The DOI matches its DataCite record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Optimal Protocols in Quantum Annealing and QAOA Problems
Open accessAbstract
Quantum Annealing (QA) and the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) are two special cases of the following control problem: apply a combination of two Hamiltonians to minimize the energy of a quantum state. Which is more effective has remained unclear. Here we analytically apply the framework of optimal control theory to show that generically, given a fixed amount of time, the optimal procedure has the pulsed (or "bang-bang") structure of QAOA at the beginning and end but can have a smooth annealing structure in between. This is in contrast to previous works which have suggested that bang-bang (i.e., QAOA) protocols are ideal. To support this theoretical work, we carry out simulations of various transverse field Ising models, demonstrating that bang-anneal-bang protocols are more common. The general features identified here provide guideposts for the nascent experimental implementations of quantum optimization algorithms.
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?
The check wasn’t confident either way, so it gives no verdict — never disputed.
In the citing paper
“It was also shown that when the total time T is large, bang-bang QAOA suffers from the proliferation of local minima in the control parameters, rendering it difficult to find optimal or near-optimal QAOA parameters.”
From Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms (2022) · cites this paper as Brady et al., 2020
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.
Citations
Cites
The Mathematical Theory of Optimal Processes.
Blum, E. K., Pontryagin, Boltyanskii, Gamkrelidze, & Mishchenko (1963) · American Mathematical Monthly · doi:10.2307/2312867 · Cited by 4,260
The Mathematical Theory of Optimal Processes
Bellman, R., Pontryagin, L. S., Boltyanskii, V. G., Gamkrelidze, R. V., Mishchenko, E. F., Trirogoff, Κ. N., & Neustadt, L. W. (1965) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1911909 · Cited by 4,212
Kirk, D. E. (1970) · Cited by 3,804
Introductory Lectures on Convex Optimization
Nesterov, Y. E. (2004) · Applied optimization · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-8853-9 · Cited by 2,734
Quantum annealing in the transverse Ising model
Kadowaki, T., & Nishimori, H. (1998) · Physical Review E · doi:10.1103/physreve.58.5355 · Cited by 2,339
Khaneja, N., Reiss, T., Kehlet, C., Schulte-Herbrüggen, T., & Glaser, S. J. (2005) · Journal of Magnetic Resonance · doi:10.1016/j.jmr.2004.11.004 · Cited by 1,854
Optimal control theory: An introduction
Levine, W. S. (1972) · IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control · doi:10.1109/tac.1972.1100008 · Cited by 1,648
Whither the Future of Controlling Quantum Phenomena?
RABITZ, H. A., de Vivie‐Riedle, R., Motzkus, M., & Kompa, K. L. (2000) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.288.5467.824 · Cited by 1,150
Observation of a many-body dynamical phase transition with a 53-qubit quantum simulator
Zhang, J., Pagano, G., Hess, P. W., Kyprianidis, A., Becker, P., Kaplan, H., Gorshkov, A. V., Gong, Z.-X., & Monroe, C. (2017) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature24654 · Cited by 1,079
Self-citationControl 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
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- [17]C. Brif, R. Chakrabarti, H. Rabitz, New Journal of Phys. , Vol. 12 (2010).
- [20]N. Khaneja, T. Reiss, C. Kehlet, T. Schulte-Herbr¨ uggen, S. J. Glaser, Journal of Magnetic Resonance 172, pp. 296-305 (2005).
- [23]M. Grace, C. Brif, H. Rabitz, I. A. Walmsley, R. L. Kosut, D. A. Lidar, Journal of Physics B 40 , 9 (2009).
- [25]A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S. Ebadi, H. Bernien, A. S. Zibrov, H. Pichler, S. Choi, J. Cui, M. Rossignolo, P. Rembold, S. Montangero, T. Calarco, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V. Vuleti´ c, M. D. Lukin, Science , Vol. 365, 6453, pp. 570-574 (2019).
- W. Hess, H. B. Kaplan, A. Kyprianidis, W. L. Tan, C. Baldwin, L. T. Brady, A. Deshpande, F. Liu, S. Jordan, A. V. Gorshkov, C. Monroe, arXiv:1906.02700 (2019). · arXiv
- [30]O. L. Mangasarian, J. SIAM Control , Vol. 4, No. 1 (1966).
- [37]L. Zhou, S. Wang, S. Choi, H. Pichler, M. D. Lukin, arXiv:1812.01041 (2018). · arXiv
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–119 of 119
Binary Quantum Control Optimization with Uncertain Hamiltonians
Fei, X., Brady, L. T., Larson, J. M., Leyffer, S., & Shen, S. (2024) · INFORMS journal on computing · doi:10.1287/ijoc.2024.0560 · Cited by 1
Self-citationApplied and Computational Mathematics Division :
Boisvert, R. F. (2021) · doi:10.6028/nist.ir.8373 · Cited by 1
Quantum algorithms for energy management optimization problems
Veshchezerova, M. (2022) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/f0d70a66z3066z4c81z8aa7zf9e72830f940 · Cited by 1
Report on scipost_202106_00008v2
Borle, A., Elfving, V. E., & Lomonaco, S. J. (2021) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.3619
Report on scipost_202106_00008v1
Borle, A., Elfving, V. E., & Lomonaco, S. J. (2021) · SciPost Physics Core · doi:10.21468/scipost.report.3409
Quantum Protocols for Hash‐Based Blockchain
Sathya, K., Premalatha, J., Balusamy, B., & Murali, S. (2022) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781119836728.ch10
Fast-forwarding molecular ground state preparation with optimal control on analog quantum simulators
Castaldo, D., Rosa, M., & Corni, S. (2024) · The Journal of Chemical Physics · doi:10.1063/5.0204618
Experience with quantum annealing computation
(2024) · Frontiers research topics · doi:10.3389/978-2-8325-5436-4
He, Z., Kemper, A. F., & Freericks, J. K. (2026) · APL Quantum · doi:10.1063/5.0293153
Measurement Equipment Inspection Path Planning and Optimization Based on Quantum Annealing Algorithm
Yang, L., Feng, X., Feng, X., Cai, J., & Li, Q. (2025) · International Journal of High Speed Electronics and Systems · doi:10.1142/s0129156425403766
Bode, T., Ramesh, K., & Stollenwerk, T. (2025) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.111.032411
On the stability of solutions to Schrödinger’s equation short of the adiabatic limit
Bringewatt, J., Jarret, M., & Mooney, T. C. (2025) · Proceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspa.2024.0193
Optimal work extraction from finite-time closed quantum dynamics
Sugimoto, S., Sagawa, T., & Hamazaki, R. (2026) · Physical Review Research · doi:10.1103/5cy2-3xjk
Quantum annealing and condensed matter physics
Kendon, V. M., & Chancellor, N. (2026) · Journal of Physics Condensed Matter · doi:10.1088/1361-648x/ae5906
Analog Quantum Computing for NP-Hard Combinatorial Graph Problems
Braida, A. (2024) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/ddc8a4b2z9f68z49d3z91e1zc1d6664298b1
Li, J., Ding, X., Wang, K., Li, J., Jia, B., Wang, M., & Hu, C. (2026) · IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing · doi:10.1109/jstars.2026.3689689
Role of overparametrization in quantum approximate optimization
Rabinovich, D., Kardashin, A., & Adhikary, S. (2026) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/m1d6-1v47 · Cited by 3
Pulse-based variational quantum algorithms
Tao, H.-X., & Wu, R.-B. (2026) · Quantum Review Letters · doi:10.1016/j.qrl.2026.06.002
Prefix-sum encoding for quantum annealing with application to haplotype inference
Nghiem, N.-V.-D., Vinh, L. S., Trinh, B., & Dinh, T. N. (2026) · EPJ Quantum Technology · doi:10.1140/epjqt/s40507-026-00543-6
Metadata
- Authors
- Brady, L. T., Baldwin, C. L., Bapat, A., Kharkov, Y., & Gorshkov, A. V.
- Affiliations
- Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2020
- Volume
- 126
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 070505-070505
- ISSN
- 0031-9007 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 2003.08952
- OpenAlex
- W3012851713
- Cited by
- 117
- References
- 42
- Citations by year
- 2026: 10 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 17
- FWCI
- 7.69
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Physical Review Letters (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- U.S. Department of Energy (DESC0019139, DESC0019449)
- National Institute of Standards and Technology
- 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 › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Keywords
- quantum annealing, quantum approximate optimization algorithm, optimal control, bang-bang control, transverse-field Ising model, quantum optimization algorithms, optimal control protocols
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