Two-parameter counter-diabatic driving in quantum annealing
Open accessAbstract
We introduce a two-parameter approximate counter-diabatic term into the Hamiltonian of the transversefield Ising model for quantum annealing to accelerate convergence to the solution, generalizing an existing single-parameter approach.The protocol is equivalent to unconventional diabatic control of the longitudinal and transverse fields in the transverse-field Ising model and thus makes it more feasible for experimental realization than an introduction of new terms such as nonstoquastic catalysts toward the same goal of performance enhancement.We test the idea for the p-spin model with p = 3, which has a first-order quantum phase transition, and show that our two-parameter approach leads to significantly larger ground-state fidelity and lower residual energy than those by traditional quantum annealing and by the single-parameter method.We also find a scaling advantage in terms of the time-to-solution as a function of the system size in a certain range of parameters as compared to the traditional methods in the sense that an exponential time complexity is reduced to another exponential complexity with a smaller coefficient.Although the present method may not always lead to a drastic exponential speedup in difficult optimization problems, it is useful because of its versatility and applicability for any problem after a simple algebraic manipulation, in contrast to some other powerful prescriptions for acceleration such as nonstoquastic catalysts in which one should carefully study in advance if it works in a given problem and should identify a proper way to meticulously control the system parameters to achieve the goal, which is generally highly nontrivial.
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
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?
Adaptations to standard QA comprise the utilization of time-dependent Hamiltonians, non-stoquastic Hamiltonians, transverse couplers, and counter-diabatic driving terms.
“Adaptations to the standard QA mentioned in Section 2 comprise the utilization of timedependent Hamiltonians [136], non-stoquastic Hamiltonians [62], transverse couplers [136], and counter-diabatic driving terms [111].”
From Quantum Combinatorial Optimization in the NISQ Era: A Systematic Mapping Study (2024) · cites this paper as [111]
The method of counter-diabatic driving circumvents the bottleneck of the adiabatic regime where proposals for implementation on current devices work with an approximate two-parameter Hamiltonian.
“The method of counter-diabatic driving [190] circumvents the bottleneck of the adiabatic regime where proposals for implementation on current devices work with an approximate two-parameter Hamiltonian [111].”
From Quantum Combinatorial Optimization in the NISQ Era: A Systematic Mapping Study (2024) · cites this paper as [111]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 44 · Cited by 39
Research works printed but not linked: 4
- E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, and M. Sipser, Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution, arXiv:quant-ph/0001106. · arXiv
- E. J. Crosson and D. A. Lidar, Prospects for quantum enhance- ment with diabatic quantum annealing, arXiv:2008.09913. · arXiv
- E. Torrontegui, S. Ibáñez, S. Martínez-Garaot, M. Modugno, A. del Campo, D. Guéry-Odelin, A. Ruschhaupt, X. Chen, and J. G. Muga, in Advances in Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics, Vol. 62, edited by E. Arimondo, P. R. Berman, and C. C. Lin (Academic Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2013), pp. 117-169.
- G. B. Mbeng, R. Fazio, and G. Santoro, Quantum Annealing: A journey through Digitalization, Control, and hybrid Quantum Variational schemes, arXiv:1906.08948. · arXiv
- Authors
- Prielinger, L., Hartmann, A., Yamashiro, Y., Nishimura, K., Lechner, W., & Nishimori, H.
- Affiliations
- TU Wien (AT)
- Universität Innsbruck (AT)
- Tokyo Institute of Technology (JP)
- Deutsches Institut für Japanstudien Tokyo (JP)
- Venue
- Physical Review Research
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2021-03-09
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2643-1564 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W3133763066
- Cited by
- 39
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 5
- FWCI
- 2.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Physical Review Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- Austrian Science Fund (Y1067-N27)
- Horizon 2020 (817482)
- Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (HR001120C0068)
- Office of the Director of National Intelligence
- Intelligence Advanced Research Projects Activity
- Army Research Office (W911NF-17-C-0050)
- 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 › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Keywords
- quantum annealing, transverse-field Ising model, p-spin model, ground-state fidelity, residual energy
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