Abstract
Programmable quantum simulators based on Rydberg atom arrays provide a versatile platform for data-driven quantum simulation of strongly correlated systems, combinatorial optimization problems, and artificial quantum materials. In this review, we present a unified perspective on how materials-inspired effective Hamiltonians can be engineered and probed in Rydberg arrays, highlighting representative phenomena such as quantum phase transitions, frustrated spin-liquid–like states, symmetry-protected topological phases, and nonequilibrium dynamics. We further discuss recent progress in machine learning-based approaches, including phase identification from experimental snapshots, neural network quantum states, Hamiltonian learning, and quantum reservoir computing. A central theme is the emergence of closed-loop classical–quantum hybrid workflows, in which quantum simulation, measurement, and classical inference are integrated through iterative feedback. These developments position Rydberg atom arrays not only as programmable simulators but also as data-driven platforms for the scalable exploration, characterization, and design of complex quantum materials.
1. Introduction
Understanding and designing strongly correlated quantum materials remains a central challenge in condensed-matter physics [1,2,3,4]. Emergent phenomena such as magnetic frustration [5,6], topological order [7,8,9], quantum criticality [10,11,12], and nonequilibrium collective dynamics [13,14,15] arise from complex many-body interactions that generate highly structured energy landscapes. In practice, the microscopic complexity of real solids is often distilled into effective lattice Hamiltonians that capture the relevant degrees of freedom and symmetries [16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23]. Yet, determining phase diagrams, ground-state structures, and dynamical response of these interacting models is frequently computationally intractable, particularly in regimes dominated by quantum fluctuations and long-range correlations.
Programmable quantum simulators offer a complementary route to this challenge by enabling direct physical realization of model Hamiltonians under controlled and tunable conditions [24,25]. Among existing platforms, Rydberg atom arrays provide a distinctive architecture combining strong and controllable interactions, flexible geometry, and single-site resolution [26,27,28,29]. Such capabilities allow systematic exploration of parameter regimes that are difficult to access in natural materials, including frustrated lattices, constrained Hilbert spaces, and driven nonequilibrium dynamics [30]. In this sense, Rydberg arrays do not reproduce specific compounds, but rather realize synthetic quantum materials in which effective spin Hamiltonians can be engineered and probed with high precision. A natural question is how such programmable Rydberg platforms can be used to simulate and explore quantum materials, bridging theoretical models and experimentally realizable systems.
From a materials perspective, the preparation of low-energy states in programmable arrays can be viewed as controlled navigation across complex many-body energy landscapes. Adiabatic evolution [31,32], variational protocols [33], and hybrid optimization schemes provide experimentally accessible pathways toward ground states while simultaneously probing spectral gaps, critical scaling, and dynamical constraints that govern quantum phase transitions. Although some of these techniques originated in the context of combinatorial optimization, they share a common formal structure with ground-state engineering in correlated matter: both involve traversing interacting Hamiltonians whose spectral properties determine accessible phases and excitations.
The rapid growth in system size and measurement resolution of Rydberg platforms generates detailed many-body datasets, including site-resolved snapshots and multi-point correlation functions. These measurements enable systematic comparison between theoretical models and experimental realizations, supporting identification of phases, inference of effective parameters, and validation of microscopic assumptions. Data-driven approaches—such as neural network representations, phase classification algorithms, and Hamiltonian learning techniques—further extend this capability by extracting structure from experimental data and refining effective descriptions [34,35]. Rather than serving solely as standalone simulators, programmable arrays can therefore be embedded within iterative classical–quantum workflows in which experimental observations inform both model selection and control strategies [36].
These interconnected elements—problem formulation, Hamiltonian encoding, quantum realization, measurement, and data-driven inference—are summarized schematically in Figure 1. As illustrated, a materials question is first mapped onto an effective Hamiltonian that captures the relevant interactions and constraints. This model is then implemented on a programmable Rydberg platform, where measurements produce bitstring-resolved snapshots of the many-body state. Learning and inference procedures analyze these data to extract structure, identify optimal configurations, and guide subsequent updates. Importantly, this process forms a dual feedback loop: experimental outcomes inform both refinement of the effective Hamiltonian (model update) and optimization of experimental control parameters (control optimization), enabling iterative improvement of both the theoretical description and its physical realization.
Figure 1.
Schematic overview of a hybrid quantum–classical workflow for materials-inspired quantum simulation. A materials problem is mapped onto an effective Hamiltonian and implemented on a programmable Rydberg atom array. Measurements produce site-resolved bitstring snapshots, which are analyzed using learning and inference methods. The results are fed back to update the model and optimize control parameters, forming a closed-loop workflow.
In this paper, we review how programmable Rydberg atom arrays can be used as a unified platform for exploring artificial quantum materials, combinatorial optimization, and data-driven quantum simulation. We present a coherent framework that integrates Hamiltonian engineering, many-body state preparation, measurement, and machine learning-based analysis, emphasizing the role of closed-loop classical–quantum hybrid workflows in enabling adaptive exploration of complex quantum systems. In this perspective, the closed-loop classical–quantum workflow introduced in Figure 1 serves as a central organizing principle of this review. Accordingly, each component—Hamiltonian encoding, quantum evolution, measurement, and data-driven inference—is discussed in terms of its role within this iterative feedback framework, highlighting how programmable Rydberg platforms enable adaptive exploration of complex quantum systems. Importantly, many of the approaches discussed in this review are closely connected to experimentally realized Rydberg platforms, providing a bridge between theoretical modeling and practical implementation.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce the physical principles underlying programmable Rydberg atom arrays, including effective Hamiltonian engineering and experimental implementation. In Section 3, we discuss how these systems can be used for ground-state engineering and combinatorial optimization, with a focus on mappings to classical energy landscapes. Section 4 reviews representative many-body phenomena realized in Rydberg platforms, including quantum phase transitions, frustrated spin-liquid–like states, symmetry-protected topological phases, and nonequilibrium dynamics. In Section 5, we present data-driven approaches to programmable quantum matter, highlighting machine learning techniques for phase identification, variational modeling, Hamiltonian learning, and quantum reservoir computing. Finally, we conclude with a perspective on closed-loop classical–quantum hybrid workflows and future directions for programmable quantum simulators.
2. Rydberg Atom Platform
Neutral-atom platforms based on optical tweezers enable deterministic trapping and manipulation of individual atoms [37]. Each atom can be initialized, coherently driven, and measured at the single-site level using precisely controlled laser fields. In particular, state-dependent fluorescence imaging allows projective measurement of individual atomic states, providing direct access to site-resolved configurations of many-body systems.
Neutral atoms excited to high-lying Rydberg states exhibit exaggerated electromagnetic properties [38,39], including strong and long-range van der Waals [40] or dipole–dipole interactions [26,41]. Figure 2a illustrates both the physical origin of these interactions and their experimental implementation. When atoms are coherently coupled between their ground state |g⟩ and a Rydberg state |r⟩ by laser fields, interactions between Rydberg excitations lead to an energy shift that depends on interatomic distance. If this interaction energy exceeds the excitation linewidth, simultaneous excitation of nearby atoms becomes energetically suppressed, giving rise to the Rydberg blockade mechanism [42,43,44,45]. As a result, the excitation dynamics of the atomic ensemble become strongly correlated [46].
Figure 2.
Experimental realization of Rydberg atom arrays for programmable quantum simulation. (a) Schematic of a neutral-atom platform implementing Rydberg blockade and an Ising-type spin Hamiltonian, including optical tweezers, Rydberg excitation lasers, and fluorescence imaging. (b) Examples of programmable Rydberg atom arrays with different geometries, including a one-dimensional chain with periodic boundary conditions (PBC), a square lattice, and a triangular lattice. Adapted from Ref. [47] under a CC-BY 4.0 license. (c) Experimental image of a two-dimensional dual-species Rydberg array composed of rubidium and caesium atoms. Adapted from Ref. [48] under a CC-BY 4.0 license.
This mechanism naturally maps onto an effective spin-1/2 description, where |g⟩ and |r⟩ define the two-level basis [49]. Coherent laser driving induces transverse and longitudinal field terms, while interactions between Rydberg excitations generate distance-dependent spin couplings. The resulting effective Hamiltonian takes the form
where and denote the local Rabi frequency and detuning, respectively, characterizes the interaction potential, is a Pauli-x operator, and [50,51,52]. This Hamiltonian corresponds to an extended Ising-type model with tunable transverse fields and long-range interactions, as schematically illustrated in Figure 2a.
Most current implementations employ alkali atoms such as rubidium or cesium, whose simple electronic structure and strong Rydberg interactions enable efficient trapping and coherent excitation [48,53,54,55]. More recently, alkaline-earth-like atoms including strontium and ytterbium have attracted attention due to their narrow optical transitions and long-lived metastable states, offering additional flexibility for state control and coherence [56,57,58,59]. While the choice of atomic species affects interaction strength and coherence properties, the underlying principles of Hamiltonian engineering remain broadly applicable.
2.1. Large-Scale and Geometry-Programmable Atomic Arrays
An important advantage of optically trapped neutral atoms is their flexible spatial arrangement [60]. Individual atoms can be assembled into defect-free arrays using optical tweezers and rearrangement protocols, enabling programmable geometries in one, two, and increasingly three dimensions [61,62,63,64,65,66]. Examples of such programmable geometries—including one-dimensional chains, square lattices, and triangular lattices—are shown in Figure 2b.
A key feature of Rydberg atom arrays is that lattice geometry itself becomes a tunable parameter. By controlling interatomic distances and connectivity, a wide range of interaction graphs can be engineered within the same experimental platform. This flexibility enables the realization of frustrated lattices and constrained Hilbert spaces, as well as the direct encoding of optimization problems into spatial configurations. It also extends to a wide range of lattice geometries, including rectangular and orthorhombic configurations, as well as more general, non-periodic arrangements.
In addition to geometric programmability, these platforms provide high-resolution measurement capabilities. After coherent evolution, atomic states are typically detected via fluorescence imaging, where atoms remaining in the ground state emit photons under resonant illumination while Rydberg-excited atoms appear dark. This mechanism enables single-site-resolved readout of many-body configurations, effectively producing bitstring snapshots of the system, as conceptually reflected in Figure 2b.
The scalability of these arrays has advanced rapidly, with experiments demonstrating coherent control of systems containing hundreds to thousands of individually addressable atoms while preserving many-body dynamics on experimentally relevant timescales [67,68]. The combination of long-range interactions, programmable geometry, and site-resolved detection establishes Rydberg atom arrays as a versatile platform for studying correlated quantum systems and implementing materials-inspired Hamiltonians. Experimental platforms have also been extended to multi-species configurations [48,55], where different atomic species can be combined within a single array to introduce additional control and interaction channels, as illustrated in Figure 2c.
2.2. Hamiltonian Engineering and Synthetic Quantum Matter
While Rydberg atom arrays naturally realize the transverse-field Ising Hamiltonian via van der Waals interactions, recent experiments have demonstrated that the accessible Hamiltonian space extends substantially beyond purely density–density interactions.
2.2.1. Resonant Dipolar XY Hamiltonians
The first major extension is the implementation of long-range XY spin models using resonant dipole–dipole interactions between Rydberg states of opposite parity. In this regime, the effective Hamiltonian takes the form of
where arises from direct dipolar exchange. The coherent propagation of a single spin excitation governed by an XY Hamiltonian was experimentally observed in a three-atom Rydberg chain without adjustable parameters. Furthermore, selective light shifts enable local control of resonance conditions, allowing one to tune atoms in and out of the resonant exchange regime dynamically. This capability introduces site-resolved control of exchange processes beyond static geometrical programmability [69,70].
2.2.2. Heisenberg XXZ Models from Dipolar Interactions
By encoding spin-1/2 degrees of freedom in two Rydberg states, the full Heisenberg XXZ Hamiltonian can be realized. The two-atom interaction matrix directly maps onto:
with and anisotropy determined by the underlying dipolar matrix elements. This type of Hamiltonian was experimentally implemented in either a frozen disordered Rydberg gas [71], programmed microwave pulses [72], and external bias fields [73]. Such manipulations can readily observe the far-from-equilibrium dynamics and glassy relaxation of total magnetization.
2.2.3. Toward Hubbard-Type Models
Beyond effective spin models, programmable Rydberg platforms have also been explored as analog simulators of more complex correlated-electron systems, including Hubbard-type models. In such approaches, the interplay between kinetic energy and interaction effects in fermionic systems can be recast into coupled degrees of freedom that are compatible with spin-like representations.
While Rydberg arrays do not directly simulate fermionic statistics, their native implementation of interacting spin Hamiltonians provides a flexible starting point for capturing essential features of Hubbard physics, such as interaction-driven correlations and collective behavior. This perspective opens a pathway toward studying strongly correlated electronic phenomena within programmable quantum simulators, without requiring a full digital encoding of fermionic degrees of freedom [74,75].
From a material perspective, the key feature of Rydberg atom arrays is not merely the presence of strong interactions but their controllability. The interaction strength, detuning, and driving amplitude can be dynamically tuned, enabling systematic exploration of different regions of parameter space within a single experimental setup. In this sense, Rydberg arrays realize synthetic quantum materials in which effective spin Hamiltonians are engineered rather than fixed by chemical composition or crystal structure. Such a microscopic Hamiltonian design enables controlled access to correlated phases and nonequilibrium regimes that are less accessible in natural materials.
3. Ground-State Engineering: From Optimization to Many-Body Energy Landscapes
The workflow introduced in Figure 1 provides a unifying perspective for understanding how programmable Rydberg platforms can be used to explore structured energy landscapes. In this section, we focus on a concrete realization of this framework through the encoding and solution of combinatorial optimization problems, and its connection to many-body physics.
3.1. Graph Encodings and Independent-Set Constraints
One of the most direct applications of programmable Rydberg atom arrays is the encoding of discrete energy landscapes associated with classical combinatorial optimization problems [76]. As illustrated in Figure 3, such problems can be mapped onto interacting atomic systems in a physically transparent manner.
Figure 3.
Implementation of the maximum independent set (MIS) problem using Rydberg atom arrays. A graph is encoded into a spatial arrangement of atoms, where edges correspond to interaction constraints mediated by the Rydberg blockade. During quantum evolution, time-dependent control parameters and drive the system toward low-energy configurations. In the final state, Rydberg excitations (red, |r⟩) correspond to selected vertices forming an independent set, while ground-state atoms (gray, |g⟩) denote unselected vertices.
A graph is first encoded into a spatial arrangement of atoms, where each atom represents a vertex . Edges are implemented by placing atoms within the Rydberg blockade radius [77], such that simultaneous excitation of neighboring sites is energetically suppressed. In this way, the blockade mechanism directly enforces the independent-set constraint at the hardware level, restricting the accessible Hilbert space to configurations without adjacent excitations.
Under strong interactions and positive detuning , the many-body ground state corresponds to the configuration that maximizes the number of Rydberg excitations while satisfying these constraints, thereby realizing a direct encoding of the maximum independent set (MIS) problem [78,79,80,81,82,83,84]. In this representation, Rydberg excitations (|r⟩) correspond to selected vertices, while ground-state atoms (|g⟩) represent unselected ones, as shown in Figure 3. This mapping is efficient because the interaction constraint is implemented natively by the underlying physics, eliminating the need for large penalty terms.
While early implementations focused on unit-disk graphs embedded in two-dimensional geometries, recent advances have expanded the accessible connectivity. Encoding schemes based on crossing lattices and local gadget constructions allow arbitrary graphs to be mapped onto unit-disk MIS instances with polynomial overhead [85]. Rydberg quantum wire architectures introduce auxiliary atoms that mediate effective long-range couplings, enabling the realization of non-planar graphs and high-degree vertices [80]. These developments demonstrate that programmable neutral-atom arrays are not restricted to geometrically local interactions but can engineer complex connectivity structures bridging abstract graph-based Hamiltonians with experimentally realizable atomic configurations. Beyond algorithmic interest, MIS-type formulations also arise in a broad range of materials-related and chemical optimization problems with pairwise incompatibility constraints [86,87,88,89,90].
3.2. Adiabatic Pathways and Spectral Gap Constraints
The encoded problem is solved through controlled quantum evolution of the interacting atomic system, as depicted in Figure 3. Time-dependent control parameters and are applied to drive the system from an initial trivial state toward a regime where interactions dominate. If the evolution is sufficiently slow compared to the inverse square of the minimum spectral gap encountered along the trajectory, the system ideally remains close to the instantaneous ground state, yielding a valid MIS solution at the end of the evolution [31,32].
From the viewpoint of correlated quantum matter, the performance of such adiabatic protocols is governed by the same spectral features that control quantum phase transitions and critical dynamics. Small spectral gaps signal enhanced correlations and critical slowing down, imposing intrinsic limits on the timescales required for ground-state preparation. Thus, adiabatic optimization and many-body critical phenomena share a common dynamical structure: both are controlled by gap closing and nonadiabatic excitations in interacting Hamiltonians.
3.3. Variational and Hybrid Schemes for Landscape Exploration
While adiabatic protocols rely on slow interpolation along predefined parameter trajectories, more flexible approaches treat the temporal profiles and as variational parameters to be optimized. In gate-based architectures, the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA) constructs trial states through alternating applications of problem and mixing Hamiltonians [33,91]. In analog Rydberg platforms, variational quantum adiabatic algorithms (VQAAs) similarly shape control fields and iteratively improve performance through classical feedback [92,93]. In these schemes, measurement outcomes—typically in the form of bitstring samples corresponding to atomic configurations—are used to evaluate solution quality and guide parameter updates.
This feedback-driven optimization directly reflects the closed-loop structure introduced in Figure 1. Measurement data not only encode candidate solutions but can also be used to refine control protocols and, more generally, improve effective model descriptions when discrepancies between theory and experiment arise. In this sense, solving combinatorial problems on programmable Rydberg arrays naturally fits within a broader paradigm of iterative learning and control, where quantum evolution, measurement, and classical inference are combined to explore complex many-body energy landscapes.
Beyond discrete optimization, programmable neutral-atom arrays have been employed to emulate materials-inspired energy models. In a thermodynamic sampling framework for nitrogen-doped graphene [94], DFT-derived formation energies were mapped onto a Rydberg Hamiltonian with uniform on-site and distance-dependent pair interactions. A global rescaling established correspondence between experimentally sampled distributions and those of the target material at an effective temperature, enabling grand-canonical control of composition via laser detuning. Complementarily, digital–analog hybrid approaches have embedded molecular electronic Hamiltonians into Rydberg registers and optimized pulse sequences to approximate ground-state energies with controlled accuracy [95]. These developments illustrate that variational and hybrid schemes extend programmable arrays beyond abstract graph problems toward physically motivated energy models relevant to materials and chemistry.
From the viewpoint of the closed-loop framework introduced in Figure 1, the measurement outcomes obtained from these protocols play a dual role: they not only encode candidate solutions to the optimization problem but also provide feedback for refining control parameters and improving subsequent state preparation. This connection highlights how ground-state engineering in Rydberg platforms naturally integrates into a feedback-driven, data-informed workflow.
5. Data-Driven Approaches to Programmable Quantum Matter
The programmability of Rydberg arrays not only enables the exploration of correlated phases and nonequilibrium dynamics but also generates large volumes of structured many-body data. As system sizes increase and experimental control becomes more sophisticated, extracting physical insight from these high-dimensional datasets becomes increasingly challenging. These developments naturally motivate data-driven approaches that leverage modern machine learning tools for the analysis, design, and control of programmable quantum matter.
5.1. Quantum Phase Identification from Experimental Snapshots
Projective measurements in programmable Rydberg atom arrays generate large ensembles of snapshot configurations, each representing a single realization of the many-body state. These data provide direct access to spatial fluctuations and correlations that are not fully captured by averaged observables. As a result, phase information is often encoded in high-dimensional statistical patterns—such as correlation functions, higher-order connected correlators, and the occurrence of local motifs—rather than in simple order parameters [127].
Figure 7a illustrates a representative data-driven workflow for extracting such structure from experimental snapshots. In a first unsupervised stage, configurations are transformed into Fourier-space features and analyzed using dimensionality-reduction and clustering techniques, producing a coarse phase diagram. This step identifies candidate regions in parameter space without relying on prior knowledge of order parameters. In a second supervised stage, real-space fluctuation maps are used to train correlation-based neural networks, which refine phase boundaries and extract physically interpretable spatial features. Notably, this workflow is directly applicable to experimentally obtained snapshot data from programmable Rydberg platforms.
Figure 7.
Data-driven analysis of many-body quantum states from experimental snapshots using machine learning. (a) Hybrid unsupervised–supervised learning pipeline applied to Rydberg atom array data, where snapshot configurations are transformed into Fourier-space features for clustering and phase identification, followed by supervised refinement using correlation-based neural networks. Reprinted from Ref. [128] under a CC-BY 4.0 license. (b) Neural network quantum state (NNQS) modeling of Rydberg systems using autoregressive architectures, enabling variational estimation of physical observables. Reprinted from Ref. [129] under a CC-BY 4.0 license.
This strategy has been experimentally implemented in programmable Rydberg atom arrays [128]. The hybrid-CCNN framework combines unsupervised clustering with supervised learning to identify both known and previously unresolved phases, including edge-ordered and nematic-like structures. Importantly, the use of real-space correlator networks enables robust phase identification in finite-size systems with open boundaries, where conventional Fourier-based diagnostics become ambiguous. At the same time, interpretation of learned features requires care, as extracted correlations may reflect both intrinsic ground-state properties and effects of nonadiabatic state preparation. Nevertheless, snapshot-based machine learning provides a systematic and scalable approach to analyzing large datasets generated by programmable quantum simulators.
5.2. Neural Network Quantum States and Variational Modeling
Beyond classification of experimental data, machine learning can also be used to construct variational representations of many-body quantum states. Neural network quantum states (NNQSs) parameterize the wave function as , where denotes a configuration and are trainable parameters optimized through variational principles. This approach replaces explicit storage of exponentially many amplitudes with a compact, learnable representation.
Numerical studies have explored the application of neural network quantum states (NNQSs) to programmable Rydberg atom arrays [129]. As illustrated in Figure 7b, autoregressive architectures such as recurrent neural networks (RNNs) enable direct sampling from the probability distribution , avoiding the need for Markov-chain sampling and improving efficiency in frustrated systems. In practice, NNQsS are combined with variational Monte Carlo methods to approximate ground states and compute physical observables, including correlation functions and entanglement measures.
In kagome-lattice geometries, RNN-based wave functions have been used to evaluate correlation functions, topological entanglement entropy, and order parameters, providing a variational characterization of the many-body state. These results suggest that regimes previously associated with exotic phases may instead be described by simpler paramagnetic states, highlighting the importance of scalable and unbiased variational methods.
Complementary developments have explored hybrid digital–analog variational schemes tailored to Rydberg hardware [130], aiming to improve robustness and reduce circuit depth. Together, these approaches establish neural network-based variational modeling as a practical tool for connecting experimental data, effective Hamiltonians, and many-body wave functions in programmable quantum systems.
5.3. Hamiltonian Learning and Device Verification
Programmable Rydberg atom arrays provide a natural setting for Hamiltonian learning, where microscopic interaction parameters are inferred directly from experimentally accessible observables. As illustrated in Figure 8a, correlation functions extracted from many-body states can be represented as graph-structured data, with nodes encoding local observables and edges encoding two-body correlations. This representation is particularly well suited for graph neural networks (GNNs), which process relational data while preserving spatial structure.
Figure 8.
(a) Hamiltonian learning using graph neural networks (GNNs), where correlation functions from many-body states are encoded as graph-structured data for inference of effective Hamiltonian parameters. Reprinted from Ref. [131] under a CC-BY 4.0 license. (b) Quantum reservoir computing (QRC) based on Rydberg atom arrays, where time-dependent inputs are encoded through external control fields and processed via a trained readout layer. Reprinted from Ref. [132] under a CC-BY 4.0 license.
Recent work has explored Hamiltonian learning in programmable Rydberg systems through numerical studies incorporating experimentally relevant parameters and imperfections [131]. These studies demonstrate that GNN-based approaches can accurately reconstruct effective transverse-field Ising Hamiltonians from correlation measurements, even in the presence of positional disorder. A key insight underlying this approach is the existence of a bijective correspondence between spin–spin correlation functions and interaction parameters, which ensures that, in principle, experimentally measured correlations uniquely determine the underlying Hamiltonian. This provides a firm theoretical foundation for data-driven Hamiltonian inference.
An important advantage of this framework is its scalability. By construction, GNN architectures are invariant to system size and can be trained on small, classically tractable arrays while generalizing to larger systems, as reflected in Figure 8a. This enables practical deployment in experimental settings, where full classical simulation is not feasible. In this sense, Hamiltonian learning becomes an inverse problem: rather than predicting observables from a known model, one reconstructs the model itself from measurement data, providing a pathway toward device calibration, verification, and feedback-based control of programmable quantum simulators.
Complementary approaches to device characterization include ancilla-assisted quantum state tomography and machine learning-based reconstruction of effective dynamics [133,134]. While these methods rely on different measurement strategies, they share a common goal with Hamiltonian learning: extracting microscopic information from experimentally accessible data. Together, these developments illustrate a broader shift toward data-driven characterization of quantum devices.
5.4. Quantum Reservoir Computing with Rydberg Atom Arrays
Beyond serving as a platform for learning physical models, Rydberg atom arrays can themselves act as computational resources. Quantum reservoir computing (QRC) leverages the intrinsic dynamics of interacting quantum systems to perform machine learning tasks [132,135]. As shown in Figure 8b, time-dependent inputs are encoded into the system through external control fields, and the resulting many-body evolution generates a high-dimensional representation of the input. A simple linear readout layer is then trained to extract the desired output.
QRC with programmable Rydberg atom arrays was first explored through numerical studies [132]. This approach extends the classical reservoir paradigm to the quantum domain, where superposition, entanglement, and nonlinear many-body dynamics enrich the representational capacity of the system [135]. In contrast to variational quantum circuits, which require optimization over many parameters, reservoir computing relies on fixed Hamiltonian dynamics and trains only a small number of readout parameters, making it well suited to noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices. Rydberg atom arrays can serve as a natural physical platform for such quantum reservoirs, as their native spin Hamiltonians realize interacting networks analogous to recurrent neural systems [132].
The physical properties of Rydberg systems further enhance their computational capabilities. Long-range interactions generate complex nonlinear dynamics, while programmable geometries enable flexible connectivity patterns. In addition, interaction signs can be engineered through atomic-state selection, allowing effective encoding of excitatory and inhibitory couplings analogous to biological neural networks [132]. In appropriate parameter regimes, collective effects such as blockade-induced constraints and weak ergodicity breaking can give rise to enhanced memory and nontrivial dynamical responses.
Numerical studies indicate that even relatively small Rydberg arrays can perform tasks such as time-series prediction, multitasking, and decision making without requiring deep circuit architectures [136,137]. These results highlight the potential of analog quantum dynamics as a computational substrate. At the same time, important questions remain regarding scalability, robustness to noise, and the extent to which quantum dynamics provide an advantage over classical reservoir models. Ongoing work exploring noise resilience, dissipative dynamics, and hybrid classical–quantum architectures suggests that these platforms may play an increasingly important role in data-driven quantum technologies [138,139]. In this sense, data-driven approaches complete the closed-loop framework by enabling systematic extraction of structure from experimental data and feeding this information back into both model construction and control optimization.
6. Perspective: Toward Closed-Loop Classical–Quantum Hybrid Workflows
Programmable Rydberg atom arrays now sit at the convergence of several traditionally distinct research directions: combinatorial optimization, correlated quantum matter, nonequilibrium dynamics, and machine learning-assisted analysis. Over the past decade, Rydberg platforms have matured into versatile programmable simulators capable of engineering tunable spin Hamiltonians and exploring emergent quantum phases at increasing system sizes [28,101]. This convergence suggests that the future of the platform may be shaped less by isolated demonstrations of quantum advantage and more by increasingly integrated classical–quantum approaches, where quantum devices operate as part of a broader computational workflow.
A natural next step is the development of closed-loop experimental workflows. In this setting, quantum simulators generate high-dimensional many-body data, which are analyzed in real time using classical machine learning models. The resulting insights—such as inferred order parameters, optimized pulse schedules, or candidate Hamiltonian parameters—are then fed back to the quantum device for subsequent iterations. This perspective directly extends the closed-loop framework introduced in Figure 1, where quantum evolution, measurement, and classical inference are integrated into an iterative feedback cycle. Reinforcement learning-based quantum control and neural network-assisted state reconstruction already illustrate elements of such hybrid strategies [140,141]. These iterative cycles transform programmable quantum simulators into adaptive scientific instruments, capable of refining control strategies and exploring phase space more efficiently than purely manual approaches. In particular, optimization-based protocols, such as those used for ground-state preparation and combinatorial problems, can naturally be embedded within such feedback loops, enabling guided navigation of complex energy landscapes.
While near-term programmable Rydberg platforms already operate successfully within the NISQ paradigm [142], several experimental bottlenecks remain. Finite coherence times constitute a primary limitation, arising from multiple sources including laser noise (intensity, frequency, and phase fluctuations), spontaneous decay from Rydberg states, and the finite temperature of the atomic ensemble. In addition, maintaining large-scale, defect-free Rydberg atom arrays over extended timescales poses significant technical challenges, particularly due to limitations in laser stability and control. These experimental constraints not only restrict accessible dynamical regimes but also directly impact data-driven approaches, as the quality and reliability of measurement data are inherently tied to the stability and fidelity of the underlying quantum platform.
Looking forward, the integration of programmable quantum matter with data-driven methodologies points toward a broader shift in how complex many-body systems are studied and engineered. As illustrated in Figure 8, learning and computation can both emerge from the intrinsic dynamics of interacting quantum systems, suggesting that quantum simulators may serve not only as platforms for realizing target Hamiltonians but also as computational resources in their own right. In this perspective, tightly integrated classical–quantum workflows provide a pragmatic route toward discovery, where analog quantum devices and classical learning algorithms jointly contribute to model building, validation, and exploration. Rydberg atom arrays exemplify this shift, functioning not only as programmable simulators but as active components in adaptive, data-driven scientific processes.
7. Conclusions
In this review, we have presented programmable Rydberg atom arrays as a unifying platform for exploring strongly correlated quantum matter, combinatorial optimization, and data-driven quantum simulation. We discussed how effective Hamiltonians can be engineered and realized experimentally, how many-body phases and nonequilibrium dynamics can be probed through site-resolved measurements, and how classical learning methods enable systematic analysis of high-dimensional experimental data. Concrete examples—including quantum phase transitions, spin-liquid–like states, symmetry-protected topological phases, and quench dynamics—illustrate the versatility of Rydberg platforms as programmable quantum simulators.
Beyond their role as experimental realizations of model Hamiltonians, Rydberg atom arrays increasingly function as components of hybrid classical–quantum workflows. A key contribution of this review is the bridge between traditionally separate areas, such as quantum simulation, materials-inspired modeling, and data-driven approaches, providing a unified framework with relevance to both fundamental studies and emerging applications. The integration of measurement, learning, and feedback enables adaptive exploration of complex energy landscapes and provides new avenues for Hamiltonian inference and quantum-enhanced computation. Together, these developments suggest that programmable quantum matter, combined with data-driven methodologies, offers a promising route toward scalable investigation and control of complex many-body systems.
Funding
This research was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) under Grant No. RS-2024-00337653, funded by the Korea government (MSIT).
Data Availability Statement
No new data were created or analyzed in this study. Data sharing is not applicable to this article.
Conflicts of Interest
The author declares no conflicts of interest.
References
- Dagotto, E. Correlated electrons in high-temperature superconductors. Rev. Mod. Phys. 1994, 66, 763–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Keimer, B.; Moore, J.E. The physics of quantum materials. Nat. Phys. 2017, 13, 1045–1055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Defenu, N.; Donner, T.; Macrì, T.; Pagano, G.; Ruffo, S.; Trombettoni, A. Long-range interacting quantum systems. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2023, 95, 35002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Tokura, Y. Quantum materials at the crossroads of strong correlation and topology. Nat. Mater. 2022, 21, 971–973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Ramirez, A.P. Strongly Geometrically Frustrated Magnets. Annu. Rev. Mater. Res. 1994, 24, 453–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moessner, R.; Ramirez, A.P. Geometrical frustration. Phys. Today 2006, 59, 24–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Wen, X.G. Topological orders in rigid states. Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 1990, 4, 239–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Levin, M.; Wen, X.G. Detecting Topological Order in a Ground State Wave Function. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2006, 96, 110405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Wen, X.G. Colloquium: Zoo of quantum-topological phases of matter. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2017, 89, 041004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Coleman, P.; Schofield, A.J. Quantum criticality. Nature 2005, 433, 226–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Sachdev, S. Quantum magnetism and criticality. Nat. Phys. 2008, 4, 173–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Sachdev, S.; Keimer, B. Quantum criticality. Phys. Today 2011, 64, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Polkovnikov, A.; Sengupta, K.; Silva, A.; Vengalattore, M. Colloquium: Nonequilibrium dynamics of closed interacting quantum systems. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2011, 83, 863–883. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- D’Alessio, L.; Kafri, Y.; Polkovnikov, A.; Rigol, M. From quantum chaos and eigenstate thermalization to statistical mechanics and thermodynamics. Adv. Phys. 2016, 65, 239–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Heyl, M. Dynamical quantum phase transitions: A review. Rep. Prog. Phys. 2018, 81, 54001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Hohenberg, P.; Kohn, W. Inhomogeneous Electron Gas. Phys. Rev. 1964, 136, B864–B871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kohn, W.; Sham, L.J. Self-Consistent Equations Including Exchange and Correlation Effects. Phys. Rev. 1965, 140, A1133–A1138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Ceperley, D.M.; Alder, B.J. Ground State of the Electron Gas by a Stochastic Method. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1980, 45, 566–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Jones, R.O. Density functional theory: Its origins, rise to prominence, and future. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2015, 87, 897–923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Metropolis, N.; Rosenbluth, A.W.; Rosenbluth, M.N.; Teller, A.H.; Teller, E. Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines. J. Chem. Phys. 1953, 21, 1087–1092. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- McMillan, W.L. Ground State of Liquid He4. Phys. Rev. 1965, 138, A442–A451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Hastings, W.K. Monte Carlo sampling methods using Markov chains and their applications. Biometrika 1970, 57, 97–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Anderson, J.B. A Random-Walk Simulation of the Schrödinger Equation: . J. Chem. Phys. 1975, 63, 1499–1503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Georgescu, I.M.; Ashhab, S.; Nori, F. Quantum simulation. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2014, 86, 153–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Daley, A.J.; Bloch, I.; Kokail, C.; Flannigan, S.; Pearson, N.; Troyer, M.; Zoller, P. Practical quantum advantage in quantum simulation. Nature 2022, 607, 667–676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Saffman, M.; Walker, T.G.; Mølmer, K. Quantum information with Rydberg atoms. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2010, 82, 2313–2363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Saffman, M. Quantum computing with atomic qubits and Rydberg interactions: Progress and challenges. J. Phys. B At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 2016, 49, 202001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Browaeys, A.; Lahaye, T. Many-body physics with individually controlled Rydberg atoms. Nat. Phys. 2020, 16, 132–142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Morgado, M.; Whitlock, S. Quantum simulation and computing with Rydberg-interacting qubits. AVS Quantum Sci. 2021, 3, 23501. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Weimer, H.; Müller, M.; Lesanovsky, I.; Zoller, P.; Büchler, H.P. A Rydberg quantum simulator. Nat. Phys. 2010, 6, 382–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Farhi, E.; Goldstone, J.; Gutmann, S.; Sipser, M. Quantum Computation by Adiabatic Evolution. arXiv 2000, arXiv:quant-ph/0001106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Albash, T.; Lidar, D.A. Adiabatic quantum computation. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2018, 90, 15002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Farhi, E.; Goldstone, J.; Gutmann, S. A Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm. arXiv 2014, arXiv:1411.4028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Henry, L.P.; Thabet, S.; Dalyac, C.; Henriet, L. Quantum evolution kernel: Machine learning on graphs with programmable arrays of qubits. Phys. Rev. A 2021, 104, 032416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Albrecht, B.; Dalyac, C.; Leclerc, L.; Ortiz-Gutiérrez, L.; Thabet, S.; D’Arcangelo, M.; Cline, J.R.K.; Elfving, V.E.; Lassablière, L.; Silvério, H.; et al. Quantum feature maps for graph machine learning on a neutral atom quantum processor. Phys. Rev. A 2023, 107, 042615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zheng, M.; Zeng, J.; Yang, W.; Chang, P.J.; Lu, Q.; Yan, B.; Zhang, H.; Wang, M.; Wei, S.; Long, G.L. Quantum-classical hybrid algorithm for solving the learning-with-errors problem on NISQ devices. Commun. Phys. 2025, 8, 208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Schlosser, N.; Reymond, G.; Protsenko, I.; Grangier, P. Sub-poissonian loading of single atoms in a microscopic dipole trap. Nature 2001, 411, 1024–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Gallagher, T.F. Rydberg Atoms; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1994. [Google Scholar]
- Lim, J.; Lee, H.G.; Ahn, J. Review of cold Rydberg atoms and their applications. J. Korean Phys. Soc. 2013, 63, 867–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Béguin, L.; Vernier, A.; Chicireanu, R.; Lahaye, T.; Browaeys, A. Direct Measurement of the van der Waals Interaction between Two Rydberg Atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013, 110, 263201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Browaeys, A.; Barredo, D.; Lahaye, T. Experimental investigations of dipole–dipole interactions between a few Rydberg atoms. J. Phys. B At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 2016, 49, 152001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Jaksch, D.; Cirac, J.I.; Zoller, P.; Rolston, S.L.; Côté, R.; Lukin, M.D. Fast Quantum Gates for Neutral Atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2000, 85, 2208–2211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lukin, M.D.; Fleischhauer, M.; Cote, R.; Duan, L.M.; Jaksch, D.; Cirac, J.I.; Zoller, P. Dipole Blockade and Quantum Information Processing in Mesoscopic Atomic Ensembles. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2001, 87, 37901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Urban, E.; Johnson, T.A.; Henage, T.; Isenhower, L.; Yavuz, D.D.; Walker, T.G.; Saffman, M. Observation of Rydberg blockade between two atoms. Nat. Phys. 2009, 5, 110–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Gaëtan, A.; Miroshnychenko, Y.; Wilk, T.; Chotia, A.; Viteau, M.; Comparat, D.; Pillet, P.; Browaeys, A.; Grangier, P. Observation of collective excitation of two individual atoms in the Rydberg blockade regime. Nat. Phys. 2009, 5, 115–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Wilk, T.; Gaëtan, A.; Evellin, C.; Wolters, J.; Miroshnychenko, Y.; Grangier, P.; Browaeys, A. Entanglement of Two Individual Neutral Atoms Using Rydberg Blockade. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 104, 10502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lienhard, V.; de Léséleuc, S.; Barredo, D.; Lahaye, T.; Browaeys, A.; Schuler, M.; Henry, L.P.; Läuchli, A.M. Observing the Space- and Time-Dependent Growth of Correlations in Dynamically Tuned Synthetic Ising Models with Antiferromagnetic Interactions. Phys. Rev. X 2018, 8, 21070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Singh, K.; Anand, S.; Pocklington, A.; Kemp, J.T.; Bernien, H. Dual-Element, Two-Dimensional Atom Array with Continuous-Mode Operation. Phys. Rev. X 2022, 12, 11040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- de Léséleuc, S.; Weber, S.; Lienhard, V.; Barredo, D.; Büchler, H.P.; Lahaye, T.; Browaeys, A. Accurate Mapping of Multilevel Rydberg Atoms on Interacting Spin-$1/2$ Particles for the Quantum Simulation of Ising Models. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018, 120, 113602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Labuhn, H.; Barredo, D.; Ravets, S.; de Léséleuc, S.; Macrì, T.; Lahaye, T.; Browaeys, A. Tunable two-dimensional arrays of single Rydberg atoms for realizing quantum Ising models. Nature 2016, 534, 667–670. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Schauss, P. Quantum simulation of transverse Ising models with Rydberg atoms. Quantum Sci. Technol. 2018, 3, 23001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, M.; Song, Y.; Kim, J.; Ahn, J. Quantum Ising Hamiltonian Programming in Trio, Quartet, and Sextet Qubit Systems. PRX Quantum 2020, 1, 20323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Graham, T.M.; Song, Y.; Scott, J.; Poole, C.; Phuttitarn, L.; Jooya, K.; Eichler, P.; Jiang, X.; Marra, A.; Grinkemeyer, B.; et al. Multi-qubit entanglement and algorithms on a neutral-atom quantum computer. Nature 2022, 604, 457–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Singh, K.; Bradley, C.E.; Anand, S.; Ramesh, V.; White, R.; Bernien, H. Mid-circuit correction of correlated phase errors using an array of spectator qubits. Science 2023, 380, 1265–1269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Anand, S.; Bradley, C.E.; White, R.; Ramesh, V.; Singh, K.; Bernien, H. A dual-species Rydberg array. Nat. Phys. 2024, 20, 1744–1750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Cooper, A.; Covey, J.P.; Madjarov, I.S.; Porsev, S.G.; Safronova, M.S.; Endres, M. Alkaline-Earth Atoms in Optical Tweezers. Phys. Rev. X 2018, 8, 41055. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Madjarov, I.S.; Covey, J.P.; Shaw, A.L.; Choi, J.; Kale, A.; Cooper, A.; Pichler, H.; Schkolnik, V.; Williams, J.R.; Endres, M. High-fidelity entanglement and detection of alkaline-earth Rydberg atoms. Nat. Phys. 2020, 16, 857–861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Jenkins, A.; Lis, J.W.; Senoo, A.; McGrew, W.F.; Kaufman, A.M. Ytterbium Nuclear-Spin Qubits in an Optical Tweezer Array. Phys. Rev. X 2022, 12, 21027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Peper, M.; Li, Y.; Knapp, D.Y.; Bileska, M.; Ma, S.; Liu, G.; Peng, P.; Zhang, B.; Horvath, S.P.; Burgers, A.P.; et al. Spectroscopy and Modeling of 171Yb Rydberg States for High-Fidelity Two-Qubit Gates. Phys. Rev. X 2025, 15, 11009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Nogrette, F.; Labuhn, H.; Ravets, S.; Barredo, D.; Béguin, L.; Vernier, A.; Lahaye, T.; Browaeys, A. Single-Atom Trapping in Holographic 2D Arrays of Microtraps with Arbitrary Geometries. Phys. Rev. X 2014, 4, 21034. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Endres, M.; Bernien, H.; Keesling, A.; Levine, H.; Anschuetz, E.R.; Krajenbrink, A.; Senko, C.; Vuletic, V.; Greiner, M.; Lukin, M.D. Atom-by-atom assembly of defect-free one-dimensional cold atom arrays. Science 2016, 354, 1024–1027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Barredo, D.; de Léséleuc, S.; Lienhard, V.; Lahaye, T.; Browaeys, A. An atom-by-atom assembler of defect-free arbitrary two-dimensional atomic arrays. Science 2016, 354, 1021–1023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, H.; Kim, M.; Lee, W.; Ahn, J. Gerchberg-Saxton algorithm for fast and efficient atom rearrangement in optical tweezer traps. Opt. Express 2019, 27, 2184–2196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Barredo, D.; Lienhard, V.; de Léséleuc, S.; Lahaye, T.; Browaeys, A. Synthetic three-dimensional atomic structures assembled atom by atom. Nature 2018, 561, 79–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Lin, R.; Zhong, H.S.; Li, Y.; Zhao, Z.R.; Zheng, L.T.; Hu, T.R.; Wu, H.M.; Wu, Z.; Ma, W.J.; Gao, Y.; et al. AI-Enabled Parallel Assembly of Thousands of Defect-Free Neutral Atom Arrays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2025, 135, 60602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Schymik, K.N.; Lienhard, V.; Barredo, D.; Scholl, P.; Williams, H.; Browaeys, A.; Lahaye, T. Enhanced atom-by-atom assembly of arbitrary tweezer arrays. Phys. Rev. A 2020, 102, 63107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Manetsch, H.J.; Nomura, G.; Bataille, E.; Lv, X.; Leung, K.H.; Endres, M. A tweezer array with 6,100 highly coherent atomic qubits. Nature 2025, 647, 60–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Chiu, N.C.; Trapp, E.C.; Guo, J.; Abobeih, M.H.; Stewart, L.M.; Hollerith, S.; Stroganov, P.L.; Kalinowski, M.; Geim, A.A.; Evered, S.J.; et al. Continuous operation of a coherent 3000-qubit system. Nature 2025, 646, 1075–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Barredo, D.; Labuhn, H.; Ravets, S.; Lahaye, T.; Browaeys, A.; Adams, C.S. Coherent Excitation Transfer in a Spin Chain of Three Rydberg Atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015, 114, 113002. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- de Léséleuc, S.; Barredo, D.; Lienhard, V.; Browaeys, A.; Lahaye, T. Optical Control of the Resonant Dipole-Dipole Interaction between Rydberg Atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017, 119, 53202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Signoles, A.; Franz, T.; Ferracini Alves, R.; Gärttner, M.; Whitlock, S.; Zürn, G.; Weidemüller, M. Glassy Dynamics in a Disordered Heisenberg Quantum Spin System. Phys. Rev. X 2021, 11, 11011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Scholl, P.; Williams, H.J.; Bornet, G.; Wallner, F.; Barredo, D.; Henriet, L.; Signoles, A.; Hainaut, C.; Franz, T.; Geier, S.; et al. Microwave Engineering of Programmable XXZ Hamiltonians in Arrays of Rydberg Atoms. PRX Quantum 2022, 3, 20303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kunimi, M.; Tomita, T. Proposal for realizing Heisenberg-type quantum-spin models in Rydberg-atom quantum simulators. Phys. Rev. A 2025, 112, L051301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Michel, A.; Henriet, L.; Domain, C.; Browaeys, A.; Ayral, T. Hubbard physics with Rydberg atoms: Using a quantum spin simulator to simulate strong fermionic correlations. Phys. Rev. B 2024, 109, 174409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Julià-Farré, S.; Michel, A.; Domain, C.; Mikael, J.; Lafoucriere, J.C.; Vovrosh, J.; Chahlaoui, A.; Claveau, D.; Villaret, G.; Hond, J.D.; et al. Hybrid quantum-classical analog simulation of two-dimensional Fermi-Hubbard models with neutral atoms. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2510.05897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lucas, A. Ising formulations of many NP problems. Front. Phys. 2014, 2, 74887. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, M.; Ahn, J.; Song, Y.; Moon, J.; Jeong, H. Quantum computing with Rydberg atom graphs. J. Korean Phys. Soc. 2023, 82, 827–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Pichler, H.; Wang, S.T.; Zhou, L.; Choi, S.; Lukin, M.D. Quantum Optimization for Maximum Independent Set Using Rydberg Atom Arrays. arXiv 2018, arXiv:1808.10816. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Ebadi, S.; Keesling, A.; Cain, M.; Wang, T.T.; Levine, H.; Bluvstein, D.; Semeghini, G.; Omran, A.; Liu, J.G.; Samajdar, R.; et al. Quantum optimization of maximum independent set using Rydberg atom arrays. Science 2022, 376, 1209–1215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, M.; Kim, K.; Hwang, J.; Moon, E.G.; Ahn, J. Rydberg quantum wires for maximum independent set problems. Nat. Phys. 2022, 18, 755–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Byun, A.; Kim, M.; Ahn, J. Finding the Maximum Independent Sets of Platonic Graphs Using Rydberg Atoms. PRX Quantum 2022, 3, 30305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Dalyac, C.; Henry, L.P.; Kim, M.; Ahn, J.; Henriet, L. Exploring the impact of graph locality for the resolution of the maximum-independent-set problem with neutral atom devices. Phys. Rev. A 2023, 108, 52423. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, K.; Kim, M.; Park, J.; Byun, A.; Ahn, J. Quantum computing dataset of maximum independent set problem on king lattice of over hundred Rydberg atoms. Sci. Data 2024, 11, 111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- de Oliveira, A.G.; Diamond-Hitchcock, E.; Walker, D.M.; Wells-Pestell, M.T.; Pelegrí, G.; Picken, C.J.; Malcolm, G.P.A.; Daley, A.J.; Bass, J.; Pritchard, J.D. Demonstration of Weighted-Graph Optimization on a Rydberg-Atom Array Using Local Light Shifts. PRX Quantum 2025, 6, 10301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Nguyen, M.T.; Liu, J.G.; Wurtz, J.; Lukin, M.D.; Wang, S.T.; Pichler, H. Quantum Optimization with Arbitrary Connectivity Using Rydberg Atom Arrays. PRX Quantum 2023, 4, 10316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Jeong, S.; Kim, M.; Hhan, M.; Park, J.; Ahn, J. Quantum programming of the satisfiability problem with Rydberg atom graphs. Phys. Rev. Res. 2023, 5, 43037. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Park, J.; Jeong, S.; Kim, M.; Kim, K.; Byun, A.; Vignoli, L.; Henry, L.P.; Henriet, L.; Ahn, J. Rydberg-atom experiment for the integer factorization problem. Phys. Rev. Res. 2024, 6, 23241. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Byun, A.; Jung, J.; Kim, K.; Kim, M.; Jeong, S.; Jeong, H.; Ahn, J. Rydberg-Atom Graphs for Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization Problems. Adv. Quantum Technol. 2024, 7, 2300398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Leclerc, L.; Dalyac, C.; Bendotti, P.; Griset, R.; Mikael, J.; Henriet, L. Implementing transferable annealing protocols for combinatorial optimization on neutral-atom quantum processors: A case study on smart charging of electric vehicles. Phys. Rev. A 2025, 111, 32611. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- D’Arcangelo, M.; Henry, L.P.; Henriet, L.; Loco, D.; Gouraud, N.; Angebault, S.; Sueiro, J.; Forêt, J.; Monmarché, P.; Piquemal, J.P. Leveraging analog quantum computing with neutral atoms for solvent configuration prediction in drug discovery. Phys. Rev. Res. 2024, 6, 43020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zhou, L.; Wang, S.T.; Choi, S.; Pichler, H.; Lukin, M.D. Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm: Performance, Mechanism, and Implementation on Near-Term Devices. Phys. Rev. X 2020, 10, 21067. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Schiffer, B.F.; Tura, J.; Cirac, J.I. Adiabatic Spectroscopy and a Variational Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm. PRX Quantum 2022, 3, 20347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Bombieri, L.; Zeng, Z.; Tricarico, R.; Lin, R.; Notarnicola, S.; Cain, M.; Lukin, M.D.; Pichler, H. Quantum Adiabatic Optimization with Rydberg Arrays: Localization Phenomena and Encoding Strategies. PRX Quantum 2025, 6, 20306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Camino, B.; Lin, M.; Buckeridge, J.; Woodley, S.M. Thermodynamic sampling of materials using neutral-atom quantum computers. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2512.21142. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Michel, A.; Grijalva, S.; Henriet, L.; Domain, C.; Browaeys, A. Blueprint for a digital-analog variational quantum eigensolver using Rydberg atom arrays. Phys. Rev. A 2023, 107, 42602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Sachdev, S. Quantum Phase Transitions; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Zurek, W.H.; Dorner, U.; Zoller, P. Dynamics of a Quantum Phase Transition. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 95, 105701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Vojta, M. Quantum phase transitions. Rep. Prog. Phys. 2003, 66, 2069. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Bernien, H.; Schwartz, S.; Keesling, A.; Levine, H.; Omran, A.; Pichler, H.; Choi, S.; Zibrov, A.S.; Endres, M.; Greiner, M.; et al. Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator. Nature 2017, 551, 579–584. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Keesling, A.; Omran, A.; Levine, H.; Bernien, H.; Pichler, H.; Choi, S.; Samajdar, R.; Schwartz, S.; Silvi, P.; Sachdev, S.; et al. Quantum Kibble–Zurek mechanism and critical dynamics on a programmable Rydberg simulator. Nature 2019, 568, 207–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Ebadi, S.; Wang, T.T.; Levine, H.; Keesling, A.; Semeghini, G.; Omran, A.; Bluvstein, D.; Samajdar, R.; Pichler, H.; Ho, W.W.; et al. Quantum phases of matter on a 256-atom programmable quantum simulator. Nature 2021, 595, 227–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Scholl, P.; Schuler, M.; Williams, H.J.; Eberharter, A.A.; Barredo, D.; Schymik, K.N.; Lienhard, V.; Henry, L.P.; Lang, T.C.; Lahaye, T.; et al. Quantum simulation of 2D antiferromagnets with hundreds of Rydberg atoms. Nature 2021, 595, 233–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Samajdar, R.; Ho, W.W.; Pichler, H.; Lukin, M.D.; Sachdev, S. Quantum phases of Rydberg atoms on a kagome lattice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e2015785118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Samajdar, R.; Ho, W.W.; Pichler, H.; Lukin, M.D.; Sachdev, S. Complex Density Wave Orders and Quantum Phase Transitions in a Model of Square-Lattice Rydberg Atom Arrays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2020, 124, 103601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, K.; Chang, M.S.; Korenblit, S.; Islam, R.; Edwards, E.E.; Freericks, J.K.; Lin, G.D.; Duan, L.M.; Monroe, C. Quantum simulation of frustrated Ising spins with trapped ions. Nature 2010, 465, 590–593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Dziarmaga, J. Dynamics of a Quantum Phase Transition: Exact Solution of the Quantum Ising Model. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2005, 95, 245701. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zhang, T.; Wang, H.; Zhang, W.; Wang, Y.; Du, A.; Li, Z.; Wu, Y.; Li, C.; Hu, J.; Zhai, H.; et al. Observation of Near-Critical Kibble-Zurek Scaling in Rydberg Atom Arrays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2025, 135, 93403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zhou, Y.; Kanoda, K.; Ng, T.K. Quantum spin liquid states. Rev. Mod. Phys. 2017, 89, 25003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Han, T.H.; Helton, J.S.; Chu, S.; Nocera, D.G.; Rodriguez-Rivera, J.A.; Broholm, C.; Lee, Y.S. Fractionalized excitations in the spin-liquid state of a kagome-lattice antiferromagnet. Nature 2012, 492, 406–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Fu, M.; Imai, T.; Han, T.H.; Lee, Y.S. Evidence for a gapped spin-liquid ground state in a kagome Heisenberg antiferromagnet. Science 2015, 350, 655–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Semeghini, G.; Levine, H.; Keesling, A.; Ebadi, S.; Wang, T.T.; Bluvstein, D.; Verresen, R.; Pichler, H.; Kalinowski, M.; Samajdar, R.; et al. Probing topological spin liquids on a programmable quantum simulator. Science 2021, 374, 1242–1247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Samajdar, R.; Joshi, D.G.; Teng, Y.; Sachdev, S. Emergent Z2 Gauge Theories and Topological Excitations in Rydberg Atom Arrays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2023, 130, 43601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Giudici, G.; Lukin, M.D.; Pichler, H. Dynamical Preparation of Quantum Spin Liquids in Rydberg Atom Arrays. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2022, 129, 90401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Kornjača, M.; Samajdar, R.; Macrì, T.; Gemelke, N.; Wang, S.T.; Liu, F. Trimer quantum spin liquid in a honeycomb array of Rydberg atoms. Commun. Phys. 2023, 6, 358. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Senthil, T. Symmetry-Protected Topological Phases of Quantum Matter. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 2015, 6, 299–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- de Léséleuc, S.; Lienhard, V.; Scholl, P.; Barredo, D.; Weber, S.; Lang, N.; Büchler, H.P.; Lahaye, T.; Browaeys, A. Observation of a symmetry-protected topological phase of interacting bosons with Rydberg atoms. Science 2019, 365, 775–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Yue, Z.; Mao, Y.F.; Liang, X.; Hua, Z.X.; Ge, P.; Chao, Y.X.; Li, K.; Jia, C.; Tey, M.K.; Xu, Y.; et al. Observation of average topological phase in disordered Rydberg atom array. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2505.06286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Chen, C.; Emperauger, G.; Bornet, G.; Caleca, F.; Gély, B.; Bintz, M.; Chatterjee, S.; Liu, V.; Barredo, D.; Yao, N.Y.; et al. Spectroscopy of elementary excitations from quench dynamics in a dipolar XY Rydberg simulator. Science 2025, 389, 483–487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lieb, E.H.; Robinson, D.W. The finite group velocity of quantum spin systems. Commun. Math. Phys. 1972, 28, 251–257. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Mitra, A. Quantum Quench Dynamics. Annu. Rev. Condens. Matter Phys. 2018, 9, 245–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Deutsch, J.M. Quantum statistical mechanics in a closed system. Phys. Rev. A 1991, 43, 2046–2049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Srednicki, M. Chaos and quantum thermalization. Phys. Rev. E 1994, 50, 888–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Rigol, M.; Dunjko, V.; Olshanii, M. Thermalization and its mechanism for generic isolated quantum systems. Nature 2008, 452, 854–858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, H.; Park, Y.; Kim, K.; Sim, H.S.; Ahn, J. Detailed Balance of Thermalization Dynamics in Rydberg-Atom Quantum Simulators. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2018, 120, 180502. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, K.; Yang, F.; Mølmer, K.; Ahn, J. Realization of an Extremely Anisotropic Heisenberg Magnet in Rydberg Atom Arrays. Phys. Rev. X 2024, 14, 11025. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Bluvstein, D.; Omran, A.; Levine, H.; Keesling, A.; Semeghini, G.; Ebadi, S.; Wang, T.T.; Michailidis, A.A.; Maskara, N.; Ho, W.W.; et al. Controlling quantum many-body dynamics in driven Rydberg atom arrays. Science 2021, 371, 1355–1359. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
- Carrasquilla, J. Machine learning for quantum matter. Adv. Phys. X 2020, 5, 1797528. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Miles, C.; Samajdar, R.; Ebadi, S.; Wang, T.T.; Pichler, H.; Sachdev, S.; Lukin, M.D.; Greiner, M.; Weinberger, K.Q.; Kim, E.A. Machine learning discovery of new phases in programmable quantum simulator snapshots. Phys. Rev. Res. 2023, 5, 13026. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Hibat-Allah, M.; Merali, E.; Torlai, G.; Melko, R.G.; Carrasquilla, J. Recurrent neural network wave functions for Rydberg atom arrays on kagome lattice. Commun. Phys. 2025, 8, 308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Lu, J.Z.; Jiao, L.; Wolinski, K.; Kornjača, M.; Hu, H.Y.; Cantu, S.; Liu, F.; Yelin, S.F.; Wang, S.T. Digital–analog quantum learning on Rydberg atom arrays. Quantum Sci. Technol. 2024, 10, 15038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Simard, O.; Dawid, A.; Tindall, J.; Ferrero, M.; Sengupta, A.M.; Georges, A. Learning Interactions between Rydberg Atoms. PRX Quantum 2025, 6, 30324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Bravo, R.A.; Najafi, K.; Gao, X.; Yelin, S.F. Quantum Reservoir Computing Using Arrays of Rydberg Atoms. PRX Quantum 2022, 3, 30325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Kim, K.; Ahn, J. Quantum Tomography of Rydberg Atom Graphs by Configurable Ancillas. PRX Quantum 2023, 4, 20316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Mukherjee, K.; Schachenmayer, J.; Whitlock, S.; Wüster, S. Quantum network tomography of small Rydberg arrays by machine learning. Phys. Rev. A 2025, 111, 43319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Mujal, P.; Martínez-Peña, R.; Nokkala, J.; García-Beni, J.; Giorgi, G.L.; Soriano, M.C.; Zambrini, R. Opportunities in Quantum Reservoir Computing and Extreme Learning Machines. Adv. Quantum Technol. 2021, 4, 2100027. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Llodrà, G.; Mujal, P.; Zambrini, R.; Giorgi, G.L. Quantum reservoir computing in atomic lattices. arXiv 2024, arXiv:2411.13401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Zhu, C.; Ehlers, P.J.; Nurdin, H.I.; Soh, D. Minimalistic and scalable quantum reservoir computing enhanced with feedback. Npj Quantum Inf. 2025, 11, 195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Sannia, A.; Martínez-Peña, R.; Soriano, M.C.; Giorgi, G.L.; Zambrini, R. Dissipation as a resource for Quantum Reservoir Computing. Quantum 2024, 8, 1291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Tariq, S.; Talha, M.; Chatzinotas, S.; Shin, H. Towards Quantum Enhanced Adversarial Robustness with Rydberg Reservoir Learning. arXiv 2025, arXiv:2510.13473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Bukov, M.; Day, A.G.R.; Sels, D.; Weinberg, P.; Polkovnikov, A.; Mehta, P. Reinforcement Learning in Different Phases of Quantum Control. Phys. Rev. X 2018, 8, 31086. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Torlai, G.; Timar, B.; van Nieuwenburg, E.P.L.; Levine, H.; Omran, A.; Keesling, A.; Bernien, H.; Greiner, M.; Vuletić, V.; Lukin, M.D.; et al. Integrating Neural Networks with a Quantum Simulator for State Reconstruction. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2019, 123, 230504. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
- Preskill, J. Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond. Quantum 2018, 2, 79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2026 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license.







