AG-2026.04-1126·hep-ph
Toward selective quantum advantage in hadronic tomography:explicit cases from Compton form factors, GPDs, TMDs, and GTMDs
Authors
- I. P. Fernando
- D. Keller
Abstract
We recast the case for quantum advantage in hadronic physics as an observable-by-observable question rather than a blanket claim about Quantum Chromo-Dynamics (QCD). Focusing on hadronic tomography, we analyze why Compton form factors (CFF), generalized parton distributions (GPDs), Transverse Momentum-dependent Distributions (TMDs), and Generalized Transverse Momentum-dependent Distributions (GTMDs) are natural quantum targets: they are defined by light-front, off-forward, or real-time correlation functions whose extraction from Euclidean calculations or sparse experimental data is often an ill-posed inverse problem. We separate three notions of advantage -- algorithmic, computational, and representational -- and connect each to explicit formal objects. At the algorithmic level, Hamiltonian simulation, linear-response algorithms, and amplitude-estimation primitives motivate gains for real-time and sign-problematic observables. At the computational level, direct quantum evaluation of matrix elements and correlators becomes plausible for PDFs, GPDs, timelike response, and high-energy evolution. At the inference level, recent Quantum Deep Neural Network (QDNN) studies of CFF extraction indicate improved performance in noisy and sparse regimes and motivate hybrid fits in which a quantum simulator supplies a physics prior while a classical network models detector and nuisance effects. We discuss why real-device execution is scientifically necessary, summarize current hardware milestones, and propose benchmark criteria for credible claims of quantum advantage in hadronic tomography.
Submitted
11 April 20262 weeks ago
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2604.10025
Chat with this PDF
Ask questions, probe assumptions, request a plain-English summary. Answers cite sections from the preprint itself.
Community
Questions and answers about this paper from other readers. No formal peer review — just a place to think out loud.