Resource-efficient digital quantum simulation of d-level systems for photonic, vibrational, and spin-s Hamiltonians 1, 2, 3, 4 5, 6 Nicolas P. D. Sawaya, ∗ Tim Menke, Thi Ha Kyaw, Sonika 7 5, 6, 8, 9 1, Johri, Al´anAspuru-Guzik, and Gian Giacomo Guerreschi † 1Intel Labs, Santa Clara, California 95054, USA 2Department of Physics, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA 3Research Laboratory of Electronics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA 4Department of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA 5Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5S 2E4, Canada 6Department of Chemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8, Canada 7Intel Labs, Hillsboro, Oregon 97124, USA 8Vector Institute for Artificial Intelligence, Toronto, Ontario M5S 1M1, Canada 9Canadian Institute for Advanced Research, Toronto, Ontario M5G 1Z8, Canada Simulation of quantum systems is expected to be one of the most important applications of quantum computing, with much of the theoretical work so far having focused on fermionic and 1 spin- 2 systems. Here, we instead consider encodings of d-level (i.e. qudit) quantum operators into multi-qubit operators, studying resource requirements for approximating operator exponentials by Trotterization. We primarily focus on spin-s and truncated bosonic operators in second quantization, observing desirable properties for approaches based on the Gray code, which to our knowledge has not been used in this context previously. After outlining a methodology for implementing an arbitrary encoding, we investigate the interplay between Hamming distances, sparsity patterns, bosonic truncation, and other properties of local operators. Finally, we obtain resource counts for five common Hamiltonian classes used in physics and chemistry, while modeling the possibility of converting between encodings within a Trotter step. The most efficient encoding choice is heavily dependent on the application and highly sensitive to d, although clear trends are present. These operation count reductions are relevant for running algorithms on near-term quantum hardware because the savings effectively decrease the required circuit depth. Results and procedures outlined in this work may be useful for simulating a broad class of Hamiltonians on qubit-based digital quantum computers. I. INTRODUCTION Simulating quantum physics will likely be one of the first practical applications of quantum computers. In simulating the many body problem, most algorithmic progress so far has focused on systems with binary degrees of freedom, 1 e.g. spin- 2 systems [1,2] or fermionic systems [3,4]. The latter case is relevant for simulations of chemical electronic structure [5,6], nuclear structure [7], and condensed matter physics [8]. This focus on binary degrees of freedom seems to be a natural development, partly because qubit-based quantum computation is the most widespread model used in theory, experiment, and the nascent quantum industry. However, for a large subset of quantum physics problems, important roles are played by components that are d- level particles (qudits) with d > 2, including bosonic fundamental particles [9], vibrational modes [10], spin-s particles [11], or electronic energy levels in molecules [12] and quantum dots [13]. Accordingly, several qubit-based quantum arXiv:1909.12847v3 [quant-ph] 16 Jul 2020 algorithms were recently developed for efficiently studying some such processes, including nuclear degrees of freedom in molecules [14–18], the Holstein model [19, 20] and quantum optics [21, 22]. In principle, there are combinatorially many ways to map a quantum system to a set of qubits [23, 24]. Mapping a d-level system to a set of qubits may be done by assigning an integer to each of the d levels and then performing an integer-to-bit mapping. Some consideration of d-level-to-qubit mappings has been published in the very recent literature, primarily for truncated bosonic degrees of freedom [14, 17–21, 25], but this is still an unexplored area of theory especially in regards to determining which encodings are optimal for which problem instances. The purpose of this work is both to provide a complete yet flexible framework for the mappings, and to analyze several encodings (both newly proposed herein and previously proposed) for a widely used set of operations and Hamiltonians. This aids ∗ [email protected] † [email protected] 2 Hardware budget A 30 max. CNOT: 25 max. qubits: 4 25 Hardware budget B 20 max. CNOT: 15 max. qubits: 6 15 10 Gray # CNOT gates # CNOT Std. binary 5 Unary 0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 # qubits FIG. 1. Especially for near-term noisy quantum hardware, gate counts and qubit counts will be limited. In principle, these constraints can be used to approximate a hardware budget for a set of hardware and a particular Hamiltonian simulation problem. For example, if one wants to simulate a collection of N bosons on a small quantum computer, the decoherence time and gate errors will constrain the allowed number of gates, while the total number of qubits will constrain the qubit count per boson. In this schematic, we show two arbitrary hardware budgets for Trotterizing the exponential ofq ˆ2 for one boson with truncation d = 5. In device A, both the Gray and standard binary encodings are satisfactory, but the unary code requires too many qubits. However, because device B allows for more qubits but fewer operations, the unary code is sufficient while the former two encodings require too many operations. This highlights the need for considering multiple encodings, as an encoding that is best for one type of hardware is not necessarily universally superior. A D A C B C D B No. 2-qubit entangling gates relative to std. binary >1.25 1.00 Std. binary 0.75 Gray 0.50 Unary Gray & Std. binary 0.25 All with compacting 0.00 1.00 1.60 2.80 1.00 1.04 0.61 2.00 1.00 0.87 3.36 1.00 0.93 0.58 0.93 0.63 1.00 0.96 3.32 0.89 1.00 1.03 0.60 1.00 0.63 1.00 0.82 0.52 1.16 1.00 1.00 3.41 0.89 1D QHO Bose–Hubbard Franck-Condon Heisenberg (~ Boson Sampling) k = 4 FIG. 2. Using an arbitrary selection of parameters for common physics and chemistry Hamiltonians, we have plotted the comparative computational costs required for first-order Trotterization. Costs are reported in terms of number of two-qubit entangling gates, relative to the cost of standard binary (SB). The three encodings shown here—standard binary, Gray code, and unary—are defined in the text. The five Hamiltonians are the Bose-Hubbard model, one-dimensional quantum harmonic oscillator (QHO), Franck-Condon calculation, boson sampling, and spin-s Heisenberg model. The optimal encodings are sensitive both to the Hamiltonian class and the number of levels d (determined by bosonic truncation or by the spin value s). In some cases, it is best to stay in a particular encoding for the duration of the simulation. Other times, it is worth bearing the resource cost of converting between encodings, because it saves on total operations. Still other times, the decision to save operations by converting between encodings will depend on whether available hardware is gate count limited or qubit count limited. Four Scenarios, A through D, are discussed in Section III. 3 in determining which mappings are more efficient for particular operators and specific hardware, including near-term intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices. When choosing which encoding to use for a given problem, it is conceptually useful to think in terms of a hardware budget, as shown in Figure1. Similar considerations have been studied for fermionic mappings [26]. For near- and intermediate-term hardware, one will often have stringent resource constraints in terms of both qubit count and gate count. Imagine that one plans to perform Hamiltonian simulation for some N-particle system. Using some set of criteria for acceptable error and other parameters, one can in principle work backwards to determine how much of a quantum resource is available for each operation. This quantity would be different for each device. Perhaps one quantum computer would allow for more qubits but another allows for more operations, as in Figure1. Because different encodings yield differing resource requirements, considering multiple encodings may be essential for determining whether the available resources are sufficient. Here we briefly summarize our results for resource comparisons of real Hamiltonian problems, in order to highlight the utility of encoding analyses and to demonstrate the ultimate practical objective of this work. Figure2 shows the relative two-qubit operation requirements for a set of five prominent physics and chemistry problems (defined in Supplementary Section VI). All comparisons are made within a given Hamiltonian. Our investigations revealed a somewhat rich interplay between qubit counts, operation counts, encodings, and conversions. The difficulty in a priori predicting the optimal encoding scheme suggests that sophisticated compilation procedures, for automatically choosing and converting between multiple encodings, will play a large role in future quantum simulation efforts for d-level systems. We note that the optimal encoding schemes have differing characteristics, all of which are present in Figure2. The results for each Hamiltonian can be categorized as one of four scenarios. Scenario A: the optimal choice is either standard binary (SB) only or Gray only, with no benefit from converting between encodings (Bose-Hubbard d = 4; 1D QHO d = 4). Scenario B: the optimal choice is to convert between SB and Gray, in order to perform different 7 local operators in different encodings (Heisenberg s = 2 ; Franck-Condon d = 4). Scenarios A and B are notable because they require both the fewest operations and the fewest qubits, as there is no benefit to expanding into the qubit-hungry unary encoding.