Cited by 41Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureMetaheuristic Optimization Algorithms ResearchComplexity and Algorithms in Graphs

Parameter Setting in Quantum Approximate Optimization of Weighted Problems

Open access
Sureshbabu, Shree Hari, Herman, Dylan, Shaydulin, Ruslan, Basso, Joao, Chakrabarti, Shouvanik, Sun, Yue, Pistoia, Marco·2024·Quantum

Abstract

Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) is a leading candidate algorithm for solving combinatorial optimization problems on quantum computers. However, in many cases QAOA requires computationally intensive parameter optimization. The challenge of parameter optimization is particularly acute in the case of weighted problems, for which the eigenvalues of the phase operator are non-integer and the QAOA energy landscape is not periodic. In this work, we develop parameter setting heuristics for QAOA applied to a general class of weighted problems. First, we derive optimal parameters for QAOA with depth p=1 applied to the weighted MaxCut problem under different assumptions on the weights. In particular, we rigorously prove the conventional wisdom that in the average case the first local optimum near zero gives globally-optimal QAOA parameters. Second, for p≥1 we prove that the QAOA energy landscape for weighted MaxCut approaches that for the unweighted case under a simple rescaling of parameters. Therefore, we can use parameters previously obtained for unweighted MaxCut for weighted problems. Finally, we prove that for p=1 the QAOA objective sharply concentrates around its expectation, which means that our parameter setting rules hold with high probability for a random weighted instance. We numerically validate this approach on general weighted graphs and show that on average the QAOA energy with the proposed fixed parameters is only 1.1 percentage points away from that with optimized parameters. Third, we propose a general heuristic rescaling scheme inspired by the analytical results for weighted MaxCut and demonstrate its effectiveness using QAOA with the XY Hamming-weight-preserving mixer applied to the portfolio optimization problem. Our heuristic improves the convergence of local optimizers, reducing the number of iterations by 7.4x on average.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.22331/q-2024-01-18-1231

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Little is known about QAOA's potential to provide a scaling advantage over classical solvers.

    “While QAOA has been studied extensively (11–14), little is known about its potential to provide a scaling advantage over classical solvers.”

    From Evidence of scaling advantage for the quantum approximate optimization algorithm on a classically intractable problem (2024) · cites this paper as [14]

    The Introduction (page unavailable) reports that QAOA has already been shown to scale better than state-of-the-art classical solvers for finding exact k-SAT solutions. That is contrary to an unqualified suggestion that its potential for a scaling advantage is little known, though the reported result is limited to k-SAT. (LLM, conf=0.70)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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 54 · Cited by 41

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Stuart Hadfield. "Quantum algorithms for scientific computing and approximate optimization" (2018). url: https://doi.org/10.48550/1805.03265. · DOI
  2. Walter Rudin. "Real and complex analysis". McGraw-Hill. (1974).
  3. Walter Rudin. "Principles of mathematical analysis". McGraw-hill. (1976).
  4. Joao Basso, Edward Farhi, Kunal Marwaha, Benjamin Villalonga, and Leo Zhou. "The quantum approximate optimization algorithm at high depth for maxcut on large-girth regular graphs and the sherrington-kirkpatrick model" (2021). url: https: //doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2110.14206. · DOI
  5. Michael JD Powell. "The BOBYQA algorithm for bound constrained optimization without derivatives". Cambridge NA Report NA2009/0626 (2009).
  6. Kaining Zhang, Liu Liu, Min-Hsiu Hsieh, and Dacheng Tao. "Escaping from the barren plateau via gaussian initializations in deep variational quantum circuits". In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. Volume 35, pages 18612-18627.

Authors
Sureshbabu, S. H., Herman, D., Shaydulin, R., Basso, J., Chakrabarti, S., Sun, Y., & Pistoia, M.
Affiliations
  • JPMorgan Chase & Co (United States) (US)
  • University of California, Berkeley (US)
Venue
Quantum
Published
2024-01-18
Volume
8
Pages
1231
ISSN
2521-327X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4390974795
Cited by
41
References
54
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 2
FWCI
5.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Quantum (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Metaheuristic Optimization Algorithms Research
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Complexity and Algorithms in Graphs
Keywords
quantum approximate optimization algorithm, portfolio optimization, combinatorial optimization

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