Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Genesis: A Compiler Framework for Hamiltonian Simulation on Hybrid CV-DV Quantum Computers

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Genesis is the first compiler framework for Hamiltonian simulation on hybrid CV-DV quantum computers; it decomposes Hamiltonians into native gates and maps them to hardware, and the paper reports end-to-end compilation of six bosonic…

desk verdict A genuinely new CV-DV Hamiltonian compiler with real substance, but the new 'Exact' rules and the qumode SWAP primitive fail algebraic checks and the paper never validates compiled circuits against exact evolution. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.13683 v1 pith:CNL66N4H submitted 2025-05-19 quant-ph cs.ARcs.PL

Zihan Chen , Jiakang Li , Minghao Guo , Henry Chen , Zirui Li , Joel Bierman , Yipeng Huang , Huiyang Zhou
show 2 more authors
Yuan Liu Eddy Z. Zhang
This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcs.ARcs.PL
keywords HamiltoniansimulationhybridCV-DVquantumcomputingcompilationqumoderoutingPaulistringsynthesisbosonicCVDV-QASMTrotterization
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

Genesis claims to be the first compiler aimed at Hamiltonian simulation on hybrid continuous-variable/discrete-variable (CV-DV) quantum computers—machines that combine qubits with qumodes, the oscillator modes that natively carry bosonic operators. It turns a Hamiltonian into a physical circuit in two stages: a rule-based template matcher decomposes the time-evolution operator into the native gate set, then a mapping and routing stage adapts the circuit to hardware in which qumodes are connected but qubits only interact through qumodes. The paper reports successful end-to-end compilation of six models—Bose-Hubbard, Z2-Higgs, Hubbard-Holstein, Heisenberg, electronic-vibration coupling, and Kerr nonlinear oscillator—and introduces a DSL, CVDV-QASM, for the intermediate representation. A sympathetic reader would care because hybrid CV-DV machines are promising for fermion-boson simulation, and this is the first automated path from such Hamiltonians to executable circuits.

What carries the argument

The machinery that carries the argument is the decomposition-rule database of Table 3 together with the multi-Pauli exponential of Section 3.2. The multi-Pauli exponential realizes an arbitrary Pauli-string rotation $e^{2i\alpha^2 P_1 P_2\cdots P_n}$ on qubits using four displacement gates on an ancillary qumode, two of them controlled by the Pauli string via conjugated control-parity gates; the qumode returns to its original state while the qubits acquire the desired phase. The rule database drives a depth-first search that applies these identities recursively until every term matches a native gate, and the routing stage exploits the ancilla's state-agnostic, reusable character to choose cheap qumode paths.

What would settle it

Choose a small instance, say $M=a^\dagger$ and $N=a$ on a Fock space truncated to a few photons, and evaluate both sides of Rule 5: the right-hand side $\exp([i t N, i t \sigma_z M])$ against the left-hand side $\exp(-i t^2 \sigma_z [M,N])$. A symbolic or numerical check at $t\neq 0$ that yields different unitaries would refute the claimed exactness; the same test applied to the other new rules would settle whether the compiled circuits are faithful.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that Hamiltonian simulation on a hybrid CV-DV processor can be automated end to end. Level-1 synthesis recurses through a database of template-rewriting identities: Trotterization splits sums, the BCH formula and exact commutator/anticommutator identities break products of creation and annihilation operators into exponentials, and block-encoding and multi-Pauli rules reduce the remaining terms to native gates such as rotations, displacements, beamsplitters, control-displacements, and control-parity gates. Level-2 compilation then maps the resulting CVDV-QASM circuit onto a grid where qumodes are connected and each qubit touches its own qumode, using beamsplitter-based qumode SWAPs and an ancillary qumode that visits the qubits of each Pauli string to implement multi-qubit exponentials by phase kickback. The paper asserts that this pipeline successfully compiled the listed Hamiltonians, making Genesis the first comprehensive compilation framework for this architecture.

Load-bearing premise

The whole pipeline assumes every identity in the Table 3 decomposition rules is algebraically correct as written—especially the four new rules marked exact—so that the compiled sequence of native gates equals the Hamiltonian exponential it claims to implement; if one of those identities is wrong, the output circuit evolves under the wrong operator.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Hybrid CV-DV quantum computers can target application-level Hamiltonians directly: a user writes the model in CVDV-QASM and the compiler produces a connectivity-compliant circuit, removing the need for hand-derived bosonic decompositions.
  • An arbitrary multi-qubit Pauli string can be executed with one ancillary qumode that is left unchanged, so the same qumode can be reused as a traveling bus for many Pauli-string gates.
  • Qumode SWAPs require only one beamsplitter and two phase-space rotations, which the paper argues should make moving qumodes much cheaper than moving qubits on this architecture.
  • The compiled gate counts and durations for the six benchmark Hamiltonians provide the first end-to-end baselines for future hybrid CV-DV compilation work.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because the ancillary qumode is state-agnostic, the same compiler could be extended to measurement-based or repeat-until-success synthesis in which the ancilla is verified and reused, a step the paper does not explore.
  • The exactness of the new Table 3 rules could be checked numerically on a truncated Fock space by comparing the compiled circuit against exact evolution for a single Hamiltonian term; a mismatch in Rule 5 would not affect the architecture-level routing ideas but would invalidate the Kerr/Bose-Hubbard decompositions that rely on it.
  • If validated, the phase-kickback multi-Pauli construction could also synthesize controlled-bosonic operations—for example, a Pauli-string-controlled displacement—by conjugating an arbitrary bosonic unitary instead of just a displacement, extending the rule set beyond the listed gates.
  • The CVDV-QASM intermediate representation is generic enough that other CV-DV platforms could share the same front end while swapping in platform-specific native gate rules.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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 presents Genesis, a two-level compiler framework for Hamiltonian simulation on hybrid continuous-variable/discrete-variable (CV-DV) quantum computers. Level 1 decomposes a Hamiltonian expressed as Pauli strings and bosonic polynomials into an intermediate representation (CVDV-QASM) and then into basis gates from a given CV-DV gate set, using a rule-based recursive template-matching search (Table 3). Level 2 maps and routes the resulting logical circuit onto a hardware coupling map, using beamsplitter-based qumode SWAPs, ancilla qumode routing (formulated as a relaxed TSP), and an optional 'floating qubit' strategy. The paper reports compilation results for six Hamiltonian models — Kerr nonlinear oscillator, Z2-Higgs, Bose-Hubbard, Hubbard-Holstein, electron-vibration coupling, and Heisenberg — as well as molecular fermionic benchmarks under Jordan-Wigner and Bravyi-Kitaev encodings. The central claim is that Genesis is the first comprehensive compilation framework for hybrid CV-DV Hamiltonian simulation that produces physically valid circuits.

Significance. If the decomposition rules and routing primitives are correct, Genesis would fill a real gap: existing tools (Bosonic Qiskit, Strawberry Fields, Perceval, Bosehedral) do not target hybrid CV-DV Hamiltonian simulation, and the paper makes a plausible case that the architecture's connectivity constraints require new compilation techniques. The manuscript includes an open-source implementation, introduces a DSL, and identifies concrete compilation subproblems (multi-qubit Pauli synthesis via qumode-mediated phase kickback, ancilla qumode routing as a Hamiltonian-path problem) that are worth studying. The evaluation covers a diverse set of physically motivated benchmarks. However, the validity of the central claim depends on the correctness of the new 'Exact' decomposition rules and the qumode SWAP primitive, and the paper provides no simulation-based check that compiled circuits reproduce e^{-iHt}. The algebraic inconsistencies identified below, if confirmed, mean the reported circuits do not implement the stated unitaries.

major comments (3)
  1. [Table 3, Rule 5; §3.1.3] The claim that Rule 5 is exact is inconsistent with the definitions in the paper. The left-hand side is exp(-i t^2 sigma_z [M,N]) while the right-hand side is exp([(i t N, i t sigma_z M)]); evaluating the commutator gives [i t N, i t sigma_z M] = t^2 sigma_z [M,N], so the right-hand side equals exp(t^2 sigma_z [M,N]), which differs from the left-hand side by both a missing factor i and an overall sign. Since Rule 5 is used on successful decomposition paths (Success hit rate 8.15% in Table 6), any compiled circuit that invokes this rule implements a different unitary than the target Hamiltonian term, undermining the paper's claim that Genesis produces physically valid circuits.
  2. [§3.4, Eq. (12)] The proposed qumode SWAP primitive does not implement a SWAP. The beamsplitter BS(pi,0) maps |1,0> to -i|0,1>; the subsequent phase rotations e^{-i pi/2 n_a} e^{-i pi/2 n_b} each contribute a factor -i on the occupied mode, giving -|0,1> while leaving |0,0> unchanged. The primitive therefore acts as -SWAP on the one-photon subspace but not as a global phase on the full Fock space, so it is not a valid routing operation for arbitrary qumode states. To implement the intended SWAP, the rotations should be e^{+i pi/2 n_a} and e^{+i pi/2 n_b}, or an equivalent correction must be supplied.
  3. [Table 3, Rules 8, 13, 15; §4.3] Rules 8, 13, and 15 are listed as 'This paper Exact' but no derivation or proof is provided, and the evaluation does not include any numerical verification that a compiled circuit reproduces e^{-iHt} (for example, state-vector or operator-fidelity checks against exact evolution for the benchmark Hamiltonians). Given that the paper's central claim is that Genesis produces physically valid circuits, the correctness of these new rules is load-bearing and is currently unsubstantiated. The block-matrix notation in Rule 8 is also ambiguous, and the claimed equality to exp(-i t sigma_z[M,N] - i t sigma_z{M,N}) is asserted without derivation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 5] The text refers to 'Bosonic Qikist'; this should be 'Bosonic Qiskit'.
  2. [§2.3] In the pattern-matching example, the text states that the second term of Eq. (2) is mapped to e^{sigma_z(alpha a† - alpha* a)}, but the second term has no Pauli factor; either the term or the gate expression should be corrected.
  3. [Table 5] The 'Duration' column should specify which latency model applies to each model, because gate counts alone do not determine duration and the text describes the 1-op/2-op latency assignment only in the table caption.
  4. [§3.2, Eq. (9)] The notation for D_k(m) and CD(k,P1...n)(±alpha) is introduced informally; the subscripts indicating the qumode and the qubit set should be defined explicitly to avoid ambiguity in the multi-Pauli synthesis formulas.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: Genesis's inputs are Hamiltonian parameters, not fitted values; the decomposition rules are asserted identities, and citations to co-authored prior work are not the sole support for the central claim.

full rationale

Walking the claimed derivation chain, Genesis takes a Hamiltonian (with parameters such as ω, κ, t, U, g, J) as input and rewrites it through stated rules into physical circuits; no parameter is fitted to an output dataset, and no output quantity is defined as the input. The Level-1 rules in Table 3 are either standard algebraic identities (Trotter/BCH, block-encoding templates) or quoted from prior work, and the Level-2 router uses ordinary SWAP and TSP-style heuristics. The most heavily used prior citation, [28], is co-authored by Yuan Liu, an author of this paper, but the load-bearing controlled-displacement identity is restated in the paper as Eq. (11) rather than merely invoked, and the no-qubit-connectivity architecture is an input model, not a derived result. Two non-circular correctness hazards should not be mistaken for circularity. Table 3 Rule 5 as printed is algebraically inconsistent with the paper's own BCH convention: the LHS is exp(−i t^2 σ_z[M,N]), while exp([(i t N, i t σ_z M)]) evaluates to exp(t^2 σ_z[M,N]), missing both the i factor and the correct sign. Similarly, the §3.4 qumode SWAP (BS(π,0) followed by e^{−iπ/2 n_a} e^{−iπ/2 n_b}) maps |1,0> to −|0,1> rather than |0,1>, because both the beamsplitter and the phase rotations contribute −i; the required rotations would be e^{+iπ/2 n_a} and e^{+iπ/2 n_b}. These are algebraic errors in asserted primitives, not instances of the output being equivalent to the input by construction. The paper also reports limited decomposition pathways and defers pathway-selection support to future work, which is a limitation statement rather than circularity. The circularity score is therefore low: 2 (minor self-citation only, not load-bearing).

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The compiler's central correctness rests on: (1) standard product formulas whose approximation error is not quantified in the evaluation; (2) a database of decomposition rules, most inherited from Kang et al. [20] and Liu et al. [28], and four new rules asserted without derivation; (3) a hardware topology assumption of qumode-connected, qubit-disconnected architecture; and (4) a hand-chosen latency model and floating-qubit threshold used in all reported cost numbers. No physical constants are fitted, and no new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • floating qubit activation threshold
    Section 3.4.1: qubit floating is triggered when the average shortest distance for active qubits in a Pauli-string exceeds an unspecified threshold; chosen by hand, and the evaluation shows it often hurts performance.
  • gate latency weights for duration metric = 1-op = 1, 2-op = 20
    Sections 4.1 and Table 2 caption: duration is computed by assigning a 20x weight to two-operand gates; this cost model is assumed, not measured, and affects all reported duration numbers.
assumptions (4)
  • standard math Trotter-Suzuki and BCH product formulas provide valid approximations to exp(-iHt).
    Section 3.1.2 invokes them to split Hamiltonian terms; approximation error is not quantified in the evaluation.
  • domain assumption Rules in Table 3 marked [20] and [28] correctly decompose the listed operator templates on hybrid CV-DV hardware.
    Sections 3.1.2 and 3.1.3 rely on these as building blocks; they are cited rather than re-derived.
  • ad hoc to paper The new rules 5, 8, 13, and 15 (This paper) are exact as stated.
    Table 3 labels them Exact without proof; Rule 5's BCH expression appears inconsistent with its left-hand side, so correctness is assumed rather than demonstrated.
  • domain assumption The hardware coupling map has no direct qubit-qubit connectivity; qumodes form a lattice and each qubit is attached to one qumode.
    Figure 1 and Section 3.4 define the target architecture; all routing results depend on this topology.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Genesis: A Compiler Framework for Hamiltonian Simulation on Hybrid CV-DV Quantum Computers." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CNL66N4H

@misc{pith2026250513683,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Genesis: A Compiler Framework for Hamiltonian Simulation on Hybrid CV-DV Quantum Computers},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CNL66N4H}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.13683}
}
abstract

This paper introduces Genesis, the first compiler designed to support Hamiltonian Simulation on hybrid continuous-variable (CV) and discrete-variable (DV) quantum computing systems. Genesis is a two-level compilation system. At the first level, it decomposes an input Hamiltonian into basis gates using the native instruction set of the target hybrid CV-DV quantum computer. At the second level, it tackles the mapping and routing of qumodes/qubits to implement long-range interactions for the gates decomposed from the first level. Rather than a typical implementation that relies on SWAP primitives similar to qubit-based (or DV-only) systems, we propose an integrated design of connectivity-aware gate synthesis and beamsplitter SWAP insertion tailored for hybrid CV-DV systems. We also introduce an OpenQASM-like domain-specific language (DSL) named CVDV-QASM to represent Hamiltonian in terms of Pauli-exponentials and basic gate sequences from the hybrid CV-DV gate set. Genesis has successfully compiled several important Hamiltonians, including the Bose-Hubbard model, $\mathbb{Z}_2-$Higgs model, Hubbard-Holstein model, Heisenberg model and Electron-vibration coupling Hamiltonians, which are critical in domains like quantum field theory, condensed matter physics, and quantum chemistry. Our implementation is available at Genesis-CVDV-Compiler(https://github.com/ruadapt/Genesis-CVDV-Compiler).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.13683 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A typical hybrid CV-DV architecture using the su [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Compilation workflow of Genesis. It first decomposes the Hamiltonian into CV-DV basis gate sets, as well as the Pauli [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Decomposing (𝑎 † ) 2𝑎 2 into three child states, i.e., splitting it into subterms 𝑀 and 𝑁 using three methods. To decompose (𝑎 † ) 2𝑎 2 , we select a splitting method for 𝑀, 𝑁, then apply the template matching rules from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Recursive decomposition and gate synthesis of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Hybrid CV-DV circuit DSL example. pauli repre￾sents the parameter of a Pauli String; R, CD, D represent the gate type; qm[i] and q[i] represent the qumode and qubit re￾spectively. Pauli String sequence will be further decomposed into basic gates in the compiler output …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: An ancilla qumode interacts with every qubit on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: In the Optimized Ancilla Qumode Routing example, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

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. Magic for Hybrid Boson-Fermion Systems: A Grassmann Phase-Space Approach

    quant-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A Grassmann phase-space Lp norm defines a computable hybrid magic proxy for boson-fermion systems, with a closed-form magic power for the conditional displacement gate.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [28]

    Smith, Eleanor Crane, John M

    Yuan Liu, Shraddha Singh, Kevin C. Smith, Eleanor Crane, John M. Martyn, Alec Eickbusch, Alexander Schuckert, Richard D. Li, Jasmine Sinanan-Singh, Miche- line B. Soley, Takahiro Tsunoda, Isaac L. Chuang, Nathan Wiebe, and Steven M. Girvin. 2024. Hybrid Oscillator-Qubit Quantum Processors: Instruction Set Archi- tectures, Abstract Machine Models, and Appl...

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Junaid Aftab, Dong An, and Konstantina Trivisa. 2024. Multi-product Hamilton- ian simulation with explicit commutator scaling.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.08922 (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  3. [2]

    Sergey B Bravyi and Alexei Yu Kitaev. 2002. Fermionic quantum computation. Annals of Physics298, 1 (2002), 210–226

    work page 2002

  4. [3]

    Bruzewicz, John Chiaverini, Robert McConnell, and Jeremy M

    Colin D. Bruzewicz, John Chiaverini, Robert McConnell, and Jeremy M. Sage

    work page

  5. [4]

    Philippe Campagne-Ibarcq, Alec Eickbusch, Steven Touzard, Evan Zalys-Geller, Nicholas E Frattini, Volodymyr V Sivak, Philip Reinhold, Shruti Puri, Shyam Shankar, Robert J Schoelkopf, et al. 2020. Quantum error correction of a qubit encoded in grid states of an oscillator.Nature584, 7821 (2020), 368–372

    work page 2020

  6. [5]

    A high on-off ratio beamsplitter interaction for gates on bosonically encoded qubits

    Benjamin J. Chapman, Stijn J. de Graaf, Sophia H. Xue, Yaxing Zhang, James Teoh, Jacob C. Curtis, Takahiro Tsunoda, Alec Eickbusch, Alexander P. Read, Akshay Koottandavida, Shantanu O. Mundhada, Luigi Frunzio, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, and R. J. Schoelkopf. 2023. A high on-off ratio beamsplitter interaction for gates on bosonically encoded qubits. arXi...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  7. [6]

    Eleanor Crane, Kevin C Smith, Teague Tomesh, Alec Eickbusch, John M Martyn, Stefan Kühn, Lena Funcke, Michael Austin DeMarco, Isaac L Chuang, Nathan Wiebe, et al. 2024. Hybrid Oscillator-Qubit Quantum Processors: Simulating Fermions, Bosons, and Gauge Fields.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.03747(2024)

    arXiv 2024

  8. [7]

    Brennan de Neeve, Thanh Long Nguyen, Tanja Behrle, and Jonathan Home

    work page

Show all 55 references
  1. [8]

    Brennan De Neeve, Thanh-Long Nguyen, Tanja Behrle, and Jonathan P Home

  2. [9]

    Renema, Chao-Yang Lu, and Jian-Wei Pan

    Yu-Hao Deng, Yi-Chao Gu, Hua-Liang Liu, Si-Qiu Gong, Hao Su, Zhi-Jiong Zhang, Hao-Yang Tang, Meng-Hao Jia, Jia-Min Xu, Ming-Cheng Chen, Jian Qin, Li-Chao Peng, Jiarong Yan, Yi Hu, Jia Huang, Hao Li, Yuxuan Li, Yaojian Chen, Xiao Jiang, Lin Gan, Guangwen Yang, Lixing You, Li Li...

    2023

  3. [10]

    Yulong Dong, K Birgitta Whaley, and Lin Lin. 2022. A quantum hamiltonian simulation benchmark.npj Quantum Information8, 1 (2022), 131

    2022

  4. [11]

    Ding, Salvatore S

    Alec Eickbusch, Volodymyr Sivak, Andy Z. Ding, Salvatore S. Elder, Shan- tanu R. Jha, Jayameenakshi Venkatraman, Baptiste Royer, S. M. Girvin, Robert J. Schoelkopf, and Michel H. Devoret. 2022. Fast universal control of an oscillator with weak dispersive coupling to a qubit.Na...

    2022 doi

  5. [12]

    Richard P Feynman. 1982. Simulating physics with computers.International journal of theoretical physics21 (1982), 467–488. Issue 6/7. doi:10.1007/BF02650179

    1982 doi

  6. [13]

    Christa Flühmann and Jonathan P Home. 2020. Direct characteristic-function tomography of quantum states of the trapped-ion motional oscillator.Physical review letters125, 4 (2020), 043602

    2020

  7. [14]

    Christa Flühmann, Thanh Long Nguyen, Matteo Marinelli, Vlad Negnevitsky, Karan Mehta, and JP Home. 2019. Encoding a qubit in a trapped-ion mechanical oscillator.Nature566, 7745 (2019), 513–517

    2019

  8. [15]

    Flühmann, T

    C. Flühmann, T. L. Nguyen, M. Marinelli, V. Negnevitsky, K. Mehta, and J. P. Home. 2019. Encoding a qubit in a trapped-ion mechanical oscillator.Nature 566, 7745 (Feb. 2019), 513–517. doi:10.1038/s41586-019-0960-6

    2019 doi

  9. [16]

    Jeffrey M Gertler, Brian Baker, Juliang Li, Shruti Shirol, Jens Koch, and Chen Wang. 2021. Protecting a bosonic qubit with autonomous quantum error correc- tion.Nature590, 7845 (2021), 243–248

    2021

  10. [17]

    P. C. Haljan, K.-A. Brickman, L. Deslauriers, P. J. Lee, and C. Monroe. 2005. Spin-Dependent Forces on Trapped Ions for Phase-Stable Quantum Gates and Entangled States of Spin and Motion.Phys. Rev. Lett.94 (Apr 2005), 153602. Issue

    2005

  11. [18]

    Yuwei Jin, Zirui Li, Fei Hua, Yanhao Chen, Henry Chen, Yipeng Huang, and Eddy Z. Zhang. 2023. Tetris: A compilation Framework for VQE Applications. arXiv:2309.01905 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  12. [19]

    1993.Über das paulische äquivalenzver- bot

    Pascual Jordan and Eugene Paul Wigner. 1993.Über das paulische äquivalenzver- bot. Springer

    1993

  13. [20]

    Christopher Kang, Micheline B Soley, Eleanor Crane, SM Girvin, and Nathan Wiebe. 2023. Leveraging hamiltonian simulation techniques to compile opera- tions on bosonic devices.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.15542(2023)

    2023 arXiv

  14. [21]

    doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.94.153602

    doi

  15. [22]

    Alexei Kitaev and William A Webb. 2008. Wavefunction preparation and resam- pling using a quantum computer.arXiv preprint arXiv:0801.0342(2008)

    2008 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Johannes Knörzer, Tao Shi, Eugene Demler, and J Ignacio Cirac. 2022. Spin- Holstein models in trapped-ion systems.Physical Review Letters128, 12 (2022), 120404

    2022

  17. [24]

    Gushu Li, Yufei Ding, and Yuan Xie. 2019. Tackling the qubit mapping problem for NISQ-era quantum devices.Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems(2019), 1001–1014

    2019

  18. [25]

    Nathan Killoran, Josh Izaac, Nicolás Quesada, Ville Bergholm, Matthew Amy, and Christian Weedbrook. 2019. Strawberry Fields: A Software Platform for Photonic Quantum Computing.Quantum3 (March 2019), 129. doi:10.22331/q- 2019-03-11-129

    2019 doi

  19. [26]

    Gushu Li, Anbang Wu, Yunong Shi, Ali Javadi-Abhari, Yufei Ding, and Yuan Xie

  20. [27]

    Langyu Li. 2024. Principal Trotter Observation Error with Truncated Commuta- tors.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.03891(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Gushu Li, Yunong Shi, and Ali Javadi-Abhari. 2021. Software-Hardware Co- Optimization for Computational Chemistry on Superconducting Quantum Processors. InProceedings of the 48th Annual International Symposium on Computer Architecture(Virtual Event, Spain)(ISCA ’21). IEEE Pres...

    2021

  22. [30]

    Yao Lu, Aniket Maiti, John WO Garmon, Suhas Ganjam, Yaxing Zhang, Jahan Claes, Luigi Frunzio, Steven M Girvin, and Robert J Schoelkopf. 2023. High- fidelity parametric beamsplitting with a parity-protected converter.nature communications14, 1 (2023), 5767

    2023

  23. [31]

    doi:10.1145/3503222.3507715

    Paulihedral: A Generalized Block-Wise Compiler Optimization Framework for Quantum Simulation Kernels.Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems(2022), 554–569. doi:10.1145/3503222.3507715

    2022

  24. [32]

    Refik Mansuroglu, Felix Fischer, and Michael J Hartmann. 2023. Problem-specific classical optimization of Hamiltonian simulation.Physical Review Research5, 4 (2023), 043035

    2023

  25. [33]

    Wein, Alexia Salavrakos, Patrick Sinnott, Dario A

    Nicolas Maring, Andreas Fyrillas, Mathias Pont, Edouard Ivanov, Petr Stepanov, Nico Margaria, William Hease, Anton Pishchagin, Thi Huong Au, Sébastien Boissier, Eric Bertasi, Aurélien Baert, Mario Valdivia, Marie Billard, Ozan Acar, Alexandre Brieussel, Rawad Mezher, Stephen C...

  26. [34]

    Seth Lloyd. 1996. Universal quantum simulators.Science273, 5278 (Aug. 1996), 1073. https://www.proquest.com/docview/213562780/abstract/ 381415109DD14C66PQ/1

    1996

  27. [35]

    Nissim Ofek, Andrei Petrenko, Reinier Heeres, Philip Reinhold, Zaki Leghtas, Brian Vlastakis, Yehan Liu, Luigi Frunzio, Steven M Girvin, Liang Jiang, et al. 2016. Extending the lifetime of a quantum bit with error correction in superconducting circuits.Nature536, 7617 (2016), 441–445

    2016

  28. [36]

    Yuwei Ma, Yuan Xu, Xianghao Mu, Weizhou Cai, Ling Hu, Weiting Wang, Xi- aoxuan Pan, Haiyan Wang, YP Song, C-L Zou, et al . 2020. Error-transparent operations on a logical qubit protected by quantum error correction.Nature Physics16, 8 (2020), 827–831

    2020

  29. [37]

    Alexandru Petrescu, Hakan E Türeci, Alexey V Ustinov, and Ioan M Pop. 2018. Fluxon-based quantum simulation in circuit QED.Physical Review B98, 17 (2018), 174505

    2018

  30. [38]

    Shaw, Pascal Scholl, Ran Finkelstein, Richard Bing-Shiun Tsai, Joon- hee Choi, and Manuel Endres

    Adam L. Shaw, Pascal Scholl, Ran Finkelstein, Richard Bing-Shiun Tsai, Joon- hee Choi, and Manuel Endres. 2024. Erasure-cooling, control, and hyper- entanglement of motion in optical tweezers. arXiv:2311.15580 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/abs/2311.15580

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    V. V. Sivak, A. Eickbusch, B. Royer, S. Singh, I. Tsioutsios, S. Ganjam, A. Miano, B. L. Brock, A. Z. Ding, L. Frunzio, S. M. Girvin, R. J. Schoelkopf, and M. H. Devoret. 2023. Real-time quantum error correction beyond break-even.Nature 616, 7955 (March 2023), 50–55. doi:10.10...

    2023 doi

  32. [40]

    Zhongchu Ni, Sai Li, Xiaowei Deng, Yanyan Cai, Libo Zhang, Weiting Wang, Zhen-Biao Yang, Haifeng Yu, Fei Yan, Song Liu, et al. 2023. Beating the break- even point with a discrete-variable-encoded logical qubit.Nature616, 7955 (2023), 56–60

    2023

  33. [41]

    Qiming Sun, Timothy C Berkelbach, Nick S Blunt, George H Booth, Sheng Guo, Zhendong Li, Junzi Liu, James McClain, Elvira R Sayfutyarova, Sandeep Sharma, et al. 2007. The python-based simulations of chemistry framework (pyscf).arXiv preprint arXiv:1701.08223(2007)

    2007 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Schmitz, Mohannad Ibrahim, Xin-Chuan Wu, and A

    Jennifer Paykin, Albert T. Schmitz, Mohannad Ibrahim, Xin-Chuan Wu, and A. Y. Matsuura. 2023. PCOAST: A Pauli-based Quantum Circuit Optimization Framework. arXiv:2305.10966 [quant-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Thekkadath, S

    G.S. Thekkadath, S. Sempere-Llagostera, B.A. Bell, R.B. Patel, M.S. Kim, and I.A. Walmsley. 2022. Experimental Demonstration of Gaussian Boson Sampling with Displacement.PRX Quantum3 (May 2022), 020336. Issue 2. doi:10.1103/ PRXQuantum.3.020336

    2022

  36. [44]

    Booth, and Jonathan Tennyson

    Jules Tilly, Hongxiang Chen, Shuxiang Cao, Dario Picozzi, Kanav Setia, Ying Li, Edward Grant, Leonard Wossnig, Ivan Rungger, George H. Booth, and Jonathan Tennyson. 2022. The Variational Quantum Eigensolver: A review of methods and best practices.Physics Reports986 (nov 2022),...

    2022 doi

  37. [45]

    Nam P Vu, Daniel Dong, Xiaohan Dan, Ningyi Lyu, Victor Batista, and Yuan Liu. 2025. A Computational Framework for Simulations of Dissipative Non- Adiabatic Dynamics on Hybrid Oscillator-Qubit Quantum Devices.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.17820(2025)

    2025

  38. [46]

    Timothy J Stavenger, Eleanor Crane, Kevin C Smith, Christopher T Kang, Steven M Girvin, and Nathan Wiebe. 2022. C2QA - Bosonic Qiskit. In2022 IEEE High Performance Extreme Computing Conference (HPEC). 1–8. doi:10.1109/ HPEC55821.2022.9926318

    2022

  39. [47]

    Christopher S Wang, Jacob C Curtis, Brian J Lester, Yaxing Zhang, Yvonne Y Gao, Jessica Freeze, Victor S Batista, Patrick H Vaccaro, Isaac L Chuang, Luigi Frunzio, et al. 2020. Efficient multiphoton sampling of molecular vibronic spectra on a superconducting bosonic processor....

    2020

  40. [48]

    Teoh, Patrick Winkel, Harshvardhan K

    James D. Teoh, Patrick Winkel, Harshvardhan K. Babla, Benjamin J. Chapman, Jahan Claes, Stijn J. de Graaf, John W. O. Garmon, William D. Kalfus, Yao Lu, Aniket Maiti, Kaavya Sahay, Neel Thakur, Takahiro Tsunoda, Sophia H. Xue, Luigi Frunzio, Steven M. Girvin, Shruti Puri, and ...

    2023 doi

  41. [49]

    Junyu Zhou, Yuhao Liu, Yunong Shi, Ali Javadi-Abhari, and Gushu Li. 2024. Bosehedral: Compiler Optimization for Bosonic Quantum Computing.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.02279(2024)

    2024 arXiv

  42. [52]

    Mattia Walschaers. 2021. Non-Gaussian Quantum States and Where to Find Them. PRX Quantum2 (Sep 2021), 030204. Issue 3. doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.030204

    2021 doi

  43. [54]

    Christopher S Wang, Nicholas E Frattini, Benjamin J Chapman, Shruti Puri, Steven M Girvin, Michel H Devoret, and Robert J Schoelkopf. 2023. Observation of wave-packet branching through an engineered conical intersection.Physical Genesis: A Compiler Framework for Hamiltonian Si...

    2023

  44. [2019]

    doi:10.1063/1.5088164

    Trapped-ion quantum computing: Progress and challenges.Applied Physics Reviews6, 2 (May 2019). doi:10.1063/1.5088164

    2019 doi

  45. [2020]

    Error correction of a logical grid state qubit by dissipative pumping. arXiv:2010.09681 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.09681 Zihan Chen, Jiakang Li, Minghao Guo, Henry Chen, Zirui Li, Joel Bierman, Yipeng Huang, Huiyang Zhou, Yuan Liu, and Eddy Z. Zhang

    2010 arXiv

  46. [2022]

    Error correction of a logical grid state qubit by dissipative pumping.Nature Physics18, 3 (2022), 296–300

    2022

  47. [2023]

    arXiv:2306.00874 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.00874

    A general-purpose single-photon-based quantum computing platform. arXiv:2306.00874 [quant-ph] https://arxiv.org/abs/2306.00874

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.