arxiv: v1 [quant-ph] 15 Dec 2014

Transcription

1 LA-UR , MIT-CTP #4618 Simulating Hamiltonian dynamic with a truncated Taylor erie arxiv: v1 [quant-ph] 15 Dec 2014 Dominic W. Berry 1, Andrew M. Child 2,3,4,5, Richard Cleve 2,5,6, Robin Kothari 2,6,7, and Rolando D. Somma 8 1 Department of Phyic and Atronomy, Macquarie Univerity, Sydney, NSW 2109, Autralia 2 Intitute for Quantum Computing, Univerity of Waterloo, N N2L 3G1, Canada 3 Department of Combinatoric & ptimization, Univerity of Waterloo, N N2L 3G1, Canada 4 Department of Computer Science, Intitute for Advanced Computer Studie, and Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science, Univerity of Maryland, College Park, MD 20910, USA 5 Canadian Intitute for Advanced Reearch, Toronto, ntario M5G 1Z8, Canada 6 School of Computer Science, Univerity of Waterloo, N N2L 3G1, Canada 7 Center for Theoretical Phyic, Maachuett Intitute of Technology, Cambridge, MA 02139, USA 8 Theoretical Diviion, Lo Alamo National Laboratory, Lo Alamo, NM 87545, USA (Dated: December 16, 2014) We decribe a imple, efficient method for imulating Hamiltonian dynamic on a quantum computer by approximating the truncated Taylor erie of the evolution operator. ur method can imulate the time evolution of a wide variety of phyical ytem. A in another recent algorithm, the cot of our method depend only logarithmically on the invere of the deired preciion, which i optimal. However, we implify the algorithm and it analyi by uing a method for implementing linear combination of unitary operation to directly apply the truncated Taylor erie. ne of the main motivation for quantum computer i their ability to efficiently imulate the dynamic of quantum ytem [1]. Since the mid-1990, many algorithm have been developed to imulate Hamiltonian dynamic on a quantum computer [2 12], with application to problem uch a imulating pin model [13] and quantum chemitry [14 17]. While it i now well known that quantum computer can efficiently imulate Hamiltonian dynamic, ongoing work ha improved the performance and expanded the cope of uch imulation. Recently, we introduced a new approach to Hamiltonian imulation with exponentially improved performance a a function of the deired preciion [18]. Specifically, we preented a method to imulate a d-pare, n-qubit Hamiltonian H acting for time t > 0, within preciion ǫ > 0, uing (τ log(τ/ǫ)/ log log(τ/ǫ)) querie to H and (nτ log 2 (τ/ǫ)/loglog(τ/ǫ)) additional twoqubit gate, where τ := d 2 H max t. Thi dependence on ǫ i exponentially better than all previou approache to Hamiltonian imulation, and the number of querie to H i optimal [18]. (For implicity, we refer to combination of logarithm like thoe in the above expreion a logarithmic.) Roughly peaking, doubling the number of digit of accuracy only double the complexity. The imulation algorithm of [18] i indirect, appealing to an unconventional model of query complexity. In thi paper, we decribe and analyze a implified approach to Hamiltonian imulation with the ame cot a the method of [18]. The new approach i eaier to undertand, and the reaon for the logarithmic cot dependence onǫi immediate. The new approach decompoe the Hamiltonian into a linear combination of unitary operation. Unlike the algorithm of [18], thee term need not be elf-invere, o the algorithm i efficient for a larger cla of Hamiltonian. The new approach i alo impler to analyze: we give a elf-contained preentation in four page. The main idea of the new approach i to implement the truncated Taylor erie of the evolution operator. Similarly to previou approache for implementing linear combination of unitary operator [12, 13], the variou term of the Taylor erie can be implemented by introducing an ancillary uperpoition and performing controlled operation. The time evolution i broken up into egment, each of which i hort enough that the evolution can be accurately approximated uing a number of term in the Taylor erie that i logarithmic in 1/ǫ. Each egment i then performed uing obliviou amplitude amplification [18]. To make thi work in the preent context, we how that a more powerful robut verion of amplitude amplification hold, where the target operation need not be unitary (and our proof of thi i impler than the proof for a weaker verion in [18]). The complexity of the method i eentially given by the order at which the erie i truncated time the number of egment. ur algorithm can be applied to imulate variou model of realitic ytem, including ytem of pin or fermion. It can alo be ued to implement other quantum algorithm [3, 19, 20]. We focu on the cae of timeindependent Hamiltonian for implicity, but we alo outline a traightforward application of our reult to timedependent Hamiltonian. Specifically, we preent a quantum algorithm that imulate the time evolution of a finite-dimenional Hamiltonian of the form H = L α l H l, (1) l=1 where each H l i unitary and a mechanim i available for implementing that unitary. Any Hamiltonian can be decompoed a a linear combination of unitary matrice, and many have decompoition into a mall number of

2 2 term that are eay to implement. For example, local Hamiltonian can be decompoed into a um of tenor product of Pauli matrice where each term act nontrivially on a contant number of qubit. More generally, we can treat any Hamiltonian that i a um of polynomially many tenor product of Pauli operator, even if the term have high weight (a occur after a Jordan-Wigner tranformation of fermionic operator into Pauli matrice). The method can alo be applied more broadly, e.g., to pare Hamiltonian. The overall imulation complexity i T := (α 1 + +α L )t time a factor that i logarithmic in 1/ǫ and the other parameter of the imulation. Summary of method. Suppoe we wih to imulate the evolution under a Hamiltonian H for time t, U := exp( iht), (2) within error ǫ. We divide the evolution time into r egment of length t/r. Within each egment, the evolution can be approximated a U r := exp( iht/r) K 1 ( iht/r)k, (3) where the Taylor erie i truncated at order K. With r egment, the accuracy required for each egment i ǫ/r. To obtain thi accuracy (provided r H t), we can chooe ( ) log(r/ǫ) K =. (4) log log(r/ǫ) The overall complexity i eentially given by the number of egment r time K. The obliviou amplitude amplification procedure of [18] enable u to determinitically implement a um of unitary operator, provided that um i unitary. Here we wih to implement the um of operator correponding to the truncated Taylor erie (3). The power of H are not themelve unitary, but we can expand the erie uing the form (1) of the Hamiltonian. Then the truncated um in (3) can be expanded a U r K L l 1,...,l k =1 ( it/r) k α l1 α lk H l1 H lk, (5) where, without lo of generality, we can et each α l > 0. Thi expreion ha a form that ha been invetigated extenively in [21], namely Ũ = m 1 j=0 β j V j, (6) where β j > 0 and where each V j i a unitary that correpond to ome ( i) k H l1 H lk. Next we explain how to implement a um of unitary operator uch a (6). Thi procedure would work exactly if the um were unitary. While the um i not exactly unitary, it i cloe to unitary, and the error can be bounded. We begin by auming that there i a mechanim available for implementing each unitary V j (and we addre the detail of thi mechanim later). We abtract thi mechanim a a unitary operation elect(v) uch that, for any j {0,1,...,m 1} and any tate ψ, elect(v) j ψ = j V j ψ. (7) To imulate Ũ, we firt implement an m-dimenional unitary B to prepare the ancillary tate B 0 = 1 m 1 j=0 where we define := m 1 j=0 β j. If we define then βj j, (8) W := (B 11)(elect(V))(B 11), (9) W 0 ψ = Ũ ψ + 1 Φ (10) 2 for ome Φ whoe ancillary tate i upported in the ubpace orthogonal to 0. In other word, applying the projector P := , PW 0 ψ = 1 0 Ũ ψ. (11) The value of can be adjuted by chooing the ize of the egment. In particular, we aim for = 2, which fit the framework of obliviou amplitude amplification introduced in [18]. There it i hown that if Ũ i unitary then it can be exactly implemented by interleavingw and W with the m-dimenional (ancilla) reflection R := 11 2P. In particular, if Ũ i unitary and A := WRW RW, then A 0 ψ = 0 Ũ ψ. (12) Effect of nonunitarity. The main approximation ued in our contruction i in truncating the Taylor erie at a uitably large order K, which give a good (but nonunitary) approximation Ũ of U r. Due to thi nonunitarity, we cannot directly ue obliviou amplitude amplification a proved in [18]; intead, we prove a robut verion of obliviou amplitude amplification that work even when Ũ i only cloe to a unitary matrix. To prove thi, firt oberve that PA 0 ψ = (3PW 4PWPW PW) 0 ψ, (13)

3 3 where we ued unitarity of W, P 2 = P, and P 0 ψ = 0 ψ. In our contruction, PWP = ( 0 0 Ũ)/ a can be een from (11). Thu, by (13), we obtain (for general Ũ) ( 3 PA 0 ψ = 0 Ũ 4 ) 3ŨŨ Ũ ψ. (14) Thi generalize a tep of obliviou amplitude amplification [a in (12)] to the cae of nonunitary Ũ and 2. It alo enable u to bound the error in obliviou amplitude amplification due to thee factor. Provided that 2 = (δ) and Ũ U r = (δ), i.e., that the condition of obliviou amplitude amplification are true to order δ, then ŨŨ 11 = (δ) and (14) implie PA 0 ψ 0 U r ψ = (δ), (15) which i an approximate analogue of (12) up to order δ. In turn, thi mean that Tr anc (PA 0 ψ ) U r ψ ψ U r = (δ), (16) where Tr anc denote the trace over the ancilla. Thu if we initialize the ancilla for each egment and dicard it afterward, the error i (δ). Then the overall error for all egment i (rδ), o we can take δ = (ǫ/r). In contrat, in [18] the error for each egment i ( δ) (though thi doe not affect the overall complexity, which i logarithmic in δ). Hamiltonian imulation algorithm. For Hamiltonian imulation, the um (6) i of the pecific form given in (5). It i then convenient to define the index et J := {(k,l 1,...,l k ) : k N,l 1,...,l k {1,...,L}} (17) and, with repect to thee indice, we let β (k,l1,...,l k ) := [(t/r) k /]α l1 α lk andv (k,l1,...,l k ) := ( i) k H l1 H lk. Then U r = j J β jv j with β j > 0. Recall that T = (α 1 + +α L )t. Taking r uch that T/r = ln(2), we obtain j J β j = 2. If T i not a multiple of ln(2), then we can take r = T/ ln(2), in which cae the final egment ha < 2. We can compenate for thi uing an ancilla qubit a in [18]. Next we et ( ) log(t/ǫ) K = (18) o that k=k+1 ln(2) k and define the truncated index et ǫ/r, (19) J := {(k,l 1,...,l k ) J : k K}. (20) We obtain Ũ = j J β jv j and, according to (8), B i a unitary that act on pan{ j : j J} a B 0 = 1 βj j. (21) j J The normalization contant i = j J β j = K 1 ln(2)k. ur choice of K implie 2 ǫ/r. When the length of the imulation i a multiple of ln(2), the Hamiltonian imulation algorithm i imply a equence of r tep, each aociated with a egment. At each tep, the m-dimenional ancilla i initialized in 0, then A i implemented, and the ancilla i dicarded. The initial tate i 0 ψ. To how that the overall error i ǫ, it uffice to how that the final tate, after tracing out the ancilla, i ǫ-cloe to U ψ, where U i the evolution operator induced by H for time t. ur choice of K implie that δ = (ǫ/r) in (16). Thu the error in the tate after tracing out the ancilla i (ǫ/r) for each egment. Uing ubadditivity and appropriately electing contant, the final error i ǫ. Circuit contruction and gate count. The baic tep of our method i the unitary A. By definition, the cot of A i the cot of two intance of elect(v), one of elect(v), and three each of B and of B. The complexity of implementing elect(v) i K time the complexity of implementing any of the individual H l. Firt we conider the number of ancillary qubit that are required to tore the bai tate k l 1 l k where 0 k K and, for each l i, 1 l i L. For the firt regiter, we ue a unary encoding, repreenting k by the tate 1 k 0 K k, o the firt regiter conit of K = (log(t/ǫ)/loglog(t/ǫ)) qubit. We tore K regiter with the value l i, but thoe after poition k are ignored when the firt regiter i in tate k 1 k 0 K k. Each of thee regiter contain log(l) qubit, o the total number of qubit required for the ancillary tate i ( ) log(l)log(t/ǫ). (22) Now we conider the number of elementary (1- and 2-qubit) gate required to implement our contruction. The operation B i a tenor product of unitary operation acting on each of the K + 1 regiter. The firt uch unitary map 0 K to the normalized verion of K tk / 1 k 0 K k. Thi i eaily achieved in (K) gate, uing a rotation on the firt qubit, followed by rotation on qubit k = 2 to K controlled by qubit k 1. The ubequent unitarie map 0 to the normalized verion of L l=1 αl l, which ha a gate cot of (L) [22]. Therefore the total gate cot of implementing B i ( L log(t/ǫ) ). (23)

4 4 The other baic component i the elect(v) operation, which map tate of the form k l 1 l k ψ to k l 1 l k ( i) k H l1 H lk ψ. Thi may be implemented uing K controlled-elect(h) operation that map tate of the form b l ψ to b l ( ih l ) b ψ. The κth controlled-elect(h) operation act on the κth qubit of k (which i encoded in unary) and the κth regiter encoding l κ. Thi operation perform ih lκ on ψ provided κ k. We next explain how to implement each controlledelect(h) operation with (L(n+log L)) gate in the pecial cae where each H 1,...,H L i expreible a a tenor product of Pauli gate. A controlled-elect(h) operation can be decompoed into a equence of controlled-h l operation (with l running from 1 to L), each of which i controlled by two regiter: the original control regiter (controlled by tate 1 ) and the elect regiter (controlled by tate l ). Each of thee can in turn be implemented by combining an (log L)-qubit generalized Toffoli gate [23] [at cot (logl)] to et a control qubit and a controlled n-fold tenor product of Pauli gate [at cot (n)]. It follow that the total cot of all controlled-elect(h) operation can be bounded by ( ) L(n+logL)log(T/ǫ) (24) for the elect(v) gate. The total number of gate for the entire imulation for time t reult from multiplying (24) by r = (T), the number of egment. Alternatively, uppoe the Hamiltonian i a pare matrix given by an oracle. Then we obtain the ame overall caling of the number of gate for a egment a in [18], ( n log2 (T/ǫ) ). (25) In thi cenario, the Hamiltonian i approximated by a um of equal-ize part, with α l = γ for all l. Then H = γ L l=1 V l approximate the true Hamiltonian H with error (γ). To obtain overall error in the evolution ǫ, γ hould be Θ(ǫ/t). The number of unitarie in the decompoition i L = (d 2 H max /γ) = (d 2 H max t/ǫ). We have T = t l α l = (d 2 H max t), o L = (T/ǫ). With all α l equal, each ancilla regiter l i can be prepared with complexity logl. For each egment, we multiply thi byk (for the number of thee regiter). The 1- pare elf-invere operation have complexity (n), but there i no need to perform an explicit equence of L controlled-h l operation when the Hamiltonian i given by an oracle. Thi yield the gate complexity given in (25). Time-dependent Hamiltonian. A imilar quantum algorithm can be applied to the time-dependent cae if we conider the time-ordered exponential { t } U(t) := T exp i dt H(t ), (26) 0 where T i the time-ordering operator. A in the timeindependent cae, we break the evolution time into r egment of ize t/r and, with no lo of generality, we conider the evolution induced by the firt egment U r := U(t/r). Thi evolution can be approximated by K ( i) k t/r 0 dtt H(t k )...H(t 1 ). (27) Rather than directly implementing (27), we dicretize the integral into M tep and approximate U r by Ũ = K ( it/r) k M k M 1 j 1,...,j k =0 T H(t jk )...H(t j1 ). (28) The dicrete time are t j = (j/m)t/r. Each of the individual Hamiltonian H(t jl ) can then be expanded a a um of L unitarie, o (28) i a um of unitarie. Thu Ũ can be implemented imilarly a in the time-independent cae. In thi cae, however, we need additional ancilla to encode the dicrete time a t j1 t jk. verall, for each egment we ue one ancillary regiter to encode k, the order of the term; K ancillary regiter to encode l 1,...,l k ; and K ancilla of ize log(m) to encode the dicrete time. The value of M mut be choen ufficiently large that the overall error i at mot ǫ. Thi value i polynomial in 1/ǫ and h := max t d dth(t). A the complexity i logarithmic in M, thi only yield a factor logarithmic in 1/ǫ and h. If K i ufficiently large that Ũ i almot unitary, we can ue obliviou amplitude amplification to obtain a tate within (ǫ/r) of U r ψ. By repeating thi r time (with the correponding evolution time) we can prepare the final tate U(t) ψ to within error ǫ. Concluion. We preented a imple quantum algorithm for Hamiltonian imulation that achieve the ame complexity a in [18]. The new method i baed on directly approximating the Taylor erie for the evolution operator. The logarithmic complexity in ǫ reult becaue the Kth-order approximation to the erie ha error of order 1 K!. ur method i generic: it doe not treat the term of the Hamiltonian in any particular order and doe not require any pecial tructural relationhip among them. Beyond Hamiltonian imulation, we expect that tool uch a robut obliviou amplitude amplification and linear combination of unitary operation will be more broadly ueful in contructing quantum algorithm. Acknowledgment. We thank Emmanuel Knill, John Prekill, and Nathan Wiebe for dicuion. D.W.B. wa upported by ARC grant FT R.S. acknowledge upport from AFSR through Grant No. FA Thi work wa alo upported by AR grant Contract Number W911NF , Indutry Canada, and NSERC.

5 5 [1] R. P. Feynman, International Journal of Theoretical Phyic 21, 467 (1982). [2] S. Lloyd, Science 273, 1073 (1996). [3] D. Aharonov and A. Ta-Shma, in Proc. 35th ACM Sympoium on Theory of Computing, pp (2003). [4] A. M. Child, Ph.D. thei, Maachuett Intitute of Technology (2004). [5] D. W. Berry, G. Ahoka, R. Cleve, and B. C. Sander, Commun. Math. Phy. 270, 359 (2007). [6] A. M. Child and R. Kothari, Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication, and Cryptography (TQC 2010), Lecture Note in Computer Science 6519, 94 (2011). [7] N. Wiebe, D. W. Berry, P. Høyer, and B. C. Sander, J. Phy. A: Math. Theor. 44, (2011). [8] N. Wiebe, D. W. Berry, P. Høyer, and B. C. Sander, J. Phy. A: Math. Theor. 43, (2010). [9] A. M. Child, Commun. Math. Phy. 294, 581 (2009). [10] D. W. Berry and A. M. Child, Quantum Inform. Comput. 12, 29 (2012). [11] D. Poulin, A. Qarry, R. D. Somma, and F. Vertraete, Phy. Rev. Lett. 106, (2011). [12] A. M. Child and N. Wiebe, Quantum Inform. Comput. 12, 901 (2012). [13] R. Somma, G. rtiz, J. E. Gubernati, E. Knill, and R. Laflamme, Phy. Rev. A 65, (2002). [14] D. Wecker, B. Bauer, B. K. Clark, M. B. Hating, M. Troyer, Phy. Rev. A 90, (2014). [15] R. Babbuh, J. McClean, D. Wecker, A. Apuru-Guzik, and N. Wiebe, arxiv: [16] R. Babbuh, P. J. Love, and A. Apuru-Guzik, Scientific Report 4, 6603 (2014). [17] J. R. McClean, R. Babbuh, P. J. Love and A. Apuru- Guzik, arxiv: [18] D. W. Berry, A. M. Child, R. Cleve, R. Kothari, and R. D. Somma, in Proc. 46th ACM Sympoium on Theory of Computing, pp (2014). [19] A. M. Child, R. Cleve, S. Jordan, and D. Yonge-Mallo, Theor. Comput. 5, 119 (2009). [20] A. W. Harrow, A. Haidim, and S. Lloyd, Phy. Rev. Lett. 103, (2009). [21] R. Kothari, Ph.D. thei, Univerity of Waterloo (2014). [22] V. V. Shende, S. S. Bullock, and I. Markov, IEEE Tran. on Computer Aided Deign of Integrated Circuit and Sytem 25, 1000 (2006). [23] A. Barenco, C. H. Bennett, R. Cleve, D. P. DiVincenzo, N. Margolu, P. Shor, T. Sleator, J. A. Smolin, and H. Weinfurter, Phy. Rev. A (1995).