Preparing ground states with a broken symmetry with variational quantum algorithms. (15th April 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Vogt, Nicolas; Zanker, Sebastian; Reiner, Jan-Michael; Marthaler, Michael; Eckl, Thomas; Marusczyk, Anika
• Is Part Of: Quantum science and technology. Volume 6:Number 3(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-04-15
• Subjects: quantum computing -- variational quantum algorithms -- symmetry breaking -- quantum simulation -- Hubbard model; Quantum theory -- Periodicals; Quantum theory; Periodicals; 530
• DOI: 10.1088/2058-9565/abe568
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2058-9565

Abstract

Abstract: One of the most promising applications for near term quantum computers is the simulation of physical quantum systems, particularly many-electron systems in chemistry and condensed matter physics. In solid state physics, finding the correct symmetry broken ground state of an interacting electron system is one of the central challenges. To help finding the correct broken symmetries in the thermodynamic limit methods that allow to determine the groundstate of large but finite interacting electron systems are very useful. The variational Hamiltonian ansatz (VHA), a variational hybrid quantum-classical algorithm especially suited for finding the ground state of a solid state system, will in general not prepare a broken symmetry state unless the initial state is chosen to exhibit the correct symmetry. In this work, we discuss three variations of the VHA designed to find the symmetry-breaking groundstate of a finite system close to a transition point between different orders. As a test case we use the two-dimensional Hubbard model where we break the symmetry explicitly by means of external fields coupling to the Hamiltonian and calculate the response to these fields. For the calculation we simulate a gate-based quantum computer and also consider the effects of dephasing noise on the algorithms. We find that two of the three algorithms are in good agreement with the exact solution for the considered parameter range. The third algorithm agrees with the exact solution only for a part of the parameter regime, but is more robust with respect to dephasing compared to the other two algorithms.