MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7117481028 · doi:10.1063/5.0300557

Quantum simulation of electron energy loss spectroscopy for battery materials

2025· article· en· W7117481028 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander A. Kunitsa, Diksha Dhawan, Stepan Fomichev, Juan Miguel Arrazola, Torin F. Stetina

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Chemical Physics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsXanadu Quantum Technologies (Canada)
FundersNational Energy Research Scientific Computing Center
KeywordsBattery (electricity)SpectroscopyInelastic scatteringCathodeElectron energy loss spectroscopyQuantumLithium (medication)ElectronQuantum computer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dynamic structure factor (DSF) is a central quantity for interpreting a vast array of inelastic scattering experiments in chemistry and materials science, but its accurate simulation poses a considerable challenge for classical computational methods. In this work, we present a quantum algorithm and an end-to-end simulation framework to compute the DSF, providing a general approach for simulating momentum-resolved spectroscopies. We apply this approach to the simulation of electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS) in the core-level electronic excitation regime, a spectroscopic technique offering sub-nanometer spatial resolution and capable of resolving element-specific information, crucial for analyzing battery materials. We derive a quantum algorithm for computing the DSF for EELS by evaluating the off-diagonal terms of the time-domain Green's function, enabling the simulation of momentum-resolved spectroscopies. To showcase the algorithm, we study the oxygen K-edge EELS spectrum of lithium manganese oxide (Li2MnO3), a prototypical cathode material for investigating the mechanisms of oxygen redox in battery materials. For a representative model of an oxygen-centered cluster of Li2MnO3 with an active space of 18 active orbitals, the algorithm requires a circuit depth of 3.25 × 108 T gates, 100 logical qubits, and roughly 104 shots.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.507
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Chemical PhysicsSame topicAdvanced Electron Microscopy Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207