Evolving objective function for improved variational quantum optimization
Open accessAbstract
A promising approach to useful computational quantum advantage is to use variational quantum algorithms for optimization problems. Crucial for the performance of these algorithms is to ensure that the algorithm converges with high probability to a near-optimal solution in a small time. In Barkoutsos et al. [Quantum 4, 256 (2020)], an alternative class of objective functions, called conditional value at risk (CVaR), was introduced and it was shown that they perform better than standard objective functions. Here we extend that work by introducing an evolving objective function, which we call ascending-CVaR and that can be used for any optimization problem. We test our proposed objective function in an emulation environment, using as case studies three different optimization problems: MaxCut, number partitioning, and portfolio optimization. We examine multiple instances of different sizes and analyze the performance using the variational quantum eigensolver with hardware-efficient ansatz and the quantum approximate optimization algorithm. We show that ascending-CVaR in all cases performs better than standard objective functions or the constant CVaR of Barkoutsos et al. [Quantum 4, 256 (2020)] and that it can be used as a heuristic for avoiding suboptimal minima. Our proposal achieves higher overlap with the ideal state in all problems, whether we consider easy or hard instances---on average, it gives up to ten times greater overlap at portfolio optimization and number partitioning, while it gives an 80% improvement at MaxCut. In the hard instances we consider, for the number partitioning problem, standard objective functions fail to find the correct solution in almost all cases, CVaR finds the correct solution at 60% of the cases, while ascending-CVaR finds the correct solution in 95% of the cases.
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?
CVar, ascending CVar, and the Gibbs objective function can be regarded as adaptations of standard QAOA or VQE that affect their underlying objective function.
“In this sense, CVar [10], ascending CVar [78], and the Gibbs objective function [86] can be regarded as adaptations of standard QAOA or VQE that affect their underlying objective function.”
From Quantum Combinatorial Optimization in the NISQ Era: A Systematic Mapping Study (2024) · cites this paper as [78]
The benefits of using RQAOA, CVar, and machine learning have been empirically validated in dedicated studies.
“The benefits of using RQAOA [22], CVar [37, 78], and machine learning [33] have been empirically validated in dedicated studies.”
From Quantum Combinatorial Optimization in the NISQ Era: A Systematic Mapping Study (2024) · cites this paper as [78]
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 51 · Cited by 24
Research works printed but not linked: 22
- Frank Arute, Kunal Arya, Ryan Babbush, Dave Bacon, Joseph C Bardin, Rami Barends, Rupak Biswas, Sergio Boixo, Fernando GSL Brandao, David A Buell, et al. Quantum supremacy using a programmable supercon- ducting processor. Nature, 574(7779):505-510, 2019.
- Sergey Bravyi, Alexander Kliesch, Robert Koenig, and Eugene Tang. Obstacles to state preparation and vari- ational optimization from symmetry protection. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.08980, 2019. · arXiv
- Ken M Nakanishi, Keisuke Fujii, and Synge Todo. Sequential minimal optimization for quantum-classical hybrid algorithms. Physical Review Research, 2(4):043158, 2020.
- Matteo M Wauters, Emanuele Panizon, Glen B Mbeng, and Giuseppe E Santoro. Reinforcement learn- ing assisted quantum optimization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.12323, 2020. · arXiv
- Song Cheng, Jing Chen, and Lei Wang. Information perspective to probabilistic modeling: Boltzmann ma- chines versus born machines. Entropy, 20(8):583, 2018.
- Tameem Albash and Daniel A Lidar. Adiabatic quantum computation. Reviews of Modern Physics, 90(1):015002, 2018.
- Fernando GSL Brandao, Michael Broughton, Edward Farhi, Sam Gutmann, and Hartmut Neven. For fixed control parameters the quantum approximate optimiza- tion algorithm's objective function value concentrates for typical instances. arXiv preprint arXiv:1812.04170, 2018. · arXiv
- Nikolaj Moll, Panagiotis Barkoutsos, Lev S Bishop, Jerry M Chow, Andrew Cross, Daniel J Egger, Ste- fan Filipp, Andreas Fuhrer, Jay M Gambetta, Marc Ganzhorn, et al. Quantum optimization using varia- tional algorithms on near-term quantum devices. Quan- tum Science and Technology, 3(3):030503, 2018.
- Joonho Lee, William J Huggins, Martin Head-Gordon, and K Birgitta Whaley. Generalized unitary coupled cluster wave functions for quantum computation. Jour- nal of chemical theory and computation, 15(1):311-324, 2018.
- Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, and Sam Gutmann. A quantum approximate optimization algorithm. arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.4028, 2014. · arXiv
- Leo Zhou, Sheng-Tao Wang, Soonwon Choi, Hannes Pichler, and Mikhail D Lukin. Quantum approximate optimization algorithm: Performance, mechanism, and implementation on near-term devices. Physical Review X, 10(2):021067, 2020.
- Ruslan Shaydulin, Ilya Safro, and Jeffrey Larson. Multi- start methods for quantum approximate optimization. In 2019 IEEE High Performance Extreme Computing Conference (HPEC), pages 1-8. IEEE, 2019.
- Charles Moussa, Henri Calandra, and Vedran Dunjko. To quantum or not to quantum: towards algorithm se- lection in near-term quantum optimization. Quantum Science and Technology, 5(4):044009, 2020.
- Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, Sam Gutmann, and Leo Zhou. The quantum approximate optimization al- gorithm and the sherrington-kirkpatrick model at infi- nite size. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.08187, 2019. · arXiv
- Richard E Korf. Multi-way number partitioning. In IJCAI, volume 9, pages 538-543, 2009.
- Hans Kellerer, Renata Mansini, and M Grazia Sper- anza. Selecting portfolios with fixed costs and mini- mum transaction lots. Annals of Operations Research, 99(1):287-304, 2000.
- Daniel J Egger, Claudio Gambella, Jakub Marecek, Scott McFaddin, Martin Mevissen, Rudy Raymond, Andrea Simonetto, Stefan Woerner, and Elena Yn- durain. Quantum computing for finance: state of the art and future prospects. IEEE Transactions on Quan- tum Engineering, 2020.
- Jeffrey Cohen, Alex Khan, and Clark Alexander. Port- folio optimization of 40 stocks using the dwave quantum annealer. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.01430, 2020. · arXiv
- Samuel Mugel, Carlos Kuchkovsky, Escolastico Sanchez, Samuel Fernandez-Lorenzo, Jorge Luis-Hita, Enrique Lizaso, and Roman Orus. Dynamic portfolio optimization with real datasets using quantum pro- cessors and quantum-inspired tensor networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.00017, 2020. · arXiv
- Jorge J Moré and Stefan M Wild. Benchmarking derivative-free optimization algorithms. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 20(1):172-191, 2009.
- Stuart Hadfield, Zhihui Wang, Bryan O'Gorman, Eleanor G Rieffel, Davide Venturelli, and Rupak Biswas. From the quantum approximate optimization algorithm to a quantum alternating operator ansatz. Algorithms, 12(2):34, 2019.
- Jarrod R McClean, Sergio Boixo, Vadim N Smelyan- skiy, Ryan Babbush, and Hartmut Neven. Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training land- scapes. Nature communications, 9(1):1-6, 2018.
- Authors
- Kolotouros, I., & Wallden, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Edinburgh (GB)
- Venue
- Physical Review Research
- Publisher
- American Physical Society (APS)
- Published
- 2022-06-21
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- ISSN
- 2643-1564 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4283266036
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 51
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1
- FWCI
- 1.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Physical Review Research (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
- Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
- Funders
- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/T001062/1, EP/T026715/1)
- 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
- variational quantum algorithms, objective function design, conditional value at risk, quantum optimization, MaxCut, number partitioning, portfolio optimization, variational quantum eigensolver, quantum approximate optimization algorithm, quantum advantage
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
