Sign in
← Atlas
Exact & formalOperatorsFermionic Hamiltonians

H₂ molecular qubit Hamiltonian (STO-3G, 2-qubit tapered)

The minimal-basis (STO-3G) H₂ electronic Hamiltonian after Jordan-Wigner/parity mapping and two-qubit tapering: the canonical small-molecule target for variational quantum eigensolver (VQE) demonstrations.

molecular hamiltonianvqequantum chemistryjordan-wignersto-3g

Atlas stars stay in the public catalog. Saving this entry to your workspace starts an unstarred private copy.

H₂ in a minimal basis is small enough to diagonalize exactly on a classical computer, which is precisely what makes it the standard first target for quantum chemistry on quantum hardware: every claimed VQE energy can be checked against an exact classical answer, isolating hardware and algorithmic error from basis-set error.

Circuit & simulation
Ground state (lowest eigenvalue, ≈ -1.137 Ha at R=0.7414 Å)100%
What this takes and returns
TakesNothingWhat joins here

No input port, deliberately. You measure a state with this entry; you do not apply it and pass a register on.

Nothing in the Atlas meets this end.

ReturnsNothingWhat joins here

No output port, deliberately. An observable is measured with, never applied, so there is no register to hand on.

Nothing in the Atlas meets this end.

Not a stage. You measure a state with this; you do not apply it and pass a register on. It has a width and deliberately no ports. See all 60 →

Where the map uses this

This record is an instance of an object the map names, so these are the processes that consume or produce one. None of them is about this record in particular.

Hamiltonian you can query 4 of 33 processes

How it works

In a minimal STO-3G basis, H₂ has two spatial molecular orbitals (bonding σg\sigma_g and antibonding σu\sigma_u^*), i.e. four spin-orbitals. Jordan-Wigner encoding these four spin-orbitals gives a 4-qubit fermionic Hamiltonian; applying a parity mapping and exploiting the two Z2\mathbb{Z}_2 symmetries of a fixed 2-electron singlet state (particle-number and spin-parity conservation) tapers this down to the standard 2-qubit operator

H=g0I ⁣I+g1Z0I+g2IZ1+g3Z0Z1+g4Y0Y1+g5X0X1,H = g_0\, I\!I + g_1\, Z_0 I + g_2\, I Z_1 + g_3\, Z_0 Z_1 + g_4\, Y_0 Y_1 + g_5\, X_0 X_1,

with the following coefficients (in Hartree) at the H₂ equilibrium bond length R=0.7414A˚R=0.7414\,\text{Å}, curated from O'Malley et al. (2016), Table I:

g0=0.4804,g1=0.3435,g2=0.4347,g3=0.5716,g4=g5=0.0910.g_0=-0.4804,\quad g_1=0.3435,\quad g_2=-0.4347,\quad g_3=0.5716,\quad g_4=g_5=0.0910.

Structural facts checked here. Every Pauli string appearing (II,ZI,IZ,ZZ,YY,XXII,ZI,IZ,ZZ,YY,XX) is Hermitian, and all six coefficients are real, so HH is Hermitian by construction — a property that must hold for any physical Hamiltonian and is trivial to confirm directly from the term list. The absence of any XYXY, YXYX, single-XX, or single-YY terms is a direct consequence of the residual symmetry after tapering (the untapered operator has more terms; the surviving six are exactly the ones commuting with both retained Z2\mathbb{Z}_2 symmetry generators), and is the standard structural signature of this specific reduction scheme rather than a general property of arbitrary two-qubit molecular Hamiltonians.

Provenance of the numbers. The form of the operator (six terms, this Pauli-string set) is a structural consequence of the mapping and is checked directly; the specific numeric values g0,,g5g_0,\dots,g_5 come from a classical Hartree-Fock plus configuration-interaction calculation in the literature and are curated here as literature values, not independently recomputed — this catalog verifies the mathematical object is well-formed, not the underlying quantum-chemistry calculation that produced its coefficients.

Why it is the canonical VQE target. Because the exact ground-state energy of this specific 2-qubit matrix is obtainable by classical diagonalization (trivial at 2 qubits), any VQE run on this Hamiltonian has a known correct answer to compare against — which is exactly why H₂ (and the closely related minimal-basis diatomics) became the field's de facto small-molecule benchmark for early superconducting- and photonic-qubit VQE demonstrations.

Bond-length dependence. The six coefficients above are only valid at R=0.7414A˚R=0.7414\,\text{Å}; scanning the bond length produces a different g0,,g5g_0,\dots,g_5 at each point, tracing out the H₂ potential energy surface used to validate dissociation-curve accuracy — a standard downstream use of this exact operator family.

Implementation
Native
h2_molecular_hamiltonian.py
from qiskit.quantum_info import SparsePauliOp
import numpy as np

# H2 in STO-3G, Jordan-Wigner + parity mapped, 2-qubit tapered by particle-number
# and spin-parity symmetry, at the equilibrium bond length R = 0.7414 A.
# Coefficients (Hartree) curated from O'Malley et al., "Scalable Quantum Simulation
# of Molecular Energies," Phys. Rev. X 6, 031007 (2016), arXiv:1512.06860, Table I.
h2_hamiltonian = SparsePauliOp(
    ["II", "ZI", "IZ", "ZZ", "YY", "XX"],
    [-0.4804, 0.3435, -0.4347, 0.5716, 0.0910, 0.0910],
)

matrix = h2_hamiltonian.to_matrix()
print("Hermitian:", np.allclose(matrix, matrix.conj().T))

eigvals = np.linalg.eigvalsh(matrix)
print("Eigenvalues (Hartree):", eigvals)
print("Ground-state energy:", eigvals.min())

RESULT = {"ground_state_energy_hartree": float(eigvals.min()), "eigenvalues_hartree": [float(v) for v in eigvals]}
Quantum vs classical

Classical baseline

Use a classical state-vector or matrix simulation at the same width, precision, and measurement objective.

Quantum claim

The quantum record demonstrates a state or operator behavior; it does not make classical simulation or communication costs disappear.

How to compare

Compare fidelity, samples, gate depth, noise, memory, and the cost of preparing and reading the state.

Declared gaps

Nobody has reviewed this record for gaps yet.

Literature & references
Scalable Quantum Simulation of Molecular Energies2015 · P. J. J. O'Malley, R. Babbush, I. D. Kivlichan, J. Romero, J. R. McClean, R. Barends, J. Kelly, P. Roushan, A. Tranter, N. Ding, B. Campbell, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, A. Dunsworth, A. G. Fowler, E. Jeffrey, A. Megrant, J. Y. Mutus, C. Neill, C. Quintana, D. Sank, A. Vainsencher, J. Wenner, T. C. White, P. V. Coveney, P. J. Love, H. Neven, A. Aspuru-Guzik, J. M. Martinis

Source of the 2-qubit tapered H₂ Hamiltonian coefficients used here, computed at the STO-3G equilibrium bond length.

arxiv.org/abs/1512.06860