Mapping Arbitrarily Sparse Two-Body Interactions on One-Dimensional Quantum Circuits

We consider an assignment problem arising in Fermionic-swap based mapping of the one-body and two-body interaction terms in simulating time evolution of a sparse second-quantized electronic structure Hamiltonian on a quantum computer. Relative efficiency of different assignment algorithms depends on the relative costs of performing a swap and computing a Hamiltonian interaction term. Under the assumption that the interaction term cost dominates the computation, we develop an iterative algorithm that uses minimum cost linear assignment (MinLA) and matching for one-body interactions, and hypergraph optimal linear arrangement (HOLA) and partial distance-2 coloring for two-body interactions, to exploit arbitrary sparsity in the Hamiltonian for efficient computation. Using a set of 122 problems from computational chemistry, we demonstrate performance improvements up to 100% relative to the state-of-the-art approach for one-body terms and up to 86% utilization for two-body terms relative to a theoretical peak utilization. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to exploit arbitrary sparsity in orbital interactions for efficient computation on one-dimensional qubit connectivity layouts. The proposed algorithms lay a foundation for extension to map general k-body interactions that arise in many domains onto generalized qubit connectivity layouts available in current and future quantum systems.

[1]  I. Chuang,et al.  Hamiltonian Simulation by Qubitization , 2016, Quantum.

[2]  I. Kassal,et al.  Polynomial-time quantum algorithm for the simulation of chemical dynamics , 2008, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[3]  Alán Aspuru-Guzik,et al.  Exploiting Locality in Quantum Computation for Quantum Chemistry. , 2014, The journal of physical chemistry letters.

[4]  J. Pople,et al.  Self‐consistent molecular orbital methods. XX. A basis set for correlated wave functions , 1980 .

[5]  Sartaj Sahni,et al.  Simulated Annealing and Combinatorial Optimization , 1986, 23rd ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference.

[6]  Harold N. Gabow,et al.  An Efficient Implementation of Edmonds' Algorithm for Maximum Matching on Graphs , 1976, JACM.

[7]  C D Batista,et al.  Generalized Jordan-Wigner transformations. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[8]  J. Pople,et al.  Self‐Consistent Molecular‐Orbital Methods. I. Use of Gaussian Expansions of Slater‐Type Atomic Orbitals , 1969 .

[9]  David Poulin,et al.  The Trotter step size required for accurate quantum simulation of quantum chemistry , 2014, Quantum Inf. Comput..

[10]  Yuan Su,et al.  Faster quantum simulation by randomization , 2018, Quantum.

[11]  H. Trotter On the product of semi-groups of operators , 1959 .

[12]  Magnús M. Halldórsson,et al.  Approximating discrete collections via local improvements , 1995, SODA '95.

[13]  Eleanor G. Rieffel,et al.  J an 2 00 0 An Introduction to Quantum Computing for Non-Physicists , 2002 .

[14]  Frank Neese,et al.  SparseMaps--A systematic infrastructure for reduced-scaling electronic structure methods. IV. Linear-scaling second-order explicitly correlated energy with pair natural orbitals. , 2016, The Journal of chemical physics.

[15]  Richard M. Karp,et al.  Reducibility Among Combinatorial Problems , 1972, 50 Years of Integer Programming.

[16]  David S. Johnson,et al.  Some Simplified NP-Complete Graph Problems , 1976, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[17]  Bojan Mohar,et al.  Optimal linear labelings and eigenvalues of graphs , 1992, Discret. Appl. Math..

[18]  Masaki Nakanishi,et al.  An efficient conversion of quantum circuits to a linear nearest neighbor architecture , 2011, Quantum Inf. Comput..

[19]  Tom Quirk,et al.  There’s Plenty of Room at the Bottom , 2006, Size Really Does Matter.

[20]  David Thomas,et al.  The Art in Computer Programming , 2001 .

[21]  Yang Xiang,et al.  Overlapping Matrix Pattern Visualization: A Hypergraph Approach , 2008, 2008 Eighth IEEE International Conference on Data Mining.

[22]  S. Sahni,et al.  Optional linear arrangement of circuit components , 1987 .

[23]  Hartmut Neven,et al.  Low-Depth Quantum Simulation of Materials , 2017, 1706.00023.

[24]  Frank Harary,et al.  Graph Theory , 2016 .

[25]  Bryan O'Gorman,et al.  Generalized swap networks for near-term quantum computing , 2019, ArXiv.

[26]  Alán Aspuru-Guzik,et al.  Quantum Simulation of Electronic Structure with Linear Depth and Connectivity. , 2017, Physical review letters.

[27]  A. Fetter,et al.  Quantum Theory of Many-Particle Systems , 1971 .

[28]  Ümit V. Çatalyürek,et al.  Graph coloring algorithms for multi-core and massively multithreaded architectures , 2012, Parallel Comput..

[29]  Jordi Petit,et al.  Experiments on the minimum linear arrangement problem , 2003, ACM J. Exp. Algorithmics.

[30]  David Harel,et al.  A Multi-scale Algorithm for the Linear Arrangement Problem , 2002, WG.

[31]  Angela K. Wilson,et al.  Gaussian basis sets for use in correlated molecular calculations. X. The atoms aluminum through argon revisited , 2001 .

[32]  Tjerk P. Straatsma,et al.  NWChem: A comprehensive and scalable open-source solution for large scale molecular simulations , 2010, Comput. Phys. Commun..

[33]  Nathan Wiebe,et al.  Hamiltonian simulation using linear combinations of unitary operations , 2012, Quantum Inf. Comput..

[34]  Frank Neese,et al.  An efficient and near linear scaling pair natural orbital based local coupled cluster method. , 2013, The Journal of chemical physics.

[35]  Alireza Shafaei,et al.  Optimization of quantum circuits for interaction distance in linear nearest neighbor architectures , 2013, 2013 50th ACM/EDAC/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC).