journal article·2025-10-31Open access

Dynamical mean field theory for real materials on a quantum computer

Johannes Selisko, Maximilian Amsler, Christopher Wever, Yukio Kawashima, Georgy Samsonidze, Rukhsan Ul Haq, Francesco Tacchino, Ivano Tavernelli, Thomas Eckl

npj Computational Materials· Volume 11· Issue 1

Abstract

Quantum computers (QC) could harbor the potential to significantly advance materials simulations, particularly at the atomistic scale involving strongly correlated fermionic systems, where an accurate description of quantum many-body effects scales unfavorably with size. While a full-scale treatment of condensed matter systems with currently available noisy quantum computers remains elusive, quantum embedding schemes like dynamical mean-field theory (DMFT) allow the mapping of an effective, reduced subspace Hamiltonian to available devices to improve the accuracy of ab initio calculations such as density functional theory (DFT). Here, we report on the development of a hybrid quantum-classical DFT + DMFT simulation framework which relies on a quantum impurity solver based on the Lehmann representation of the impurity Green’s function. Hardware experiments with up to 14 qubits on the IBM Quantum system are conducted, using advanced error mitigation methods and a novel calibration scheme for an improved zero-noise extrapolation to effectively reduce adverse effects from inherent noise on current quantum devices. We showcase the utility of our quantum DFT + DMFT workflow by assessing the correlation effects on the electronic structure of a real material, Ca 2 CuO 2 Cl 2 , which is mapped to an effective single-band Hubbard Hamiltonian and the subsequently derived Anderson impurity model solved with up to 6 bath sites on available quantum hardware. Further, we carefully benchmark our quantum results with respect to exact reference solutions and experimental spectroscopy measurements. While challenges remain to scale our approach to larger, multi-orbital and multi-site systems with more bath sites, the present work marks an important milestone towards achieving utility-scale quantum computation in materials simulation.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Quantum many-body systems · Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture · Spectroscopy and Quantum Chemical Studies

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (100+)

Show source-provided references
1. Louie, S. G., Chan, Yang-Hao, da Jornada, F. H., Li, Z. & Qiu, D. Y. Discovering and understanding materials through computation. Nat. Mater. 20, 728–735 (2021).10.1038/s41563-021-01015-1 ↗
2. Marzari, N., Ferretti, A. & Wolverton, C. Electronic-structure methods for materials design. Nat. Mater. 20, 736–749 (2021).10.1038/s41563-021-01013-3 ↗
3. Ament, S. et al. Autonomous materials synthesis via hierarchical active learning of nonequilibrium phase diagrams. Sci. Adv. 7, eabg4930 (2021).10.1126/sciadv.abg4930 ↗
4. Lejaeghere, K. et al. Reproducibility in density functional theory calculations of solids. Science 351, aad3000 (2016).10.1126/science.aad3000 ↗
5. Simons Collaboration on the Many-Electron Problem, Williams, K. T. et al. Direct comparison of many-body methods for realistic electronic Hamiltonians. Phys. Rev. X 10, 011041 (2020).
6. Sun, Q. & Chan, GarnetKin-Lic Quantum embedding theories. Acc. Chem. Res. 49, 2705–2712 (2016).10.1021/acs.accounts.6b00356 ↗
7. Georges, A. & Kotliar, G. Hubbard model in infinite dimensions. Phys. Rev. B 45, 6479–6483 (1992).10.1103/PhysRevB.45.6479 ↗
8. Kotliar, G. et al. Electronic structure calculations with dynamical mean-field theory. Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 865–951 (2006).10.1103/RevModPhys.78.865 ↗
9. Sangiovanni, G. et al. Static versus dynamical mean-field theory of Mott antiferromagnets. Phys. Rev. B 73, 205121 (2006).10.1103/PhysRevB.73.205121 ↗
10. Karp, J. et al. Many-body electronic structure of NdNiO2 and CaCuO2. Phys. Rev. X 10, 021061 (2020).
11. Karp, J., Hampel, A. & Millis, A. J. Superconductivity and antiferromagnetism in NdNiO2 and CaCuO2: a cluster DMFT study. Phys. Rev. B 105, 205131 (2022).10.1103/PhysRevB.105.205131 ↗
12. Chen, H., Hampel, A., Karp, J., Lechermann, F. & Millis, A. J. Dynamical mean field studies of infinite layer nickelates: physics results and methodological implications. Front. Phys. 10, https://doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2022.835942 (2022).10.3389/fphy.2022.835942 ↗
13. Yang, Y.-F. & Held, K. Dynamical mean field theory for manganites. Phys. Rev. B 82, 195109 (2010).10.1103/PhysRevB.82.195109 ↗
14. Paul, A. & Birol, T. Strain tuning of plasma frequency in vanadate, niobate, and molybdate perovskite oxides. Phys. Rev. Mater. 3, 085001 (2019).10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.3.085001 ↗
15. Park, Y. et al. SrNbO3 as a transparent conductor in the visible and ultraviolet spectra. Commun. Phys. 3, 1–7 (2020).10.1038/s42005-020-0372-9 ↗
16. Paul, A. & Birol, T. Cation order control of correlations in double perovskite Sr2VNbO6. Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033156 (2020).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.033156 ↗
17. Si, L., Kaufmann, J., Zhong, Z., Tomczak, J. M. & Held, K. Pitfalls and solutions for perovskite transparent conductors. Phys. Rev. B 104, L041112 (2021).10.1103/PhysRevB.104.L041112 ↗
18. Cappelli, E. et al. Electronic structure of the highly conductive perovskite oxide SrMoO3. Phys. Rev. Mater. 6, 075002 (2022).10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.6.075002 ↗
19. Lu, Y. & Haverkort, M. W. Exact diagonalization as an impurity solver in dynamical mean field theory. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 226, 2549–2564 (2017).10.1140/epjst/e2017-70042-4 ↗
20. Hirsch, J. E. & Fye, R. M. Monte Carlo method for magnetic impurities in metals. Phys. Rev. Lett. 56, 2521–2524 (1986).10.1103/PhysRevLett.56.2521 ↗
21. Werner, P., Comanac, A., de’ Medici, L., Troyer, M. & Millis, A. J. Continuous-time solver for quantum impurity models. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 076405 (2006).10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.076405 ↗
22. Gull, E. et al. Continuous-time Monte Carlo methods for quantum impurity models. Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 349–404 (2011).10.1103/RevModPhys.83.349 ↗
23. Seth, P., Krivenko, I., Ferrero, M. & Parcollet, O. TRIQS/CTHYB: a continuous-time quantum Monte Carlo hybridisation expansion solver for quantum impurity problems. Comput. Phys. Commun. 200, 274–284 (2016).10.1016/j.cpc.2015.10.023 ↗
24. Loh, E. Y. et al. Sign problem in the numerical simulation of many-electron systems. Phys. Rev. B 41, 9301–9307 (1990).10.1103/PhysRevB.41.9301 ↗
25. Silver, R. N., Sivia, D. S. & Gubernatis, J. E. Maximum-entropy method for analytic continuation of quantum Monte Carlo data. Phys. Rev. B 41, 2380–2389 (1990).10.1103/PhysRevB.41.2380 ↗
26. García, D. J., Hallberg, K. & Rozenberg, M. J. Dynamical mean field theory with the density matrix renormalization group. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 246403 (2004).10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.246403 ↗
27. Žitko, R. & Pruschke, T. Energy resolution and discretization artifacts in the numerical renormalization group. Phys. Rev. B 79, 085106 (2009).10.1103/PhysRevB.79.085106 ↗
28. Dai, X. et al. Calculated phonon spectra of plutonium at high temperatures. Science 300, 953–955 (2003).10.1126/science.1083428 ↗
29. Qiu, H., Zhuang, J., Huang, L., Zhao, J. & Du, L. Improved Hubbard-I approximation impurity solver for quantum impurity models. J. Phys. 31, 025601 (2018).
30. Bauer, B., Wecker, D., Millis, A. J., Hastings, M. B. & Troyer, M. Hybrid quantum-classical approach to correlated materials. Phys. Rev. X 6, 031045 (2016).
31. Endo, S., Kurata, I. & Nakagawa, Y. O. Calculation of the Green’s function on near-term quantum computers. Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033281 (2020).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.033281 ↗
32. Rungger, I. et al. Dynamical mean field theory algorithm and experiment on quantum computers. Preprint at: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1910.04735 (2020).10.48550/arXiv.1910.04735 ↗
33. Keen, T., Maier, T., Johnston, S. & Lougovski, P. Quantum-classical simulation of two-site dynamical mean-field theory on noisy quantum hardware. Quantum Sci. Technol. 5, 035001 (2020).10.1088/2058-9565/ab7d4c ↗
34. Jaderberg, B., Agarwal, A., Leonhardt, K., Kiffner, M. & Jaksch, D. Minimum hardware requirements for hybrid quantum-classical DMFT. Quantum Sci. Technol. 5, 034015 (2020).10.1088/2058-9565/ab972b ↗
35. Francois, J. et al. Krylov variational quantum algorithm for first principles materials simulations. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2105.13298 (2021).10.48550/arXiv.2105.13298 ↗
36. Oftelie, LindsayBassman et al. Simulating quantum materials with digital quantum computers. Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 043002 (2021).10.1088/2058-9565/ac1ca6 ↗
37. Vorwerk, C., Sheng, N., Govoni, M., Huang, B. & Galli, G. Quantum embedding theories to simulate condensed systems on quantum computers. Nat. Comput. Sci. 2, 424–432 (2022).10.1038/s43588-022-00279-0 ↗
38. Backes, S., Murakami, Y., Sakai, S. & Arita, R. Dynamical mean-field theory for the Hubbard-Holstein model on a quantum device. Phys. Rev. B 107, 165155 (2023).10.1103/PhysRevB.107.165155 ↗
39. Jacopo, R. et al. One-particle Green’s functions from the quantum equation of motion algorithm. Phys. Rev. Res. 4, https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevresearch.4.043011 (2022).10.1103/physrevresearch.4.043011 ↗
40. Ehrlich, J., Urban, D. & Elsässer, C. Variational quantum-algorithm based self-consistent calculations for the two-site DMFT model on noisy quantum computing hardware. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 37, 225901 (2025).10.1088/1361-648X/add4db ↗
41. Jamet, F. Agarwal, A. & Rungger, I. Quantum subspace expansion algorithm for Green’s functions. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2205.00094 (2022).10.48550/arXiv.2205.00094 ↗
42. Libbi, F., Rizzo, J., Tacchino, F., Marzari, N. & Tavernelli, I. Effective calculation of the Green’s function in the time domain on near-term quantum processors. Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043038 (2022).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4.043038 ↗
43. Sakurai, R., Mizukami, W. & Shinaoka, H. Hybrid quantum-classical algorithm for computing imaginary-time correlation functions. Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023219 (2022).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4.023219 ↗
44. Gomes, N., Williams-Young, D. B. & de Jong, W. A. Computing the many-body Green’s function with adaptive variational quantum dynamics. J. Chem. Theory Comput. 19, 3313–3323 (2023).10.1021/acs.jctc.3c00150 ↗
45. Steckmann, T. et al. Mapping the metal-insulator phase diagram by algebraically fast-forwarding dynamics on a cloud quantum computer. Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 023198 (2023).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.023198 ↗
46. Peruzzo, A. et al. A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor. Nat. Commun. 5, 1–7 (2014).10.1038/ncomms5213 ↗
47. Tilly, J. et al. The variational quantum eigensolver: a review of methods and best practices. Phys. Rep. 986, 1–128 (2022).10.1016/j.physrep.2022.08.003 ↗
48. Cerezo, M. et al. Variational quantum algorithms. Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 625–644 (2021).10.1038/s42254-021-00348-9 ↗
49. Kuroiwa, K. & Nakagawa, Y. O. Penalty methods for a variational quantum eigensolver. Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 013197 (2021).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.3.013197 ↗
50. Higgott, O., Wang, D. & Brierley, S. Variational quantum computation of excited states. Quantum 3, 156 (2019).10.22331/q-2019-07-01-156 ↗
51. Nakanishi, K. M., Mitarai, K. & Fujii, K. Subspace-search variational quantum eigensolver for excited states. Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 033062 (2019).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.1.033062 ↗
52. Ollitrault, P. J. et al. Quantum equation of motion for computing molecular excitation energies on a noisy quantum processor. Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 043140 (2020).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.043140 ↗
53. Grande, B. & Müller-Buschbaum, H. K. ÜberOxocuprate.XVII.ZurKenntnis von Ca2CuO2Cl2 und Ca2CuO2Br2. Z. Anorg. Allg. Chem. 429, 88–90 (1977).10.1002/zaac.19774290112 ↗
54. Yamada, I. et al. Single-layer oxychloride superconductor Ca2−xCuO2Cl2 with A-site cation deficiency. Phys. Rev. B 72, 224503 (2005).10.1103/PhysRevB.72.224503 ↗
55. Baptiste, Benoît, Azuma, M., Yu, R., Giura, P. & d’Astuto, M. Ca2CuO2Cl2, a redetermination from single-crystal X-ray diffraction data. IUCrData 3, x181645 (2018).10.1107/S2414314618016450 ↗
56. Hiroi, Z., Kobayashi, N. & Takano, M. Probable hole-doped superconductivity without apical oxygens in (Ca, Na)2CuO2CI2. Nature 371, 139–141 (1994).10.1038/371139a0 ↗
57. Argyriou, D. N. et al. Structure and superconductivity without apical oxygens in (Ca, Na)2CuO2Cl2. Phys. Rev. B 51, 8434–8437 (1995).10.1103/PhysRevB.51.8434 ↗
58. Zhang, F. C. & Rice, T. M. Effective Hamiltonian for the superconducting Cu oxides. Phys. Rev. B 37, 3759 (1988).10.1103/PhysRevB.37.3759 ↗
59. Lee, P. A., Nagaosa, N. & Wen, Xiao-Gang Doping a Mott insulator: physics of high-temperature superconductivity. Rev. Mod. Phys. 78, 17 (2006).10.1103/RevModPhys.78.17 ↗
60. Zhigadlo, N. D. et al. Synthesis and bulk properties of oxychloride superconductor Ca2−xNaxCuO2Cl2. J. Phys. 97, 012121 (2008).
61. Wu, M. K. et al. Superconductivity at 93K in a new mixed-phase Y-Ba-Cu-O compound system at ambient pressure. Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 908–910 (1987).10.1103/PhysRevLett.58.908 ↗
62. Kandala, A. et al. Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets. Nature 549, 242–246 (2017).10.1038/nature23879 ↗
63. Polat, F., Tuncer, H., Moin, A. & Challenger, M. Model-driven engineering for quantum programming: a case study on ground state energy calculation. 2024 IEEE 48th Annual Computers, Software, and Applications Conference (COMPSAC), Osaka, Japan, 2353−2360, https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPSAC61105.2024.00378 (2024).10.1109/COMPSAC61105.2024.00378 ↗
64. Gratsea, K. et al. Onionvqe optimization strategy for ground state preparation on NISQ devices. Quantum Sci. Technol. 10, 015024 (2024).10.1088/2058-9565/ad8a85 ↗
65. Grant, E., Wossnig, L., Ostaszewski, M. & Benedetti, M. An initialization strategy for addressing barren plateaus in parametrized quantum circuits. Quantum 3, 214 (2019).10.22331/q-2019-12-09-214 ↗
66. Bonet-Monroig, X. et al. Performance comparison of optimization methods on variational quantum algorithms. Phys. Rev. A 107, 032407 (2023).10.1103/PhysRevA.107.032407 ↗
67. Selisko, J., Amsler, M., Hammerschmidt, T., Drautz, R. & Eckl, T. Extending the variational quantum eigensolver to finite temperatures. Quantum Sci. Technol. 9, 015026 (2023).10.1088/2058-9565/ad1340 ↗
68. Hibat-Allah, M., Mauri, M., Carrasquilla, J. & Perdomo-Ortiz, A. A framework for demonstrating practical quantum advantage: comparing quantum against classical generative models. Commun. Phys 7, 68 (2024).10.1038/s42005-024-01552-6 ↗
69. Wiersema, R. et al. Exploring entanglement and optimization within the Hamiltonian variational ansatz. PRX Quantum 1, 020319 (2020).10.1103/PRXQuantum.1.020319 ↗
70. Kim, Y. et al. Evidence for the utility of quantum computing before fault tolerance. Nature 618, 500–505 (2023).10.1038/s41586-023-06096-3 ↗
71. Arsenault, Louis-Franççois, Sémon, P. & Tremblay, A.-M. S. Benchmark of a modified iterated perturbation theory approach on the fcc lattice at strong coupling. Phys. Rev. B 86, 085133 (2012).10.1103/PhysRevB.86.085133 ↗
72. Kohsaka, Y. et al. Angle-resolved photoemission spectroscopy of (Ca, Na)2CuO2Cl2 crystals: fingerprints of a magnetic insulator in a heavily underdoped superconductor. J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 72, 1018–1021 (2003).10.1143/JPSJ.72.1018 ↗
73. Damascelli, A., Hussain, Z. & Shen, Zhi-Xun Angle-resolved photoemission studies of the cuprate superconductors. Rev. Mod. Phys. 75, 473–541 (2003).10.1103/RevModPhys.75.473 ↗
74. Georges, A., Kotliar, G., Krauth, W. & Rozenberg, M. J. Dynamical mean-field theory of strongly correlated fermion systems and the limit of infinite dimensions. Rev. Mod. Phys. 68, 13–125 (1996).10.1103/RevModPhys.68.13 ↗
75. McClean, J. R., Boixo, S., Smelyanskiy, V. N., Babbush, R. & Neven, H. Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes. Nat. Commun. 9, 1–6 (2018).10.1038/s41467-018-07090-4 ↗
76. Wang, S. et al. Noise-induced barren plateaus in variational quantum algorithms. Nat. Commun. 12, 6961 (2021).10.1038/s41467-021-27045-6 ↗
77. Kitaev, A. Y. Quantum measurements and the Abelian stabilizer problem. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/9511026 (1995).10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/9511026 ↗
78. Motta, M. et al. Determining eigenstates and thermal states on a quantum computer using quantum imaginary time evolution. Nat. Phys. 16, 205–210 (2020).10.1038/s41567-019-0704-4 ↗
79. Nishi, H., Kosugi, T. & Matsushita, Yu-ichiro Implementation of quantum imaginary-time evolution method on NISQ devices by introducing nonlocal approximation. npj Quantum Inf. 7, 1–7 (2021).10.1038/s41534-021-00409-y ↗
80. McArdle, S. et al. Variational ansatz-based quantum simulation of imaginary time evolution. npj Quantum Inf. 5, 1–6 (2019).10.1038/s41534-019-0187-2 ↗
81. Cortes, C. L. & Gray, S. K. QuantumKrylov subspace algorithms for ground- and excited-state energy estimation. Phys. Rev. A 105, 022417 (2022).10.1103/PhysRevA.105.022417 ↗
82. Giannozzi, P. et al. QUANTUMESPRESSO: a modular and open-source software project for quantum simulations of materials. J. Phys. 21, 395502 (2009).
83. Perdew, J. P., Burke, K. & Ernzerhof, M. Generalized gradient approximation made simple. Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3865–3868 (1996).10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.3865 ↗
84. van Setten, M. J. et al. ThePseudoDojo: training and grading a 85 element optimized norm-conserving pseudopotential table. Comput. Phys. Commun. 226, 39–54 (2018).10.1016/j.cpc.2018.01.012 ↗
85. Pizzi, G. et al. Wannier90 as a community code: new features and applications. J. Phys. 32, 165902 (2020).
86. Nakamura, K. et al. RESPACK: an ab initio tool for derivation of effective low-energy model of material. Comput. Phys. Commun. 261, 107781 (2021).10.1016/j.cpc.2020.107781 ↗
87. Kurita, K., Misawa, T., Yoshimi, K., Ido, K. & Koretsune, T. Interface tool fromWannier90 toRESPACK: wan2respack. Comput. Phys. Commun. 292, 108854 (2023).10.1016/j.cpc.2023.108854 ↗
88. Parcollet, O. et al. Triqs: a toolbox for research on interacting quantum systems. Comput. Phys. Commun. 196, 398 – 415 (2015).10.1016/j.cpc.2015.04.023 ↗
89. Eva, P., Erik, K., Alexander, L., & Dieter, V. (eds) DMFT:From Infinite Dimensions to Real Materials, Schriften des Forschungszentrums Jülich. Reihe modeling and simulation, Vol. 8 (Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH Zentralbibliothek, 2018).
90. Eva, P., Erik, K., Alexander, L., & Dieter, V. (eds) Dynamical Mean-Field Theory of Correlated Electrons, Modeling and Simulation, Vol. 12, https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/909714 (Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH Zentralbibliothek, 2022).
91. Merkel, M. E., Carta, A., Beck, S. & Hampel, A. solid_dmft: gray-boxing DFT+DMFT materials simulations with TRIQS. J. Open Source Softw. 7, 4623 (2022).10.21105/joss.04623 ↗
92. Beck, S., Hampel, A., Parcollet, O., Ederer, C. & Georges, A. Charge self-consistent electronic structure calculations with dynamical mean-field theory using Quantum ESPRESSO, Wannier 90 and TRIQS. J. Phys. 34, 235601 (2022).
93. Hampel, A., Beck, S. & Ederer, C. Effect of charge self-consistency in DFT + DMFT calculations for complex transition metal oxides. Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033088 (2025).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.2.033088 ↗
94. Lu, Y., Höppner, M., Gunnarsson, O. & Haverkort, M. W. Efficient real-frequency solver for dynamical mean-field theory. Phys. Rev. B 90, 085102 (2014).10.1103/PhysRevB.90.085102 ↗
95. Jordan, P. & Wigner, E. Über das Paulische Äquivalenzverbot. Z. Phys. 47, 631–651 (1928).10.1007/BF01331938 ↗
96. Jones, E. B. et al. Dynamic, symmetry-preserving, and hardware-adaptable circuits for quantum computing many-body states and correlators of the Anderson impurity model. Phys. Rev. Research 7, 023186 (2025).10.1103/PhysRevResearch.7.023186 ↗
97. Jiang, Z., Sung, K. J., Kechedzhi, K., Smelyanskiy, V. N. & Boixo, S. Quantum algorithms to simulate many-body physics of correlated fermions. Phys. Rev. Appl. 9, 044036 (2018).10.1103/PhysRevApplied.9.044036 ↗
98. Sun, Q. et al. Recent developments in the PySCF program package. J. Chem. Phys. 153, 024109 (2020).10.1063/5.0006074 ↗
99. Byrd, R. H., Lu, P., Nocedal, J. & Zhu, C. A limited memory algorithm for bound constrained optimization. SIAM J. Sci. Comput. 16, 1190–1208 (1995).10.1137/0916069 ↗
100. Zhu, C., Byrd, R. H., Lu, P. & Nocedal, J. Algorithm 778:L-BFGS-B: Fortran subroutines for large-scale bound-constrained optimization. ACM Trans. Math. Softw. 23, 550–560 (1997).10.1145/279232.279236 ↗