artifacts rather than better state preparation.

    Authors: We acknowledge that these implementation details were insufficiently described. The revised Methods section now specifies that the AFQMC scoring function uses the mean energy after population control has stabilized, with error bars obtained from block averaging over independent walker populations. Sign-problem mitigation follows the standard phaseless approximation, and only scores whose error bars lie below a fixed threshold are accepted for ranking; these criteria are applied uniformly to both baseline and mutated protocols. revision: yes

  3. Referee: Methods (scoring mechanism): The paper does not specify the number of independent runs, statistical tests, or variance metrics used to establish that the mutated protocols consistently outperform baselines. The abstract's claim of improvement therefore lacks the quantitative support needed to substantiate robustness under constrained budgets.

    Authors: We agree that quantitative robustness metrics were missing. The revised manuscript states that every protocol comparison was performed over 20 independent runs with distinct random seeds. We now report mean energy improvements together with standard deviations and include paired t-test p-values demonstrating that the observed gains are statistically significant at the 0.05 level under the fixed space-time budgets. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical agent-based optimization relies on external quantum proxies

full rationale

The paper presents an empirical workflow in which autoresearch agents mutate code for VQE/DMRG/AFQMC protocols and rank outputs using scalar energy estimates and convergence proxies supplied by the underlying quantum methods themselves. No derivation chain, uniqueness theorem, or first-principles prediction is claimed; the central result is simply that mutated protocols yield lower proxy values under compute budgets. Because the scoring functions are defined externally by standard quantum algorithms (variational energy, DMRG truncation error, AFQMC statistical estimates) and are not fitted or redefined inside the paper, no step reduces to a self-definition or fitted-input prediction. Any self-citations are incidental and non-load-bearing for the reported improvements.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The approach assumes that scalar energy proxies are sufficient to guide evolutionary improvement of protocols and that the agent operates without external human preference signals.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Energy estimates serve as reliable proxies for ground-state convergence
    The paper ranks protocols by estimated energies, presupposing this ordering correlates with actual state quality.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5539 in / 1203 out tokens · 35729 ms · 2026-05-11T02:05:25.700620+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

97 extracted references · 97 canonical work pages · 2 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Alhussein Fawzi, Matej Balog, Aja Huang, Thomas Hubert, Bernardino Romera-Paredes, Mohammadamin Barekatain, Alexander Novikov, Francisco J. R. Ruiz, Julian Schrittwieser, Grzegorz Swirszcz, David Silver, Demis Hassabis, and Pushmeet Kohli. AlphaTensor: Discovering faster matrix multiplication algorithms with reinforcement learning.Nature, 610:47–53, 2022....

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05172-4 2022

  2. [2]

    Mankowitz, Andrea Michi, Anton Zhernov, Marco Gelmi, Marco Selvi, Cosmin Paduraru, Edouard Leurent, Shariq Iqbal, Jean-Baptiste Lespiau, Alex Ahern, et al

    Daniel J. Mankowitz, Andrea Michi, Anton Zhernov, Marco Gelmi, Marco Selvi, Cosmin Paduraru, Edouard Leurent, Shariq Iqbal, Jean-Baptiste Lespiau, Alex Ahern, et al. AlphaDev: Faster sorting algorithms discovered using deep reinforcement learning.Nature, 618:257–263, 2023.doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06004-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06004-9 2023

  3. [3]

    , author Barekatain, M

    Bernardino Romera-Paredes, Mohammadamin Barekatain, Alexander Novikov, Matej Balog, M. Pawan Kumar, Emilien Dupont, Francisco J. R. Ruiz, Jordan S. Ellenberg, Pengming Wang, Omar Fawzi, George Holland, Pushmeet Kohli, and Alhussein Fawzi. Mathematical discoveries from program search with large language models. Nature, 625:468–475, 2024.doi:10.1038/s41586-...

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06924-6 2024

  4. [4]

    Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards Implicitly Incentivizes Correct Reasoning in Base LLMs

    Xumeng Wen, Zihan Liu, Shun Zheng, Shengyu Ye, Zhirong Wu, Yang Wang, Zhijian Xu, Xiao Liang, Junjie Li, Ziming Miao, Jiang Bian, and Mao Yang. Reinforcement learning with verifiable rewards implicitly incentivizes correct reasoning in base LLMs. InThe Fourteenth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2026. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2506.14245. 8

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.14245 2026

  5. [5]

    Dohan, and David R

    Angelica Chen, David M. Dohan, and David R. So. EvoPrompting: Language models for code-level neural architecture search. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36, pages 7787–7817, 2023.doi: 10.52202/075280-0342

    work page doi:10.52202/075280-0342 2023

  6. [6]

    Evolution of heuristics: Towards efficient automatic algorithm design using large language model, 2024

    Fei Liu, Xialiang Tong, Mingxuan Yuan, Xi Lin, Fu Luo, Zhenkun Wang, Zhichao Lu, and Qingfu Zhang. Evolution of heuristics: Towards efficient automatic algorithm design using large language model, 2024. ICML 2024

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Agrawal, Shangyin Tan, Dilara Soylu, Noah Ziems, Rishi Khare, Krista Opsahl-Ong, Arnav Singhvi, Herumb Shandilya, Michael J

    Lakshya A. Agrawal, Shangyin Tan, Dilara Soylu, Noah Ziems, Rishi Khare, Krista Opsahl-Ong, Arnav Singhvi, Herumb Shandilya, Michael J. Ryan, Meng Jiang, Christopher Potts, Koushik Sen, Alexandros G. Dimakis, Ion Stoica, Dan Klein, Matei Zaharia, and Omar Khattab. GEPA: Reflective prompt evolution can outperform reinforcement learning, 2025

    work page 2025

  8. [8]

    ReEvo: Large language models as hyper-heuristics with reflective evolution

    Federico Berto, Zhiguang Cao, Chuanbo Hua, Haeyeon Kim, Jinkyoo Park, Guojie Song, Jiarui Wang, and Haoran Ye. ReEvo: Large language models as hyper-heuristics with reflective evolution. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems 37, pages 43571–43608, 2024.doi:10.52202/079017-1381

    work page doi:10.52202/079017-1381 2024

  9. [9]

    Alexander Novikov, Ngan Vu, Marvin Eisenberger, Emilien Dupont, Po-Sen Huang, Adam Zsolt Wagner, Sergey Shirobokov, Borislav Kozlovskii, Francisco J. R. Ruiz, Abbas Mehrabian, M. Pawan Kumar, Abigail See, Swarat Chaudhuri, George Holland, Alex Davies, Sebastian Nowozin, Pushmeet Kohli, and Matej Balog. AlphaEvolve: A coding agent for scientific and algori...

    work page 2025

  10. [10]

    OpenEvolve: Open-source implementation of an evolutionary coding agent

    Asankhaya Sharma. OpenEvolve: Open-source implementation of an evolutionary coding agent. GitHub repository,

    work page

  11. [11]

    Accessed 2026-03-26

    URLhttps://github.com/algorithmicsuperintelligence/OpenEvolve. Accessed 2026-03-26

    work page 2026

  12. [12]

    Learning to discover at test time, 2026

    Mert Yuksekgonul, Daniel Koceja, Xinhao Li, Federico Bianchi, Jed McCaleb, Xiaolong Wang, Jan Kautz, Yejin Choi, James Zou, Carlos Guestrin, and Yu Sun. Learning to discover at test time, 2026

    work page 2026

  13. [13]

    Darwin G

    Jenny Zhang, Shengran Hu, Cong Lu, Robert Tjarko Lange, and Jeff Clune. Darwin Gödel machine: Open-ended evolution of self-improving agents. InInternational Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2026. doi:10.48550/arXiv.2505.22954. ICLR 2026 Poster

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2505.22954 2026

  14. [14]

    Autonomous chemical research with large language models

    Daniil A. Boiko, Robert MacKnight, Ben Kline, and Gabe Gomes. Autonomous chemical research with large language models.Nature, 624:570–578, 2023.doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06792-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06792-0 2023

  15. [15]

    Organa: A robotic assistant for automated chemistry experimentation and characterization.Matter, 8(2), 2025.doi:10.1016/j.matt.2024.10.015

    Kourosh Darvish, Marta Skreta, Yuchi Zhao, Naruki Yoshikawa, Sagnik Som, Miroslav Bogdanovic, Yang Cao, Han Hao, Haoping Xu, Alán Aspuru-Guzik, et al. Organa: A robotic assistant for automated chemistry experimentation and characterization.Matter, 8(2), 2025.doi:10.1016/j.matt.2024.10.015

    work page doi:10.1016/j.matt.2024.10.015 2025

  16. [16]

    Juraj Gottweis, Wei-Hung Weng, Alexander N. Daryin, Tao Tu, Anil Palepu, Petar Sirkovic, Artiom Myaskovsky, Felix Weissenberger, Keran Rong, Ryutaro Tanno, Khaled Saab, Dan Popovici, Jacob Blum, Fan Zhang, Katherine Chou, Avinatan Hassidim, Burak Gokturk, Amin Vahdat, Pushmeet Kohli, Yossi Matias, Andrew Carroll, Kavita Kulkarni, Nenad Tomasev, Yuan Guan,...

    work page 2025

  17. [17]

    Yunheng Zou, Austin H. Cheng, Abdulrahman Aldossary, Jiaru Bai, Shi Xuan Leong, Jorge Arturo Campos- Gonzalez-Angulo, Changhyeok Choi, Cher Tian Ser, Gary Tom, Andrew Wang, Zijian Zhang, Ilya Yakavets, Han Hao, Chris Crebolder, Varinia Bernales, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. El agente: An autonomous agent for quantum chemistry.Matter, 8(7):102263, 2025.doi:10.10...

    work page doi:10.1016/j.matt.2025.102263 2025

  18. [18]

    Pérez-Sánchez, Jérôme F

    Ignacio Gustin, Luis Mantilla Calderón, Juan B. Pérez-Sánchez, Jérôme F. Gonthier, Yuma Nakamura, Karthik Panicker, Manav Ramprasad, Zijian Zhang, Yunheng Zou, Varinia Bernales, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. El agente cuántico: Automating quantum simulations, 2025

    work page 2025

  19. [19]

    Pérez-Sánchez, Yunheng Zou, Jorge A

    Juan B. Pérez-Sánchez, Yunheng Zou, Jorge A. Campos-Gonzalez-Angulo, Marcel Müller, Ignacio Gustin, Andrew Wang, Han Hao, Tsz Wai Ko, Changhyeok Choi, Eric S. Isbrandt, Mohammad Ghazi Vakili, Hanyong Xu, Chris Crebolder, Varinia Bernales, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. El agente quntur: A research collaborator agent for quantum chemistry, 2026

    work page 2026

  20. [20]

    Pérez-Sánchez, Ignacio Gustin, Hanyong Xu, Mohammad Ghazi Vakili, Chris Crebolder, Alán Aspuru-Guzik, and Varinia Bernales

    Changhyeok Choi, Yunheng Zou, Marcel Müller, Han Hao, Yeonghun Kang, Juan B. Pérez-Sánchez, Ignacio Gustin, Hanyong Xu, Mohammad Ghazi Vakili, Chris Crebolder, Alán Aspuru-Guzik, and Varinia Bernales. El agente estructural: An artificially intelligent molecular editor, 2026

    work page 2026

  21. [21]

    El agente sólido: A new age(nt) for solid state simulations, 2026

    Sai Govind Hari Kumar, Yunheng Zou, Andrew Wang, Jesús Valdés-Hernández, Tsz Wai Ko, Nathan Yue, Olivia Leng, Hanyong Xu, Chris Crebolder, Alán Aspuru-Guzik, and Varinia Bernales. El agente sólido: A new age(nt) for solid state simulations, 2026. 9

    work page 2026

  22. [22]

    El agente gráfico: Structured execution graphs for scientific agents, 2026

    Jiaru Bai, Yunheng Zou, Andrew Wang, Changhyeok Choi, Mohammad Ghazi Vakili, Hanyong Xu, Chris Crebolder, Varinia Bernales, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. El agente gráfico: Structured execution graphs for scientific agents, 2026

    work page 2026

  23. [23]

    Active learning machine learns to create new quantum experiments.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(6):1221–1226, 2018.doi:10.1073/pnas.1714936115

    Alexey A Melnikov, Hendrik Poulsen Nautrup, Mario Krenn, Vedran Dunjko, Markus Tiersch, Anton Zeilinger, and Hans J Briegel. Active learning machine learns to create new quantum experiments.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(6):1221–1226, 2018.doi:10.1073/pnas.1714936115

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1714936115 2018

  24. [24]

    Automated discovery of superconducting circuits and its application to 4-local coupler design.arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.03322, 2019.doi:10.48550/arXiv.1912.03322

    Tim Menke, Florian Häse, Simon Gustavsson, Andrew J Kerman, William D Oliver, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. Automated discovery of superconducting circuits and its application to 4-local coupler design.arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.03322, 2019.doi:10.48550/arXiv.1912.03322

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.1912.03322 1912

  25. [25]

    Agents for self-driving laboratories applied to quantum computing,

    Shuxiang Cao, Zijian Zhang, Mohammed Alghadeer, Simone D Fasciati, Michele Piscitelli, Mustafa Bakr, Peter Leek, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. Agents for self-driving laboratories applied to quantum computing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.07978, 2024.doi:10.48550/arXiv.2412.07978

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2412.07978 2024

  26. [26]

    Mitchener, A

    Ludovico Mitchener, Angela Yiu, Benjamin Chang, Mathieu Bourdenx, Tyler Nadolski, Arvis Sulovari, Eric C Landsness, Daniel L Barabasi, Siddharth Narayanan, Nicky Evans, et al. Kosmos: An ai scientist for autonomous discovery.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.02824, 2025.doi:10.48550/arXiv.2511.02824

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.02824 2025

  27. [27]

    Towards autonomous quantum physics research using llm agents with access to intelligenttools,

    Sören Arlt, Xuemei Gu, and Mario Krenn. Towards autonomous quantum physics research using llm agents with access to intelligent tools.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.11752, 2025.doi:10.48550/arXiv.2511.11752

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2511.11752 2025

  28. [28]

    Digital discovery of interferometric gravitational wave detectors.Physical Review X, 15(2):021012, 2025.doi:10.1103/physrevx.15.021012

    Mario Krenn, Yehonathan Drori, and Rana X Adhikari. Digital discovery of interferometric gravitational wave detectors.Physical Review X, 15(2):021012, 2025.doi:10.1103/physrevx.15.021012

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.15.021012 2025

  29. [29]

    Lange, et al

    Cong Lu, Chao Lu, Robert T. Lange, et al. Towards end-to-end automation of AI research.Nature, 651:914–919, 2026.doi:10.1038/s41586-026-10265-5

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-026-10265-5 2026

  30. [30]

    Meta-designing quantum ex- periments with language models.Nature Machine Intelligence, pages 1–10, 2026.doi:10.1038/s42256-025-01153-0

    Sören Arlt, Haonan Duan, Felix Li, Sang Michael Xie, Yuhuai Wu, and Mario Krenn. Meta-designing quantum ex- periments with language models.Nature Machine Intelligence, pages 1–10, 2026.doi:10.1038/s42256-025-01153-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s42256-025-01153-0 2026

  31. [31]

    GPT-5.4 Thinking System Card

    OpenAI. GPT-5.4 Thinking System Card. System card, 2026. URL https://deploymentsafety.openai.com/ gpt-5-4-thinking/gpt-5-4-thinking.pdf. Accessed 2026-04-12

    work page 2026

  32. [32]

    Claude opus 4.6 system card

    Anthropic. Claude opus 4.6 system card. System card, 2026. URLhttps://www.anthropic.com/system-cards. Accessed 2026-04-12

    work page 2026

  33. [33]

    Nemotron 3 super: Open, efficient mixture-of-experts hybrid mamba-transformer model for agentic reasoning, 2026

    NVIDIA. Nemotron 3 super: Open, efficient mixture-of-experts hybrid mamba-transformer model for agentic reasoning, 2026

    work page 2026

  34. [34]

    autoresearch

    Andrej Karpathy. autoresearch. GitHub repository, 2026. URL https://github.com/karpathy/autoresearch. Accessed 2026-03-26

    work page 2026

  35. [35]

    Nature Communications5(1), 4213 (2014) https://doi.org/ 10.1038/ncomms5213

    Alberto Peruzzo, Jarrod McClean, Peter Shadbolt, Man-Hong Yung, Xiao-Qi Zhou, Peter J. Love, Alán Aspuru- Guzik, and Jeremy L. O’Brien. A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor.Nature Communications, 5:4213, 2014.doi:10.1038/ncomms5213

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms5213 2014

  36. [36]

    The theory of variational hybrid quantum-classical algorithms,

    Jarrod R. McClean, Jonathan Romero, Ryan Babbush, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. The theory of variational hybrid quantum-classical algorithms.New Journal of Physics, 18(2):023023, 2016.doi:10.1088/1367-2630/18/2/023023

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/18/2/023023 2016

  37. [37]

    Olson, Matthias Degroote, Peter D

    Yudong Cao, Jonathan Romero, Jonathan P. Olson, Matthias Degroote, Peter D. Johnson, Mária Kieferová, Ian D. Kivlichan, Tim Menke, Borja Peropadre, Nicolas P. D. Sawaya, Sukin Sim, Libor Veis, and Alán Aspuru- Guzik. Quantum chemistry in the age of quantum computing.Chemical Reviews, 119(19):10856–10915, 2019. doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00803

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00803 2019

  38. [38]

    Kottmann, Tim Menke, Wai-Keong Mok, Sukin Sim, Leong-Chuan Kwek, and Al´ an Aspuru-Guzik

    Kishor Bharti, Alba Cervera-Lierta, Thi Ha Kyaw, Tobias Haug, Sumner Alperin-Lea, Abhinav Anand, Matthias Degroote, Hermanni Heimonen, Jakob S Kottmann, Tim Menke, et al. Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms.Reviews of Modern Physics, 94(1):015004, 2022.doi:10.1103/revmodphys.94.015004

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.94.015004 2022

  39. [39]

    Thermodynamic limit of density matrix renormalization.Physical Review Letters, 75(19):3537–3540, 1995.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.3537

    Stellan Östlund and Stefan Rommer. Thermodynamic limit of density matrix renormalization.Physical Review Letters, 75(19):3537–3540, 1995.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.3537

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.75.3537 1995

  40. [40]

    Schollwöck,The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Annals of Physics326(1), 96 (2011), doi:10.1016/j.aop.2010.09.012

    Ulrich Schollwöck. The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states.Annals of Physics, 326(1):96–192, 2011.doi:10.1016/j.aop.2010.09.012

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aop.2010.09.012 2011

  41. [41]

    Orús,A practical introduction to tensor networks: Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states, Annals of Physics349, 117 (2014), doi:10.1016/j.aop.2014.06.013

    Román Orús. A practical introduction to tensor networks: Matrix product states and projected entangled pair states.Annals of Physics, 349:117–158, 2014.doi:10.1016/j.aop.2014.06.013. 10

    work page doi:10.1016/j.aop.2014.06.013 2014

  42. [42]

    Blankenbecler, D

    R. Blankenbecler, D. J. Scalapino, and R. L. Sugar. Monte carlo calculations of coupled boson-fermion systems. I. Physical Review D, 24(8):2278–2286, 1981.doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.24.2278

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.24.2278 1981

  43. [43]

    D. J. Scalapino and R. L. Sugar. Monte carlo calculations of coupled boson-fermion systems. II.Physical Review B, 24(8):4295–4308, 1981.doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.24.4295

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.24.4295 1981

  44. [44]

    Quantum monte carlo method using phase-free random walks with slater determinants.Physical Review Letters, 90(13):136401, 2003.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.136401

    Shiwei Zhang and Henry Krakauer. Quantum monte carlo method using phase-free random walks with slater determinants.Physical Review Letters, 90(13):136401, 2003.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.136401

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.90.136401 2003

  45. [45]

    C. Lanczos. An iteration method for the solution of the eigenvalue problem of linear differential and integral operators.Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards, 45(4):255–282, 1950.doi:10.6028/jres.045.026

    work page doi:10.6028/jres.045.026 1950

  46. [46]

    On the adiabatic theorem of quantum mechanics.Journal of the Physical Society of Japan, 5(6): 435–439, 1950.doi:10.1143/JPSJ.5.435

    Tosio Kato. On the adiabatic theorem of quantum mechanics.Journal of the Physical Society of Japan, 5(6): 435–439, 1950.doi:10.1143/JPSJ.5.435

    work page doi:10.1143/jpsj.5.435 1950

  47. [47]

    Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution, 2000

    Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, Sam Gutmann, and Michael Sipser. Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution, 2000

    work page 2000

  48. [48]

    Kirkpatrick and C

    S. Kirkpatrick, C. D. Gelatt Jr., and M. P. Vecchi. Optimization by simulated annealing.Science, 220(4598): 671–680, 1983.doi:10.1126/science.220.4598.671

    work page doi:10.1126/science.220.4598.671 1983

  49. [49]

    D. R. Hartree. The wave mechanics of an atom with a non-coulomb central field. part ii. some results and discussion.Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 24(1):111–132, 1928.doi:10.1017/ S0305004100011920

    work page 1928

  50. [50]

    V. Fock. Näherungsmethode zur lösung des quantenmechanischen mehrkörperproblems.Zeitschrift für Physik, 61 (1-2):126–148, 1930.doi:10.1007/BF01340294

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01340294 1930

  51. [51]

    Steven R. White. Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups.Physical Review Letters, 69 (19):2863–2866, 1992.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.69.2863

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.69.2863 1992

  52. [52]

    Steven R. White. Density-matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups.Physical Review B, 48(14): 10345–10356, 1993.doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.48.10345

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.48.10345 1993

  53. [53]

    Über eine neue methode zur lösung gewisser variationsprobleme der mathematischen physik.Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik, 135:1–61, 1909.doi:10.1515/crll.1909.135.1

    Walter Ritz. Über eine neue methode zur lösung gewisser variationsprobleme der mathematischen physik.Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik, 135:1–61, 1909.doi:10.1515/crll.1909.135.1

    work page doi:10.1515/crll.1909.135.1 1909

  54. [54]

    Carlson, and J

    Shiwei Zhang, J. Carlson, and J. E. Gubernatis. Constrained path quantum monte carlo method for fermion ground states.Physical Review Letters, 74(18):3652–3655, 1995.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.3652

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.74.3652 1995

  55. [55]

    W. A. Al-Saidi, Shiwei Zhang, and Henry Krakauer. Auxiliary-field quantum monte carlo calculations of molecular systems with a gaussian basis.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 124(22):224101, 2006.doi:10.1063/1.2200885

    work page doi:10.1063/1.2200885 2006

  56. [56]

    Matthew Amy, Dmitri Maslov, and Michele Mosca. Polynomial-time t-depth optimization of clifford+t circuits via matroid partitioning.IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems, 33 (10):1476–1489, 2014.doi:10.1109/TCAD.2014.2341953

    work page doi:10.1109/tcad.2014.2341953 2014

  57. [57]

    Quantum circuits as a game: A reinforcement learning agent for quantum compilation and its application to reconfigurable neutral atom arrays, 2025

    Kouhei Nakaji, Jonathan Wurtz, Haozhe Huang, Luis Mantilla Calderón, Karthik Panicker, Elica Kyoseva, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. Quantum circuits as a game: A reinforcement learning agent for quantum compilation and its application to reconfigurable neutral atom arrays, 2025

    work page 2025

  58. [58]

    Grimsley, Sophia E

    Harper R. Grimsley, Sophia E. Economou, Edwin Barnes, and Nicholas J. Mayhall. An adaptive variational algorithm for exact molecular simulations on a quantum computer.Nature Communications, 10(1):3007, 2019. doi:10.1038/s41467-019-10988-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-019-10988-2 2019

  59. [59]

    Rattew, Shaohan Hu, Marco Pistoia, Richard Chen, and Steve Wood

    Arthur G. Rattew, Shaohan Hu, Marco Pistoia, Richard Chen, and Steve Wood. A domain-agnostic, noise-resistant, hardware-efficient evolutionary variational quantum eigensolver, 2019

    work page 2019

  60. [60]

    Quantum circuit architecture search for variational quantum algorithms.npj Quantum Information, 8(1):62, 2022.doi:10.1038/s41534-022-00570-y

    Yuxuan Du, Tao Huang, Shan You, Min-Hsiu Hsieh, and Dacheng Tao. Quantum circuit architecture search for variational quantum algorithms.npj Quantum Information, 8(1):62, 2022.doi:10.1038/s41534-022-00570-y

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-022-00570-y 2022

  61. [61]

    Kottmann, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik

    Alba Cervera-Lierta, Jakob S. Kottmann, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. The meta-variational quantum eigensolver (meta-vqe): Learning energy profiles of parameterized hamiltonians for quantum simulation.PRX Quantum, 2(2): 020329, 2021.doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.020329

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.2.020329 2021

  62. [62]

    Kouhei Nakaji, Lasse Bjørn Kristensen, Ryota Kemmoku, Jorge A. Campos-Gonzalez-Angulo, Mohammad Ghazi Vakili, Haozhe Huang, Mohsen Bagherimehrab, Christoph Gorgulla, FuTe Wong, Alex McCaskey, Jin-Sung Kim, Thien Nguyen, Pooja Rao, Qi Gao, Michihiko Sugawara, Naoki Yamamoto, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik. The generative quantum eigensolver (gqe) and its applicatio...

    work page 2024

  63. [63]

    Shi, L.-M

    Y.-Y. Shi, L.-M. Duan, and G. Vidal. Classical simulation of quantum many-body systems with a tree tensor network.Physical Review A, 74(2):022320, 2006.doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.74.022320

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.74.022320 2006

  64. [64]

    G. Vidal. Entanglement renormalization.Physical Review Letters, 99(22):220405, 2007.doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett. 99.220405

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2007

  65. [65]

    Verstraete , author V

    F. Verstraete, V. Murg, and J. I. Cirac. Matrix product states, projected entangled pair states, and variational renormalization group methods for quantum spin systems.Advances in Physics, 57(2):143–224, 2008. doi: 10.1080/14789940801912366

    work page doi:10.1080/14789940801912366 2008

  66. [66]

    Valentin Murg, Frank Verstraete, Reinhold Schneider, Peter R Nagy, and O Legeza. Tree tensor network state with variable tensor order: An efficient multireference method for strongly correlated systems.Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation, 11(3):1027–1036, 2015.doi:10.1021/ct501187j

    work page doi:10.1021/ct501187j 2015

  67. [67]

    Stochastic properties of the frequency dynamics in real and synthetic power grids,

    Toshiya Hikihara, Hiroshi Ueda, Kouichi Okunishi, Kenji Harada, and Tomotoshi Nishino. Automatic structural optimization of tree tensor networks.Physical Review Research, 5(1):013031, 2023.doi:10.1103/physrevresearch. 5.013031

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch 2023

  68. [68]

    Differentiable programming tensor networks.Physical Review X, 9(3):031041, 2019.doi:10.1103/physrevx.9.031041

    Hai-Jun Liao, Jin-Guo Liu, Lei Wang, and Tao Xiang. Differentiable programming tensor networks.Physical Review X, 9(3):031041, 2019.doi:10.1103/physrevx.9.031041

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.9.031041 2019

  69. [69]

    Weber, David R

    James Shee, John L. Weber, David R. Reichman, Richard A. Friesner, and Shiwei Zhang. On the potentially transformative role of auxiliary-field quantum monte carlo in quantum chemistry: A highly accurate method for transition metals and beyond.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 158(14):140901, 2023.doi:10.1063/5.0134009

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0134009 2023

  70. [70]

    Symmetry in auxiliary-field quantum monte carlo calculations.Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 88(12):125132, 2013.doi:10.1103/physrevb.88.125132

    Hao Shi and Shiwei Zhang. Symmetry in auxiliary-field quantum monte carlo calculations.Physical Review B—Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 88(12):125132, 2013.doi:10.1103/physrevb.88.125132

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.88.125132 2013

  71. [71]

    Mingpu Qin, Hao Shi, and Shiwei Zhang. Coupling quantum monte carlo and independent-particle calculations: Self-consistent constraint for the sign problem based on the density or the density matrix.Physical Review B, 94 (23):235119, 2016.doi:10.1103/physrevb.94.235119

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.94.235119 2016

  72. [72]

    Selected configuration interaction wave functions in phaseless auxiliary field quantum monte carlo.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 156(17), 2022.doi:10.1063/5.0087047

    Ankit Mahajan, Joonho Lee, and Sandeep Sharma. Selected configuration interaction wave functions in phaseless auxiliary field quantum monte carlo.The Journal of Chemical Physics, 156(17), 2022.doi:10.1063/5.0087047

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0087047 2022

  73. [73]

    Mingpu Qin. Self-consistent optimization of the trial wave function within the constrained path auxiliary field quantum monte carlo method using mixed estimators.Physical Review B, 107(23):235124, 2023. doi: 10.1103/physrevb.107.235124

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.107.235124 2023

  74. [74]

    Self-refinement of auxiliary-field quantum monte carlo via non-orthogonal configuration interaction.Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation, 21(9):4481–4493, 2025

    Zoran Sukurma, Martin Schlipf, and Georg Kresse. Self-refinement of auxiliary-field quantum monte carlo via non-orthogonal configuration interaction.Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation, 21(9):4481–4493, 2025. doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.5c00127

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.5c00127 2025

  75. [75]

    Dutoi and Peter J

    Alán Aspuru-Guzik, Anthony D. Dutoi, Peter J. Love, and Martin Head-Gordon. Simulated quantum computation of molecular energies.Science, 309(5741):1704–1707, 2005.doi:10.1126/science.1113479

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1113479 2005

  76. [76]

    Kottmann, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik.Quantum Computing for Quantum Chemistry

    Philipp Schleich, Luis Mantilla Calderón, Chong Sun, Mohsen Bagherimehrab, Abdulrahman Aldossary, Jakob S. Kottmann, and Alán Aspuru-Guzik.Quantum Computing for Quantum Chemistry. ACS In Focus. American Chemical Society, 2025. ISBN 9780841295964.doi:10.1021/acsinfocus.7e9012

    work page doi:10.1021/acsinfocus.7e9012 2025

  77. [77]

    Über das paulische äquivalenzverbot.Zeitschrift für Physik, 47(9–10): 631–651, 1928.doi:10.1007/BF01331938

    Pascual Jordan and Eugene Wigner. Über das paulische äquivalenzverbot.Zeitschrift für Physik, 47(9–10): 631–651, 1928.doi:10.1007/BF01331938

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01331938 1928

  78. [78]

    McClean, Nicholas C

    Jarrod R. McClean, Nicholas C. Rubin, Kevin J. Sung, Ian D. Kivlichan, Nathan Wiebe, Peter J. Love, Alán Aspuru-Guzik, et al. OpenFermion: The electronic structure package for quantum computers.Quantum Science and Technology, 5(3):034014, 2020.doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ab8ebc

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ab8ebc 2020

  79. [79]

    Sun , author T

    Qiming Sun, Timothy C. Berkelbach, Nick S. Blunt, George H. Booth, Sheng Guo, Zhendong Li, Junzi Liu, James D. McClain, Elvira R. Sayfutyarova, Sandeep Sharma, Sebastian Wouters, and Garnet Kin-Lic Chan. PySCF: The python-based simulations of chemistry framework.WIREs Computational Molecular Science, 8(1): e1340, 2018.doi:10.1002/wcms.1340

    work page doi:10.1002/wcms.1340 2018

  80. [80]

    Nature Communications9(1) (2018) https:// doi.org/10.1038/s41467-018-07090-4

    Jarrod R. McClean, Sergio Boixo, Vadim N. Smelyanskiy, Ryan Babbush, and Hartmut Neven. Bar- ren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes.Nature Communications, 9(1), 2018. doi: 10.1038/s41467-018-07090-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07090-4 2018

Showing first 80 references.