PreprintCited by 234Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum many-body systemsQuantum Information and Cryptography

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Limitations of optimization algorithms on noisy quantum devices

Open access
Franca, Daniel Stilck, Garcia-Patron, Raul·2020·arXiv

Abstract

Recent technological developments have focused the interest of the quantum computing community on investigating how near-term devices could outperform classical computers for practical applications. A central question that remains open is whether their noise can be overcome or it fundamentally restricts any potential quantum advantage. We present a transparent way of comparing classical algorithms to quantum ones running on near-term quantum devices for a large family of problems that include optimization problems and approximations to the ground state energy of Hamiltonians. Our approach is based on the combination of entropic inequalities that determine how fast the quantum computation state converges to the fixed point of the noise model, together with established classical methods of Gibbs state sampling. The approach is extremely versatile and allows for its application to a large variety of problems, noise models and quantum computing architectures. We use our result to provide estimates for a variety of problems and architectures that have been the focus of recent experiments, such as quantum annealers, variational quantum eigensolvers, and quantum approximate optimization. The bounds we obtain indicate that substantial quantum advantages are unlikely for classical optimization unless the current noise rates are decreased by orders of magnitude or the topology of the problem matches that of the device. This is the case even if the number of qubits increases substantially. We reach similar but less stringent conclusions for quantum Hamiltonian problems.

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.

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

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2009.05532

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.

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?

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

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 54

  1. [2]J. Preskill, Quantum 2 , 79 (2018). http://dx.doi.org/10.22331/q-2018-08-06-79 · DOI · Paper page
  2. [3]A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M.-H. Yung, X.-Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. O'Brien, Nature Communications 5 (2014), 10.1038/ncomms5213. · DOI · Paper page
  3. [6]R. LaRose, A. Tikku, ´ E. O'Neel-Judy, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, npj Quantum Information 5 (2019), 10.1038/s41534-019-0167-6. · DOI · Paper page
  4. [7]C. Bravo-Prieto, R. LaRose, M. Cerezo, Y. Subasi, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, 'Variational quantum linear solver,' (2019), arXiv:1909.05820 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  5. [8]S. McArdle, T. Jones, S. Endo, Y. Li, S. C. Benjamin, and X. Yuan, npj Quantum Information 5 (2019), 10.1038/s41534-019-0187-2. · DOI · Paper page
  6. [9]N. Moll, P. Barkoutsos, L. S. Bishop, J. M. Chow, A. Cross, D. J. Egger, S. Filipp, A. Fuhrer, J. M. Gambetta, M. Ganzhorn, et al. , arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.01022 (2017). · arXiv
  7. [11]D. Wang, O. Higgott, and S. Brierley, Physical review letters 122 , 140504 (2019).
  8. [12]E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, 'A quantum approximate optimization algorithm,' (2014), arXiv:1411.4028 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  9. [13]E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, and M. Sipser, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0001106 (2000). · arXiv
  10. [15]A. Lucas, Frontiers in Physics 2 (2014), 10.3389/fphy.2014.00005. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphy.2014.00005 · DOI · Paper page
  11. [16]A. Mller-Hermes, D. S. Fran¸ ca, and M. M. Wolf, Journal of Mathematical Physics 57 , 022202 (2016).
  12. [18]S. Bubeck, Foundations and Trends R © in Machine Learning 8 , 231 (2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/2200000050 · DOI
  13. [19]S. Aaronson, X. Chen, E. Hazan, S. Kale, and A. Nayak, Journal of Statistical Mechanics: Theory and Experiment 2019 , 124019 (2019).
  14. 2018 (ACM Press, 2018).
  15. [21]F. G. Brand˜ ao, A. Kalev, T. Li, C. Y.-Y. Lin, K. M. Svore, and X. Wu, arXiv preprint arXiv:1710.02581 (2017). · arXiv
  16. [22]F. G. S. L. Brando, R. Kueng, and D. S. Frana, 'Faster quantum and classical sdp approximations for quadratic binary optimization,' (2019), arXiv:1909.04613 [cs.DS]. · arXiv
  17. [23]A. Youssry, C. Ferrie, and M. Tomamichel, New Journal of Physics 21 , 033006 (2019).
  18. [24]D. Petz, Communications in Mathematical Physics 114 , 345 (1988). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01225040 · DOI
  19. [25]D. A. Levin and Y. Peres, Markov chains and mixing times , Vol. 107 (American Mathematical Soc., 2017).
  20. [26]R. Eldan, F. Koehler, and O. Zeitouni, 'A Spectral Condition for Spectral Gap: Fast Mixing in High-Temperature Ising Models,' (2020), arXiv:2007.08200v1, 2007.08200. · arXiv
  21. [27]G. A. Kochenberger, J.-K. Hao, Z. L, H. Wang, and F. Glover, Journal of Heuristics 19 , 565 (2011).
  22. [28]I. Dunning, S. Gupta, and J. Silberholz, INFORMS Journal on Computing 30 , 608 (2018).
  23. [29]A. Yurtsever, J. A. Tropp, O. Fercoq, M. Udell, and V. Cevher, arXiv preprint arXiv:1912.02949 (2019). · arXiv
  24. [30]E. Crosson and S. Slezak, 'Classical Simulation of High Temperature Quantum Ising Models,' (2020), arXiv:2002.02232v1, 2002.02232. · arXiv
  25. [31]A. Harrow, S. Mehraban, and M. Soleimanifar, 'Classical algorithms, correlation decay, and complex zeros of partition functions of quantum many-body systems,' (2019), arXiv:1910.09071v1, 1910.09071. · arXiv
  26. [32]T. Kuwahara, K. Kato, and F. G. Brando, Physical Review Letters 124 (2020), 10.1103/physrevlett.124.220601. · DOI
  27. [37]S. R. White, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 , 190601 (2009). http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.190601 · DOI
  28. [40]S. Jansen, M.-B. Ruskai, and R. Seiler, Journal of Mathematical Physics 48 , 102111 (2007).
  29. [41]M. H. S. Amin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 , 220401 (2009). http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.220401 · DOI
  30. [42]M. J. Kastoryano and K. Temme, Journal of Mathematical Physics 54 , 052202 (2013).
  31. [43]R. Olkiewicz and B. Zegarlinski, Journal of Functional Analysis 161 , 246 (1999).
  32. [44]S. Beigi, N. Datta, and C. Rouz´ e, Communications in Mathematical Physics 376 , 753 (2020). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-020-03750-z · DOI
  33. [46]T. Albash and D. A. Lidar, Physical Review A 91 (2015), 10.1103/physreva.91.062320. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.91.062320 · DOI
  34. [49]V. S. Denchev, S. Boixo, S. V. Isakov, N. Ding, R. Babbush, V. Smelyanskiy, J. Martinis, and H. Neven, Physical Review X 6 (2016), 10.1103/physrevx.6.031015. · DOI · Paper page
  35. [50]M. Aramon, G. Rosenberg, E. Valiante, T. Miyazawa, H. Tamura, and H. G. Katzgraber, Frontiers in Physics 7 (2019), 10.3389/fphy.2019.00048. · DOI · Paper page
  36. [52]I. Bardet and C. Rouz´ e, arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.05379 (2018). · arXiv
  37. [55]M. Mller-Lennert, F. Dupuis, O. Szehr, S. Fehr, and M. Tomamichel, Journal of Mathematical Physics 54 , 122203 (2013).
  38. [56]N. Datta, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 55 , 2816 (2009). http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/tit.2009.2018325 · DOI
  39. [58]M. J. Kastoryano, D. Reeb, and M. M. Wolf, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 45 , 075307 (2012).
  40. [59]L. Lami and M. Huber, Journal of Mathematical Physics 57 , 092201 (2016).
  41. [60]E. P. Hanson, C. Rouz´ e, and D. S. Fran¸ ca, Annales Henri Poincar´ e (2020), 10.1007/s00023-020-00906-4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00023-020-00906-4 · DOI
  42. [61]A. Harrow and J. Napp, 'Low-depth gradient measurements can improve convergence in variational hybrid quantum-classical algorithms,' (2019), arXiv:1901.05374 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  43. [62]Y. Ge, A. Moln´ ar, and J. I. Cirac, Physical Review Letters 116 (2016), 10.1103/physrevlett.116.080503. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.116.080503 · DOI
  44. [63]E. Farhi, D. Gamarnik, and S. Gutmann, 'The Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm Needs to See the Whole Graph: Worst Case Examples,' (2020), arXiv:2005.08747v1, 2005.08747. · arXiv
  45. [64]S. Bravyi, A. Kliesch, R. Koenig, and E. Tang, 'Obstacles to State Preparation and Variational Optimization from Symmetry Protection,' (2019), arXiv:1910.08980v1, 1910.08980. · arXiv
  46. [65]M. X. Goemans and D. P. Williamson, Journal of the ACM (JACM) 42 , 1115 (1995).
  47. [67]M. B. Hastings and T. Koma, Communications in Mathematical Physics 265 , 781 (2006). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-006-0030-4 · DOI
  48. [68]R. Ors, Annals of Physics 349 , 117158 (2014). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aop.2014.06.013 · DOI · Paper page
  49. [69]I. H. Kim and B. Swingle, 'Robust entanglement renormalization on a noisy quantum computer,' (2017), arXiv:1711.07500 [quant-ph]. · arXiv
  50. [70]I. H. Kim, 'Noise-resilient preparation of quantum manybody ground states,' (2017), arXiv:1703.00032 [quantph]. · arXiv
  51. [71]J. Borregaard, M. Christandl, and D. S. Frana, 'Noise-robust exploration of quantum matter on nearterm quantum devices,' (2019), arXiv:1909.04786v1, 1909.04786. · arXiv
  52. [72]F. G. S. L. Brandao and K. M. Svore, in 58th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer ScienceFOCS 2017 (IEEE Computer Soc., Los Alamitos, CA, 2017) pp. 415-426.
  53. [73]M. Christandl and A. Mller-Hermes, Communications in Mathematical Physics 353 , 821 (2017). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-017-2885-y · DOI
  54. [74]A. A. Budini, Physical Review A 64 (2001), 10.1103/physreva.64.052110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.64.052110 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Franca, D. S., & Garcia-Patron, R.
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2020
Volume
17
Issue
11
Pages
1221-1227
ISSN
1745-2473 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3086576671
Cited by
234
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 51 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 3
FWCI
12.87
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Physics (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • Research at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Villum Fonden (10059)
  • Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
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
noisy quantum devices, quantum advantage, optimization algorithms, variational quantum algorithms, quantum annealing, entropy inequality, noise models, quantum error correction

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