Towards quantum chemistry on a quantum computer

Nature Chemistry

Volumn 2, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 106-111

  Lanyon, B P ^a   Whitfield, J D ^b   Gillett, G G ^a   Goggin, M E ^a,c   Almeida, M P ^a   Kassal, I ^b   Biamonte, J D ^b,e   Mohseni, M ^b,f   Powell, B J ^a   Barbieri, M ^a,d   Aspuru Guzik, A ^b   White, A G ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^b HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c TRUMAN STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIV PARIS SUD   (France)

^e UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^f MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

HYDROGEN;

ALGORITHM; ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; COMPUTER; LIGHT RELATED PHENOMENA; QUANTUM THEORY;

ALGORITHMS; COMPUTERS; HYDROGEN; OPTICAL PROCESSES; QUANTUM THEORY;

EID: 76249130670     PISSN: 17554330     EISSN: 17554349     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/nchem.483     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Feynman, R. P. Simulating physics with computers. Int. J. Theor. Phys. 21, 467-488 (1982).
2. Lloyd, S. Universal quantum simulators. Science 273, 1073-1078 (1996).
3. Head-Gordon, M. & Artacho, E. Chemistry on the computer. Physics Today 61(4), 58-63 (2008).
4. Hung, L. & Carter, E. A. Accurate simulations of metals at the mesoscale: Explicit treatment of 1 million atoms with quantum mechanics. Chem. Phys. Lett. 475, 163-170 (2009).
5. Chelikowsky, J. R. et al. Pseudopotentials on grids: Application to the electronic, optical, and vibrational properties of silicon nanocrystals. J. Comput. Theor. Nanosci. 6, 1247-1261 (2009).
6. Dreuw, A. & Head-Gordon, M. Failure of time-dependent density functional theory for long-range charge-transfer excited states: The zincbacteriochlorinbacterlochlorin and bacteriochlorophyll-spheroidene complexes. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126, 4007-4016 (2004).
7. Levine, B. G. & Martinez, T. J. Isomerization through conical intersections. Ann. Rev. Phys. Chem. 58, 613-634 (2007).
8. Lee, P. A., Nagaosa, N. & Wen, X.-G. Doping a Mott insulator: Physics of hightemperature superconductivity. Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 17-85 (2006).
9. Van Voorhis, T. & Head-Gordon, M. Benchmark variational coupled cluster doubles results. J. Chem. Phys. 113, 8873-8879 (2000).
10. Abrams, D. & Lloyd, S. Simulation of many-body fermi systems on a universal quantum computer. Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 2586-2586 (1997).
11. Kassal, I. Jordan, S. P., Love, P. J., Mohseni, M. & Aspuru-Guzik, A. Polynomialtime quantum algorithm for the simulation of chemical dynamics Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 105, 18681-18686 (2008).
12. Zalka. C. Efficient simulation of quantum systems by quantum computers. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 454, 313-322 (1998).
13. Kassal, I. & Aspuru-Guzik, A. Quantum algorithm for molecular properties and geometry optimization. J. Chem. Phys. (in the press); preprint at http://arxiv. org/abs/0908.1921 (2009).
14. Lidar D. A. & Wang, H. Calculating the thermal rate constant with exponential speedup on a quantum computer. Phys. Rev. E 59, 2429-2438 (1999).
15. Aspuru-Guzik, A., Dutoi, A., Love, P. J. & Head-Gordon, M. Simulated quantum computation of molecular energies. Science 309, 1704-1707 (2005).
16. Brown, K. R., Clark, R. J. & Chuang, I. L. Limitations of quantum simulation examined by simulating a pairing Hamiltonian using nuclear magnetic resonance. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 050504 (2006).
17. Clark C. R., Metodi, T. S., Gasster, S. D. & Brown, K. R. Resource requirements for fault-tolerant quantum simulation: The ground state of the transverse Ising model. Phys. Rev. A 79, 062314 (2009).
18. Somaroo, S., Tseng, C. H., Havel, T. F., Laflamme, R. & Cory, D. G. Quantum simulations on a quantum computer. Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 5381-5384 (1999).
19. Yang, X., Wang, A. M., Xu, F. & Du. J. Experimental simulation of a pairing Hamiltonian on anNMR quantumcomputer. Chem. Phys. Lett. 422, 20-24 (2006).
20. Friedenauer, A., Schmitz, H., Glueckert, J. T., Porras, D. & Schaetz, T. Simulating a quantum magnet with trapped ions. Nature Phys. 4, 757-761 (2008).
21. Gerritsma, R. et al. Quantum simulation of the Dirac equation. Preprint at: http://arxiv.org/abs/0909.0674 (2009).
22. Vidal, G. Efficient classical simulation of slightly entangled quantum computations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 147902 (2003).
23. Schmidt-Kaler, F. et al. Realization of the Cirac-Zoller controlled-NOT quantum gate Nature 422, 408-411 (2003).
24. Leibfried, D. et al. Experimental demonstration of a robust, high-fidelity geometric two ion-qubit phase gate. Nature 422, 412-415 (2003).
25. O'Brien, J. L., Pryde, G. J.,White, A. G., Ralph, T. C. & Branning, D.Demonstration of an all-optical quantum controlled-NOT gate. Nature 426, 264-267 (2003).
26. Plantenberg, H. J., de Groot, P. C., Harmans, C. J. P. M. & Mooij, J. E. Demonstration of controlled-NOT quantum gates on a pair of superconducting quantum bits. Nature 447, 836-839 (2007).
27. Pashkin, Y. A. et al. Quantum oscillations in two coupled charge qubits. Nature 421, 823-826 (2003).
28. Knill, E., Laflamme, R. & Milburn, G. J. A scheme for efficient quantum computation with linear optics. Nature 409, 46-52 (2001).
29. Kok, P. et al. Linear optical quantum computing with photonic qubits. Rev. Mod. Phys. 79, 135 (2007).
30. Lanyon, B. P. et al. Experimental demonstration of a compiled version of Shor's Algorithm with quantum entanglement. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 250505 (2007).
31. Lanyon, B. P. et al. Simplifying quantum logic using higher-dimensional Hilbert spaces. Nature Phys. 5, 134-140 (2009).
32. Kitaev, A. Quantum measurements and the Abelian Stabilizer Problem. Preprint at: http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9511026 (1995).
33. Dobsicek, M., Johansson, G., Shumeiko, V. S. & Wendin, G. Arbitrary accuracy iterative phase estimation algorithm as a two qubit benchmark. Phys. Rev. A 76, 030306(R) (2007).
34. Nielsen, M. A. & Chuang, I. L. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2001).
35. Helgaker, T., Jorgensen, P. & Olsen, J. Modern Electronic Structure Theory (Wiley, 2000).
36. Xiu-Mei, L., Jun, L. & Xian-Ping, S. Experimental realization of arbitrary accuracy iterative phase estimation algorithms on ensemble quantum computers. Chinese Phys. Lett. 24, 3316-3319 (2007).
37. Braunstein, S. L. et al. Separability of very noisy mixed states and implications for NMR quantum computing. Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1054-1057 (1999).
38. Chiaverini J. et al. Implementation of the semiclassical quantum Fourier transform in a scalable system. Science 308, 997-1000 (2005).
39. Nielsen, M. A. Optical quantum computation using cluster states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 040503 (2004).
40. Wu, L.-A., Byrd, M. S. & Lidar, D. A. Polynomial-time simulation of pairing models on a quantum computer. Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 057904 (2002).
41. Farhi, E., Goldstone, J., Gutmann, S. & Sipser, M. Quantum adiabatic evolution algorithms with different paths. Science 292, 472-475 (2000).
42. Grangier, P., Sanders, B. & Vuckovic, J. (eds) Special issue: Focus on single photons on demand New J. Phys. 6, (2004).
43. Cheung, J., Migdal, A. & Rastello, M.-L. (eds) Special issue: Single-photon: detectors, applications, and measurement methods. J. Mod. Opt. 56, 2-3 (2009).
44. Dür,W., Bremner, M. J. & Briegel, H. J. Quantum simulation of interacting highdimensional systems: the influence of noise. Phys. Rev. A 78, 052325 (2008).
45. Jané, E., Vidal, G., Dür, W., Zoller, P. & Cirac, J. I. Simulation of quantum dynamics with quantum optical systems. Quant. Inf. Comp. 3, 15-37 (2003).
46. Hehre, W. J., Stewart, R. F. & Pople, J. A. Self-consistent molecular orbital methods I. Use of Gaussian expansions of slater type atomic orbitals. J. Chem. Phys. 51, 2657-2664 (1969).
47. Szabo, A. & Ostlund, N. Modern Quantum Chemistry: Introduction to Advanced Electronic Structure Theory (Dover Publications, 1996).
48. Liao, Y. et al. Electro-optic integration of embedded electrodes and waveguides in LiNbO3using a femtosecond laser. Opt. Lett. 33, 2281-2283 (2008).