Efficient Quantum Circuits for Coherent Conversion Between General First- and Second-Quantized Many-Body Representations

arXiv:2606.25029v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Quantum simulation at fixed particle number admits two equivalent descriptions, a first-quantized (particle) representation and a second-quantized (occupation-number) representation. Their quantum resource costs differ sharply across computational tasks, so the ability to convert coherently between them is valuable. We construct an explicit unitary $Q$, with inverse $Q^\dagger$, that maps a first-quantized state to its fixed-$N$ occupation-number form while diagnosing the input's particle-exchange symmetry. The conversion is therefore symmetry-agnostic at the input yet fully resolved at the output, and it applies uniformly to bosonic, fermionic, and parastatistical sectors. At its foundation lies a structural identification that we place at the center of this work: the quantum Schur transform supplied by Schur-Weyl duality is the non-abelian Fourier transform of the commuting pair $(S_N,U(d))$, and the occupation-number representation is its weight basis, retaining only the labels shared by both factors, the irrep $\lambda$ and the $\mathfrak{u}(d)$ weight. This reduction is lossless for bosons and fermions, while a canonical Gelfand-Tsetlin promise renders it one-to-one for the remaining sectors. Algorithmically, $Q$ composes the strong Schur transform with reversible arithmetic that computes occupations as successive row-sum differences of the Gelfand-Tsetlin pattern, yielding gate complexity $\mathrm{poly}(N,d,\log(1/\epsilon))$. The converted state is prepared efficiently in quantum memory. Any classical algorithm that outputs it explicitly, however, pays a cost set by the sector dimension, which is polynomial of degree $N$ in $d$ at fixed $N$ and exponential in $N$ when $d=\Theta(N)$. Finally, an efficient classical sampler for the induced occupation-number distribution would yield one for arbitrary quantum circuits, contrary to standard complexity assumptions.