Evolving Quantum Error-Correcting Encodings for Molecular Simulation
Abstract
Useful quantum algorithms require many coupled discrete design choices. We study LLM-driven evolutionary program synthesis -- a language model edits a program, an external verifier scores the result, and high-scoring programs are retained and re-mutated -- as a tool for quantum-computing research. As a case study, we apply this loop to the Generalized Superfast Encoding (GSE), a fermion-to-qubit encoding whose prior molecular constructions reach code distance $3$. The search discovered interpret...
Description / Details
Useful quantum algorithms require many coupled discrete design choices. We study LLM-driven evolutionary program synthesis -- a language model edits a program, an external verifier scores the result, and high-scoring programs are retained and re-mutated -- as a tool for quantum-computing research. As a case study, we apply this loop to the Generalized Superfast Encoding (GSE), a fermion-to-qubit encoding whose prior molecular constructions reach code distance . The search discovered interpretable constructor programs whose codes have \emph{exact} distance on the molecular instances tested, and distance on one -mode instance, under strict stabilizer-coset semantics. To our knowledge these are the first GSE/superfast encodings beyond distance for dense molecular Hamiltonians. A second search, guided by verifier analysis of the first artifact, found a circulant constructor that reaches a five-qubits-per-mode floor on the tested -, -, -, and -mode instances, with certified dense-rule fallback at the failing -mode case. As secondary resource descriptors, in a code-capacity \emph{memory} comparison at the resulting encodings use -- fewer data qubits than a scoped per-mode Jordan--Wigner surface route and have -- lower logical-failure rates under finite-weight decoding tables with explicit truncation brackets; we claim no circuit-level fault-tolerance or Trotter-cost advantage. The search trajectory illustrates a general operating lesson: rewarding distance alone selects trivial dense graphs, whereas holding verified distance fixed and rewarding compression selects structured rules.
Source: arXiv:2606.25870v1 - http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.25870v1 PDF: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2606.25870v1 Original Link: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.25870v1
Please sign in to join the discussion.
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!
Jun 25, 2026
Quantum Computing
Quantum Physics
0