pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.08349 · v1 · pith:24BESPSEnew · submitted 2026-06-06 · 🪐 quant-ph · math-ph· math.MP· physics.flu-dyn

Quantum algorithms for stochastic nonlinear differential equations

Sergey Bravyi , Adam Byrne , Mykhaylo Zayats , Sergiy Zhuk This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 19:16 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph math-phmath.MPphysics.flu-dyn
keywords quantum algorithmsstochastic differential equationsnonlinear dynamicsquantum simulationfluid dynamicsturbulenceNavier-Stokesharmonic oscillators
0
0 comments X

The pith

Quantum algorithm approximates low-order correlations for nonlinear stochastic differential equations at polylogarithmic cost in dimension when the drift preserves norm.

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

The paper constructs a quantum algorithm that handles a class of N-dimensional stochastic differential equations featuring dissipation together with quadratic nonlinear drift. The method applies to strongly nonlinear all-to-all systems that lie outside the reach of earlier quantum approaches restricted to weak nonlinearity or sparse couplings. When the drift satisfies a norm-preserving condition, as occurs in standard discretizations of fluid equations, the algorithm returns rigorous error bounds on expectation values of low-order correlation functions. The total cost scales polynomially in log(N) and linearly with evolution time. The central technical step is an efficient subroutine that simulates an auxiliary system of N interacting quantum harmonic oscillators.

Core claim

We present a quantum algorithm for a broad class of N-dimensional stochastic differential equations with dissipation and quadratic drift. The algorithm applies to strongly nonlinear systems with all-to-all interactions. For norm-preserving drifts, a condition satisfied by key fluid dynamics discretizations, our method approximates expectation values of low-order correlation functions with rigorous error bounds at a cost polynomial in log(N) and linear in the evolution time. Our main technical advance is a subroutine for simulating an auxiliary system of N interacting quantum harmonic oscillators with cost polylogarithmic in N. We formulate turbulence models, including Navier-Stokes and dampe

What carries the argument

Subroutine for simulating an auxiliary system of N interacting quantum harmonic oscillators, which produces the polylog(N) scaling for the overall SDE solver.

If this is right

  • Navier-Stokes and damped Euler equations become candidates for quantum simulation under the stated cost bounds.
  • Expectation values of low-order correlations in these fluid models can be obtained with error guarantees linear in time.
  • The same framework covers other quadratic-drift SDEs that satisfy the norm-preserving property.
  • Strongly nonlinear all-to-all interactions are now inside the scope of quantum algorithms for stochastic dynamics.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If hardware can realize the oscillator subroutine, small-N turbulence simulations could serve as an early test bed for the scaling claim.
  • The norm-preserving restriction may limit direct application to compressible flows or systems with strong external forcing.
  • The approach opens a possible route to quantum treatment of nonlinear wave equations that admit similar quadratic-drift representations.

Load-bearing premise

The quadratic drift term must obey a norm-preserving condition that makes the auxiliary oscillator simulation efficient.

What would settle it

Explicit gate-count measurement for the oscillator subroutine at N equals 8 that exceeds any polynomial in log(8) while the claimed error bound on a low-order correlation still holds.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.08349 by Adam Byrne, Mykhaylo Zayats, Sergey Bravyi, Sergiy Zhuk.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Quantum simulation workflow. A quadratic ODE for a state vector X(t) ∈ R N is converted into a stochastic differential equation (SDE) by adding random noise. Rather than tracking the full state vector, the quantum algorithm estimates the noise-averaged value of a scalar observable u0 : R N → R evaluated at the solution X(t) for a given target initial condition x ∈ R N . As a function of t and x, this expec… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Monte Carlo simulation of dEB. Rows 1-2; a realization of the velocity field for the SDE Eq. (2) describing the discretized dEB model with an additional deterministic forcing Eq. (10). Rows 3-5; the same SDE without deterministic forcing. The first two columns show the averaged velocity field, and the third column shows the expectation v(t, x). 15 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Generation of the turbulent initial condition. Profiles of the first component of the velocity V = (V1, V2) for the dEB model Eq. (192) with Kolmogorov forcing Eq. (198) over t ∈ [0, tturb]. The behavior of the dEB model with Kolmogorov forcing is illustrated in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p080_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Sample variance in projection coefficients. Unbiased sample variance in all N coefficients Xi(T) and X2 i (T) at the final time T = 3.0. For the observable, we consider u0,ξ∗ (X(t)) = X N i=1 Xi(t) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p081_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Unfiltered expectation v(t, x). Comparison of the expected value v(t, x) for observable u0,ξ∗ (X(t)) with the filter w(pi) for (α, β) = (10−2 , 1.6) versus the “unfiltered” observable with (α, β) = (0, 0), over t ∈ [tturb, T] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p082_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Sample variance in averaged observables. Sample variance σb 2 in the expectation v(t, x) averaged across the spatial points ξ ∗ ∈ l, plotted at timepoints t ∈ [tturb, T] [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p083_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Expectation v(t, x) for different noise rates q. Comparison of the expected value v(t, x) for Wiener noise q = 2.5 × 10−4 versus with q = 5 × 10−4 over t ∈ [tturb, T], which correspond to initial condition noise rates of q/(2λ) = 1.25 and q/(2λ) = 2.5, respectively [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p083_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Expectation v(t, x) for different choices of observable u0(X(t)). Expected value of the observables Xi(t), X2 i (t) and XiXi+1(t) over a subset of indices 1 ≤ i ≤ N, for q = 2.5 × 10−4 , over t ∈ [tturb, T]. 83 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p083_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Stochastic nonlinear dynamics underlie many models in engineering and computational physics, yet accurate high-dimensional simulation remains challenging. We present a quantum algorithm for a broad class of $N$-dimensional stochastic differential equations with dissipation and quadratic drift. The algorithm applies to strongly nonlinear systems with all-to-all interactions, thereby extending the scope of previously known quantum algorithms that were limited to weak nonlinearity and sparse systems. For norm-preserving drifts, a condition satisfied by key fluid dynamics discretizations, our method approximates expectation values of low-order correlation functions with rigorous error bounds at a cost polynomial in $\log{(N)}$ and linear in the evolution time. Our main technical advance is a subroutine for simulating an auxiliary system of $N$ interacting quantum harmonic oscillators with cost polylogarithmic in $N$. Finally, we formulate turbulence models, including Navier-Stokes and damped Euler equations, within this framework, opening a route to quantum simulation of strongly nonlinear SDEs governing turbulence and nonlinear wave dynamics.

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 manuscript presents a quantum algorithm for simulating a broad class of N-dimensional stochastic differential equations (SDEs) with dissipation and quadratic drift terms. It claims that when the drift satisfies a norm-preserving condition (asserted to hold for discretizations of Navier-Stokes and damped Euler equations), expectation values of low-order correlation functions can be approximated with rigorous error bounds at a cost that is polynomial in log(N) and linear in evolution time. The central technical contribution is a polylog(N)-cost subroutine for simulating an auxiliary system of N interacting quantum harmonic oscillators. The work also formulates turbulence models within this SDE framework.

Significance. If the norm-preserving condition holds for the target models and the error analysis is complete, the result would extend quantum simulation techniques to strongly nonlinear, all-to-all interacting SDEs, a regime previously inaccessible to polylog scaling. The oscillator simulation subroutine, if rigorously established, constitutes a reusable primitive with potential applications beyond the SDE setting.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and turbulence models section] Abstract and the section formulating turbulence models: the claim that 'key fluid dynamics discretizations' satisfy the norm-preserving condition on the quadratic drift is asserted without an explicit verification that the chosen spatial discretization of the Navier-Stokes or damped Euler equations preserves the required norm (or equivalent structural property) under the quadratic term. This condition is load-bearing for invoking the polylog(N) oscillator subroutine at the stated cost.
  2. [Abstract (and any error analysis section)] The abstract asserts 'rigorous error bounds' for the approximation of low-order correlation functions, yet the provided text does not include the full derivation or explicit propagation of errors from the oscillator subroutine through the SDE discretization; without this, the polynomial-in-log(N) claim cannot be verified as stated.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Notation for the norm-preserving condition should be defined explicitly (e.g., as an equation) rather than described only in prose, to allow direct checking against the fluid discretizations.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful review and constructive feedback on our manuscript. We address each major comment below, indicating planned revisions where appropriate to strengthen the presentation.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and turbulence models section] Abstract and the section formulating turbulence models: the claim that 'key fluid dynamics discretizations' satisfy the norm-preserving condition on the quadratic drift is asserted without an explicit verification that the chosen spatial discretization of the Navier-Stokes or damped Euler equations preserves the required norm (or equivalent structural property) under the quadratic term. This condition is load-bearing for invoking the polylog(N) oscillator subroutine at the stated cost.

    Authors: We agree that an explicit verification of the norm-preserving condition for the chosen discretizations would improve clarity and verifiability, as this property is essential for the polylog(N) scaling. The manuscript asserts the condition based on the structural form of the quadratic drift term in the SDE formulation of these fluid models. We will add a dedicated paragraph or subsection in the turbulence models section that explicitly derives the norm preservation (or equivalent invariant) for the specific spatial discretizations employed, including the relevant algebraic steps for the quadratic term. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract (and any error analysis section)] The abstract asserts 'rigorous error bounds' for the approximation of low-order correlation functions, yet the provided text does not include the full derivation or explicit propagation of errors from the oscillator subroutine through the SDE discretization; without this, the polynomial-in-log(N) claim cannot be verified as stated.

    Authors: The manuscript contains the complete error analysis, including propagation of errors from the quantum harmonic oscillator subroutine through the SDE discretization, sampling procedure, and final estimation of low-order correlations, with all bounds derived rigorously in the technical sections. The abstract summarizes the resulting complexity. To address the concern, we will revise the abstract to explicitly reference the theorem or section containing the full error propagation and add a brief summary paragraph in the main text if needed for accessibility. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation relies on standard quantum primitives

full rationale

The paper's central result is a quantum algorithm for SDEs under a norm-preserving drift condition, with cost polynomial in log(N) derived from a new subroutine simulating N interacting oscillators. This builds on established quantum simulation techniques without reducing the claimed bounds or complexity to a fitted parameter, self-defined quantity, or load-bearing self-citation chain. The condition is presented as an external structural assumption satisfied by target models; no step equates the output complexity to the input by construction. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The result rests on the stated class of SDEs (quadratic drift plus dissipation) and the norm-preserving property; no free parameters or new entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The SDE belongs to the class with quadratic drift and dissipation terms.
    Abstract defines the algorithm's applicability to this broad class.
  • domain assumption Drift is norm-preserving, enabling the stated error bounds and scaling.
    Condition invoked for the polynomial-in-log(N) cost and fluid-dynamics examples.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5705 in / 1180 out tokens · 15856 ms · 2026-06-27T19:16:08.381653+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Quantum Derivative Pricing for SPDEs via BDSDE Representation

    quant-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    Quantum-accelerated MLMC methods for BDSDE-based SPDE derivative pricing and Greeks achieve sampling complexity improvement from O(ε^{-2}) to O(ε^{-1}).

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Grid-point and time-step requirements for direct numerical simulation and large-eddy simulation.Physics of Fluids, 33(1), 2021

    Xiang IA Yang and Kevin P Griffin. Grid-point and time-step requirements for direct numerical simulation and large-eddy simulation.Physics of Fluids, 33(1), 2021

    2021

  2. [2]

    Efficient quantum algorithm for dissipative nonlinear differential equations

    Jin-Peng Liu, Herman Øie Kolden, Hari K Krovi, Nuno F Loureiro, Konstantina Trivisa, and Andrew M Childs. Efficient quantum algorithm for dissipative nonlinear differential equations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118(35):e2026805118, 2021

    2021

  3. [3]

    Bharadwaj, and Mikel Sanz

    Javier Gonzalez-Conde, Dylan Lewis, Sachin S. Bharadwaj, and Mikel Sanz. Quantum carleman linearization efficiency in nonlinear fluid dynamics.Phys. Rev. Res., 7:023254, Jun 2025

    2025

  4. [4]

    A quantum algorithm to solve nonlinear differential equations

    Sarah K Leyton and Tobias J Osborne. A quantum algorithm to solve nonlinear differential equations.arXiv preprint arXiv:0812.4423, 2008

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  5. [5]

    Nonlinear quantum mechanics implies polynomial-time solu- tion for np-complete and #p problems.Physical Review Letters, 81(18):3992, 1998

    Daniel S Abrams and Seth Lloyd. Nonlinear quantum mechanics implies polynomial-time solu- tion for np-complete and #p problems.Physical Review Letters, 81(18):3992, 1998

    1998

  6. [6]

    Optimal state discrimination and unstructured search in nonlinear quantum mechanics.Physical Review A, 93(2):022314, 2016

    Andrew M Childs and Joshua Young. Optimal state discrimination and unstructured search in nonlinear quantum mechanics.Physical Review A, 93(2):022314, 2016

    2016

  7. [7]

    Quantum and classical algorithms for nonlinear unitary dynamics.Quantum, 9:1741, 2025

    Noah Brustle and Nathan Wiebe. Quantum and classical algorithms for nonlinear unitary dynamics.Quantum, 9:1741, 2025

    2025

  8. [8]

    Childs, and Hari Krovi

    Abtin Ameri, Joseph Carolan, Andrew M. Childs, and Hari Krovi. Quantum lower bounds for simulating fluid dynamics.arXiv preprint, 2026

    2026

  9. [9]

    Hamiltonian systems and transformation in hilbert space.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 17(5):315–318, 1931

    Bernard O Koopman. Hamiltonian systems and transformation in hilbert space.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 17(5):315–318, 1931

    1931

  10. [10]

    Zur operatorenmethode in der klassischen mechanik.Annals of Mathemat- ics, 33(3):587–642, 1932

    John von Neumann. Zur operatorenmethode in der klassischen mechanik.Annals of Mathemat- ics, 33(3):587–642, 1932

    1932

  11. [11]

    Nonlinear dynamical systems and classical orthogonal polynomials.Journal of Mathematical Physics, 38(5):2483–2505, 1997

    Krzysztof Kowalski. Nonlinear dynamical systems and classical orthogonal polynomials.Journal of Mathematical Physics, 38(5):2483–2505, 1997

    1997

  12. [12]

    Linear embedding of nonlinear dynamical systems and prospects for efficient quantum algorithms.Physics of Plasmas, 28(6), 2021

    Alexander Engel, Graeme Smith, and Scott E Parker. Linear embedding of nonlinear dynamical systems and prospects for efficient quantum algorithms.Physics of Plasmas, 28(6), 2021

    2021

  13. [13]

    A polynomial time quantum algorithm for exponentially large scale nonlinear differential equations via hamiltonian simulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.00653, 2023

    Yu Tanaka and Keisuke Fujii. A polynomial time quantum algorithm for exponentially large scale nonlinear differential equations via hamiltonian simulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.00653, 2023. 91

    work page arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    Quantum algorithm for the advection-diffusion equation and the Koopman-von Neumann approach to nonlinear dynamical systems.Computer Physics Commu- nications, 309:109498, 2025

    Ivan Novikau and Ilon Joseph. Quantum algorithm for the advection-diffusion equation and the Koopman-von Neumann approach to nonlinear dynamical systems.Computer Physics Commu- nications, 309:109498, 2025

    2025

  15. [15]

    Koopman spectral linearization vs

    Dongwei Shi and Xiu Yang. Koopman spectral linearization vs. carleman linearization: A computational comparison study.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.19078, 2023

    work page arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2004

    Iosif I Gikhman and Anatoli V Skorokhod.The Theory of Stochastic Processes: I, volume 210. Springer Science & Business Media, 2004

    2004

  17. [17]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2004

    Giuseppe Da Prato.Kolmogorov equations for stochastic PDEs. Springer Science & Business Media, 2004

    2004

  18. [18]

    Kolmogorov equation associated to a stochastic Navier– Stokes equation.journal of functional analysis, 160(1):312–336, 1998

    Franco Flandoli and Fausto Gozzi. Kolmogorov equation associated to a stochastic Navier– Stokes equation.journal of functional analysis, 160(1):312–336, 1998

    1998

  19. [19]

    A numerical approach to kolmogorov equation in high dimension based on gaussian analysis.Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applica- tions, 493(1):124505, 2021

    Franco Flandoli, Dejun Luo, and Cristiano Ricci. A numerical approach to kolmogorov equation in high dimension based on gaussian analysis.Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applica- tions, 493(1):124505, 2021

    2021

  20. [20]

    Existence and smoothness of the navier-stokes equation.The millennium prize problems, 57(67):22, 2006

    Charles L Fefferman. Existence and smoothness of the navier-stokes equation.The millennium prize problems, 57(67):22, 2006

    2006

  21. [21]

    Navier–stokes equation

    Clay Mathematics Institute. Navier–stokes equation. URLhttps://www.claymath.org/ millennium/navier-stokes-equation/. Accessed 2026-03-29

    2026

  22. [22]

    Springer, 2015

    Robert C Dalang, Marco Dozzi, Franco Flandoli, and Francesco Russo.Stochastic Analysis: A Series of Lectures. Springer, 2015

    2015

  23. [23]

    Foias, O

    C. Foias, O. Manley, R. Rosa, and R. Temam.Navier-Stokes Equations and Turbulence. Ency- clopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. Cambridge University Press, 2001

    2001

  24. [24]

    Predictability: A problem partly solved

    Edward N Lorenz. Predictability: A problem partly solved. InProc. Seminar on predictability, volume 1, pages 1–18. Reading, 1996

    1996

  25. [25]

    A detectability criterion and data assimilation for nonlinear differential equations.Nonlinearity, 31(11):5235, 2018

    Jason Frank and Sergiy Zhuk. A detectability criterion and data assimilation for nonlinear differential equations.Nonlinearity, 31(11):5235, 2018

    2018

  26. [26]

    Evidence that random behavior is generic for non- linear differential equations.Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 1(1):68–79, 1980

    Steven A Orszag and John B McLaughlin. Evidence that random behavior is generic for non- linear differential equations.Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 1(1):68–79, 1980

    1980

  27. [27]

    From optimization to sampling through gradient flows.Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 70(6), 2023

    N Garc´ ıa Trillos, Bamdad Hosseini, and Daniel Sanz-Alonso. From optimization to sampling through gradient flows.Notices of the American Mathematical Society, 70(6), 2023

    2023

  28. [28]

    Multistep parametric processes in nonlinear optics

    Solomon M Saltiel, Andrey A Sukhorukov, and Yuri S Kivshar. Multistep parametric processes in nonlinear optics. InProgress in optics, volume 47, pages 1–73. Elsevier, 2005. 92

    2005

  29. [29]

    Bardina, J

    J. Bardina, J. H. Ferziger, and W. C. Reynolds. Improved subgrid-scale models for large-eddy simulation. InProceedings of the 13th AIAA Fluid and Plasma Dynamics Conference, Snowmass, Colorado, jul 1980. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. AIAA Paper 80-1357

    1980

  30. [30]

    Layton and R

    W. Layton and R. Lewandowski. On a well-posed turbulence model.Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems - Series B, 6(1):111–128, 2006

    2006

  31. [31]

    Lunasin, and Edriss S

    Yanping Cao, Evelyn M. Lunasin, and Edriss S. Titi. Global well-posedness of the three- dimensional viscous and inviscid simplified bardina turbulence models.Communications in Mathematical Sciences, 4(4):823–848, 2006

    2006

  32. [32]

    Bardina, J

    J. Bardina, J. H. Ferziger, and W. C. Reynolds. Improved turbulence models based on large eddy simulation of homogeneous, incompressible, turbulent flows. Nasa contractor report, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, may 1983. Stanford University Thermosciences Division Technical Report TF-19

    1983

  33. [33]

    Gambetta, Dario Gil, and Zaira Nazario

    Sergey Bravyi, Oliver Dial, Jay M. Gambetta, Dario Gil, and Zaira Nazario. The future of quantum computing with superconducting qubits.Journal of Applied Physics, 132(16):160902, 2022

    2022

  34. [34]

    Massimo Germano, Ugo Piomelli, Parviz Moin, and William H. Cabot. A dynamic subgrid-scale eddy viscosity model.Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics, 3(7):1760–1765, 1991

    1991

  35. [35]

    Douglas K. Lilly. A proposed modification of the germano subgrid-scale closure method.Physics of Fluids A: Fluid Dynamics, 4(3):633–635, 1992

    1992

  36. [36]

    Improved quantum algorithms for linear and nonlinear differential equations.Quan- tum, 7:913, 2023

    Hari Krovi. Improved quantum algorithms for linear and nonlinear differential equations.Quan- tum, 7:913, 2023

    2023

  37. [37]

    Further improving quantum algorithms for nonlinear differential equations via higher-order methods and rescaling

    Pedro CS Costa, Philipp Schleich, Mauro ES Morales, and Dominic W Berry. Further improving quantum algorithms for nonlinear differential equations via higher-order methods and rescaling. npj Quantum Information, 11(1):141, 2025

    2025

  38. [38]

    Efficient quantum algorithm for nonlinear reaction–diffusion equations and energy estimation.Commu- nications in Mathematical Physics, 404(2):963–1020, 2023

    Jin-Peng Liu, Dong An, Di Fang, Jiasu Wang, Guang Hao Low, and Stephen Jordan. Efficient quantum algorithm for nonlinear reaction–diffusion equations and energy estimation.Commu- nications in Mathematical Physics, 404(2):963–1020, 2023

    2023

  39. [39]

    An efficient quantum algorithm for simulating polynomial dynamical systems: A

    Amit Surana, Abeynaya Gnanasekaran, and Tuhin Sahai. An efficient quantum algorithm for simulating polynomial dynamical systems: A. surana et al.Quantum Information Processing, 23(3):105, 2024

    2024

  40. [40]

    Quantum algorithms for nonlinear differential equations via pivot-shifted carleman linearization.arXiv preprint, 2026

    Ke Wang, Zikang Jia, Shravan Veerapaneni, and Zhiyan Ding. Quantum algorithms for nonlinear differential equations via pivot-shifted carleman linearization.arXiv preprint, 2026

    2026

  41. [41]

    Quantum algorithms for nonlinear dynamics: Revisiting carleman linearization with no dissipative conditions.SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 47(2):A943–A970, 2025

    Hsuan-Cheng Wu, Jingyao Wang, and Xiantao Li. Quantum algorithms for nonlinear dynamics: Revisiting carleman linearization with no dissipative conditions.SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 47(2):A943–A970, 2025. 93

    2025

  42. [42]

    Koopman–von neumann approach to quantum simulation of nonlinear classical dynamics.Physical Review Research, 2(4):043102, 2020

    Ilon Joseph. Koopman–von neumann approach to quantum simulation of nonlinear classical dynamics.Physical Review Research, 2(4):043102, 2020

    2020

  43. [43]

    Quantum simu- lation of a noisy classical nonlinear dynamics.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06198v2, oct 2025

    Sergey Bravyi, Robert Manson-Sawko, Mykhaylo Zayats, and Sergiy Zhuk. Quantum simu- lation of a noisy classical nonlinear dynamics.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.06198v2, oct 2025. arXiv:2507.06198

    work page arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    Linear combination of hamiltonian simulation for nonuni- tary dynamics with optimal state preparation cost.Physical Review Letters, 131(15):150603, 2023

    Dong An, Jin-Peng Liu, and Lin Lin. Linear combination of hamiltonian simulation for nonuni- tary dynamics with optimal state preparation cost.Physical Review Letters, 131(15):150603, 2023

    2023

  45. [45]

    Quantum algorithm for linear non-unitary dynamics with near-optimal dependence on all parameters.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 407(1):19, 2026

    Dong An, Andrew M Childs, and Lin Lin. Quantum algorithm for linear non-unitary dynamics with near-optimal dependence on all parameters.Communications in Mathematical Physics, 407(1):19, 2026

    2026

  46. [46]

    Optimal quantum simulation of linear non-unitary dynamics.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.19238, 2025

    Guang Hao Low and Rolando D Somma. Optimal quantum simulation of linear non-unitary dynamics.arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.19238, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  47. [47]

    Turbulence and Interaction-TI2006

    Roel Verstappen. On restraining the production of small scales of motion in a turbulent chan- nel flow.Computers and Fluids, 37(7):887–897, 2008. ISSN 0045-7930. Special Issue of the “Turbulence and Interaction-TI2006” Conference

    2008

  48. [48]

    Continuous markov processes and stochastic equations.Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo, 4:48–90, 1955

    Gisirˆ o Maruyama. Continuous markov processes and stochastic equations.Rendiconti del Circolo Matematico di Palermo, 4:48–90, 1955

    1955

  49. [49]

    Campbell

    Earl T. Campbell. A random compiler for fast hamiltonian simulation.Physical Review Letters, 123(7):070503, 2019

    2019

  50. [50]

    Sornborger, Yigit Subasi, and Guoming Wang

    David Jennings, Kamil Korzekwa, Matteo Lostaglio, Andrew T. Sornborger, Yigit Subasi, and Guoming Wang. Quantum algorithms for general nonlinear dynamics based on the carleman embedding.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.07155, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    Jennings , author K

    David Jennings, Kamil Korzekwa, Matteo Lostaglio, Richard Ashworth, Emanuele Marsili, and Stephen Rolston. An end-to-end quantum algorithm for nonlinear fluid dynamics with bounded quantum advantage.arXiv preprint arXiv:2512.03758, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    Bernt Oksendal.Stochastic differential equations: an introduction with applications. Springer Science & Business Media, 2013

    2013

  53. [53]

    Cambridge university press Cambridge, 1999

    George E Andrews, Richard Askey, Ranjan Roy, Ranjan Roy, and Richard Askey.Special functions, volume 71. Cambridge university press Cambridge, 1999

    1999

  54. [54]

    Quantum singular value transfor- mation and beyond: Exponential improvements for quantum matrix arithmetics

    Andr´ as Gily´ en, Yuan Su, Guang Hao Low, and Nathan Wiebe. Quantum singular value transfor- mation and beyond: Exponential improvements for quantum matrix arithmetics. InProceedings of the 51st Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2019), pages 193–204. ACM, 2019. 94

    2019

  55. [55]

    Toward optimal circuit size for sparse quantum state preparation.Physical Review A, 110(3):032439, 2024

    Rui Mao, Guojing Tian, and Xiaoming Sun. Toward optimal circuit size for sparse quantum state preparation.Physical Review A, 110(3):032439, 2024

    2024

  56. [56]

    Simulating hamiltonian dynamics with a truncated taylor series.Physical review letters, 114(9): 090502, 2015

    Dominic W Berry, Andrew M Childs, Richard Cleve, Robin Kothari, and Rolando D Somma. Simulating hamiltonian dynamics with a truncated taylor series.Physical review letters, 114(9): 090502, 2015

    2015

  57. [57]

    Hamiltonian simulation by qubitization.Quantum, 3: 163, 2019

    Guang Hao Low and Isaac L Chuang. Hamiltonian simulation by qubitization.Quantum, 3: 163, 2019

    2019

  58. [58]

    Yanping Cao and Edriss S. Titi. On the rate of convergence of the two-dimensional alpha-models of turbulence to the navier–stokes equations.Numerical Functional Analysis and Optimization, 30(11-12):1231–1271, 2009

    2009

  59. [59]

    Gronwall

    Thomas H. Gronwall. Note on the derivatives with respect to a parameter of the solutions of a system of differential equations.Annals of Mathematics, 20(4):292–296, 1919

    1919

  60. [60]

    Classical solutions for a generalized euler equation in two dimensions.Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 215(2):471–484, 1997

    Marcel Oliver. Classical solutions for a generalized euler equation in two dimensions.Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 215(2):471–484, 1997. ISSN 0022-247X

    1997

  61. [61]

    Kloeden and Eckhard Platen.Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations, volume 23 ofApplications of Mathematics

    Peter E. Kloeden and Eckhard Platen.Numerical Solution of Stochastic Differential Equations, volume 23 ofApplications of Mathematics. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1992

    1992

  62. [62]

    Fishman.Monte Carlo: Concepts, Algorithms, and Applications

    George S. Fishman.Monte Carlo: Concepts, Algorithms, and Applications. Springer, New York,

  63. [63]

    LD Meshalkin and Ia G Sinai. Investigation of the stability of a stationary solution of a system of equations for the plane movement of an incompressible viscous liquid.Journal of Applied Mathematics and Mechanics, 25(6):1700–1705, 1961

    1961

  64. [64]

    Zhuk and T

    S. Zhuk and T. Tchrakian. Parameter estimation for euler equations with uncertain inputs. InProceedings of the IEEE 54th Annual Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), pages 7405–7410, Osaka, Japan, 2015. IEEE

    2015

  65. [65]

    Importance sampling for stochastic quan- tum simulations.Quantum, 7:977, 2023

    Oriel Kiss, Michele Grossi, and Alessandro Roggero. Importance sampling for stochastic quan- tum simulations.Quantum, 7:977, 2023

    2023

  66. [66]

    Berndt, Amita Malik, and Alexandru Zaharescu

    Bruce C. Berndt, Amita Malik, and Alexandru Zaharescu. Partitions intokth powers of terms in an arithmetic progression.Mathematische Zeitschrift, 290(3–4):1277–1307, 2018

    2018

  67. [67]

    Power partitions and saddle-point method.Journal of Number Theory, 204:435–445, 2019

    G´ erald Tenenbaum, Jie Wu, and Ya-Li Li. Power partitions and saddle-point method.Journal of Number Theory, 204:435–445, 2019. 95

    2019