Quantum Hamiltonian Mapping for Larger Molecule Simulation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current quantum computers face limitations in simulating larger molecules due to high computational costs and hardware constraints, such as limited qubits, gate depth, and accuracy, which hinder efficient molecular simulations.

Innovation Solution

The system reduces the number of quantum circuit gate operations and modifies the Hamiltonian to improve embedding on a quantum annealer, using parametrization in spin coherent states and Pauli Z rotations, and transforms fermionic Hamiltonians into qubit Hamiltonians to reduce the number of qubits required for simulations.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If conventional numerical methods are used to solve molecular simulations, then computational accuracy can be maintained, but computational time becomes intractable due to many body interactions

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvecomputational accuracyVSAvoidcomputational time
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces conventional classical numerical methods with quantum mechanical approaches. Specifically, it uses quantum computers to simulate molecular systems, leveraging quantum effects like superposition and entanglement to naturally model quantum chemical phenomena. This substitution allows the system to achieve both high computational accuracy for many-body interactions and improved computational efficiency by exploiting quantum parallelism and the natural quantum behavior of the simulated system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

2Adaptability or versatility

If the number of qubits is increased to simulate larger molecules, then simulation capability improves, but hardware limitations and computational cost increase

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesimulation capabilityVSAvoidnumber of qubits
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies segmentation by dividing the molecular simulation problem into smaller, manageable subsystems. It uses techniques such as fragment molecular orbital methods or divide-and-conquer approaches where the large molecule is partitioned into smaller fragments that can be simulated independently on limited quantum hardware. The results are then combined to obtain the properties of the full system, thereby reducing the number of qubits required at any given time while maintaining simulation capability for larger molecules.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent employs nesting strategies where hierarchical levels of simulation are combined. Classical computational methods are used for portions of the system where quantum effects are less critical, while quantum computational methods are applied to specific regions where quantum effects dominate. This nested approach allows efficient utilization of limited quantum resources while still capturing essential quantum phenomena in the full molecular system.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #7Nested doll (Nesting)

3Measurement precision

If gate depth is increased to achieve full configuration interaction equivalent energy, then computational accuracy improves, but noise from gate operations increases the final error

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveenergy calculation accuracyVSAvoidcalculation reliability
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies partial action by implementing truncated configuration interaction or selected configuration interaction methods where only the most significant excited determinants are included in the quantum simulation. Rather than attempting full configuration interaction which would require excessive gate depth and introduce significant noise, the method selectively includes important correlation effects. This approach achieves sufficient computational accuracy for chemical applications while keeping the quantum circuit depth within manageable limits, thereby maintaining calculation reliability.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent employs feedback mechanisms through variational quantum eigensolver (VQE) or similar hybrid quantum-classical algorithms. The quantum computer prepares trial wavefunctions and measures energies, which are then fed back to a classical optimizer that adjusts the parameters of the quantum circuit. This iterative feedback process allows the system to converge to accurate energy values without requiring excessively deep circuits, as each iteration refines the solution based on previous measurements, thereby achieving both accuracy and reliability with limited gate depth.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentUS11829843B2Methods and systems for solving a problem on a quantum computer
Publication Date: 2023.11.28 OTI LUMIONICS INC
  • US11829843B2 patent drawing
  • US11829843B2 patent drawing
  • US11829843B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A method of solving a problem can include providing a fermionic Hamiltonian, transformation of the fermionic Hamiltonian to qubit operators, transformation of the fermionic Hamiltonian in qubit operators to a mean-field Hamiltonian, and embedding the Hamiltonian onto a quantum computer. Such systems and methods may improve upon existing methods for solving electronic structure problems on a computer by adapting the problem to available hardware, reducing computational cost, and reducing the number of required qubits to solve electronic structure problems for larger number of atoms.