The DOI matches its Crossref record; 49 of the 49 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Parameter concentrations in quantum approximate optimization
Open accessAbstract
The quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA) has become a cornerstone of contemporary quantum applications development. In QAOA, a quantum circuit is trained---by repeatedly adjusting circuit parameters---to solve a problem instance. Several recent findings have reported parameter concentration effects in QAOA and their presence has become one of folklore: while empirically observed, the concentrations have not been defined and analytical approaches remain scarce, focusing on limiting system sizes while neglecting parameter scaling as system size increases. We found that optimal QAOA circuit parameters concentrate as an inverse polynomial in the problem size, providing an optimistic result for improving circuit training. Our results are analytically demonstrated for QAOA at $p=1,2$ (corresponding to 2 and 4 tunable parameters, respectively). The technique is also applicable for higher depths wherein the concentration effect is cross verified numerically. Parameter concentrations allow for training on a fraction $w
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“On the other hand, there is increasing evidence that classes of problems exhibit pronounced parameter concentration of the optimal or near optimal angles [19], [51], [1], [6], [61], [17], [48], [41]”
From High-Round QAOA for MAX $k$-SAT on Trapped Ion NISQ Devices (2023) · cites this paper as [1]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets
Kandala, A., Mezzacapo, A., Temme, K., Takita, M., Brink, M., Chow, J. M., & Gambetta, J. M. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature23879 · Cited by 2,982
Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator
Bernien, H., Schwartz, S., Keesling, A., Levine, H., Omran, A., Pichler, H., Choi, S., Zibrov, A. S., Endres, M., Greiner, M., et al. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature24622 · Cited by 2,460
A Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm
Farhi, E., Goldstone, J., & Gutmann, S. (2014) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1411.4028 · Cited by 1,789
Quantum computation and quantum-state engineering driven by dissipation
Verstraete, F., Wolf, M. M., & Ignacio Cirac, J. (2009) · Nature Physics · doi:10.1038/nphys1342 · Cited by 1,570
Control of quantum phenomena: past, present and future
Brif, C., Chakrabarti, R., & Rabitz, H. (2010) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/12/7/075008 · Cited by 950
Zhou, L., Wang, S.-T., Choi, S., Pichler, H., & Lukin, M. D. (2020) · Physical Review X · doi:10.1103/physrevx.10.021067 · Cited by 913
Quantum approximate optimization of non-planar graph problems on a planar superconducting processor
Harrigan, M. P., Sung, K. J., Neeley, M., Satzinger, K. J., Arute, F., Arya, K., Atalaya, J., Bardin, J. C., Barends, R., Boixo, S., et al. (2021) · Nature Physics · doi:10.1038/s41567-020-01105-y · Cited by 564
Control of quantum phenomena: past, present and futurePreprint
Brif, C., Chakrabarti, R., & RABITZ, H. A. (2010) · Cited by 548
QAOA for Max-Cut requires hundreds of qubits for quantum speed-up
Guerreschi, G. G., & Matsuura, A. Y. (2019) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-019-43176-9 · Cited by 337
Quantum Supremacy through the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm
Farhi, E., & Harrow, A. W. (2016) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1602.07674 · Cited by 331
Farhi, E., Goldstone, J., Gutmann, S., & Zhou, L. (2022) · Quantum · doi:10.22331/q-2022-07-07-759 · Cited by 284
Hybrid Quantum-Classical Approach to Quantum Optimal Control
Li, J., Yang, X., Peng, X., & Sun, C.-P. (2017) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.118.150503 · Cited by 278
Obstacles to Variational Quantum Optimization from Symmetry Protection
Bravyi, S., Kliesch, A., Koenig, R., & Tang, E. (2020) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.260505 · Cited by 278
Quantum approximate optimization of the long-range Ising model with a trapped-ion quantum simulator
Pagano, G., Bapat, A., Becker, P., Collins, K. S., De, A., Hess, P. W., Kaplan, H. B., Kyprianidis, A., Tan, W. L., Baldwin, C., et al. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2006373117 · Cited by 262
Zacharov, I., Arslanov, R., Gunin, M., Stefonishin, D., Bykov, A., Pavlov, S. V., Panarin, O., Maliutin, A., Rykovanov, S. G., & Fedorov, M. V. (2019) · Open Engineering · doi:10.1515/eng-2019-0059 · Cited by 210
XY mixers: Analytical and numerical results for the quantum alternating operator ansatz
Wang, Z., Rubin, N. C., Dominy, J. M., & Rieffel, E. G. (2020) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.101.012320 · Cited by 190
Quantum annealing initialization of the quantum approximate optimization algorithm
Sack, S. H., & Serbyn, M. (2021) · Quantum · doi:10.22331/q-2021-07-01-491 · Cited by 182
Performance of the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm on the Maximum Cut Problem
Crooks, G. E. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1811.08419 · Cited by 158
Reachability Deficits in Quantum Approximate Optimization
Akshay, V., Philathong, H., Morales, M. E. S., & Biamonte, J. D. (2020) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.124.090504 · Cited by 151
Self-citationNear-optimal quantum circuit for Grover's unstructured search using a transverse field
Zhang, J., Rieffel, E. G., & Wang, Z. (2017) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.95.062317 · Cited by 145
Classical and quantum bounded depth approximation algorithms
Hastings, M. B. (2019) · Quantum Information and Computation · doi:10.26421/qic19.13-14-3 · Cited by 144
Efficient variational simulation of non-trivial quantum states
Ho, W. W., & Hsieh, T. H. (2019) · SciPost Physics · doi:10.21468/scipostphys.6.3.029 · Cited by 139
Training the quantum approximate optimization algorithm without access to a quantum processing unit
Streif, M., & Leib, M. (2020) · Quantum Science and Technology · doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ab8c2b · Cited by 125 · cited 3×
“The authors in [23] explain their numerical observation via reverse causal cone i.”
BackgroundGrover Mixers for QAOA: Shifting Complexity from Mixer Design to State Preparation
Bartschi, A., & Eidenbenz, S. (2020) · 2020 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) · doi:10.1109/qce49297.2020.00020 · Cited by 122
Optimal Protocols in Quantum Annealing and Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm Problems
Brady, L. T., Baldwin, C. L., Bapat, A., Kharkov, Y., & Gorshkov, A. V. (2021) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.126.070505 · Cited by 119
Optimal Protocols in Quantum Annealing and QAOA Problems
Brady, L. T., Baldwin, C. L., Bapat, A., Kharkov, Y., & Gorshkov, A. V. (2020) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2003.08952 · Cited by 117
Quantum State Engineering of a Hubbard System with Ultracold Fermions
Chiu, C., Ji, G., Mazurenko, A., Greif, D., & Greiner, M. (2018) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.243201 · Cited by 114
On the universality of the quantum approximate optimization algorithm
Morales, M. E. S., Biamonte, J., & Zimborás, Z. (2020) · Quantum Information Processing · doi:10.1007/s11128-020-02748-9 · Cited by 109
Self-citationClassical and Quantum Bounded Depth Approximation Algorithms
Hastings, M. B. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1905.07047 · Cited by 96
Heat-machine control by quantum-state preparation: From quantum engines to refrigerators
Gelbwaser-Klimovsky, D., & Kurizki, G. (2014) · Physical Review E · doi:10.1103/physreve.90.022102 · Cited by 93
Sugisaki, K., Nakazawa, S., Toyota, K., Sato, K., Shiomi, D., & Takui, T. (2018) · ACS Central Science · doi:10.1021/acscentsci.8b00788 · Cited by 89
Brandao, F. G. S. L., Broughton, M., Farhi, E., Gutmann, S., & Neven, H. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1812.04170 · Cited by 88
Quantum approximate optimization is computationally universalPreprint
Lloyd, S. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1812.11075 · Cited by 68
Quantum state preparation in circuit QED via Landau-Zener tunneling
Saito, K., Wubs, M., Kohler, S., Peter Hänggi, A., & Kayanuma, Y. (2006) · Europhysics Letters (EPL) · doi:10.1209/epl/i2006-10232-4 · Cited by 67
Richerme, P., Senko, C., Smith, J., Lee, A., Korenblit, S. É., & Monroe, C. R. (2013) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.88.012334 · Cited by 66
Ultrafast variational simulation of nontrivial quantum states with long-range interactions
Ho, W. W., Jonay, C., & Hsieh, T. H. (2019) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.99.052332 · Cited by 46
Fast Navigation in a Large Hilbert Space Using Quantum Optimal Control
Larrouy, A., Patsch, S., Richaud, R., Raimond, J. M., Brune, M., Koch, C. P., & Gleyzes, S. (2020) · Physical Review X · doi:10.1103/physrevx.10.021058 · Cited by 46
Abrupt transitions in variational quantum circuit training
Campos, E., Nasrallah, A., & Biamonte, J. (2021) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.103.032607 · Cited by 46
Self-citationOptimizing QAOA: Success Probability and Runtime Dependence on Circuit DepthPreprint
Niu, M. Y., Lu, S., & Chuang, I. L. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1905.12134 · Cited by 45
Quantum state preparation and control of single molecular ions
Leibfried, D. (2012) · New Journal of Physics · doi:10.1088/1367-2630/14/2/023029 · Cited by 42
Comparison of QAOA with Quantum and Simulated Annealing
Streif, M., & Leib, M. (2019) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1901.01903 · Cited by 35
Quantum state preparation and control of single molecular ionsPreprint
Leibfried, D. G. (2016) · Cited by 34
Butko, A., Michelogiannakis, G., Williams, S., Iancu, C., Donofrio, D., Shalf, J. M., Carter, J. T., & Siddiqi, I. A. (2020) · IEEE International Conference on Rebooting Computing (ICRC) · doi:10.1109/icrc2020.2020.00011 · Cited by 32
Claes, J., & van Dam, W. (2021) · Quantum · doi:10.22331/q-2021-09-15-542 · Cited by 18
Certified variational quantum algorithms for eigenstate preparation
Kardashin, A., Uvarov, A., Yudin, D. I., & Biamonte, J. (2020) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.102.052610 · Cited by 16
Self-citation2020 International Conference on Rebooting Computing (ICRC)
(2020) · doi:10.1109/icrc51095.2020 · Cited by 14
Variational quantum state preparation via quantum data buses
Kuzmin, V. V., & Silvi, P. (2020) · Quantum · doi:10.22331/q-2020-07-06-290 · Cited by 12
Polynomial scaling of QAOA for ground-state preparation of the fully-connected p-spin ferromagnetPreprint
Wauters, M. M., Mbeng, G. B., & Santoro, G. E. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2003.07419 · Cited by 7
Efficient unitary preparation of non-trivial quantum statesPreprint
Ho, W. W., & Hsieh, T. H. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 3
Cited by
Sorted by citations
A review on Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm and its variants
Blekos, K., Brand, D., Ceschini, A., Chou, C.-H., Li, R.-H., Pandya, K., & Summer, A. (2024) · Physics Reports · doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2024.03.002 · Cited by 563
Herman, D., Googin, C., Liu, X., Sun, Y., Galda, A., Safro, I., Pistoia, M., & Alexeev, Y. (2023) · Nature Reviews Physics · doi:10.1038/s42254-023-00603-1 · Cited by 361
Solving Vehicle Routing Problem Using Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm
Azad, U., Behera, B. K., Ahmed, E. A., Panigrahi, P. K., & Farouk, A. (2023) · IEEE Transactions on Intelligent Transportation Systems · doi:10.1109/tits.2022.3172241 · Cited by 149
Scaling of the quantum approximate optimization algorithm on superconducting qubit based hardware
Weidenfeller, J., Valor, L. C., Gacon, J., Tornow, C., Bello, L., Woerner, S., & Egger, D. J. (2022) · Quantum · doi:10.22331/q-2022-12-07-870 · Cited by 127
QAOA-in-QAOA: Solving Large-Scale MaxCut Problems on Small Quantum Machines
Zhou, Z.-F., Du, Y., Tian, X., & Tao, D. (2023) · Physical Review Applied · doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.19.024027 · Cited by 77
Metadata
- Authors
- Akshay, V., Rabinovich, D., Campos, E., & Biamonte, J.
- Affiliations
- Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology (RU)
- Venue
- Physical Review A
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2021-07-07
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 0556-2791 (ISSN-L)
- 2469-9926
- 2469-9934
- OpenAlex
- W3139223064
- Cited by
- 103
- References
- 47
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 25 · 2024: 23 · 2023: 25 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 3
- FWCI
- 6.01
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Physical Review A (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Leading Research Center on Quantum Computing (014/20)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum many-body systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Metaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
- Keywords
- quantum approximate optimization algorithm, variational quantum algorithms, circuit depth
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
