<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Critical Limitations in Quantum-Selected Configuration Interaction Methods · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2501.07231/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:27:26 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2501.07231/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Critical Limitations in Quantum-Selected Configuration Interaction Methods — HN submission</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49203707</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:submission:2501.07231:49203707</guid><pubDate>Thu, 06 Aug 2026 22:50:09 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Spin audit of SQD/QSCI quantum-chemistry benchmarks on iron–sulfur clusters&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Author here. Background, for anyone who hasn&amp;#x27;t followed this fight: IBM&amp;#x27;s iron–sulfur SQD results (Sci. Adv. 2025) are one of the flagship &amp;quot;quantum computers are useful for chemistry now&amp;quot; claims, and a published critique (arXiv:2501.07231) argues the quantum samples never beat classical selected-CI at matched cost. That argument is still live. Both sides have been arguing about energies. Neither measured which electronic state these calculations actually converge to. So I measured it. ⟨S²⟩ comes out between 4.7 and 7.0 depending on the system and the subspace size, where the target these…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;19 points; 1 discussion reply on HN. &lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2501.07231/"&gt;Paper and source history&lt;/a&gt;. A submission is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>physics.chem-ph</category></item><item><title>Critical Limitations in Quantum-Selected Configuration Interaction Methods — HN submission</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49097083</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:submission:2501.07231:49097083</guid><pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 13:13:16 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;Spin audit of SQD/QSCI quantum-chemistry benchmarks on iron–sulfur clusters&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Author here. Background, for anyone who hasn&amp;#x27;t followed this fight: IBM&amp;#x27;s iron–sulfur SQD results (Sci. Adv. 2025) are one of the flagship &amp;quot;quantum computers are useful for chemistry now&amp;quot; claims, and a published critique (arXiv:2501.07231) argues the quantum samples never beat classical selected-CI at matched cost. That argument is still live. Both sides have been arguing about energies. Neither measured which electronic state these calculations actually converge to. So I measured it. ⟨S²⟩ comes out between 4.7 and 7.0 depending on the system and the subspace size, where the target these…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;9 points; 6 discussion replies on HN. &lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2501.07231/"&gt;Paper and source history&lt;/a&gt;. A submission is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>physics.chem-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
