Quantum Simulation of Nuclear Dynamics in First Quantization

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2507.22814
• Title: Quantum Simulation of Nuclear Dynamics in First Quantization
• Authors: Luca Spagnoli, Chiara Lissoni, Alessandro Roggero (University of Trento & INFN-TIFPA)
• Classification: quant-ph (Quantum Physics), nucl-th (Nuclear Theory)
• Publication Date: November 10, 2025 (arXiv v2)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2507.22814

Abstract

Real-time dynamics of nuclear systems are crucial for predicting scattering cross sections in ground-based experiments and astrophysical applications. However, first-principles simulation of these dynamical processes is limited by the exponential cost of classical computational resources. This paper provides the first complete characterization of resource requirements for studying nuclear dynamics using first quantization with a complete leading-order (LO) pionless effective field theory (EFT) Hamiltonian, employing both product formulas and quantum signal processing (QSP) strategies. The study demonstrates that time evolution of such Hamiltonians can be achieved with polynomial resources in particle number and logarithmic resources in the number of single-particle basis states, representing an exponential improvement compared to second quantization methods. Interesting simulations of low-energy nuclear scattering may require only tens of millions of T gates and several hundred logical qubits, suggesting that simple nuclear reaction studies may be feasible on early fault-tolerant quantum platforms.

Research Background and Motivation

Core Problems to Address

This research aims to solve the problem of quantum simulation resource requirements for nuclear system dynamics, specifically:

1. How to efficiently simulate low-energy nuclear scattering and nuclear reaction processes
2. How to overcome the exponential resource bottleneck of classical computing in nuclear dynamics simulation
3. How to design feasible nuclear physics applications for early fault-tolerant quantum computers

Importance of the Problem

1. Scientific Significance: Nuclear dynamics simulation is crucial for understanding stellar nucleosynthesis, neutrino property experiments, neutrinoless double-beta decay, and other fundamental physics questions
2. Computational Challenge: Although ab initio methods for nuclear structure have made significant progress, a general, controllable, and scalable simulation strategy for complete nuclear reaction dynamics remains lacking
3. Quantum Advantage Potential: Quantum computing promises to provide near-term significant impact in simulating dynamical processes

Limitations of Existing Methods

Problems with second quantization methods (such as Watson et al. 40):

• High Memory Requirements: Number of qubits grows linearly with single-particle space size Ω, O(Ω)
• High Gate Cost: For 8×8×8 lattice, requires at least 2048-3072 qubits
• Strong Volume Dependence: T gate count at least linearly depends on volume, O(Ω), inefficient for nuclear scattering problems (sparse limit η/Ω ≪ 1)

Specifically, the resource requirements for second-order product formulas are: $C^{2nd} = O\left(\frac{t^{3/2}\eta^{1/2}}{\epsilon^{1/2}}\Omega \log\left(\frac{t\eta\Omega}{\epsilon}\right)\right)$

Research Motivation

1. Exploiting Sparsity: In nuclear reaction simulation, particle number η is fixed and much smaller than the number of single-particle states Ω; first quantization can exploit this property
2. Reducing Resource Requirements: Expecting to achieve qubit count O(η log Ω) and logarithmic gate cost dependence
3. Early Application Feasibility: Providing practical nuclear physics applications for the forthcoming fault-tolerant quantum computers

Core Contributions

The main contributions of this paper include:

1. First Complete Resource Characterization: Provides complete quantum simulation resource estimates for the full LO pionless EFT Hamiltonian (including three-body interactions) in first quantization
2. Exponential Improvement: Achieves exponential improvement over second quantization methods in volume Ω:
   • Qubit count: O(Ω) → O(η log Ω)
   • T gate count (second-order Trotter): O(Ω) → Õ(η^{3/2} log Ω)
3. Multiple Algorithm Implementations: Provides detailed implementation and resource analysis for three classes of algorithms:
   • First-order, second-order, fourth-order product formulas
   • Quantum Signal Processing (QSP)
   • Generalized Quantum Signal Processing (GQSP)
4. Innovative Block Encoding Scheme: Designs new block encoding methods for contact interactions, achieving O(η) gate cost by exploiting fermionic statistics
5. Fermionic Half-Norm Generalization: Generalizes the fermionic half-norm concept from second quantization to first quantization for precise Trotter error bound estimation
6. Practical Parameter Assessment: Uses realistic nuclear physics parameters for resource estimation, showing that 16-nucleon simulation can be completed with approximately 10^7 T gates and ~200 logical qubits

Methods in Detail

Task Definition

Input:

• Initial quantum state of η nucleons
• Pionless EFT Hamiltonian H = T + V₂ + V₃
• Evolution time t and target error ϵ

Output:

• Approximate time evolution operator U(t) such that ‖U(t) - e^{-iHt}‖ < ϵ

Constraints:

• Spatial lattice: d-dimensional, M = 2^m lattice points per dimension, periodic boundary conditions
• Number of single-particle states: Ω = 4·M^d (4 from spin and isospin)
• Sparse limit: η/Ω ≪ 1

Hamiltonian Discretization

First Quantization Encoding Scheme:

• Each particle represented by log₂(Ω) qubits
• Position encoding: d·log₂(M) = dm qubits
• Spin/isospin: 2 qubits
• Total qubit count: Q = (dm + 2)η

Kinetic Energy Operator (diagonal in momentum space): $T = K(QFT^{\otimes d\eta})^\dagger \sum_{i=0}^{\eta-1}\sum_{w=0}^{d-1}\sum_{p=0}^{2^m-1} q_w^2 \Pi_{w,i}(p) (QFT^{\otimes d\eta})$

where K = ℏ²/(2μa²)(2π/2^m)², and q_w is the momentum component accounting for periodic boundary conditions.

Potential Energy Operators (diagonal in position space): $V_2 = \frac{C}{2}\sum_{i,j\neq i}\sum_{\vec{r}_i,\vec{r}_j} \delta_{\vec{r}_i,\vec{r}_j}\Pi_i(\vec{r}_i)\Pi_j(\vec{r}_j)$$V_3 = \frac{G}{6}\sum_{i,j\neq i, k\neq i,j}\sum_{\vec{r}_i,\vec{r}_j,\vec{r}_k} \delta_{\vec{r}_i,\vec{r}_j}\delta_{\vec{r}_i,\vec{r}_k}\Pi_i(\vec{r}_i)\Pi_j(\vec{r}_j)\Pi_k(\vec{r}_k)$

Product Formula Implementation

Core Idea

Decompose the evolution operator into products of kinetic and potential energy evolution: $e^{-iHt} \approx (e^{-iT\tau}e^{-iV\tau})^r, \quad \tau = t/r$

Kinetic Energy Exponential Implementation (Lemma 1)

Strategy: Utilize QFT to diagonalize kinetic energy in momentum space

Steps:

1. Apply QFT to spatial registers of all particles
2. For each spatial dimension and particle:
   • Compute p² (requires squaring circuit, cost 4m² - 4m T gates)
   • Use phase kickback method to apply diagonal unitary e^{-iKq²t}
3. Apply inverse QFT

Resource Cost: $T_T(\epsilon, t) = O\left[\eta m\left(m + \log\left(\frac{t\eta\lambda_T}{\epsilon}\right)\right)\right]$

where λ_T = dKη2^{2m-2} = (ℏ²dηπ²)/(2μa²) is the upper bound on kinetic energy norm.

Potential Energy Exponential Implementation (Lemma 3)

Key Innovation: Merge implementation of V₂ and V₃, exploiting the identity: $V_3(\vec{r}_0,...,\vec{r}_{\eta-1}) = G\sum_{i<j}\delta_{\vec{r}_i,\vec{r}_j}\sum_{k>j}\delta_{\vec{r}_j,\vec{r}_k}$

Implementation Strategy:

1. For each particle pair (i,j):
   • Use dm CNOT gates and 1 C^{dm}X gate to check position equality
   • Store result in auxiliary qubit
   • Apply RZ(2Ct) gate (two-body potential)
2. For each triple (i,j,k), k>j:
   • Check r⃗_j = r⃗_k
   • Use Toffoli gate and auxiliary bits to apply RZ(2Gt)

Resource Cost: $T_V(\epsilon) = O\left[\eta^3\left(m + \log\left(\frac{\eta}{\epsilon}\right)\right)\right]$

Requires dm+1 auxiliary qubits.

Second-Order Trotter Formula (Theorem 2)

Decomposition Form: $U(t) = \left(e^{-iT\tau/2}e^{-iV\tau}e^{-iT\tau/2}\right)^r$

Error Bound: Using fermionic half-norm, error is $\epsilon_{Trotter}^{(2)} \leq \frac{t^3}{r^2}\alpha_2$

where $\alpha_2 = \frac{\eta}{24}(dK2^{2m-2})^2 M(4) + \frac{\eta}{12}(dK2^{2m-2})M(3)^2$

M(s) is the potential energy upper bound after correcting coupling constants.

Step Selection: $r = \lceil\sqrt{4t^3\alpha_2/\epsilon}\rceil$

Total T Gate Count: $T_{tr}^{(2)}(\epsilon,t) = \tilde{O}\left(\frac{t^{3/2}\eta^{3/2}}{\epsilon^{1/2}}\log\left(\frac{t\eta\Omega}{\epsilon}\right)(\eta^2 + \log\Omega)\right)$

Quantum Signal Processing Implementation

Block Encoding Construction (Theorem 3)

Objective: Construct unitary U_H such that a⟨0|U_H|0⟩_a = H/λ_H

Kinetic Energy Block Encoding (Lemma 4):

• Follow Su et al. 51 strategy
• PREPARE: Prepare state |+⟩|i⟩_f|ω⟩_g∑_r 2^{r/2}|r⟩∑_s 2^{s/2}|s⟩
• SELECT: Conditionally flip b register unless momentum bits match
• One-norm: λ_T = dKη2^{2(m-1)}
• Cost: O(ηm(m + log(m/ϵ))) T gates

Potential Energy Block Encoding (Lemma 5):

Innovation: Exploit identity $V = \left(\frac{C}{2} - \frac{G}{6}\right)\sum_{i,j\neq i}\delta_{\vec{r}_i,\vec{r}_j} + \frac{G}{6}\left(\sum_{i,j\neq i}\delta_{\vec{r}_i,\vec{r}_j}\right)^2$

Implementation:

1. Define oracle U_match: |0⟩S|r⃗₀⟩···|r⃗{η-1}⟩ → |Λ⟩S|r⃗₀⟩···|r⃗{η-1}⟩
   • Λ counts particles at same location as first particle (at most 3, requires 2 qubits)
2. PREPARE: Prepare |+⟩_b|i⟩_f|φ⟩_l|κ⟩_p|κ⟩_q
   • |φ⟩_l encodes relative weights of C and G
   • |κ⟩ = (|0⟩ + √2|1⟩)/√3 for squared term
3. SELECT: Implement using U_match and conditional Z gates

One-norm: λ_V = η(3|C| + 4G)/2

Cost: O(ηm + log(1/ϵ)) T gates, dm+4 auxiliary qubits

QSP Time Evolution (Theorem 4)

Basic Construction:

• Define W = ((2|P⟩⟨P| - 1)⊗1)U_S
• Define V_φ = (e^{-iφZ/2}⊗1)V_0(e^{iφZ/2}⊗1)
• Implement polynomial P_Q(t) ≈ e^{it} through repeated application of V_φ

Polynomial Order: Using Jacobi-Anger expansion, requires $Q(t,\epsilon_t) = \lceil 2\lambda_H|t| + 3\log(6/\epsilon_t)\rceil$ repetitions

Total Resources: $T_{QSP}(\epsilon,t) = O\left((ηt + \log(1/\epsilon))\log(\Omega)(η + \log(mηt/\epsilon))\right)$

Qubit Count: O(η + m + log(t/ϵ))

GQSP Improvement (Theorem 5)

Optimization: Exploit W†W = U_S relationship, reducing SELECT calls by approximately half

Resources: Approximately 2× gate cost reduction compared to QSP, same qubit requirements

Technical Innovations

1. Fermionic Half-Norm Generalization:
   • Define ‖O‖_A = ‖Π_A O Π_A‖, where Π_A is antisymmetric subspace projection
   • Exploit Pauli exclusion principle: at most 4 fermions per lattice site
   • Precisely estimate commutator norms, optimize Trotter step count
2. Efficient Potential Implementation:
   • Merge V₂ and V₃ to avoid redundant computation
   • Apply rotations on auxiliary bits saving factor of 2
   • Exploit fermionic occupation number limits to simplify circuits
3. Block Encoding Innovation:
   • Potential block encoding exploits V₃ squared structure
   • U_match oracle requires only O(η) cost
   • Maintain SELECT self-inverse property for QSP compatibility
4. Phase Gradient State Reuse:
   • Use same phase register for QFT and diagonal unitaries
   • Reduce auxiliary qubit overhead

Experimental Setup

Physical Parameters

Using parameters consistent with prior work 39,40:

• Lattice spacing: a = 1.4 fm
• Nucleon mass: μ = 939 MeV
• Coupling constants (SU(4) symmetric):
  • ℏ²/(2μa²) = 10.58 MeV
  • C = -98.23 MeV
  • G = 127.84 MeV
• Spatial dimension: d = 3

Simulation Scenarios

Scenario 1: Crossing Time$t_{cross}(L) = \frac{aL}{\hbar c}\sqrt{\frac{\mu}{2E}}$ where L = 2^m is linear lattice size, E = 10 MeV is nucleon energy.

• Purpose: Evaluate cost of simulating nuclear collisions or semi-exclusive processes

Scenario 2: Response Resolution Time$t_r(\Delta\omega) = \left(\left\lceil\frac{\Delta H}{\Delta\omega}\right\rceil - 1\right)\frac{2\pi}{\Delta H}$ where ΔH = ‖T‖ + ‖V‖ + 18η, Δω = 100 MeV.

• Purpose: Evaluate cost of computing nuclear cross sections via linear response methods

Comparison Methods

1. Second Quantization Trotter 40: Watson et al. implementation
2. First Quantization Second-Order Trotter: This work
3. First Quantization QSP: This work
4. First Quantization GQSP: This work

Evaluation Metrics

• T Gate Count: Non-Clifford gate cost (main bottleneck)
• Logical Qubit Count: Quantum memory requirements
• Target Error: ϵ ∈ {10^{-1}, 10^{-3}}

Implementation Details

• Qubit encoding: dm position qubits, 2 spin/isospin qubits
• QFT implementation: Using approximate QFT 85, precision O(m log(m/ϵ))
• Rotation synthesis: Using Kliuchnikov et al. 86 method
• Multi-controlled gates: Using Gidney construction 61, 4 T gates per Toffoli

Experimental Results

Main Results

Fixed Volume Analysis (8×8×8 Lattice)

Table IV Summary (t_, ϵ=0.1):

Key Findings:

1. Clear Qubit Advantage: First quantization has far lower qubit requirements than second quantization across all particle counts (~15× difference)
2. GQSP Optimal: GQSP provides lowest gate cost in all tested scenarios
3. Crossover Point: First-order Trotter becomes more costly than second-order Trotter for η≈10-20 (due to η^{3/2} dependence)

Volume Dependence Analysis (Figure 11)

Crossing Time Simulation (η=16, ϵ=10^{-2}):

• Lattice sizes: 8³ to 4096³ (Ω from 2048 to 2.7×10¹¹)
• Second Quantization: T gates grow from 10⁸ to 10²² (Ω^{3/2} growth)
• First-Order Trotter: T gates grow from 10⁸ to 10¹² (Ω^{1/2} growth)
• GQSP: T gates grow from 10⁷ to 10¹¹ (Ω^{1/3} growth)

Response Resolution Simulation (η=16, Δω=100 MeV):

• Second Quantization: Linear growth O(Ω)
• First-Order Methods: Logarithmic growth O(log²Ω)
• GQSP Advantage: When Ω increases by 8 orders of magnitude, gate cost increases by less than 5×

Error Dependence Analysis

Figure 10 (8³ lattice, t_):

• At ϵ=10^{-1}: GQSP ~100× faster than second-order Trotter
• At ϵ=10^{-3}: GQSP advantage more pronounced (logarithmic vs square-root dependence)
• First-order Trotter slightly superior to second quantization at ϵ=10^{-1} and η=40

Particle Number Dependence

Crossover Point Analysis:

• First-order vs Second-order Trotter: η≈10-20 (small lattice)
• QSP vs Second-order Trotter: η≈200-255
• GQSP: Maintains advantage across all tested ranges (η≤294)

Scaling Law Verification:

• First-order Trotter: T ∝ η^{3/2} (matches theory)
• QSP/GQSP: T ∝ η² (matches theory)
• Second quantization: T ∝ η^{1/2} (matches theory)

Early Fault-Tolerant Platform Feasibility

Minimal Simulation Example (¹⁶O, 8³ lattice, ϵ=0.1):

• GQSP: 3.75×10⁷ T gates, 235 qubits
• Comparison: ~10× more expensive than Fermi-Hubbard QPE, comparable to molecular ground state simulation
• Conclusion: Feasible on early fault-tolerant quantum computers

Related Work

Nuclear Physics Quantum Simulation

1. Second Quantization Methods:
   • Roggero et al. 39: First pionless EFT quantum simulation, O(Ω) resources
   • Watson et al. 40: Improved Trotter formula, O(η^{1/2}Ω) gate cost
   • Using Jordan-Wigner or Verstraete-Cirac encoding
2. First Quantization Exploration:
   • Roggero et al. 39: First demonstration with triton toy model
   • Weiss et al. 53: Pionless EFT without three-body interactions, O(η² log Ω) single-step cost
   • This work: First complete resource characterization including three-body interactions

Quantum Chemistry First Quantization

• Abrams & Lloyd 47: Early fermionic system simulation
• Kassal et al. 48: Chemical dynamics polynomial-time algorithm
• Su et al. 51: Fault-tolerant chemistry simulation, O(n log Ω) qubits
• Georges et al. 52: Chemistry simulation with arbitrary basis sets

Product Formula Theory

• Suzuki 54, Lloyd 55: Foundational theory
• Childs et al. 63: Commutator scaling theory
• Campbell 74: Early fault-tolerant Hubbard model simulation
• Su et al. 62: Fermionic half-norm

QSP/GQSP Development

• Low & Chuang 56,57: QSP and qubitization
• Gilyén et al. 65,66: QSVT
• Motlagh & Wiebe 58: GQSP
• Berry et al. 67: GQSP efficiency doubling

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Exponential Improvement: First quantization achieves exponential improvement in volume dependence
   • Qubits: O(Ω) → O(η log Ω)
   • Gate cost: O(Ω) → O(log² Ω) (for fixed time)
2. Optimal Algorithm: GQSP provides best performance in all tested scenarios
   • Gate cost: O((ηt + log(1/ϵ))log(Ω)(η + log(mηt/ϵ)))
   • Qubits: O(η log Ω + log(t/ϵ))
3. Early Application Feasibility: Simple nuclear reaction simulation (e.g., ¹⁶O) may be achievable on early fault-tolerant quantum computers
   • ~10⁷ T gates
   • ~200 logical qubits
4. Applicable Range: First quantization outperforms second quantization in sparse limit (η/Ω ≪ 1)

Limitations

1. Particle Number Dependence:
   • First-order methods have stronger η dependence (η^{3/2} vs η^{1/2})
   • For very large η (>200), second quantization may be superior
2. Incomplete Cost Coverage:
   • Initial state preparation cost not analyzed in detail (antisymmetrization O(η log η log M))
   • Observable measurement and circuit repetition costs not estimated
   • Only SU(4) symmetric interactions considered
3. Parameter Dependence:
   • Resource estimates sensitive to coupling constants C, G
   • Lattice spacing a choice affects precision and cost
4. Optimization Space:
   • Finite difference methods unexplored (may improve Trotter error)
   • Potential exponential could be optimized from O(η³) to O(η²)
   • Depth optimization insufficiently considered

Future Directions

1. End-to-End Resource Estimation:
   • Complete nuclear scattering simulation pipeline
   • Initial state preparation strategies
   • Observable extraction methods
2. More Accurate Hamiltonians:
   • SU(4) breaking terms (singlet-triplet distinction)
   • Higher-order EFT interactions
   • Higher-energy collisions
3. Algorithm Improvements:
   • Finite difference kinetic energy representation
   • Parallel rotation gates (Hamming Weight Phasing)
   • Logarithmic-depth multi-controlled gates 81
   • Gate count vs depth optimization tradeoffs
4. Alternative Encoding Schemes:
   • QEC codes beyond surface codes 82-84
   • Hardware-specific optimizations
5. Physical Applications:
   • Neutrino-nucleus scattering
   • Light nuclear fusion reactions
   • Nuclear response function calculations

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor:
   • Complete mathematical derivations and error analysis
   • Formal generalization of fermionic half-norm
   • All theorems have detailed proofs (appendices)
2. Method Innovation:
   • Novel potential block encoding design exploiting fermionic statistics
   • Clever optimization merging V₂ and V₃ implementations
   • Phase gradient state reuse reducing resource overhead
3. Experimental Completeness:
   • Systematic comparison of multiple algorithms
   • Detailed assessment using realistic physics parameters
   • Clear verification of resource scaling laws
4. Practical Value:
   • Provides feasible applications for early fault-tolerant quantum computers
   • Resource estimates specific to T gates and qubit counts
   • High implementation potential (detailed algorithm descriptions)
5. Writing Quality:
   • Clear structure with rigorous logic
   • Sufficient technical detail without redundancy
   • Effective figures supporting arguments

Weaknesses

1. Scope Limitations:
   • Only considers SU(4) symmetric case
   • Excludes spin-isospin breaking interactions
   • Assumes three-dimensional space (though generalizable)
2. Incomplete Cost Estimation:
   • Lacks detailed initial state preparation analysis
   • Observable measurement costs not discussed
   • Overall "wall-clock time" estimates missing
3. Missing Experimental Verification:
   • No small-scale quantum hardware validation
   • No direct comparison with classical simulation
   • Actual error model performance untested
4. Optimization Potential Unexplored:
   • Finite difference methods only briefly mentioned
   • Parallelization strategies insufficiently discussed
   • Hardware-specific optimizations lacking
5. Comparison Fairness:
   • Second quantization may have further optimization potential
   • Different methods may have different error models

Impact

1. Contribution to Field:
   • Significant: First proof of early feasibility for nuclear dynamics quantum simulation
   • Provides benchmark for nuclear physics quantum algorithm research
   • Advances first quantization applications in physical simulation
2. Theoretical Significance:
   • Fermionic half-norm generalization has universal value
   • Block encoding techniques applicable to other contact interaction systems
   • Resource scaling laws guide future research
3. Practical Value:
   • High: Resource estimates demonstrate early fault-tolerant quantum computer feasibility
   • Provides quantum computing application prospects for experimental physicists
   • May incentivize quantum hardware development investment
4. Reproducibility:
   • Good: Detailed algorithm descriptions with complete appendix derivations
   • Clear parameters enabling direct implementation
   • Recommendation: Open-source code implementation would greatly enhance impact

Applicable Scenarios

1. Ideal Applications:
   • Low-energy nuclear scattering (E < m_π c²)
   • Light nuclear reactions (η < 50)
   • Large volume requirement problems (Ω ≫ η)
2. Limited Scenarios:
   • High-density nuclear matter (η/Ω not small)
   • Processes requiring precise spin-isospin dependence
   • Extreme precision requirements (ϵ ≪ 10^{-3})
3. Potential Extensions:
   • Low-energy effective theories of lattice QCD
   • Cold atom systems with contact interactions
   • Other sparse fermionic systems

Relationship to Quantum Advantage

This work's position on the quantum advantage pathway:

• Near-term: Unsuitable for NISQ (requires fault tolerance)
• Medium-term: Ideal application for early fault-tolerant quantum computers
• Long-term: Establishes foundation for complete quantum simulation of nuclear physics

Key References

39 Roggero et al., PRD 101, 074038 (2020) - First pionless EFT quantum simulation 40 Watson et al., arXiv:2312.05344 - Second quantization improvement 51 Su et al., PRX Quantum 2, 040332 (2021) - Chemistry first quantization 56,57 Low & Chuang, PRL 118, 010501; Quantum 3, 163 - QSP theory 62 Su et al., Quantum 5, 495 (2021) - Fermionic half-norm 63 Childs et al., PRX 11, 011020 (2021) - Trotter error theory 67 Berry et al., PRA 110, 012612 (2024) - GQSP efficiency doubling

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality theoretical quantum algorithm paper making important contributions to nuclear physics quantum simulation. Through rigorous theoretical analysis and detailed resource estimation, it first demonstrates the feasibility of simple nuclear reaction quantum simulation on early fault-tolerant quantum computers. The methods are innovative, the analysis comprehensive, and the work significantly advances the field. Main limitations are lack of experimental verification and incomplete end-to-end cost analysis, which can be addressed in follow-up work. Recommended for publication in high-impact quantum computing or nuclear physics journals.