INQA Conference 2025: Axel Pérez-Obiol - Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

INQA Conference 2025: Axel Pérez-Obiol - Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona

🎙 Axel Pérez-Obiol 👥 311 📅 November 28, 2025 ⏱ 25 min 👁 35 📄 original study 🧭 2026-08-16
Available in: English (current) Français

Keywords

quantum annealingnuclear shell modelground stateadiabatic evolutionHamiltonian

Summary

Axel Pérez-Obiol presents a quantum annealing protocol to solve the nuclear shell model, a quantum many-body problem. The nuclear shell model describes atomic nuclei but its basis size grows exponentially with nucleon number, limiting classical solutions. The speaker proposes a tailored driver Hamiltonian that preserves a large spectral gap, and validates the approach on a dozen nuclei with basis sizes up to 10^5 using classical simulations. The results show high fidelity and low energy errors, with performance depending on the annealing time and the spectral gap. The protocol’s computational cost on quantum circuits is polynomial in the single-particle basis size, suggesting scalability to heavier nuclei. The talk also discusses the choice of time protocol and driver, and compares with VQE, noting that annealing avoids the optimization complexity. The speaker addresses questions about spinful fermions and the nature of the Hamiltonian.

140 words

Critical Evaluation

Value of the Information & Strength of the Argument

The talk provides a clear motivation for using quantum annealing for nuclear structure, highlighting the exponential scaling of classical methods. The argumentation is solid: the speaker explains the problem, proposes a solution, and validates it with numerical simulations. The results are presented with quantitative metrics (fidelity, energy error) and compared to classical benchmarks. The discussion of the spectral gap and its relation to annealing time is insightful. The speaker also addresses potential limitations, such as the nonlocal nature of the nuclear Hamiltonian and the need for native fermionic hardware. Overall, the value is high for researchers in quantum computing and nuclear physics.

Scientific Rigor, Source Quality, Title Accuracy

The talk is based on original research, presumably peer-reviewed (the speaker mentions a paper published in summer). The speaker does not cite specific sources during the talk, but the description mentions the paper. The title accurately reflects the content. The talk is technically rigorous, with clear methodology and results. The speaker acknowledges the need for further work on hardware implementation. The description provides a link to the paper, which is a reliable source. The talk is well-structured and the claims are supported by simulations.

201 words

Title / Content Match

The title accurately reflects the content: a conference talk by Axel Pérez-Obiol on quantum annealing for the nuclear shell model.

Quality & Reliability

8/10

The talk presents original research with a clear methodology, results, and discussion. The speaker is an academic researcher, and the work is part of a conference presentation. The content is technical and appears rigorous, but the lack of detailed peer-reviewed references in the talk limits a higher score.

Key Moments

Cited Sources

  • Solving the nuclear shell model with a quantum annealing protocol — Paper mentioned in the description, presenting the results of the talk.

Concurring Sources

  • Quantum annealing for nuclear structure — The paper referenced in the description, which presents the same results.

Contribution & Novelties

The talk presents a novel application of quantum annealing to the nuclear shell model, proposing a tailored driver Hamiltonian and demonstrating its effectiveness on a dozen nuclei. The approach shows polynomial scaling in the single-particle basis size, which is promising for heavier nuclei. This bridges quantum annealing and nuclear physics, offering a new tool for nuclear structure calculations.

Pour aller plus loin :

92 words

Radar Profile

The radar profile shows high scores in technical level and information quality, with slightly lower scores in quantity and reliability. This indicates a technically dense talk with solid content, but limited in breadth and with some uncertainty in sources.

Reliability 8/10

💬 No comments were provided for analysis.