Faster Algorithmic Quantum and Classical Simulations by Corrected Product Formulas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hamiltonian simulation using product formulas is arguably the most straightforward and practical approach for algorithmic simulation of a quantum system’s dynamics on a quantum computer. Here we present corrected product formulas (CPFs), a variation of product formulas achieved by injecting auxiliary terms called correctors into standard product formulas. We establish several correctors that improve the accuracy of standard product formulas by orders of magnitude when simulating Hamiltonians comprised of two exactly simulatable partitions, a common structure of lattice Hamiltonians. Importantly, injecting these correctors increases the overall simulation cost by only a small additive or multiplicative factor. We show that correctors are particularly advantageous for perturbed systems, where one partition has a relatively small norm compared to the other, as they allow the small norm to be utilized as an additional parameter for controlling the simulation error. We demonstrate the performance of CPFs by numerical simulations for several lattice Hamiltonians. Numerical results show that our theoretical error bounds for CPFs match or outperform the empirical error scaling of standard product formulas for these systems. We also demonstrate improvements offered by CPFs by implementing small-size systems on actual quantum hardware, as well as on noisy and noiseless quantum simulators. CPFs could be a valuable algorithmic tool for early fault-tolerant quantum computers with limited computing resources. As for standard product formulas, CPFs could also be used for simulations on a classical computer.
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 | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".