pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.05297 · v1 · pith:4NGO547Pnew · submitted 2026-06-03 · 🪐 quant-ph · hep-lat· nucl-th

Continuous-variable ADAPT-VQE for bosonic lattice models

Dimitrios Athanasakos , Gloria Tejedor-Garc\'ia , Jack Y. Araz , Mafalda Ram\^oa , Bharath Sambasivam , Sophia E. Economou , Felix Ringer This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 05:37 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph hep-latnucl-th
keywords continuous-variable quantum computingADAPT-VQEbosonic lattice modelsBose-Hubbard modelKitaev chainvariational quantum eigensolverground state preparationsymmetry preservation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Continuous-variable ADAPT-VQE produces shallower circuits for bosonic lattice models than standard VQE.

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

The paper introduces CV-ADAPT-VQE as a method to prepare ground states of bosonic systems using an adaptive variational quantum algorithm on continuous-variable hardware. It demonstrates the approach on the Bose-Hubbard model, which conserves total boson number, and on the bosonic Kitaev chain with optional Kerr interaction, which conserves global parity. Tailored operator pools that preserve these symmetries are used to build the ansatz iteratively. GPU-based classical simulations show that this adaptive selection yields significantly shallower circuits than non-adaptive Hamiltonian-based VQE methods. This reduction in depth matters for making quantum simulations of condensed-matter, chemistry, and high-energy models feasible on near-term devices.

Core claim

We present a continuous-variable adaptive variational quantum eigensolver (CV-ADAPT-VQE) that constructs symmetry-preserving operator pools for bosonic models and, via GPU simulations, achieves significantly shallower circuits for ground-state preparation of the Bose-Hubbard model and the bosonic Kitaev chain than Hamiltonian-based VQE approaches.

What carries the argument

CV-ADAPT-VQE with symmetry-preserving operator pools that iteratively select operators to build a variational ansatz while respecting conserved quantities such as boson number or parity.

If this is right

  • Shallow circuits from CV-ADAPT-VQE enable simulation of larger bosonic lattice sizes on current quantum hardware.
  • The method directly supports ground-state studies in condensed-matter systems that conserve particle number or parity.
  • Extension to models with on-site interactions, such as Kerr terms, remains compatible with the symmetry-preserving pools.
  • The approach opens pathways for quantum simulations in quantum chemistry and high-energy physics involving bosonic degrees of freedom.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The adaptive selection may reduce the total number of two-mode gates needed compared with fixed-pool methods even when the final energy accuracy is held constant.
  • Testing the same pools on discrete-variable encodings of the same bosonic models could reveal whether the depth advantage is specific to continuous-variable hardware.
  • If the operator pools prove complete for a wider class of bosonic Hamiltonians, the technique could serve as a template for symmetry-aware ansatz construction in other variational algorithms.

Load-bearing premise

The symmetry-preserving operator pools are sufficient for the adaptive selection to converge to the ground state, and the classical GPU simulations correctly forecast performance gains on physical quantum hardware.

What would settle it

Executing the CV-ADAPT-VQE circuits on an actual continuous-variable quantum device and measuring whether the achieved circuit depth and energy accuracy match or exceed the reductions predicted by the classical simulations relative to standard VQE.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.05297 by Bharath Sambasivam, Dimitrios Athanasakos, Felix Ringer, Gloria Tejedor-Garc\'ia, Jack Y. Araz, Mafalda Ram\^oa, Sophia E. Economou.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Schematic illustration of the CV-ADAPT-VQE ground state preparation algorithm presented in this work. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Expectation value of the total boson number across the lattice [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Hamiltonian-based VQE ans¨atze for the Bose-Hubbard model (left) and the bosonic Kitaev chain (right) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: The energy difference between the variational energy and the exact ground-state energy ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: The energy difference between the variational energy and the exact ground-state energy (solid lines, left [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Difference between the variationally obtained energy and the result using exact diagonalization (solid lines, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: Energy difference with respect to exact diagonal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: FIG. 8: The energy difference between the variational energy and the exact ground-state energy, ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: The energy difference between the variational energy and the exact ground-state energy, ∆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: BFGS iterations as a function of the number of gates for CV-ADAPT-VQE with and without Hessian [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a continuous-variable adaptive variational quantum eigensolver (CV-ADAPT-VQE). As concrete examples, we consider the ground-state preparation for (i) the Bose-Hubbard model and (ii) the bosonic Kitaev chain, including its extension with an on-site Kerr interaction. The former conserves the total boson number, while the latter conserves global parity. We construct symmetry-preserving operator pools tailored to each case and show, using GPU-based classical simulations, that CV-ADAPT-VQE results in significantly shallower circuits compared to Hamiltonian-based VQE approaches. Our results point toward direct applications in quantum simulations of condensed-matter systems, quantum chemistry, and high-energy physics.

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

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper introduces continuous-variable ADAPT-VQE (CV-ADAPT-VQE) for ground-state preparation in bosonic lattice models, specifically the Bose-Hubbard model (particle-number conserving) and the bosonic Kitaev chain (parity conserving, with optional Kerr term). It constructs model-specific symmetry-preserving operator pools and reports GPU-based classical simulations showing that the adaptive method produces significantly shallower circuits than standard Hamiltonian-based VQE approaches.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the work could be significant for quantum simulation of bosonic condensed-matter systems, as shallower circuits are advantageous on near-term hardware. The explicit construction of symmetry-preserving pools and the use of GPU simulations for classical verification are strengths that provide a concrete, reproducible starting point for further development.

major comments (2)
  1. [Numerical simulations / results section] The central claim that CV-ADAPT-VQE yields shallower circuits for ground-state preparation rests on the assumption that the adaptive procedure converges to the true ground state. No comparison to exact diagonalization (or other high-accuracy benchmarks) for small system sizes is reported to confirm that the symmetry-preserving pools generate a sufficiently expressive ansatz within the relevant symmetry sector.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states that simulations demonstrate 'significantly shallower circuits' but the manuscript supplies no quantitative metrics (e.g., circuit depth values with error bars, convergence thresholds, or direct comparison tables) that would allow assessment of the magnitude or statistical significance of the reported advantage.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Methods] Notation for the continuous-variable operators and the precise definition of the symmetry-preserving pools could be clarified with an explicit listing or table in the methods section.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We are grateful to the referee for their thorough review and valuable comments on our manuscript. We believe the suggested additions will improve the clarity and rigor of our presentation. Below we provide point-by-point responses to the major comments.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Numerical simulations / results section] The central claim that CV-ADAPT-VQE yields shallower circuits for ground-state preparation rests on the assumption that the adaptive procedure converges to the true ground state. No comparison to exact diagonalization (or other high-accuracy benchmarks) for small system sizes is reported to confirm that the symmetry-preserving pools generate a sufficiently expressive ansatz within the relevant symmetry sector.

    Authors: We agree that verifying convergence to the true ground state is important. Our symmetry-preserving operator pools are designed to be expressive within the conserved symmetry sector (particle number for the Bose-Hubbard model and parity for the bosonic Kitaev chain), allowing the ansatz to represent the ground state. In the simulations, we track the variational energy, which stabilizes at a value consistent with the expected ground-state energy for the models considered. To directly address the referee's concern, we will add comparisons with exact diagonalization for small system sizes (such as 2 and 3 sites) in the revised results section, confirming that the final energies match the exact values. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The abstract states that simulations demonstrate 'significantly shallower circuits' but the manuscript supplies no quantitative metrics (e.g., circuit depth values with error bars, convergence thresholds, or direct comparison tables) that would allow assessment of the magnitude or statistical significance of the reported advantage.

    Authors: The main text includes detailed simulation results with figures displaying circuit depths for CV-ADAPT-VQE versus standard VQE across different system sizes and models. These figures provide the quantitative comparison, including the depths achieved. However, we acknowledge that the abstract could be more specific. We will revise the abstract to include quantitative examples of the depth reduction and add a table in the results section summarizing key metrics such as final circuit depths, energy convergence thresholds, and direct comparisons. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; results rest on new simulations of proposed method

full rationale

The paper introduces CV-ADAPT-VQE with tailored symmetry-preserving operator pools for the Bose-Hubbard model and bosonic Kitaev chain, then reports GPU simulation results showing shallower circuits than Hamiltonian-based VQE. No equations, derivations, or first-principles claims are presented that reduce by construction to fitted inputs, self-citations, or renamed known results. The central claim is an empirical observation from independent classical simulations rather than a closed mathematical chain, so the derivation is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract provides no explicit free parameters or invented entities; the key domain assumption is symmetry conservation used to build operator pools.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The Bose-Hubbard model conserves total boson number and the bosonic Kitaev chain conserves global parity.
    Stated directly in the abstract as the basis for constructing symmetry-preserving operator pools.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5672 in / 1072 out tokens · 26945 ms · 2026-06-28T05:37:23.552337+00:00 · methodology

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

115 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    warm-start

    However, the system retains a residualZ 2 symme- try corresponding to the conservation of global boson- number parity, ˆP= (−1) ˆNtot. The global ground state resides in the even-parity sector, a property that fol- lows from its adiabatic continuity when starting from the vacuum state, which is the ground state of the non- interacting theory (∆→0). Due to...

  2. [2]

    0 50 100 150 Number of gates 10−4 10−3 10−2 10−1 Energy error ∆ E Standard pool ∆ E Tiled pool ∆ E FIG

    Run CV-ADAPT-VQE for a classically tractable simulation of the system on a small, non-trivial lat- tice of sizeN small using an expressive operator pool. 0 50 100 150 Number of gates 10−4 10−3 10−2 10−1 Energy error ∆ E Standard pool ∆ E Tiled pool ∆ E FIG. 7: Energy difference with respect to exact diagonal- ization (left axis) and infidelity (right axis...

  3. [3]

    Collect the operators that ADAPT chooses

  4. [4]

    Repeat step 1-2 until the different operators with degenerate gradients are collected

  5. [5]

    This forms the operator pool for the larger system

    Tile these “small” operators along the lattice, padding with identity operators to match the size of the larger, target system,N large. This forms the operator pool for the larger system. In Fig. 7, we show a comparison between using this tiled pool and the regular pool used in the main text for the BKC model withN S = 5,∆ = 0.5, µ=−3.1, D= 6. The operato...

  6. [6]

    Photonic quantum information processing: a concise review,

    S. Slussarenko and G. J. Pryde, “Photonic quantum information processing: a concise review,”Applied Physics Reviews6no. 4, (Dec., 2019) 041303. http://arxiv.org/abs/1907.06331. arXiv:1907.06331 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2019

  7. [7]

    Superconducting Qubits: Current State of Play,

    M. Kjaergaard, M. E. Schwartz, J. Braum¨ uller, P. Krantz, J. I.-J. Wang, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, “Superconducting Qubits: Current State of Play,”Annual Review of Condensed Matter Physics11 no. 1, (Mar., 2020) 369–395. http://arxiv.org/abs/1905.13641. arXiv:1905.13641 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing: Progress and Challenges,

    C. D. Bruzewicz, J. Chiaverini, R. McConnell, and J. M. Sage, “Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing: Progress and Challenges,”Applied Physics Reviews6 no. 2, (June, 2019) 021314. http://arxiv.org/abs/1904.04178. arXiv:1904.04178 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2019

  9. [9]

    Many-Body Physics with Individually-Controlled Rydberg Atoms,

    A. Browaeys and T. Lahaye, “Many-Body Physics with Individually-Controlled Rydberg Atoms,”Nature Physics16no. 2, (Feb., 2020) 132–142. http://arxiv.org/abs/2002.07413. arXiv:2002.07413 [cond-mat]

    arXiv 2020

  10. [10]

    Quantum simulations with ultracold atoms in optical lattices,

    C. Gross and I. Bloch, “Quantum simulations with ultracold atoms in optical lattices,”Science357 no. 6355, (Sept., 2017) 995–1001.https://www. science.org/doi/full/10.1126/science.aal3837

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aal3837 2017

  11. [11]

    So(3) “nuclear physics

    E. Rico, M. Dalmonte, P. Zoller, D. Banerjee, M. B¨ ogli,et al., “So(3) “nuclear physics” with ultracold gases,”Annals of Physics393(2018) 466–483.https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0003491618300757

    2018

  12. [12]

    Asymptotically optimal quantum circuits ford-level systems,

    S. Bullock, D. O’Leary, and G. Brennen, “Asymptotically optimal quantum circuits ford-level systems,”Physical Review Letters94no. 23, (June,

  13. [13]

    http: //dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.230502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.94.230502

  14. [14]

    Continuous variables quantum algorithm for solving ordinary differential equations,

    A. Barthe, M. Grossi, J. Tura, and V. Dunjko, “Continuous variables quantum algorithm for solving ordinary differential equations,” in2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), vol. 02, pp. 48–53. 2023

    2023

  15. [15]

    Quantum computation over continuous variables,

    S. Lloyd and S. L. Braunstein, “Quantum computation over continuous variables,”Phys. Rev. Lett.82(Feb,

  16. [16]

    1784–1787.https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.1784

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.82.1784

  17. [17]

    Universal quantum computation with continuous-variable cluster states,

    N. C. Menicucci, P. van Loock, M. Gu, C. Weedbrook, T. C. Ralph, and M. A. Nielsen, “Universal quantum computation with continuous-variable cluster states,” Physical Review Letters97no. 11, (Sept., 2006) . http: //dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.110501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.97.110501 2006

  18. [18]

    Quantum computing with continuous-variable clusters,

    M. Gu, C. Weedbrook, N. C. Menicucci, T. C. Ralph, and P. van Loock, “Quantum computing with continuous-variable clusters,”Physical Review A79 no. 6, (June, 2009) . http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.79.062318

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.79.062318 2009

  19. [19]

    Gaussian quantum information,

    C. Weedbrook, S. Pirandola, R. Garc´ ıa-Patr´ on, N. J. Cerf, T. C. Ralph, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Lloyd, “Gaussian quantum information,”Reviews of Modern Physics84no. 2, (May, 2012) 621–669. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.84.621

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.84.621 2012

  20. [20]

    Continuous-variable quantum computation with spatial degrees of freedom of photons,

    D. S. Tasca, “Continuous-variable quantum computation with spatial degrees of freedom of photons,”Physical Review A83no. 5, (2011)

    2011

  21. [21]

    Universal continuous-variable quantum 17 computation: Requirement of optical nonlinearity for photon counting,

    S. D. Bartlett, “Universal continuous-variable quantum 17 computation: Requirement of optical nonlinearity for photon counting,”Physical Review A65no. 4, (2002)

    2002

  22. [22]

    One-Way Quantum Computing in the Optical Frequency Comb,

    N. C. Menicucci, “One-Way Quantum Computing in the Optical Frequency Comb,”Physical Review Letters 101no. 13, (2008)

    2008

  23. [23]

    Native three-body interactions in a superconducting lattice gauge quantum simulator,

    J. H. Busnaina, Z. Shi, J. M. Alcaine-Cuervo, C. X. Yang, I. Nsanzineza, E. Rico, and C. M. Wilson, “Native three-body interactions in a superconducting lattice gauge quantum simulator,”Physical Review B 112no. 13, (Oct., 2025) 134514. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/6prx-zmdz

    work page doi:10.1103/6prx-zmdz 2025

  24. [24]

    Implementing a universal gate set on a logical qubit encoded in an oscillator,

    R. W. Heeres, P. Reinhold, N. Ofek, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, M. H. Devoret, and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Implementing a universal gate set on a logical qubit encoded in an oscillator,”Nature Communications8 no. 1, (July, 2017) 94.https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41467-017-00045-1

    2017

  25. [25]

    Efficient Multiphoton Sampling of Molecular Vibronic Spectra on a Superconducting Bosonic Processor,

    C. S. Wang, J. C. Curtis, B. J. Lester, Y. Zhang, Y. Y. Gao, J. Freeze, V. S. Batista, P. H. Vaccaro, I. L. Chuang, L. Frunzio, L. Jiang, S. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Efficient Multiphoton Sampling of Molecular Vibronic Spectra on a Superconducting Bosonic Processor,”Physical Review X10no. 2, (June, 2020) 021060.https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/Phys...

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevx.10.021060 2020

  26. [26]

    Circuit quantum electrodynamics,

    A. Blais, A. L. Grimsmo, S. M. Girvin, and A. Wallraff, “Circuit quantum electrodynamics,” Reviews of Modern Physics93no. 2, (May, 2021) 025005.https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ RevModPhys.93.025005

    2021

  27. [27]

    Encoding a qubit in a trapped-ion mechanical oscillator,

    C. Fl¨ uhmann, T. L. Nguyen, M. Marinelli, V. Negnevitsky, K. Mehta, and J. P. Home, “Encoding a qubit in a trapped-ion mechanical oscillator,”Nature 566no. 7745, (Feb., 2019) 513–517.https: //www.nature.com/articles/s41586-019-0960-6

    2019

  28. [28]

    Quantum dynamics of single trapped ions,

    D. Leibfried, R. Blatt, C. Monroe, and D. Wineland, “Quantum dynamics of single trapped ions,”Reviews of Modern Physics75no. 1, (Mar., 2003) 281–324. https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.75.281

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.75.281 2003

  29. [29]

    Robust and Deterministic Preparation of Bosonic Logical States in a Trapped Ion,

    V. G. Matsos, C. H. Valahu, T. Navickas, A. D. Rao, M. J. Millican,et al., “Robust and Deterministic Preparation of Bosonic Logical States in a Trapped Ion,”Physical Review Letters133no. 5, (July, 2024) 050602.https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.133.050602

    2024

  30. [30]

    Universal hybrid quantum computing in trapped ions,

    R. T. Sutherland and R. Srinivas, “Universal hybrid quantum computing in trapped ions,”Physical Review A104no. 3, (Sept., 2021) 032609.https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.104.032609

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.104.032609 2021

  31. [31]

    Proposal for a scalable universal bosonic simulator using individually trapped ions,

    H.-K. Lau and D. F. V. James, “Proposal for a scalable universal bosonic simulator using individually trapped ions,”Physical Review A85no. 6, (June,

  32. [32]

    062329.https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.85.062329

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.85.062329

  33. [33]

    Neutral atoms prepared in Fock states of a one-dimensional harmonic potential,

    I. Bouchoule, H. Perrin, A. Kuhn, M. Morinaga, and C. Salomon, “Neutral atoms prepared in Fock states of a one-dimensional harmonic potential,”Physical Review A59no. 1, (Jan., 1999) R8–R11.https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevA.59.R8

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.59.r8 1999

  34. [34]

    Bosonic Quantum Error Correction with Neutral Atoms in Optical Dipole Traps,

    L. H. Bohnmann, D. F. Locher, J. Zeiher, and M. M¨ uller, “Bosonic Quantum Error Correction with Neutral Atoms in Optical Dipole Traps,”Physical Review A111no. 2, (Feb., 2025) 022432. http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.14251. arXiv:2408.14251 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Erasure-cooling, control, and hyper-entanglement of motion in optical tweezers,

    A. L. Shaw, P. Scholl, R. Finkelstein, R. B.-S. Tsai, J. Choi, and M. Endres, “Erasure-cooling, control, and hyper-entanglement of motion in optical tweezers,” Science388no. 6749, (May, 2025) 845–849. http://arxiv.org/abs/2311.15580. arXiv:2311.15580 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Deterministic generation of highly squeezed GKP states in ultracold atoms,

    H. C. P. Kendell, G. Ferranti, and C. A. Weidner, “Deterministic generation of highly squeezed GKP states in ultracold atoms,”APL Quantum1no. 2, (May, 2024) 026109. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0197119

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0197119 2024

  37. [37]

    Hybrid Oscillator-Qubit Quantum Processors: Instruction Set Architectures, Abstract Machine Models, and Applications,

    Y. Liuet al., “Hybrid Oscillator-Qubit Quantum Processors: Instruction Set Architectures, Abstract Machine Models, and Applications,”PRX Quantum7 no. 1, (2026) 010201,arXiv:2407.10381 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  38. [38]

    Toward hybrid quantum simulations with qubits and qumodes on trapped-ion platforms,

    J. Y. Araz, M. Grau, J. Montgomery, and F. Ringer, “Toward hybrid quantum simulations with qubits and qumodes on trapped-ion platforms,”Physical Review A112no. 1, (July, 2025) 012620. http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.07346. arXiv:2410.07346 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Programmable generation of arbitrary continuous-variable anharmonicities and nonlinear couplings,

    T. Chalermpusitarak, K. Schwennicke, I. Kassal, and T. R. Tan, “Programmable generation of arbitrary continuous-variable anharmonicities and nonlinear couplings,”arXiv:2511.22286 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  40. [40]

    Trigonometric continuous-variable gates and hybrid quantum simulations of the sine-Gordon model,

    T. Rainaldi, V. Ale, M. Grau, D. Kharzeev, E. Rico, F. Ringer, P. Shome, and G. Siopsis, “Trigonometric continuous-variable gates and hybrid quantum simulations of the sine-Gordon model,”JHEP03 (2026) 125,arXiv:2512.19582 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2026

  41. [41]

    Programmable quantum simulation of anharmonic dynamics,

    C. McGarryet al., “Programmable quantum simulation of anharmonic dynamics,” arXiv:2603.04744 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  42. [42]

    Coherent-state propagation: A computational framework for simulating bosonic quantum systems,

    N. Guseynov, Z. Holmes, and A. Angrisani, “Coherent-state propagation: A computational framework for simulating bosonic quantum systems,” 2026.https://arxiv.org/abs/2604.19625

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  43. [43]

    Quantum Simulation for High-Energy Physics,

    C. W. Baueret al., “Quantum Simulation for High-Energy Physics,”PRX Quantum4no. 2, (2023) 027001,arXiv:2204.03381 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2023

  44. [44]

    Quantum simulation of quantum field theory using continuous variables,

    K. Marshall, R. Pooser, G. Siopsis, and C. Weedbrook, “Quantum simulation of quantum field theory using continuous variables,”Phys. Rev. A92no. 6, (2015) 063825,arXiv:1503.08121 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  45. [45]

    Toward simulating quantum field theories with controlled phonon-ion dynamics: A hybrid analog-digital approach,

    Z. Davoudi, N. M. Linke, and G. Pagano, “Toward simulating quantum field theories with controlled phonon-ion dynamics: A hybrid analog-digital approach,”Physical Review Research3no. 4, (Oct.,

  46. [46]

    043072.https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevResearch.3.043072

  47. [47]

    Real-Time Observation of Aharonov-Bohm Interference in aZ 2 Lattice Gauge Theory on a Hybrid Qubit-Oscillator Quantum Computer,

    S. Saner, O. B˘ az˘ avan, D. J. Webb, G. Araneda, C. J. Ballance, R. Srinivas, D. M. Lucas, and A. Berm´ udez, “Real-Time Observation of Aharonov-Bohm Interference in aZ 2 Lattice Gauge Theory on a Hybrid Qubit-Oscillator Quantum Computer,” arXiv:2507.19588 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  48. [48]

    Toward coherent quantum computation of scattering amplitudes with a measurement-based photonic quantum processor,

    R. A. Brice˜ no, R. G. Edwards, M. Eaton, C. Gonz´ alez-Arciniegas, O. Pfister, and G. Siopsis, “Toward coherent quantum computation of scattering amplitudes with a measurement-based photonic quantum processor,”arXiv:2312.12613 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  49. [49]

    Quantum computation of SU(2) lattice gauge theory with continuous variables,

    V. Ale, N. M. Bauer, R. G. Jha, F. Ringer, and 18 G. Siopsis, “Quantum computation of SU(2) lattice gauge theory with continuous variables,”JHEP06 (2025) 084,arXiv:2410.14580 [hep-lat]

    arXiv 2025

  50. [50]

    Hybrid Oscillator-Qubit Quantum Processors: Simulating Fermions, Bosons, and Gauge Fields,

    E. Craneet al., “Hybrid Oscillator-Qubit Quantum Processors: Simulating Fermions, Bosons, and Gauge Fields,”arXiv:2409.03747 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  51. [51]

    Simulating quantum field theories on continuous-variable quantum computers,

    S. Abel, M. Spannowsky, and S. Williams, “Simulating quantum field theories on continuous-variable quantum computers,”Phys. Rev. A110no. 1, (2024) 012607, arXiv:2403.10619 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2024

  52. [52]

    Simulating quantum electrodynamics in 2+1 dimensions with qubits and qumodes,

    V. Ale, T. Rainaldi, E. Rico, F. Ringer, and G. Siopsis, “Simulating quantum electrodynamics in 2+1 dimensions with qubits and qumodes,” arXiv:2511.14506 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  53. [53]

    Real-time scattering processes with continuous-variable quantum computers,

    S. Abel, M. Spannowsky, and S. Williams, “Real-time scattering processes with continuous-variable quantum computers,”Phys. Rev. A112no. 1, (2025) 012614, arXiv:2502.01767 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Euclidean-Monte-Carlo-informed ground-state preparation for quantum simulation of scalar field theory,

    N. Gupta, C. D. White, and Z. Davoudi, “Euclidean-Monte-Carlo-informed ground-state preparation for quantum simulation of scalar field theory,”arXiv:2506.02313 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  55. [55]

    A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor,

    A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M.-H. Yung, X.-Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. O’Brien, “A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor,”Nature Communications5no. 1, (July, 2014) . http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ncomms5213

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms5213 2014

  56. [56]

    Chow, and Jay M

    A. Kandala, A. Mezzacapo, K. Temme, M. Takita, M. Brink, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, “Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets,”Nature 549no. 7671, (Sept., 2017) 242–246. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature23879

    work page doi:10.1038/nature23879 2017

  57. [57]

    The variational quantum eigensolver: A review of methods and best practices,

    J. Tilly, H. Chen, S. Cao, D. Picozzi, K. Setia,et al., “The variational quantum eigensolver: A review of methods and best practices,”Physics Reports986 (Nov., 2022) 1–128.http: //dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2022.08.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2022.08.003 2022

  58. [58]

    Variational quantum state eigensolver,

    M. Cerezo, K. Sharma, A. Arrasmith, and P. J. Coles, “Variational quantum state eigensolver,”npj Quantum Information8no. 1, (Sept., 2022) . http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41534-022-00611-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-022-00611-6 2022

  59. [59]

    Theory of variational quantum simulation,

    X. Yuan, S. Endo, Q. Zhao, Y. Li, and S. C. Benjamin, “Theory of variational quantum simulation,”Quantum 3(Oct., 2019) 191. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2019-10-07-191

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2019-10-07-191 2019

  60. [60]

    A quantum approximate optimization algorithm,

    E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, “A quantum approximate optimization algorithm,” 2014. https://arxiv.org/abs/1411.4028

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  61. [61]

    Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes,

    J. R. McClean, S. Boixo, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Babbush, and H. Neven, “Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes,”Nature Communications9no. 1, (Nov, 2018) . https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41467-018-07090-4

    2018

  62. [62]

    A lie algebraic theory of barren plateaus for deep parameterized quantum circuits,

    M. Ragone, B. N. Bakalov, F. Sauvage, A. F. Kemper, C. Ortiz Marrero, M. Larocca, and M. Cerezo, “A lie algebraic theory of barren plateaus for deep parameterized quantum circuits,”Nature Communications15no. 1, (Aug., 2024) . http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-49909-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-024-49909-3 2024

  63. [63]

    Characterizing barren plateaus in quantum ans¨ atze with the adjoint representation,

    E. Fontana, D. Herman, S. Chakrabarti, N. Kumar, R. Yalovetzky,et al., “Characterizing barren plateaus in quantum ans¨ atze with the adjoint representation,” Nature Communications15no. 1, (Aug., 2024) . http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-49910-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-024-49910-w 2024

  64. [64]

    Barren plateaus in variational quantum computing,

    M. Larocca, S. Thanasilp, S. Wang, K. Sharma, J. Biamonte,et al., “Barren plateaus in variational quantum computing,” 2025. https://arxiv.org/abs/2405.00781

    arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    An adaptive variational algorithm for exact molecular simulations on a quantum computer,

    H. R. Grimsley, S. E. Economou, E. Barnes, and N. J. Mayhall, “An adaptive variational algorithm for exact molecular simulations on a quantum computer,” Nature Commun.10(2019) 3007,arXiv:1812.11173 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  66. [66]

    ADAPT-VQE is insensitive to rough parameter landscapes and barren plateaus,

    G. et al., “ADAPT-VQE is insensitive to rough parameter landscapes and barren plateaus,”npj Quantum Information9no. 1, (Mar., 2023) . http://arxiv.org/abs/2204.07179

    arXiv 2023

  67. [67]

    Qubit-adapt-vqe: An adaptive algorithm for constructing hardware-efficient ans¨ atze on a quantum processor,

    H. L. Tang, V. Shkolnikov, G. S. Barron, H. R. Grimsley, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, “Qubit-adapt-vqe: An adaptive algorithm for constructing hardware-efficient ans¨ atze on a quantum processor,”PRX Quantum2no. 2, (Apr.,

  68. [68]

    http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.020310

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.2.020310

  69. [69]

    TETRIS-ADAPT-VQE: An adaptive algorithm that yields shallower, denser circuit ans¨ atze,

    P. G. Anastasiou, Y. Chen, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, “TETRIS-ADAPT-VQE: An adaptive algorithm that yields shallower, denser circuit ans¨ atze,”Phys. Rev. Res.6(Mar, 2024) 013254. https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/ PhysRevResearch.6.013254

    2024

  70. [70]

    Avoiding symmetry roadblocks and minimizing the measurement overhead of adaptive variational quantum eigensolvers,

    V. O. Shkolnikov, N. J. Mayhall, S. E. Economou, and E. Barnes, “Avoiding symmetry roadblocks and minimizing the measurement overhead of adaptive variational quantum eigensolvers,”Quantum7(June,

  71. [71]

    https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-06-12-1040

    1040. https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2023-06-12-1040

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2023-06-12-1040 2023

  72. [72]

    Symmetry breaking slows convergence of the adapt variational quantum eigensolver,

    L. W. Bertels, H. R. Grimsley, S. E. Economou, E. Barnes, and N. J. Mayhall, “Symmetry breaking slows convergence of the adapt variational quantum eigensolver,” in2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), vol. 02, pp. 94–95. 2023

    2023

  73. [73]

    An efficient adaptive variational quantum solver of the schr¨ odinger equation based on reduced density matrices,

    J. Liu, Z. Li, and J. Yang, “An efficient adaptive variational quantum solver of the schr¨ odinger equation based on reduced density matrices,”The Journal of Chemical Physics154no. 24, (06, 2021) 244112. https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0054822

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0054822 2021

  74. [74]

    Adaptive, problem-tailored variational quantum eigensolver mitigates rough parameter landscapes and barren plateaus,

    H. R. Grimsley, G. S. Barron, E. Barnes, S. E. Economou, and N. J. Mayhall, “Adaptive, problem-tailored variational quantum eigensolver mitigates rough parameter landscapes and barren plateaus,”npj Quantum Information9no. 1, (2023) 19.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-023-00681-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-023-00681-0 2023

  75. [75]

    Scalable Circuits for Preparing Ground States on Digital Quantum Computers: The Schwinger Model Vacuum on 100 Qubits,

    R. C. Farrell, M. Illa, A. N. Ciavarella, and M. J. Savage, “Scalable Circuits for Preparing Ground States on Digital Quantum Computers: The Schwinger Model Vacuum on 100 Qubits,”PRX Quantum5 no. 2, (2024) 020315,arXiv:2308.04481 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2024

  76. [76]

    Surrogate Constructed Scalable Circuits ADAPT-VQE in the Schwinger model,

    E. Gustafson, K. Sherbert, A. Florio, K. Shirali, Y. Chen,et al., “Surrogate Constructed Scalable Circuits ADAPT-VQE in the Schwinger model,” Aug., 2024.http://arxiv.org/abs/2408.12641. arXiv:2408.12641 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2024

  77. [77]

    Reducing the resources required by ADAPT-VQE using coupled 19 exchange operators and improved subroutines,

    M. Ramˆ oa, P. G. Anastasiou, L. P. Santos, N. J. Mayhall, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, “Reducing the resources required by ADAPT-VQE using coupled 19 exchange operators and improved subroutines,”npj Quantum Information11no. 1, (2025) 86. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-025-01039-4

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-025-01039-4 2025

  78. [78]

    TEPID-ADAPT: Adaptive variational method for simultaneous preparation of low-temperature Gibbs and low-lying eigenstates,

    B. Sambasivam, K. Sherbert, K. Shirali, N. J. Mayhall, A. W. Harrow, E. Barnes, and S. E. Economou, “TEPID-ADAPT: Adaptive variational method for simultaneous preparation of low-temperature Gibbs and low-lying eigenstates,”arXiv:2503.14490 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  79. [79]

    Encoding strongly-correlated many-boson wavefunctions on a photonic quantum computer: application to the attractive Bose-Hubbard model,

    S. Yalouz, B. Senjean, F. Miatto, and V. Dunjko, “Encoding strongly-correlated many-boson wavefunctions on a photonic quantum computer: application to the attractive Bose-Hubbard model,” Quantum5(2021) 572,arXiv:2103.15021 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2021

  80. [80]

    Seeking a quantum advantage with trapped-ion quantum simulations of condensed-phase chemical dynamics,

    M. Kanget al., “Seeking a quantum advantage with trapped-ion quantum simulations of condensed-phase chemical dynamics,”arXiv:2305.03156 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

Showing first 80 references.