pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2512.01605 · v2 · submitted 2025-12-01 · 🪐 quant-ph

Recognition: 1 theorem link

· Lean Theorem

Resource Estimation for VQE on Small Molecules: Impact of Fermion Mappings and Hamiltonian Reductions

Anurag K. S. V. , Ashish Kumar Patra , Vikas Dattatraya Ghevade , Sai Shankar P. , Ruchika Bhat , Raghavendra V. , Rahul Maitra , Jaiganesh G
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 03:00 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords Variational Quantum EigensolverFermion-to-qubit mappingHamiltonian reductionResource estimationMolecular ground statesUCCSD ansatzNISQ simulations
0
0 comments X

The pith

Suitable fermion mappings combined with symmetry reductions can halve qubit counts and cut gate counts by up to 27.5 times for VQE calculations on small molecules.

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

The paper examines how different mappings from electrons to qubits and subsequent simplifications of the molecular equations affect the resources required to run the Variational Quantum Eigensolver for ground-state energies. It tests Jordan-Wigner, Bravyi-Kitaev, and Parity mappings together with Z2 tapering and frozen-core approximations on representative small molecules while keeping the same active space. The central result is that these choices together reduce the number of qubits by up to 50 percent, the number of quantum gates by up to 27.5 times, and the number of Pauli terms in the Hamiltonian by up to 2.75 times compared with the unreduced case. A sympathetic reader would care because current quantum hardware is small and noisy, so any systematic way to lower these costs brings chemically useful simulations closer to practical execution.

Core claim

The analysis reveals that appropriate transformations, when combined with symmetry-based reductions, can substantially reduce qubit counts by up to ≈50% and quantum gate counts by up to ≈27.5× and Hamiltonian Pauli string counts by up to ≈2.75×, relative to the corresponding unreduced Hamiltonian representations within the same active-space configuration for the representative set of molecular systems under study.

What carries the argument

The Jordan-Wigner, Bravyi-Kitaev, and Parity fermion-to-qubit mappings together with Z2 tapering and frozen-core approximations, which shrink the effective qubit register size and remove redundant terms from the qubit Hamiltonian.

If this is right

  • VQE circuits for the tested molecules fit on smaller NISQ processors than the unreduced versions would allow.
  • The measured resource numbers supply concrete baselines for estimating costs when moving the same molecules to fault-tolerant architectures.
  • Circuit designers can prioritize specific mappings and tapering steps to minimize depth and term count for a given active space.
  • The same reduction pipeline applies directly to other small molecules without altering the underlying active-space choice.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The reported savings might change if a different ansatz, such as a hardware-efficient one, replaces UCCSD.
  • Combining these reductions with error-mitigation techniques could further improve effective accuracy on noisy hardware.
  • Testing the same mappings and reductions on slightly larger active spaces would show how the resource gains scale with molecular size.

Load-bearing premise

The UCCSD ansatz together with the chosen active spaces and reductions must still produce ground-state energies accurate to chemical precision without the simplifications adding errors that would invalidate the reported resource counts.

What would settle it

For a concrete molecule such as LiH or H2O, run the reduced VQE circuit, compare its ground-state energy to a high-accuracy classical reference, and check whether the energy error remains below 1.6 milliHartree while the measured qubit, gate, and Pauli-term counts match the stated reduction factors.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.01605 by Anurag K. S. V., Ashish Kumar Patra, Jaiganesh G, Raghavendra V., Rahul Maitra, Ruchika Bhat, Sai Shankar P., Vikas Dattatraya Ghevade.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic representation of a diatomic molecular system described by the non-relativistic molecular Hamiltonian in Eq. (4). The nuclei A and B (shown in red) and electrons i and j (shown in blue) are located by their respective position vectors ⃗RA,⃗RB,⃗ri , and⃗rj with respect to the origin. The inter-particle vectors⃗riA,⃗rjA, and⃗ri j are represented as solid lines, while the internuclear vector ⃗RAB = … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Workflow for resource estimation in the VQE framework, showing the sequence from molecular input to Hamiltonian modeling, qubit mapping, ansatz construction, and circuit compilation, along with key outputs at each stage. 3.1 Hamiltonian Modeling In this stage, molecular properties are computed using the chosen basis set, and the second-quantized electronic Hamiltonian Hˆ sq is obtained. The nuclear–nuclear… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: 3D molecular structures: (a) Methane (CH4) and (b) Fluoromethane (CH3F) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Scaling behaviour of qubit and gate requirements across molecular systems using JW, BK, Pa mappings and Hamiltonian reduction configurations. (a)-(d) correspond to the first set of molecular systems (LiH,HF,BeH2,and H2O). Here, T denotes qubit tapering via Z2 symmetries, and F denotes the FC approximation. Symbols indicate the applied configurations: (–) both T and F are false, (T) only tapering is applied… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (continued) Scaling behaviour of qubit and gate requirements across molecular systems using JW, BK, Pa mappings and Hamiltonian reduction configurations. (e)-(h) correspond to the next set of molecular systems (NH3,CH4,O2,and N2). Here, T denotes qubit tapering via Z2 symmetries, and F denotes the FC approximation. Symbols indicate the applied configurations: (–) both T and F are false, (T) only tapering i… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: (continued) Scaling behaviour of qubit and gate requirements across molecular systems using JW, BK, Pa mappings and Hamiltonian reduction configurations. (i)-(l) correspond to the remaining molecular systems (CO,C2H2,H2O2,and C2H4). Here, T denotes qubit tapering via Z2 symmetries, and F denotes the FC approximation. Symbols indicate the applied configurations: (–) both T and F are false, (T) only tapering… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Accurate determination of ground-state energies for molecules remains a challenge in quantum chemistry and a cornerstone for progress in fields such as drug discovery and materials design. The Variational Quantum Eigensolver (VQE) represents a leading hybrid quantum-classical paradigm for addressing this challenge; however, its widespread realization is limited by noise and the restricted scalability of current quantum hardware. Achieving efficient simulations on Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) devices and forthcoming Fault-Tolerant Application-Scalable Quantum (FASQ) systems demands a detailed understanding of how computational resources scale with molecular complexity and fermion-to-qubit encodings. In this study, resource requirements for VQE implementations employing the Unitary Coupled Cluster Singles and Doubles (UCCSD) ansatz are systematically analyzed. The molecular Hamiltonian is formulated in second quantization and mapped to qubit operators through the Jordan-Wigner (JW), Bravyi-Kitaev (BK), and Parity (Pa) transformations. Hamiltonian reduction strategies, including $\mathbb{Z}_2$ tapering and frozen-core approximations, are examined to assess their effect on quantum resource scaling. The analysis reveals that appropriate transformations, when combined with symmetry-based reductions, can substantially reduce qubit counts by up to $\approx 50\%$ and quantum gate counts by up to $\approx 27.5\times$ and Hamiltonian Pauli string counts by up to $\approx 2.75\times$, relative to the corresponding unreduced Hamiltonian representations within the same active-space configuration for the representative set of molecular systems under study. These findings provide practical circuit-level insights for executing chemically relevant simulations on NISQ hardware, while establishing physical-resource baselines that may inform future logical-level analyses targeting FASQ systems.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The paper analyzes resource requirements for VQE with the UCCSD ansatz on small molecules. It compares Jordan-Wigner, Bravyi-Kitaev, and Parity fermion-to-qubit mappings, then applies Z2 tapering and frozen-core reductions to the second-quantized Hamiltonian. The central claim is that these steps, within the same active-space configuration, yield up to ~50% fewer qubits, ~27.5× fewer quantum gates, and ~2.75× fewer Pauli strings relative to the unreduced active-space Hamiltonian for the studied molecules, providing practical baselines for NISQ and FASQ implementations.

Significance. If the resource counts are shown to apply to chemically accurate ground states, the work supplies concrete, mapping-specific scaling data derived from explicit circuit constructions. This is useful for NISQ circuit design and for setting logical-resource targets on fault-tolerant hardware. The systematic side-by-side comparison of three mappings plus two reduction techniques is a clear strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that savings occur 'within the same active-space configuration' is undercut by the inclusion of frozen-core approximations. Unlike exact Z2 tapering, frozen-core discards core orbitals and correlation, shifting the ground-state energy by an amount that depends on the molecule and basis and can exceed chemical accuracy (~1.6 mHa). The reported 50% qubit, 27.5× gate, and 2.75× Pauli-string reductions therefore apply to an approximated Hamiltonian rather than the target chemically accurate problem; the UCCSD ansatz does not correct this Hamiltonian-level error.
  2. [Resource Estimation] Resource Estimation section (or equivalent): the manuscript provides no quantitative verification that the frozen-core energies remain within chemical accuracy for the tabulated molecules, nor does it separate the resource savings attributable to exact Z2 tapering from those attributable to the approximate frozen-core step. Without these data the central scaling claims cannot be interpreted as applying to the intended problem.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and introduction would benefit from an explicit list of the molecular systems, basis sets, and active-space sizes used in the study.
  2. [Methods] Clarify how gate counts were obtained after transpilation (e.g., which compiler, optimization level, and whether two-qubit gate counts or total gate counts are reported).

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their insightful comments and the opportunity to clarify aspects of our work. We respond to each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that savings occur 'within the same active-space configuration' is undercut by the inclusion of frozen-core approximations. Unlike exact Z2 tapering, frozen-core discards core orbitals and correlation, shifting the ground-state energy by an amount that depends on the molecule and basis and can exceed chemical accuracy (~1.6 mHa). The reported 50% qubit, 27.5× gate, and 2.75× Pauli-string reductions therefore apply to an approximated Hamiltonian rather than the target chemically accurate problem; the UCCSD ansatz does not correct this Hamiltonian-level error.

    Authors: We thank the referee for highlighting this important distinction. The phrase 'within the same active-space configuration' was meant to convey that the fermion mappings and Z2 tapering are applied to Hamiltonians derived from the same selection of active orbitals. Frozen-core approximation is a standard method in quantum chemistry to reduce the problem size by freezing core electrons, which is part of defining the active space for many calculations. Nevertheless, we recognize that this step introduces an approximation to the energy. In the revised manuscript, we will update the abstract to more precisely describe the reductions as including frozen-core approximations and will add a sentence noting that the accuracy of the frozen-core approach for the studied systems is consistent with common practices in the field, where it often preserves chemical accuracy for valence-dominated properties. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Resource Estimation] Resource Estimation section (or equivalent): the manuscript provides no quantitative verification that the frozen-core energies remain within chemical accuracy for the tabulated molecules, nor does it separate the resource savings attributable to exact Z2 tapering from those attributable to the approximate frozen-core step. Without these data the central scaling claims cannot be interpreted as applying to the intended problem.

    Authors: We agree that explicit verification and separation of effects would enhance the interpretability of our results. Although the current manuscript focuses on resource scaling rather than energy accuracy benchmarks, we will incorporate in the revision a table or discussion providing the frozen-core energy errors for the molecules considered, drawing from established quantum chemistry literature or our own calculations where possible. Furthermore, we will add resource estimates broken down by the application of Z2 tapering alone versus the combined Z2 tapering and frozen-core reductions to clearly separate the contributions of each technique. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Resource counts obtained via direct enumeration from mappings and reductions; no circular reduction to inputs.

full rationale

The paper derives qubit, gate, and Pauli-string counts through explicit application of JW/BK/Pa mappings, Z2 tapering, and frozen-core approximations to the second-quantized Hamiltonian, followed by UCCSD circuit construction. These are standard, non-fitted enumerations performed on concrete molecular instances within fixed active spaces. No equation or central claim reduces the reported savings (e.g., 50% qubit reduction) to a parameter defined by the same data or to a self-citation chain. The derivation chain remains self-contained against external benchmarks of Hamiltonian term counting and circuit depth estimation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard quantum-chemistry assumptions about active-space selection and the validity of UCCSD for ground states; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption UCCSD ansatz accurately captures the ground-state wavefunction for the studied molecules within the chosen active space
    The resource analysis is performed exclusively with the UCCSD ansatz as stated in the abstract.
  • domain assumption Frozen-core and Z2 tapering preserve the essential chemistry without significant accuracy loss
    Reductions are applied and resource savings are reported without accompanying error analysis in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5646 in / 1535 out tokens · 43074 ms · 2026-05-17T03:00:35.247110+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Loss-aware state space geometry for quantum variational algorithms

    quant-ph 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Loss-aware natural gradient variants are introduced by embedding the loss hypersurface in a statistical manifold or using quantum state overlaps, yielding conformal updates that adjust effective step size.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 91 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Feynman, R. P. Simulating physics with computers.Int. J. Theor. Phys.21, 467–488, DOI: 10.1007/BF02650179 (1982)

    work page doi:10.1007/bf02650179 1982

  2. [2]

    & Ezawa, H

    Tonomura, A., Endo, J., Matsuda, T., Kawasaki, T. & Ezawa, H. Demonstration of single-electron buildup of an interference pattern.Am. J. Phys.57, 117–120, DOI: 10.1119/1.16104 (1989)

    work page doi:10.1119/1.16104 1989

  3. [3]

    Experiment and the foundations of quantum physics.Rev

    Zeilinger, A. Experiment and the foundations of quantum physics.Rev. Mod. Phys.71, S288–S297, DOI: 10.1103/ RevModPhys.71.S288 (1999)

    work page 1999

  4. [4]

    Einstein , author B

    Einstein, A., Podolsky, B. & Rosen, N. Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev.47, 777–780, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.47.777 (1935)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.47.777 1935

  5. [5]

    & Horodecki, K

    Horodecki, R., Horodecki, P., Horodecki, M. & Horodecki, K. Quantum entanglement.Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 865–942, DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.81.865 (2009)

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.81.865 2009

  6. [6]

    Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring

    Shor, P. Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring. InProceedings 35th Annual Symposium on F oundations of Computer Science, 124–134, DOI: 10.1109/SFCS.1994.365700 (1994)

    work page doi:10.1109/sfcs.1994.365700 1994

  7. [7]

    Grover, L. K. A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. InProceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC ’96, 212–219, DOI: 10.1145/237814.237866 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY , USA, 1996)

    work page doi:10.1145/237814.237866 1996

  8. [8]

    Shor, P. W. Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer.SIAM J. on Comput.26, 1484–1509, DOI: 10.1137/S0097539795293172 (1997)

    work page doi:10.1137/s0097539795293172 1997

  9. [9]

    & Chuang, I.Quantum Computation and Quantum Information

    Nielsen, M. & Chuang, I.Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge Series on Information and the Natural Sciences (Cambridge University Press, 2000). 11.Lloyd, S. Universal quantum simulators.Science273, 1073–1078, DOI: 10.1126/science.273.5278.1073 (1996)

    work page doi:10.1126/science.273.5278.1073 2000

  10. [10]

    D., Love, P

    Aspuru-Guzik, A., Dutoi, A. D., Love, P. J. & Head-Gordon, M. Simulated quantum computation of molecular energies. Science309, 1704–1707, DOI: 10.1126/science.1113479 (2005)

    work page doi:10.1126/science.1113479 2005

  11. [11]

    A Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm

    Harrow, A. W., Hassidim, A. & Lloyd, S. Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations.Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 150502, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.150502 (2009). 14.Farhi, E., Goldstone, J. & Gutmann, S. A quantum approximate optimization algorithm (2014). 1411.4028

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.103.150502 2009

  12. [12]

    & Tapp, A

    Boyer, M., Brassard, G., Høyer, P. & Tapp, A. Tight bounds on quantum searching.F ortschritte der Physik46, 493–505, DOI: 10.1002/(SICI)1521-3978(199806)46:4/5<493::AID-PROP493>3.0.CO;2-P (1998)

    work page doi:10.1002/(sici)1521-3978(199806)46:4/5 1998

  13. [13]

    Rev.119, 10856–10915, DOI: 10.1021/acs

    Cao, Y .et al.Quantum chemistry in the age of quantum computing.Chem. Rev.119, 10856–10915, DOI: 10.1021/acs. chemrev.8b00803 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs 2019

  14. [14]

    McArdle, S., Endo, S., Aspuru-Guzik, A., Benjamin, S. C. & Yuan, X. Quantum computational chemistry.Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 015003, DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.92.015003 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.92.015003 2020

  15. [15]

    K.et al.Survey of quantum algorithms: Foundations, frameworks and applications.AuthoreaDOI: 10.22541/ au.176341037.72812424/v1 (2025)

    Patra, A. K.et al.Survey of quantum algorithms: Foundations, frameworks and applications.AuthoreaDOI: 10.22541/ au.176341037.72812424/v1 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    & Chan, G

    Bauer, B., Bravyi, S., Motta, M. & Chan, G. K.-L. Quantum algorithms for quantum chemistry and quantum materials science.Chem. Rev.120, 12685–12717, DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00829 (2020). 15/19

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00829 2020

  17. [17]

    O’Malley, P. J. J.et al.Scalable quantum simulation of molecular energies.Phys. Rev. X6, 031007, DOI: 10.1103/ PhysRevX.6.031007 (2016)

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond.Quantum2, 79, DOI: 10.22331/q-2018-08-06-79 (2018)

    Preskill, J. Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond.Quantum2, 79, DOI: 10.22331/q-2018-08-06-79 (2018). 22.Eisert, J. & Preskill, J. Mind the gaps: The fraught road to quantum advantage (2025). 2510.19928

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.22331/q-2018-08-06-79 2018

  19. [19]

    Peruzzo, J

    Peruzzo, A.et al.A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor.Nat. Commun.5, 4213, DOI: 10.1038/ncomms5213 (2014)

    work page doi:10.1038/ncomms5213 2014

  20. [20]

    R., Romero, J., Babbush, R

    McClean, J. R., Romero, J., Babbush, R. & Aspuru-Guzik, A. The theory of variational hybrid quantum-classical algorithms.New J. Phys.18, 023023, DOI: 10.1088/1367-2630/18/2/023023 (2016)

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

  21. [21]

    K.et al.Quantum algorithms for electronic structure calculations: Particle-hole hamiltonian and optimized wave-function expansions.Phys

    Barkoutsos, P. K.et al.Quantum algorithms for electronic structure calculations: Particle-hole hamiltonian and optimized wave-function expansions.Phys. Rev. A98, 022322, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.98.022322 (2018)

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.98.022322 2018

  22. [22]

    Reports986, 1–128, DOI: 10.1016/j.physrep.2022.08.003 (2022)

    Tilly, J.et al.The variational quantum eigensolver: A review of methods and best practices.Phys. Reports986, 1–128, DOI: 10.1016/j.physrep.2022.08.003 (2022). The Variational Quantum Eigensolver: a review of methods and best practices

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

  23. [23]

    J., Mintert, F

    Tranter, A., Love, P. J., Mintert, F. & Coveney, P. V . A comparison of the bravyi–kitaev and jordan–wigner transformations for the quantum simulation of quantum chemistry.J. Chem. Theory Comput.14, 5617–5630, DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc. 8b00450 (2018)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc 2018

  24. [24]

    & Weiß, H

    Kühn, M., Zanker, S., Deglmann, P., Marthaler, M. & Weiß, H. Accuracy and resource estimations for quantum chemistry on a near-term quantum computer.J. Chem. Theory Comput.15, 4764–4780, DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00236 (2019)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.9b00236 2019

  25. [25]

    Resource estimation for quantum variational simulations of the hubbard model.Phys

    Cai, Z. Resource estimation for quantum variational simulations of the hubbard model.Phys. Rev. Appl.14, 014059, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.14.014059 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.14.014059 2020

  26. [26]

    D.et al.Reducing the cost of energy estimation in the variational quantum eigensolver algorithm with robust amplitude estimation (2022)

    Johnson, P. D.et al.Reducing the cost of energy estimation in the variational quantum eigensolver algorithm with robust amplitude estimation (2022). 2203.07275

    work page arXiv 2022

  27. [27]

    Quantum Sci

    Otten, M.et al.Qrechem: quantum resource estimation software for chemistry applications.Front. Quantum Sci. Technol. 2, DOI: 10.3389/frqst.2023.1232624 (2023)

    work page doi:10.3389/frqst.2023.1232624 2023

  28. [28]

    & Izmaylov, A

    Patel, S., Jayakumar, P., Yen, T.-C. & Izmaylov, A. F. Quantum measurement for quantum chemistry on a quantum computer.Chem. Rev.125, 7490–7524, DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev.5c00055 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.5c00055 2025

  29. [29]

    E.et al.Ground-state energy estimation on current quantum hardware through the variational quantum eigensolver: A practical study.J

    Belaloui, N. E.et al.Ground-state energy estimation on current quantum hardware through the variational quantum eigensolver: A practical study.J. Chem. Theory Comput.21, 6777–6792, DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.4c01657 (2025). 34.Gundlach, H.et al.Quantum advantage in computational chemistry? (2025). 2508.20972

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.4c01657 2025

  30. [30]

    Alexeev, Y .et al.A perspective on quantum computing applications in quantum chemistry using 25–100 logical qubits.J. Chem. Theory Comput.DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.5c01038 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.5c01038 2025

  31. [31]

    Technol.4, 014008, DOI: 10.1088/2058-9565/aad3e4 (2018)

    Romero, J.et al.Strategies for quantum computing molecular energies using the unitary coupled cluster ansatz.Quantum Sci. Technol.4, 014008, DOI: 10.1088/2058-9565/aad3e4 (2018)

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/aad3e4 2058

  32. [32]

    Tapering off qubits to simulate fermionic Hamiltonians

    Bravyi, S., Gambetta, J. M., Mezzacapo, A. & Temme, K. Tapering off qubits to simulate fermionic hamiltonians (2017). 1701.08213

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  33. [33]

    & Wigner, E

    Jordan, P. & Wigner, E. Über das paulische äquivalenzverbot.Zeitschrift für Physik47, 631–651, DOI: 10.1007/ BF01331938 (1928)

    work page 1928

  34. [34]

    A.et al.The fermionic canonical commutation relations and the jordan-wigner transform.Sch

    Nielsen, M. A.et al.The fermionic canonical commutation relations and the jordan-wigner transform.Sch. Phys. Sci. The Univ. Qld.59, 75 (2005)

    work page 2005

  35. [35]

    Bravyi, S. B. & Kitaev, A. Y . Fermionic quantum computation.Annals Phys.298, 210–226, DOI: 10.1006/aphy.2002.6254 (2002)

    work page doi:10.1006/aphy.2002.6254 2002

  36. [36]

    T., Richard, M

    Seeley, J. T., Richard, M. J. & Love, P. J. The bravyi-kitaev transformation for quantum computation of electronic structure.The J. Chem. Phys.137, 224109, DOI: 10.1063/1.4768229 (2012)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.4768229 2012

  37. [37]

    Tranter, A.et al.The bravyi–kitaev transformation: Properties and applications.Int. J. Quantum Chem.115, 1431–1441, DOI: 10.1002/qua.24969 (2015)

    work page doi:10.1002/qua.24969 2015

  38. [38]

    & Ostlund, N

    Szabo, A. & Ostlund, N. S.Modern Quantum Chemistry: Introduction to Advanced Electronic Structure Theory, chap. 2, 39–107. Dover Books on Chemistry (Dover Publications, Mineola, NY , 1996), 1st, revised edn. 16/19

    work page 1996

  39. [39]

    & Olsen, J.Molecular Electronic-Structure Theory, chap

    Helgaker, T., Jørgensen, P. & Olsen, J.Molecular Electronic-Structure Theory, chap. 1, 1–33 (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2000), 1st edn. 45.Born, M. & Huang, K.Dynamical Theory of Crystal Lattices(Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1954)

    work page 2000

  40. [40]

    Fetter, A. L. & Walecka, J. D.Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems, chap. 1, 3–32. Dover Books on Physics (Dover Publications, Mineola, New York, 2003). Corrected reprint of the 7th printing (McGraw-Hill, 1971)

    work page 2003

  41. [41]

    & Oppenheimer, R

    Shavitt, I. & Bartlett, R. J.Many-Body Methods in Chemistry and Physics: MBPT and Coupled-Cluster Theory, chap. 2, 54–90. Cambridge Molecular Science (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009), 1st edn. Chapter 2. 48.Born, M. & Oppenheimer, R. Zur quantentheorie der molekeln.Annalen der Physik389, 457–484, DOI: 10.1002/andp. 19273892002 (1927)

    work page doi:10.1002/andp 2009

  42. [42]

    Thomas, I. L. Protonic structure of molecules. i. ammonia molecules.Phys. Rev.185, 90–94, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRev.185. 90 (1969)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrev.185 1969

  43. [43]

    The protonic structure of methane, ammonia, water, and hydrogen fluoride.Chem

    Thomas, I. The protonic structure of methane, ammonia, water, and hydrogen fluoride.Chem. Phys. Lett.3, 705–706, DOI: 10.1016/0009-2614(69)87015-6 (1969)

    work page doi:10.1016/0009-2614(69)87015-6 1969

  44. [44]

    & Iguchi, K

    Tachikawa, M., Mori, K., Nakai, H. & Iguchi, K. An extension of ab initio molecular orbital theory to nuclear motion. Chem. Phys. Lett.290, 437–442, DOI: 10.1016/S0009-2614(98)00519-3 (1998)

    work page doi:10.1016/s0009-2614(98)00519-3 1998

  45. [45]

    & Hoshino, M

    Nakai, H., Sodeyama, K. & Hoshino, M. Non-born–oppenheimer theory for simultaneous determination of vibrational and electronic excited states: ab initio no+mo/cis theory.Chem. Phys. Lett.345, 118–124, DOI: 10.1016/S0009-2614(01) 00836-3 (2001)

    work page doi:10.1016/s0009-2614(01 2001

  46. [46]

    Simultaneous determination of nuclear and electronic wave functions without born–oppenheimer approximation: Ab initio no+mo/hf theory.Int

    Nakai, H. Simultaneous determination of nuclear and electronic wave functions without born–oppenheimer approximation: Ab initio no+mo/hf theory.Int. J. Quantum Chem.86, 511–517, DOI: 10.1002/qua.1106 (2002)

    work page doi:10.1002/qua.1106 2002

  47. [47]

    & Sodeyama, K

    Nakai, H. & Sodeyama, K. Many-body effects in nonadiabatic molecular theory for simultaneous determination of nuclear and electronic wave functions: Ab initio nomo/mbpt and cc methods.The J. Chem. Phys.118, 1119–1127, DOI: 10.1063/1.1528951 (2003)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1528951 2003

  48. [48]

    Nuclear orbital plus molecular orbital theory: Simultaneous determination of nuclear and electronic wave functions without born–oppenheimer approximation.Int

    Nakai, H. Nuclear orbital plus molecular orbital theory: Simultaneous determination of nuclear and electronic wave functions without born–oppenheimer approximation.Int. J. Quantum Chem.107, 2849–2869, DOI: 10.1002/qua.21379 (2007)

    work page doi:10.1002/qua.21379 2007

  49. [49]

    Tachikawa, M. Simultaneous optimization of gaussian type function exponents for electron and positron with full-ci wavefunction – application to ground and excited states of positronic compounds with multi-component molecular orbital approach.Chem. Phys. Lett.350, 269–276, DOI: 10.1016/S0009-2614(01)01286-6 (2001)

    work page doi:10.1016/s0009-2614(01)01286-6 2001

  50. [50]

    & Nagashima, U

    Ishimoto, T., Tachikawa, M. & Nagashima, U. Review of multicomponent molecular orbital method for direct treatment of nuclear quantum effect.Int. J. Quantum Chem.109, 2677–2694, DOI: 10.1002/qua.22069 (2009)

    work page doi:10.1002/qua.22069 2009

  51. [51]

    P., Iordanov, T

    Webb, S. P., Iordanov, T. & Hammes-Schiffer, S. Multiconfigurational nuclear-electronic orbital approach: Incorporation of nuclear quantum effects in electronic structure calculations.The J. Chem. Phys.117, 4106–4118, DOI: 10.1063/1.1494980 (2002)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1494980 2002

  52. [52]

    & Hammes-Schiffer, S

    Pavoševi´c, F., Culpitt, T. & Hammes-Schiffer, S. Multicomponent quantum chemistry: Integrating electronic and nuclear quantum effects via the nuclear–electronic orbital method.Chem. Rev.120, 4222–4253, DOI: 10.1021/acs.chemrev. 9b00798 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev 2020

  53. [53]

    & Yang, Y

    Xu, X. & Yang, Y . Constrained nuclear-electronic orbital density functional theory: Energy surfaces with nuclear quantum effects.The J. Chem. Phys.152, 084107, DOI: 10.1063/1.5143371 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5143371 2020

  54. [54]

    & Yang, Y

    Xu, X. & Yang, Y . Full-quantum descriptions of molecular systems from constrained nuclear–electronic orbital density functional theory.The J. Chem. Phys.153, 074106, DOI: 10.1063/5.0014001 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0014001 2020

  55. [55]

    & Yang, Y

    Culpitt, T., Chen, Z., Pavoševi´c, F. & Yang, Y . Constrained nuclear-electronic orbital theory for quantum computation.J. Chem. Theory Comput.21, 7845–7854, DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.5c00815 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.5c00815 2025

  56. [56]

    J., Stewart, R

    Hehre, W. J., Stewart, R. F. & Pople, J. A. Self-consistent molecular-orbital methods. i. use of gaussian expansions of slater-type atomic orbitals.The J. Chem. Phys.51, 2657–2664, DOI: 10.1063/1.1672392 (1969)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.1672392 1969

  57. [57]

    Gaussian basis sets for use in correlated molecular calculations

    Dunning, J., Thom H. Gaussian basis sets for use in correlated molecular calculations. i. the atoms boron through neon and hydrogen.The J. Chem. Phys.90, 1007–1023, DOI: 10.1063/1.456153 (1989)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.456153 1989

  58. [58]

    Konfigurationsraum und zweite quantelung.Zeitschrift für Physik75, 622–647, DOI: 10.1007/BF01344458 (1932)

    Fock, V . Konfigurationsraum und zweite quantelung.Zeitschrift für Physik75, 622–647, DOI: 10.1007/BF01344458 (1932). 17/19

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01344458 1932

  59. [59]

    & Wehner, S

    Steudtner, M. & Wehner, S. Fermion-to-qubit mappings with varying resource requirements for quantum simulation. New J. Phys.20, 063010, DOI: 10.1088/1367-2630/aac54f (2018)

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/aac54f 2018

  60. [60]

    & Neven, H

    Jiang, Z., Kalev, A., Mruczkiewicz, W. & Neven, H. Optimal fermion-to-qubit mapping via ternary trees with applications to reduced quantum states learning.Quantum4, 276, DOI: 10.22331/q-2020-06-04-276 (2020)

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2020-06-04-276 2020

  61. [61]

    & Cubitt, T

    Derby, C., Klassen, J., Bausch, J. & Cubitt, T. Compact fermion to qubit mappings.Phys. Rev. B104, 035118, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevB.104.035118 (2021)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevb.104.035118 2021

  62. [62]

    & García-Pérez, G

    Miller, A., Zimborás, Z., Knecht, S., Maniscalco, S. & García-Pérez, G. Bonsai algorithm: Grow your own fermion-to- qubit mappings.PRX Quantum4, 030314, DOI: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.030314 (2023)

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.4.030314 2023

  63. [63]

    & Strelchuk, S

    O’Brien, O. & Strelchuk, S. Ultrafast hybrid fermion-to-qubit mapping.Phys. Rev. B109, 115149, DOI: 10.1103/ PhysRevB.109.115149 (2024)

    work page 2024

  64. [64]

    72.Yu, J., Liu, Y ., Sugiura, S., Van V oorhis, T

    Parella-Dilmé, T.et al.Reducing entanglement with physically inspired fermion-to-qubit mappings.PRX Quantum5, 030333, DOI: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.5.030333 (2024). 72.Yu, J., Liu, Y ., Sugiura, S., Van V oorhis, T. & Zeytino˘glu, S. Clifford circuit-based heuristic optimization of fermion-to- qubit mappings.J. Chem. Theory Comput.21, 9430–9443, DOI: 10.1021/ac...

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.5.030333 2024

  65. [65]

    In2025 IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA), 143–157, DOI: 10.1109/HPCA61900.2025.00022 (2025)

    Liu, Y .et al.Hatt: Hamiltonian adaptive ternary tree for optimizing fermion-to-qubit mapping. In2025 IEEE International Symposium on High Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA), 143–157, DOI: 10.1109/HPCA61900.2025.00022 (2025)

    work page doi:10.1109/hpca61900.2025.00022 2025

  66. [66]

    O., Taylor, P

    Roos, B. O., Taylor, P. R. & Sigbahn, P. E. A complete active space scf method (casscf) using a density matrix formulated super-ci approach.Chem. Phys.48, 157–173, DOI: 10.1016/0301-0104(80)80045-0 (1980)

    work page doi:10.1016/0301-0104(80)80045-0 1980

  67. [67]

    V ., Tavernelli, I

    Battaglia, S., Rossmannek, M., Rybkin, V . V ., Tavernelli, I. & Hutter, J. A general framework for active space embedding methods with applications in quantum computing.npj Comput. Mater.10, 297, DOI: 10.1038/s41524-024-01477-2 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41524-024-01477-2 2024

  68. [68]

    T.et al.Efficient symmetry-preserving state preparation circuits for the variational quantum eigensolver algorithm.npj Quantum Inf.6, 10, DOI: 10.1038/s41534-019-0240-1 (2020)

    Gard, B. T.et al.Efficient symmetry-preserving state preparation circuits for the variational quantum eigensolver algorithm.npj Quantum Inf.6, 10, DOI: 10.1038/s41534-019-0240-1 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-019-0240-1 2020

  69. [69]

    Setia, K.et al.Reducing qubit requirements for quantum simulations using molecular point group symmetries.J. Chem. Theory Comput.16, 6091–6097, DOI: 10.1021/acs.jctc.0c00113 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1021/acs.jctc.0c00113 2020

  70. [70]

    & Yunoki, S

    Seki, K., Shirakawa, T. & Yunoki, S. Symmetry-adapted variational quantum eigensolver.Phys. Rev. A101, 052340, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.101.052340 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.101.052340 2020

  71. [71]

    Näherungsmethode zur lösung des quantenmechanischen mehrkörperproblems.Zeitschrift für Physik61, 126–148, DOI: 10.1007/BF01340294 (1930)

    Fock, V . Näherungsmethode zur lösung des quantenmechanischen mehrkörperproblems.Zeitschrift für Physik61, 126–148, DOI: 10.1007/BF01340294 (1930). 80.Van Rossum, G. Python tutorial. Tech. Rep. CS-R9526, Centrum voor Wiskunde en Informatica (CWI) (1995). 81.Python Software Foundation.Python Language Reference, v3.11(2022). Accessed: 2025-11-18. 82.Harris,...

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01340294 1930

  72. [72]

    Libcint: An efficient general integral library for gaussian basis functions.J

    Sun, Q. Libcint: An efficient general integral library for gaussian basis functions.J. Comput. Chem.36, 1664–1671, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jcc.23981 (2015)

    work page doi:10.1002/jcc.23981 2015

  73. [73]

    Sun, Q.et al.Pyscf: the python-based simulations of chemistry framework.WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci.8, e1340, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcms.1340 (2018)

    work page doi:10.1002/wcms.1340 2018

  74. [74]

    Sun, Q.et al.Recent developments in the pyscf program package.The J. Chem. Phys.153, 024109, DOI: 10.1063/5. 0006074 (2020). 86.Javadi-Abhari, A.et al.Quantum computing with qiskit (2024). 2405.08810. 87.Qiskit Community. Qiskit aer v0.15.1. https://pypi.org/project/qiskit-aer/0.15.1/ (2024). Accessed: 2025-11-18. 88.The Qiskit Nature Developers and Contr...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1063/5 2020

  75. [75]

    IBM Quantum (2025)

    Qiskit Development Team.Qiskit SDK Docs: Qiskit Circuit Library - v1.3.3. IBM Quantum (2025). Accessed: 2025-11-07

    work page 2025

  76. [76]

    & Tully, J

    Hammes-Schiffer, S. & Tully, J. C. Proton transfer in solution: Molecular dynamics with quantum transitions.The J. Chem. Phys.101, 4657–4667, DOI: 10.1063/1.467455 (1994)

    work page doi:10.1063/1.467455 1994

  77. [77]

    E., Marx, D., Klein, M

    Tuckerman, M. E., Marx, D., Klein, M. L. & Parrinello, M. On the quantum nature of the shared proton in hydrogen bonds.Science275, 817–820, DOI: 10.1126/science.275.5301.817 (1997). 18/19

    work page doi:10.1126/science.275.5301.817 1997

  78. [78]

    Morrone, J. A. & Car, R. Nuclear quantum effects in water.Phys. Rev. Lett.101, 017801, DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101. 017801 (2008)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.101 2008

  79. [79]

    Reece, S. Y . & Nocera, D. G. Proton-coupled electron transfer in biology: Results from synergistic studies in natural and model systems.Annu. Rev. Biochem.78, 673–699, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.biochem.78.080207.092132 (2009)

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.biochem.78.080207.092132 2009

  80. [80]

    & Michaelides, A

    Li, X.-Z., Walker, B. & Michaelides, A. Quantum nature of the hydrogen bond.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.108, 6369–6373, DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1016653108 (2011)

    work page doi:10.1073/pnas.1016653108 2011

Showing first 80 references.