AG-2026.04-1676·quant-ph
Classical simulation of free-fermionic dynamics and quantum chemistry with magic input
Authors
- Changhun Oh
- Michał Oszmaniec
- Oliver Reardon-Smith
- Zoltán Zimborás
Abstract
Establishing the precise computational boundary between classically tractable fermionic systems and those capable of genuine quantum advantage is a central challenge in quantum simulation. While injecting non-Gaussian ``magic" inputs into free-fermion circuits is widely expected to generate intractable complexity, we identify a physically motivated intermediate regime. Supported by rigorous bounds and numerical evidence, we show that for a class of paired non-Gaussian fermionic states, essential quantum simulation primitives -- transition amplitudes, overlaps, and arbitrary-weight number correlators -- can be efficiently approximated to additive error under free-fermionic dynamics. This tractability stems from an algebraic reduction that compresses exponentially large multiparticle interference into a single coefficient of a multivariate Pfaffian polynomial. Because these classical estimators match the intrinsic $O(1/\sqrt{K})$ statistical uncertainty of quantum hardware utilizing $K$ measurement shots, they constitute a practical benchmark. Building on this foundation, we construct an additive-error estimator for high-weight Wilson observables in the noninteracting quench of recent trapped-ion experiments, providing a rigorous classical benchmark. Extending this to quantum chemistry, we demonstrate that core overlap-based subroutines for antisymmetrized products of strongly orthogonal geminals admit exact Pfaffian reductions. Ultimately, these results sharpen the boundary of quantum advantage, establishing that the paired-electron scaffold is effectively dequantized and clarifying exactly where quantum resources are indispensable.
Submitted
29 April 2026today
Version
v1
License
CC-BY-4.0
DOI
10.48550/arXiv.2604.26813
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.