The next few years will be exciting as prototype universal quantum processors emerge, enabling the implementation of a wider variety of algorithms. Of particular interest are quantum heuristics, which require experimentation on quantum hardware for their evaluation and which have the potential to significantly expand the breadth of applications for which quantum computers have an established advantage. A leading candidate is Farhi et al.'s quantum approximate optimization algorithm, which alternates between applying a cost function based Hamiltonian and a mixing Hamiltonian. Here, we extend this framework to allow alternation between more general families of operators. The essence of this extension, the quantum alternating operator ansatz, is the consideration of general parameterized families of unitaries rather than only those corresponding to the time evolution under a fixed local Hamiltonian for a time specified by the parameter. This ansatz supports the representation of a larger, and potentially more useful, set of states than the original formulation, with potential long-term impact on a broad array of application areas. For cases that call for mixing only within a desired subspace, refocusing on unitaries rather than Hamiltonians enables more efficiently implementable mixers than was possible in the original framework. Such mixers are particularly useful for optimization problems with hard constraints that must always be satisfied, defining a feasible subspace, and soft constraints whose violation we wish to minimize. More efficient implementation enables earlier experimental exploration of an alternating operator approach, in the spirit of the quantum approximate optimization algorithm, to a wide variety of approximate optimization, exact optimization, and sampling problems. In addition to introducing the quantum alternating operator ansatz, we lay out design criteria for mixing operators, detail mappings for eight problems, and provide a compendium with brief descriptions of mappings for a diverse array of problems.
Farhi et al. recently proposed a class of quantum algorithms, the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA), for approximately solving combinatorial optimization problems. A level-p QAOA circuit consists of p steps; in each step a classical Hamiltonian, derived from the cost function, is applied followed by a mixing Hamiltonian. The 2p times for which these two Hamiltonians are applied are the parameters of the algorithm, which are to be optimized classically for the best performance. As p increases, parameter optimization becomes inefficient due to the curse of dimensionality. The success of the QAOA approach will depend, in part, on finding effective parameter-setting strategies. Here, we analytically and numerically study parameter setting for QAOA applied to MaxCut. For level-1 QAOA, we derive an analytical expression for a general graph. In principle, expressions for higher p could be derived, but the number of terms quickly becomes prohibitive. For a special case of MaxCut, the ring of disagrees, or the 1D antiferromagnetic ring, we provide an analysis for arbitrarily high level. Using a fermionic representation, the evolution of the system under QAOA translates into quantum control of an ensemble of independent spins. This treatment enables us to obtain analytical expressions for the performance of QAOA for any p. It also greatly simplifies numerical search for the optimal values of the parameters. By exploring symmetries, we identify a lower-dimensional sub-manifold of interest; the search effort can be accordingly reduced. This analysis also explains an observed symmetry in the optimal parameter values. Further, we numerically investigate the parameter landscape and show that it is a simple one in the sense of having no local optima.PACS numbers:
Physical annealing systems provide heuristic approaches to solving combinatorial optimization problems. Here, we benchmark two types of annealing machines—a quantum annealer built by D-Wave Systems and measurement-feedback coherent Ising machines (CIMs) based on optical parametric oscillators—on two problem classes, the Sherrington-Kirkpatrick (SK) model and MAX-CUT. The D-Wave quantum annealer outperforms the CIMs on MAX-CUT on cubic graphs. On denser problems, however, we observe an exponential penalty for the quantum annealer [exp(–αDWN2)] relative to CIMs [exp(–αCIMN)] for fixed anneal times, both on the SK model and on 50% edge density MAX-CUT. This leads to a several orders of magnitude time-to-solution difference for instances with over 50 vertices. An optimal–annealing time analysis is also consistent with a substantial projected performance difference. The difference in performance between the sparsely connected D-Wave machine and the fully-connected CIMs provides strong experimental support for efforts to increase the connectivity of quantum annealers.
Richard Feynman's observation that certain quantum mechanical effects cannot be simulated efficiently on a computer led to speculation that computation in general could be done more efficiently if it used these quantum effects. This speculation proved justified when Peter Shor described a polynomial time quantum algorithm for factoring integers.In quantum systems, the computational space increases exponentially with the size of the system which enables exponential parallelism. This parallelism could lead to exponentially faster quantum algorithms than possible classically. The catch is that accessing the results, which requires measurement, proves tricky and requires new non-traditional programming techniques.The aim of this paper is to guide computer scientists through the barriers that separate quantum computing from conventional computing. We introduce basic principles of quantum mechanics to explain where the power of quantum computers comes from and why it is difficult to harness. We describe quantum cryptography, teleportation, and dense coding. Various approaches to exploiting the power of quantum parallelism are explained. We conclude with a discussion of quantum error correction.
We report on a case study in programming an early quantum annealer to attack optimization problems related to operational planning. While a number of studies have looked at the performance of quantum annealers on problems native to their architecture, and others have examined performance of select problems stemming from an application area, ours is one of the first studies of a quantum annealer's performance on parametrized families of hard problems from a practical domain. We explore two different general mappings of planning problems to quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO) problems, and apply them to two parametrized families of planning problems, navigation-type and scheduling-type. We also examine two more compact, but problemtype specific, mappings to QUBO, one for the navigation-type planning problems and one for the scheduling-type planning problems. We study embedding properties and parameter setting, and examine their effect on the efficiency with which the quantum annealer solves these problems. From these results we derive insights useful for the programming and design of future quantum annealers: problem choice, the mapping used, the properties of the embedding, and the annealing profile all matter, each significantly affecting the performance.
Inspired by a class of algorithms proposed by Farhi et al. (arXiv:1411.4028), namely the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA), we present a circuit-based quantum algorithm to search for a needle in a haystack, obtaining the same quadratic speedup achieved by Grover's original algorithm. In our algorithm, the problem Hamiltonian (oracle) and a transverse field are applied alternately to the system in a periodic manner. We introduce a technique, based on spin-coherent states, to analyze the composite unitary in a single period. This composite unitary drives a closed transition between two states that have high degrees of overlap with the initial state and the target state, respectively. The transition rate in our algorithm is of order Θ(1/ √ N ), and the overlaps are of order Θ(1), yielding a nearly optimal query complexity of T √ N (π/2 √ 2 ). Our algorithm is a QAOA circuit that demonstrates a quantum advantage with a large number of iterations that is not derived from Trotterization of an adiabatic quantum optimization (AQO) algorithm. It also suggests that the analysis required to understand QAOA circuits involves a very different process from estimating the energy gap of a Hamiltonian in AQO.
We investigate alternative annealing schedules on the current generation of quantum annealing hardware (the D-Wave 2000Q), which includes the use of forward and reverse annealing with an intermediate pause. This work provides new insights into the inner workings of these devices (and quantum devices in general), particular into how thermal effects govern the system dynamics. We show that a pause mid-way through the anneal can cause a dramatic change in the output distribution, and we provide evidence suggesting thermalization is indeed occurring during such a pause. We demonstrate that upon pausing the system in a narrow region shortly after the minimum gap, the probability of successfully finding the ground state of the problem Hamiltonian can be increased over an order of magnitude. We relate this effect to relaxation (i.e. thermalization) after diabatic and thermal excitations that occur in the region near to the minimum gap. For a set of large-scale problems of up to 500 qubits, we demonstrate that the distribution returned from the annealer very closely matches a (classical) Boltzmann distribution of the problem Hamiltonian, albeit one with a temperature at least 1.5 times higher than the (effective) temperature of the annealer. Moreover, we show that larger problems are more likely to thermalize to a classical Boltzmann distribution. arXiv:1810.05881v2 [quant-ph]
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.