Partitioning Quantum Chemistry Simulations with Clifford Circuits
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current quantum computing hardware is restricted by the availability of only few, noisy qubits which limits the investigation of larger, more complex molecules in quantum chemistry calculations on quantum computers in the near term. In this work, we investigate the limits of their classical and near-classical treatment while staying within the framework of quantum circuits and the variational quantum eigensolver. To this end, we consider naive and physically motivated, classically efficient product ansatz for the parametrized wavefunction adapting the separable-pair ansatz form. We combine it with post-treatment to account for interactions between subsystems originating from this ansatz. The classical treatment is given by another quantum circuit that has support between the enforced subsystems and is folded into the Hamiltonian. To avoid an exponential increase in the number of Hamiltonian terms, the entangling operations are constructed from purely Clifford or near-Clifford circuits. While Clifford circuits can be simulated efficiently classically, they are not universal. In order to account for missing expressibility, near-Clifford circuits with only few, selected non-Clifford gates are employed. The exact circuit structure to achieve this objective is molecule-dependent and is constructed using simulated annealing and genetic algorithms. We demonstrate our approach on a set of molecules of interest and investigate the extent of our methodology's reach.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".