CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 89Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureParallel Computing and Optimization TechniquesTheoretical and Computational Physics

How "Quantum" is the D-Wave Machine?

Open access
Shin, Seung Woo, Smith, Graeme, Smolin, John A., Vazirani, Umesh·2014·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.1401.7087arXiv 1401.7087
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Recently there has been intense interest in claims about the performance of the D-Wave machine. In this paper, we outline a simple classical model, and show that it achieves excellent correlation with published input-output behavior of the D-Wave One machine on 108 qubits. While raising questions about "how quantum" the D-Wave machine is, the new model also provides additional algorithmic insights into the nature of the native computational problem solved by the D-Wave machine.

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

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.1401.7087

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

  • A comparison with SA, spin-vector-monte-carlo, and simulated QA suggests that QA possesses the best scaling properties.

    “A comparison with SA, spin-vector-monte-carlo [215], and simulated QA suggests that QA possesses the best scaling properties [7].”

    From Quantum Combinatorial Optimization in the NISQ Era: A Systematic Mapping Study (2024) · cites this paper as [215]

    The paper compares D-Wave’s success-probability patterns with simulated quantum annealing and classical models, not their scaling properties (Our model, p. 4). Its discussion of scaling instead predicts that the D-Wave machine will become ineffective at finding ground states as the number of qubits increases (How 'Quantum' is the D-Wave Machine?, p. 2). (LLM, conf=0.80)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The performance of D-Wave annealers has been explored comprehensively.

    “The performance of D-Wave annealers have also been explored comprehensively (Albash et al. , 2015; Cohen et al. , 2020; Shin et al. , 2014).”

    From Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms (2022) · cites this paper as Shin et al., 2014

    The opening section (p. 1) says the paper examines a classical model against published input-output behavior of the 108-qubit D-Wave One, so it does explore an aspect of performance. It does not establish that performance across D-Wave annealers has been explored comprehensively. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. [1][1] Barrett, J., Hardy, L. & Kent, A. No signalling and quantum key distribution. Physical Review Letters 95 (2005). -
  2. [4][4] Vazirani, U. V. & Vidick, T. Certifiable quantum dice -or, exponential randomness expansion. In ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (2012). -
  3. [5][5] Aharonov, D., Ben-Or, M. & Eban, E. Interactive proofs for quantum computation. In Proceedings of Innovations of Computer Science , 453-469 (2010). -
  4. [7][7] 8. Fitzsimons, J. F. & Kashefi, E. Unconditionally verifiable blind computation. E-print arXiv:1203.5217. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1203.5217v2 (2012). - · arXiv
  5. [15][15] Wang, L. et al. Comment on: 'classical signature of quantum annealing'. E-print arXiv:1305.5837. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1305.5837v1.pdf (2013). - · arXiv
  6. [17][17] van Dam, W., Mosca, M. & Vazirani, U. How powerful is adiabatic quantum computation? E-print arXiv:0206003. http://arxiv.org/pdf/quant-ph/ 0206003v1 (2002). -
  7. [19][19] Vinci, W., Albash, T., Mishra, A., Warburton, P. A. & Lidar, D. A. Distinguishing classical and quantum models for the D-Wave device. E-print arXiv:1403.4228. http://arxiv.org/pdf/ 1403.4228v1.pdf (2014). - · arXiv
  8. [20][20] Shin, S. W., Smith, G., Smolin, J. A. & Vazirani, U. Comment on 'distinguishing classical and quantum models for the D-Wave device'. E-print arXiv:1404.6499. http://arxiv.org/pdf/ 1404.6499v2.pdf (2014). - · arXiv
  9. [21][21] Saket, R. A PTAS for the classical Ising spin glass problem on the Chimera graph structure. E-print arXiv:1306.6943. http://arxiv.org/pdf/ 1306.6943v2 (2013). - · arXiv
  10. [23][23] Farhi, E., Goldstone, J., Gutmann, S. & Sipser, M. Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution. Eprint arXiv:quant-ph/0001106. http://arxiv.org/ pdf/quant-ph/0001106v1.pdf (2000). - · arXiv
  11. [24][24] Altshuler, B., Krovi, H. & Roland, J. Anderson localization casts clouds over adiabatic quantum optimization. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 107 , 12446-12450 (2010). -
  12. [25][25] Smolin, J. A. & Smith, G. Classical signature of quantum annealing. E-print arXiv:1305.4904. http: //arxiv.org/pdf/1305.4904v1.pdf (2013). - · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Shin, S. W., Smith, G., Smolin, J. A., & Vazirani, U.
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2014
ISSN
2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1401.7087
arXiv
1401.7087
OpenAlex
W54487369
Cited by
89
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 13
Type
posted content
Language
en
Open access
Licence
arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
Locations
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Hardware and Architecture › Parallel Computing and Optimization Techniques
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Condensed Matter Physics › Theoretical and Computational Physics
Keywords
quantum annealing, quantum computing, classical models, qubits, input-output behavior, quantumness, 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