Physics-Informed Machine Learning Correction of Variational Quantum Eigensolver Energies for Molecular Ground States
The variational quantum Eigensolver (VQE) provides a scalable route to molecular ground-state energies on near-term quantum hardware, but its accuracy degrades rapidly as system size grows because hardware-efficient ansätze cannot span the full correlation subspace. We introduce a physics-informed ridge regression correction that is trained on the difference between VQE and Hartree-Fock (HF) energies and applied as a postprocessing step requiring no additional quantum resources. The feature setthe VQE-HF energy gap ΔE, its square ΔE 2, the active-space qubit count, the number of active electrons, and two cross-term interactionscaptures the dominant drivers of ansatz error in a low-dimensional, interpretable form. The model is benchmarked on H2, H2O, NH3, CH4, C2H6, and CH3OH using the STO-3G basis set and a state vector VQE simulator using a two-layer Ry-CNOT hardware-efficient ansatz. To assess cross-molecule generalizability, the corrected framework is further tested on CO2, N2, and HCN under both untrained and trained conditions. Absolute energy errors fall from a range of 0.02-0.79 Ha (raw VQE) to 0.0007-0.094 Ha after correction, corresponding to improvement factors of 3× to 640× relative to CASCI reference values. Zero-shot generalization tests yield factors of 9-58×, and including molecules in training improves results by a further order of magnitude in several cases. The three extended molecules exhibit improvement factors of 4-6× in untrained settings and 5-6× after training, providing preliminary evidence of transferability across chemically distinct systems. These findings suggest that the VQE-HF energy gap encodes physically transferable information about correlation-energy saturation, and that even the smallest training set can produce practically useful corrections for near-term quantum chemistry.
0 Comments
The summary above is machine-written and the abstract is the authors' own pitch. This is where people who read the paper say what it actually found, what the summary missed, and which part is worth your time.
Log in to join the discussion.