Realizable Hamiltonians for universal adiabatic quantum computers
Jacob D. Biamonte ^{1}^{,} ^{∗} and Peter J. Love ^{2}^{,} ^{†}
^{1} Oxford University Computing Laboratory, Wolfson Building, Parks Road, Oxford, OX1 3QD, United Kingdom. ^{2} Department of Physics, 370 Lancaster Ave., Haverford College, Haverford, PA USA 19041.
It has been established that local lattice spin Hamiltonian s can be used for universal adiabatic quantum computation. However, the 2local model Hamiltonians used in these proofs are general and hence do not limit the types of interactions required between spins. To address this concern, the present paper provides two simple model Hamiltonians th at are of practical interest to experi mentalists working towards the realization of a universal adiabatic quantum computer. The model Hamiltonians presented are the simplest known quantumMer linArthurcomplete ( QMAcomplete) 2local Hamiltonians. The 2local Ising model with 1local transverse ﬁeld which has been realized using an array of technologies, is perhaps the simplest quantum spin model but is unlikely to be universal for adiabatic quantum computation. We demonstrate that this model can be rendered
coupling. We also show
the universality and QMAcompleteness of spin models with only 1local σ ^{z} and σ ^{x} ﬁelds and 2local
σ ^{z} σ ^{x} interactions.
universal
and QMAcomplete by adding a tunable 2local transverse σ ^{x} σ ^{x}
What are the minimal physical resources required for universal quantum computation? This question is of in terest in understanding the connections between phys ical and computational complexity, and for any practi cal implementation of quantum computation. In 1982, Barahona [1] showed that ﬁnding the ground state of the random ﬁeld Ising model is NPhard. Such observations fostered approaches to solving problems based on classi cal [2] and later quantum annealing [3]. The idea of using the ground state properties of a quantum system for com putation found its full expression in the adiabatic model of quantum computation [4 ]. This model works by evolv ing a system from the accessible ground state of an initial Hamiltonian H _{i} to the ground state of a ﬁnal Hamilto nian H _{f} , which encodes a problem’s solution. The evo
lution takes place over parameters s ∈ [0 , 1] as H (s ) = (1 − s )H _{i} + sH _{f} , where s changes slowly enough that tran sitions out of the ground state are suppressed [5 ]. The simplest adiabatic algorithms can be realized by adding noncommuting transverse ﬁeld terms to the Ising Hamil
tonian: ^{} _{i} h _{i} σ + ^{} _{i} ∆ _{i} σ
, (c.f. [6 ]).
However, it is unlikely that the Ising model with trans verse ﬁeld can be used to construct a universal adiabatic quantum computer [7].
What then are the simplest Hamiltonians that al low universal adiabatic quantum computation? For this we turn to the complexity class quantumMerlinArthur (QMA), the quantum analog of NP, and consider the QMAcomplete problem k local Hamiltonian [8]. One solves k local Hamiltonian by determining if there ex ists an eigenstate with energy above a given value or be low another—with a promise that one of these situations is the case—when the system has at most klocal inter actions. A Yes instance is shown by providing a witness
z
i
x
i
^{+}
i,j ^{J} ij ^{σ} i
z
z
σ
j
eigenstate with energy below the lowest promised value.
The problem 5 local Hamiltonian was shown to be QMAcomplete by Kitaev [8 ]. To accomplish this, Ki taev modiﬁed the autonomous quantum computer pro posed by Feynman [9 ]. This modiﬁcation later inspired a proof of the polynomial equivalence between quantum circuits and adiabatic evolutions by Aharonov et al. [10] (see also [ 11, 12]). Kempe, Kitaev and Regev subse quently proved QMAcompleteness of 2 local Hamil tonian [14]. Oliveira and Terhal then showed that uni versality remains even when the 2local Hamiltonians act on particles in a subgraph of the 2D square lattice [15]. Any QMAcomplete Hamiltonian may realize universal adiabatic quantum computation, and so these results are also of interest for the implementation of quantum com putation.
Since 1 local Hamiltonian is eﬃciently solvable, an open question is to determine which combinations of 2local interactions allow one to build QMAcomplete
Hamiltonians. Furthermore, the problem of ﬁnding the minimum set of interactions required to build a universal adiabatic quantum computer is of practical, as well as theoretical, interest: every type of 2local inter action requires a separate type of physical interaction. To address this question we prove the following theorems:
Theorem 1. The problem 2 local ZZXX Hamil tonian is QMAcomplete, with the ZZXX Hamiltonian given as:
H ZZXX =
i
+ ^{}
i,j
h _{i} σ
z
i
J ij σ
z
i
+ ^{} ∆ _{i} σ +
x
i
i
z
j
σ
+ ^{}
i,j
K ij σ
x
i
x
σ
j .
(1)
^{∗} Electronic 
address: jacob.biamonte@comlab.ox.ac.uk 

^{†} Electronic 
address: plove@haverford.edu 
Theorem 2. The problem 2 local ZX Hamiltonian 
2
is QMAcomplete, with the ZX Hamiltonian given as
H ZX =
h _{i} σ
z
i
+ ^{} ∆ _{i} σ +
x
i
i i
+ ^{}
i<j
J ij σ
z
i
x
j
σ
+ ^{}
i<j
K ij σ
x
i
z
σ
j ^{.}
(2)
a. Structure In the present paper we brieﬂy review
the standard circuit to adiabatic construction to show that 2 local Hamiltonian is QMAcomplete when re stricted to realvalued Hamiltonians. We then show how to approximate the ground states of such 2local real Hamiltonians by the ZX and ZZXX Hamiltonians. We conclude this work by providing references conﬁrming our claim that the Hamiltonians in Eq. (1) and (2) are highly relevant to experimentalists attempting to build a univer sal adiabatic quantum computer.
I. THE PROBLEM
The translation from quantum circuits to adiabatic evolutions began when Kitaev [8] replaced the time dependence of gate model quantum algorithms with spa tial degrees of freedom using the nondegenerate ground state of a positive semideﬁnite Hamiltonian:
(3)
0
= H ψ _{h}_{i}_{s}_{t} =
(H in + H clock + H clockinit + H prop )ψ hist .
To describe this, let T be the number of gates in the quantum circuit with gate sequence U _{T} · · · U _{2} U _{1} and let n be the number of logical qubits acted on by the circuit. Denote the circuit’s classical input by x and its output by ψ _{o}_{u}_{t} . The history state representing the circuit’s entire time evolution is:
ψ hist =
^{1}
+ 1 x ⊗ 0 ^{⊗} ^{T} + U _{1} x ⊗ 1 0 ^{⊗} ^{T} ^{−} ^{1}
^{√} T
+
+ .
U _{2} U _{1} x ⊗ 11 0 ^{⊗} ^{T} ^{−} ^{2} .
.
(4)
+ U _{T} · · · U _{2} U _{1} x ⊗ 1 ^{⊗} ^{T} ,
where we have indexed distinct time steps by a T qubit unary clock. In the following, tensor product symbols separate operators acting on logical qubits (left) and clock qubits (right). H _{i}_{n} acts on all n logical qubits and the ﬁrst clock qubit. By annihilating timezero clock states coupled
with classical input x, H _{i}_{n} ensures that valid input state
(x ⊗ 0
0 ) is in the low energy eigenspace:
H in =
^{+}
n
i=1
(11 − x _{i} x _{i} ) ⊗ 0 0  _{1}
4
1
n
i=1
(11 − (− 1) ^{x} ^{i} σ ) ⊗ (11 + σ ).
z
i
z
1
(5)
H _{c}_{l}_{o}_{c}_{k} is an operator on clock qubits ensuring that
valid unary clock states 00
the low energy eigenspace:
0 , 10
H clock =
T − 1
t=1
01 01  _{(} _{t}_{,}_{t}_{+}_{1}_{)}
=
_{4} 1 (T − 1)11 + σ
1 z − σ
z
T −
0 
, 110 
0 
etc., span 
(6) 
T − 1
t=1
( t+1) ^{,}
σ σ ^{z}
z
t
where the superscript (t, t + 1) indicates the clock qubits acted on by the projection. This Hamiltonian has a sim ple physical interpretation as a line of ferromagnetically coupled spins with twisted boundary conditions, so that the ground state is spanned by all states with a sin gle domain wall. The term H _{c}_{l}_{o}_{c}_{k}_{i}_{n}_{t} applies a penalty 1 1  _{t}_{=}_{1} to the ﬁrst qubit to ensure that the clock is in state 0 ^{⊗} ^{T} − at time t = 0. H _{p}_{r}_{o}_{p} acts both on logical and clock qubits. It en sures that the ground state is the history state corre sponding to the given circuit. H _{p}_{r}_{o}_{p} is a sum of T terms, H _{p}_{r}_{o}_{p} = ^{} _{t}_{=}_{1} H _{p}_{r}_{o}_{p}_{,}_{t} , where each term checks that the propagation from time t − 1 to t is correct. For 2 ≤ t ≤ T − 1, H _{p}_{r}_{o}_{p} _{,}_{t} is deﬁned as:
T
H _{p}_{r}_{o}_{p}_{,}_{t} ^{d}^{e}^{f} = 11 ⊗ t − 1 t − 1  − U _{t} ⊗ t t − 1 
(7)
where operators t t − 1  = 110 100  _{(} _{t}_{−} _{1}_{,}_{t}_{,}_{t}_{+}_{1}_{)} etc., act on clock qubits t − 1, t , and t + 1 and where the operator U _{t} is the t ^{t}^{h} gate in the circuit. For the boundary cases (t = 1 , T ), one writes H _{p}_{r}_{o}_{p}_{,}_{t} by omitting a clock qubit (t − 1 and t + 1 respectively). We have now explained all the terms in the Hamilto nian from Eq. (3)—a key building block used to prove the QMAcompleteness of 5 local Hamiltonian [8 ]. The construction reviewed in the present section was also used in a proof of the polynomial equivalence between quantum circuits and adiabatic evolutions [10]. Which physical systems can implement the Hamiltonian model of computation from Eq. (3 )? Ideally, we wish to ﬁnd a simple Hamiltonian that is in principle realizable using current, or nearfuture technology. The ground states of many physical systems are realvalued, such as the ground states of the Hamiltonians from Eq. (1) and (2 ). So a logical ﬁrst step in our program is to show the QMA completeness of general realvalued local Hamiltonians.
†
− U ⊗ t − 1 t  + 11 ⊗ t t ,
t
A. The QMAcompleteness of realvalued Hamiltonians
Bernstein and Vazirani showed that arbitrary quan tum circuits may be represented using realvalued gates operating on realvalued wave functions [17 ]. Using this idea, one can show that 5 local real Hamiltonian
is already QMAcomplete—leaving the proofs in [8] oth
erwise intact and changing only the gates used in the
3
circuits. H _{i}_{n} from Eq. (5 ) and H _{c}_{l}_{o}_{c}_{k} from Eq. (6 ) are al ready realvalued and at most 2local. Now consider the terms in H _{p}_{r}_{o}_{p} from Eq. (7 ) for the case of selfinverse elementary gates U _{t} = U :
†
t
11
H prop ,t =
−
(11 − σ ^{z} _{t}_{−} _{1}_{)} )(11 + σ ^{z}
4
^{U} (11 − σ ^{z}
(
( t− 1) ^{)}^{σ} t
x
( t+1) ^{)}
(11 + σ ^{z}
( t+1) ^{)}
4
For the boundary cases (t = 1 , T ), deﬁne:
^{(}^{8}^{)}
H prop,1 =
^{1}
_{2} (11 + σ ) − U _{1} ⊗ _{2} (σ ^{x} + σ ^{x} σ )
1
z
2
z
2
1
1
H _{p}_{r}_{o}_{p}_{,}_{T} = ^{1} _{2} (11 − σ ^{z}
( T − 1) ^{)} ^{−} ^{U} T ^{⊗}
1
_{2} (σ _{T} − σ ^{z}
x
( T − 1) ^{σ}
(9)
_{T} ).
x
The terms from Eq. (8 ) and (9) acting on the clock space are already realvalued and at most 3local. As an ex plicit example of the gates U _{t} , let us deﬁne a universal realvalued and selfinverse 2qubit gate:
R _{i}_{j} (φ) = ^{1} _{2} (11 + σ ) + ^{1}
z
i
_{2} (11 − σ ) ⊗ (sin(φ)σ + cos(φ)σ ).
z
i
x
i
z
j
The gate sequence R _{i}_{j} (φ)R _{i}_{j} (π/ 2) recovers the universal gate from [18]. This is a continuous set of elementary gates parameterized by the angle φ. Discrete sets of self inverse gates which are universal are also readily con structed. For example, Shi showed that a set comprising the CNOT plus any onequbit gate whose square does not preserve the computational basis is universal [13]. We immediately see that a universal set of selfinverse gates cannot contain only the CNOT and a single onequbit gate. However, the set { CNOT , X, cos ψX + sin ψZ } is universal for any single value of ψ which is not a multiple of π/ 4. A reduction from 5local to 2local Hamiltonian was accomplished by the use of gadgets that reduced 3 local Hamiltonian terms to 2local terms [14]. From the results in [14] (see also [ 15]) and the QMAcompleteness of 5 local real Hamiltonian , it now follows that 2  local real Hamiltonian is QMAcomplete and uni versal for adiabatic quantum computation. We note that the real product σ ⊗ σ , or tensor powers thereof, are not necessary in any part of our construction, and so Hamil tonians composed of the following pairwise products of realvalued Pauli matrices are QMAcomplete and uni versal for adiabatic quantum computation[29]:
y
i
y
j
{ 11, 11 ⊗ σ ^{x} , 11 ⊗ σ ^{z} ,σ ^{x} ⊗ 11 , σ ^{z} ⊗ 11,σ ^{x} ⊗ σ ^{z} ,σ ^{z} ⊗ σ ^{x} ,σ ^{x} ⊗ σ ^{x} ,σ ^{z} ⊗ σ ^{z} } .
(10)
To prove our Theorems (1) and (2), we will next show that one can approximate all the terms from Eq. (10) using either the ZX or ZZXX Hamiltonians—the Hamil
tonians from Eq. (1 ) and (2 ) respectively. We do this using perturbation theory [14, 15] to construct gadget Hamiltonians that approximate the operators σ σ and
z
i
x
j
σ i z with terms from the ZZXX Hamiltonian as well as
the operators σ σ and σ σ with terms from the ZX Hamiltonian.
σ
x
i
z
i
z
i
x
i
x
j
B. The ZZXX gadget
We use the ZZXX Hamiltonian from Eq. (1 ) to con
struct the interaction σ σ from σ ^{x} σ ^{x} and σ ^{z} σ ^{z} interac tions. Let H _{e}_{ﬀ} = α _{i}_{j} σ σ ⊗ 0 0  _{k} , where qubit k is an
z
i
x
j
z
i
x
j
ancillary qubit and deﬁne the penalty Hamiltonian H _{p} and corresponding Green’s function G(z ) as follows:
H _{p} = δ 1 1  _{k} = ^{δ} (11 − σ )
2
z
k
G(z ) ^{d}^{e}^{f}
= (z 11 − H _{p} ) ^{−} ^{1} .
and
(11)
H _{p} splits the Hilbert space into a degenerate low en
ergy eigenspace L _{−} = span{s _{i} s _{j} 0 ∀s _{i} ,s _{j} ∈ { 0 , 1 }} , in which qubit k is 0 , and a δ energy eigenspace L _{+} = span{s _{i} s _{j} 1 ∀s _{i} ,s _{j} ∈ { 0 , 1 }} , in which qubit k is 1 . First, we give the ZZXX Hamiltonian which pro duces an eﬀective σ ^{z} σ ^{z} interaction in the low energy subspace. Let Y be an arbitrary ZZXX Hamiltonian
acting on qubits i and j and consider a perturbation
V = V _{1} + V _{2} + V _{3} that breaks the L _{−} zero eigenspace
degeneracy by creating an operator O (ǫ ) close to H _{e}_{ﬀ} in this space:
V _{1} = V _{2} =
=
V _{3}
[Y + D (σ + 11)] ⊗ 11 _{k} − Aσ ⊗ 0 0  _{k} B (σ + 11) ⊗ σ
Cσ
x
j
z
i
x
j
x
k
z
i
⊗ 1 1  _{k} .
(12)
The term V _{2} above allows the mediator qubit k to un dergo virtual excitations and applies an σ ^{x} term to qubit j during transitions between the L _{−} and L _{+} subspaces. During excitation into L _{+} , the term V _{3} applies a σ ^{z} term to qubit i . This perturbation is illustrated in ﬁgure 1
FIG. 1: The ZZXX gadget used to approximate the operator
using only σ ^{x} σ ^{x} and σ ^{z} σ ^{z} interactions. The present
ﬁgure presents a diagrammatic representation of the Pertur  bation Hamiltonian V = V _{1} + V _{2} + V _{3} from Eq. ( 12 ) applied
to qubits i, j and k . Not shown in the present ﬁgure is an overall constant energy shift of D .
x
z
σ σ
i
j
Let Π _{±} be projectors on L _{±} ; for arbitrary operator
O we deﬁne O _{±}_{∓} = Π _{±} O Π _{∓} (O _{±}_{±} = Π _{±} O Π _{±} ) and let
λ(O ) denote the lowest eigenvalue of O . One approxi
mates λ(H _{t}_{a}_{r}_{g} ) of the desired low energy eﬀective 2local Hamiltonian by a realizable 2local physical Hamiltonian
4
˜ 
˜ 

H 
= H _{p} + V , where λ( H ) is calculated using perturba 
In practice there will always be some interaction be 
˜ 
tion theory. The spectrum of H _{−}_{−} is approximated by the projection of the selfenergy operator Σ(z ) for real valued z which has the following series expansion:
tween qubits i and j . We assume Y is a ZZXX Hamil
˜
tonian and express the dressed Hamiltonian Y in terms
of modiﬁed coupling coeﬃcients. Writing the physical Hamiltonian:
Σ _{−}_{−} (z ) =
_{0}
th
_{1}
st
H p– + V −− +
_{2}
nd
V _{−} _{+} G _{+}_{+} (z )V _{+} _{−} (13)
+ V _{−} _{+} G _{+}_{+} (z )V _{+} G _{+}_{+} (z )V _{+} _{−}
_{3} rd
+ O ^{} V ^{4} δ ^{−} ^{3} ^{} + · · ·
Note that with our penalty Hamiltonian H _{−}_{−} = 0, and for the perturbing Hamiltonian V = V _{1} + V _{2} + V _{3} only V _{1} is nonzero in the low energy subspace, V _{1} and V _{3} are nonzero in the high energy subspace, and only V _{2} induces transitions between the two subspaces. The nonzero projections are:
V _{1} _{−}_{−}
= [Y + Aσ
z
i
+ D (σ + 11)] ⊗ 0 0  _{k}
x
j
^{V} _{2} _{−} _{+} ^{=}
B (σ + 11) ⊗ 0 1  _{k}
x
j
^{V} _{2} _{+} _{−} ^{=}
V _{3} _{+}_{+}
V _{+}
B (σ + 11) ⊗ 1 0  _{k} = V _{3}
= (Y + Cσ
x
j
z
i
+ D (σ + 11)) ⊗ 1 1  _{k}
x
j
(14)
Y
=
+
+
J _{i}_{j} σ σ
h _{i} σ
z
i
z
i
h _{j} σ
+
+ ∆ _{i} σ + ∆ _{j} σ +
i
j
K _{i}_{j} σ σ j .
i
x
x
z
j
x
x
z
j
(18)
The new dressed coupling strengths are:
h _{i} → h _{i} 1 +
∆ _{i} → ∆ _{i} 1 +
∆ _{j} → ∆ _{j} 1 +
K ij → K ij 1 +
2
_{δ} _{)} _{2}
B ^{2}
B
2
(z −
− δ ) ^{2} ^{+} (z − δ ) ^{2} ^{K} ^{i}^{j}
2
(z
2
2
− δ ) ^{2}
2
B
(z
− δ ) ^{2} ^{+} (z − δ ) ^{2} ^{∆} ^{i}
2
(z
2
B ^{2}
B ^{2}
B ^{2}
with additional couplings:
2
B ^{2}
2
B ^{2}
(z − _{δ} _{)} ^{2} ^{∆} ^{j} ^{1}^{1} ^{+} (z − δ ) ^{2} ^{h} ^{i} ^{σ}
z
i
x
j
σ
(19)
(20)
The series expansion of the selfenergy follows directly:
1 ^{s}^{t}
:
2 ^{n}^{d} :
3 ^{r}^{d} :
+
+
(Y − Aσ
i z + D (σ + 11)) ⊗ 0 0  _{k}
x
j
B
2
z − δ ^{(}^{σ} B ^{2} C
(z − δ
x
j
+ 11) ^{2} ⊗ 0 0  _{k}
_{)} _{2} (σ + 11)σ (σ + 11) ⊗ 0 0  _{k}
x
j
z
i
x
j
B
− δ ) ^{2} ^{(}^{σ}
2
(z
x
j
+ 11)Y (σ + 11) ⊗ 0 0  _{k}
x
j
4 DB ^{2}
− δ ) ^{2} ^{(}^{σ}
_{j} + 11) ^{3} ⊗ 0 0  _{k}
x
(z
(15)
The selfenergy in the low energy subspace (where qubit k is in state 0 ) is therefore:
Σ _{−}_{−} (z ) ≃
Y +
˜
2 B ^{2} C
(z
− δ )
_{2}
− A σ
z
i
+
+
z − B ^{2} _{δ} + D +
2
2 B ^{2} C
− δ ) ^{2} ^{σ}
(z
z
i
x
j
σ
4 DB ^{2}
(z
− δ )
_{2} (σ + 11)
x
j
+ O ^{} V ^{4} δ ^{−} ^{3} ^{} + · · ·
(16)
˜ 

Y 
is the interaction between qubits i and j which is the 
original physical interaction dressed by the eﬀect of vir
tual excitations into the high energy subspace.
We see that the eﬀect of the gadget on any existing phys ical interaction is to modify the coupling constants, add
an overall shift in energy, and to add a small correction to the σ ^{z} σ ^{z} coupling which depends on the strength of the σ term in Y . If Y is regarded as the net uncontrolled physical Hamiltonian coupling i and j (a source of error)
it is only the local σ ﬁeld which contributes to an error
z
i
z
i
in the σ ^{z} σ ^{z} coupling strength. We make the following choices for our gadget parame
ters A, B , C and D :
¯
A = α _{i}_{j}
B =
E 2/ 3 ¯
δ
¯
E
E ^{} 2/ 3
δ
C = ^{α} ^{i}^{j}
2
¯
D = 2 δ ^{1}^{/} ^{3}
_{E} 2/ 3
¯
(21)
Where E is an energy scale parameter to be ﬁxed later.
We expand the selfenergy (16) in the limit where z is
constant (z = O (1) ≪ δ ). Writing (z − δ ) ^{−} ^{1} ≃ −
1
O ( _{2} ) gives:
δ
1
δ ^{+}
Σ(0) _{−}_{−}
=
˜
Y + α _{i}_{j} σ σ
i
z
x (22)
j
¯
E
4/ 3
+
+ O ^{} V ^{4} δ ^{−} ^{3} ^{} + · · ·
8
_{δ} 1/ 3 ^{(}^{σ}
x
j
+ 11)
˜
Y = Y +
B
− δ ) ^{2} ^{(}^{σ}
2
(z
x
j
+ 11)Y (σ + 11)
x
j
(17)
For the
σ
selfenergy to become O (ǫ ) close to Y
⊗ 0 0  _{k} , the error terms in (22) must be
+
α ij σ
z
i
x
j
5
bounded above by ǫ through an appropriate choice of δ .
Deﬁne a lower bound on the spectral gap δ as an inverse
¯ ¯
polynomial in ǫ : δ ≥ Eǫ ^{−} ^{r} , where E is a constant and
integer r ≥ 1. Now bound r by considering the (weak) upper bound on V :
V ≤ Y + α _{i}_{j}  + 4 δ ^{1}^{/} ^{3} E ^{2}^{/} ^{3}
¯
+
2 E
¯
δ
¯
E
^{} ^{2}^{/} ^{3} _{+} α _{i}_{j} 
2
E ^{} 2/ 3
δ
¯
.
(23)
The largest term in δ ^{−} ^{3} V ^{4} is O ( E ¯ ( E/δ ¯ ) ^{1}^{/} ^{3} ), and so
This also
bounds the term below fourth order,
and so for z ≪
fact, Σ(0) _{−}_{−} = H _{e}_{ﬀ} + Eǫ (σ + 11). Now apply Theorem
in order that δ ^{−} ^{3} V ^{4} < ǫ we require r ≥ 3.
_{E} ¯ 4/ 3 _{δ} − 1/ 3 _{=} _{O} _{(}
¯
Eǫ )
δ we obtain Σ _{−}_{−} (z ) − H _{e}_{ﬀ} = O (ǫ ). In
¯
x
j
˜
(3) from [14] and it follows that λ(H _{e}_{ﬀ} ) − λ( H ) = O (ǫ ).
It also follows from Lemma (11) of [14] that the ground state wavefunction of H _{e}_{ﬀ} is also close to the ground state of our gadget. The ZZXX Hamiltonian (1 ) allows for the direct real ization of all terms in (10 ) except for σ ^{z} σ ^{x} and σ ^{x} σ ^{z} interactions. These terms can be approximated with only O (ǫ ) error using the gadget in the present section— thereby showing that the ZZXX Hamiltonian can eﬃ ciently approximate all terms from (10). Similarly, the ZX Hamiltonian allows for the direct realization of all terms in (10) except for σ ^{z} σ ^{z} and σ ^{x} σ ^{x} interactions. These terms will be approximated with only O (ǫ ) er ror by deﬁning gadgets in the coming sections—showing that the ZX Hamiltonian can also be used to eﬃciently approximate all terms from (10).
C. The ZZ from ZX gadget
using the ZX
Hamiltonian in Eq. (2 ) by deﬁning a penalty Hamiltonian
as in Eq. (11 ). The required perturbation is a sum of terms V = V _{1} + V _{2} :
We approximate the operator β _{i}_{j} σ σ
z
i
z
j
V _{1}
V _{2}
=
= B (σ
Y + A0 0  _{k}
z
i
− σ ) ⊗ σ
z
j
x
k
(24)
The nonzero projections are:
V
_{1}_{+}_{+}
V _{1}_{−}_{−}
=
=
Y ⊗ 1 1  _{k} (Y + A11 ⊗ 0 0  _{k}
V _{2}_{+}
_{−}
= B (σ
z
i
− σ ) ⊗ 1 0  _{k}
z
j
V _{2}_{−} _{+} = B (σ ^{z} − σ ^{z} ) ⊗ 0 1  _{k}
i
j
(25)
V _{1} does not couple the low and high energy subspaces and V _{2} couples the subspaces but is zero in each subspace.
FIG. 2: The ZZ from ZX gadget: The present ﬁgure presents
a diagrammatic representation of the Perturbative Hamilto
nian V = V _{1} + V _{2} from Eq. ( 24 ) applied to qubits i, j and k .
In addition to these terms shown in the present ﬁgure, there
is an overall energy shift of A/2.
The series expansion of the selfenergy follows directly:
1 ^{s}^{t}
: (Y + A11) ⊗ 0 0  _{k}
2 ^{n}^{d} :
B ^{2} (σ
z
i
−
σ ^{z} ) ^{2}
j
(z − δ )
⊗ 0 0  _{k}
3 ^{r}^{d} :
B
2
(z − δ ) ^{2} ^{(}^{σ}
z
i
− σ )Y (σ
z
j
z
i
− σ ) ⊗ 0 0  _{k}
z
j
(26)
Note that in this case the desired terms appear at second order in the expansion, rather than at third order as was the case for the ZX from ZZXX gadget. The terms which dress the physical hamiltonian Y coupling qubits i and j appear at third order. The series expansion of the self energy in the low energy subspace is:
˜
Σ(z ) _{−}_{−} = ( Y + A11)
+ 2 B ^{2} (1 − σ σ )
z
i
z
j
(z − δ )
+ O (V  ^{4} δ ^{−} ^{3} )
˜
(27)
where the dressed interaction Y is deﬁned:
˜ B
Y = Y +
2
(z − δ ) ^{2} ^{(}^{σ}
z
i
− σ )Y (σ
z
j
z
i
− σ )
z
j
(28)
We assume that the physical interaction Y between i and
j qubits is a ZX Hamiltonian and express the dressed
Hamiltonian in terms of modiﬁed coupling constants. Writing the physical Hamiltonian:
Y
= h _{i} σ
z
i
h _{j} σ
+ J _{i}_{j} σ σ
+
z
i
z
j
x
j
+
+
∆ _{i} σ + ∆ _{j} σ
K _{i}_{j} σ σ
x
i
x
i
z
j
x
j
(29)
We obtain modiﬁed coupling strengths:
h _{i} _{→} _{h} _{i} _{+}
h _{j} _{→} _{h} _{i} _{+}
2 B ^{2} (h _{i} − h _{j} )
(z − δ ) ^{2}
2 B ^{2} (h _{j} − h _{i} )
(z − δ ) ^{2}
^{.}
(30)
6
In this case only the local Z ﬁeld strengths are modiﬁed. We choose values for the perturbation interaction
strengths as follows: B = ^{β} ^{i}^{j} ^{δ} and A = β _{i}_{j} and ex pand the selfenergy in the limit where z is constant (z = O (1) ≪ δ ):
2
˜
Σ(0) _{−}_{−} = Y + β _{i}_{j} σ σ
z
i
z
j
+ O (V  ^{4} δ ^{−} ^{3} ).
(31)
We again choose δ to be an inverse power in a small
¯
parameter ǫ so that δ ≥ Eǫ ^{−} ^{s} , and again use the (weak)
upper bound on V :
V  ≤ Y  + β _{i}_{j} + ^{} 2 β _{i}_{j} δ
(32)
The largest term in V  ^{4} δ ^{−} ^{3} is 4 β _{i}_{j} δ ^{−} ^{1} , and so in order that V  ^{4} δ ^{−} ^{3} < ǫ we require r ≥ 1. Using the gadget deﬁned in the present section, the ZX Hamiltonian can now be used to eﬃciently approximate all terms in (10) except for σ ^{x} σ ^{x} interactions. These interactions can also be approximated with only O (ǫ ) error by deﬁning an additional gadget in the next section.
2
D. The XX from ZX gadget
An σ ^{x} σ ^{x} coupling may be produced from the σ ^{z} σ ^{x} coupling as follows. We deﬁne a penalty Hamiltonian and corresponding Green’s function:
H _{p} =
G ++ =
^{δ} (11 − σ ) = δ − −
2
x
k
1
_{−} _{δ} − − _{k} .
_{z}
(33)
This penalty Hamiltonian splits the Hilbert space into a low energy subspace in which the ancilla qubit k is in state + = (0 + 1 )/ ^{√} 2 and a high energy subspace in which the ancilla qubit k is in state − = (0 −1 )/ ^{√} 2. The perturbation is a sum of two terms V = V _{1} + V _{2} , where V _{1} and V _{2} are given by:
V _{1}
V _{2}
=
= B (σ
Y ⊗ 11 _{k} + A+ +  _{k}
x
i
− σ )σ
x
j
z
k
The nonzero projections are:
(34)
V _{1}_{+}_{+}
V
_{1}_{−}_{−}
= − −V _{1} − − _{k}
=
=
Y ⊗ − − _{k} Y ⊗ + +  _{k} + A+ +  _{k}
(35)
V _{2}_{+} _{−} = − −V _{2} + +  _{k}
=
B (σ
x
i
x
j
− σ
)− +  _{k}
V _{2}_{−} _{+} = + + V _{2} − − _{k}
=
B (σ
x
i
x
j
− σ
)+ − _{k} .
Once more we see that the perturbation V _{1} does not cou ple the subspaces, whereas V _{2} couples the subspaces but
FIG. 3: The XX from ZX gadget: The present ﬁgure presents a diagrammatic representation of the Perturbative Hamiltonian V = V _{1} + V _{2} from Eq. ( 34 ) applied to qubits i, j and k . In addition to the terms shown in the present ﬁg ure, there is an overall energy shift of A/2. The penalty term
applied to qubit k is the σ ^{x} basis.
is zero in each subspace. This perturbation is illustrated in Figure 3. The series expansion of the selfenergy follows:
1 ^{s}^{t}
:
2 ^{n}^{d} :
3 ^{r}^{d} :
(Y + A11) ⊗ + +  _{k}
B ^{2} (σ
x
i
− σ ^{x} ) ^{2}
j
(z − δ )
⊗ + +  _{k}
B
2
(z − δ ) ^{2} ^{(}^{σ}
x
i
− σ )Y (σ
x
j
x
i
− σ )
x
j
(36)
Again we see that the desired term appears at second order, while the third order term is due to the dressing
of the physical interaction Y between qubits i and j . In
the low energy subspace the series expansion of the self
energy to third order is:
˜
(37)
Σ(z ) _{−}_{−}
=
+
( Y + A11) 2 B ^{2} (11 − σ σ )
x
i
x
j
(z − δ )
+
O (V  ^{4} δ ^{−} ^{3} )
˜
where the dressed interaction Y is deﬁned:
˜ B
Y = Y +
2
(z − δ ) ^{2} ^{(}^{σ}
x
i
− σ )Y (σ
x
j
x
i
− σ ).
x
j
(38)
Once more we assume the physical Hamiltonian Y is a ZX Hamiltonian 29 and we describe the eﬀects of dressing to low order in terms of the new dressed coupling strengths:
∆ _{i} _{→} _{∆} _{i} _{+}
∆ _{j} _{→} _{∆} _{i} _{+}
2 B ^{2} (∆ _{i} − ∆ _{j} )
(z − δ ) ^{2}
2 B ^{2} (∆ _{j} − ∆ _{i} )
(z − δ ) ^{2}
^{,}
(39)
and in this case only the local X ﬁeld strengths are mod
iﬁed. Choosing values for our gadget parameters A = γ _{i}_{j}
and B = ^{γ} ^{i}^{j}
Mucho más que documentos.
Descubra todo lo que Scribd tiene para ofrecer, incluyendo libros y audiolibros de importantes editoriales.
Cancele en cualquier momento.