Quantum adiabatic algorithm design using reinforcement learning

Quantum algorithm design plays a crucial role in exploiting the computational advantage of quantum devices. Here we develop a deep-reinforcement-learning based approach for quantum adiabatic algorithm design. Our approach is generically applicable to a class of problems with solution hard-to-find but easy-to-verify, e.g., searching and NP-complete problems. We benchmark this approach in Grover-search and 3-SAT problems, and find that the adiabatic algorithm obtained by our RL approach leads to significant improvement in the resultant success probability. In application to Grover search, our RL design automatically produces an adiabatic quantum algorithm that has the quadratic speedup. We find for all our studied cases that quantitatively the RL-designed algorithm has a better performance compared to the analytically constructed nonlinear Hamiltonian path when the encoding Hamiltonian is solvable, and that this RL-design approach remains applicable even when the nonlinear Hamiltonian path is not analytically available. In 3-SAT we find RL design has fascinating transferability---the adiabatic algorithm obtained by training on a specific choice of clause number leads to better performance consistently over the linear algorithm on different clause numbers. These findings suggest the applicability of reinforcement learning for automated quantum adiabatic algorithm design. Further considering the established complexity equivalence of circuit and adiabatic quantum algorithms, we expect the RL-designed adiabatic algorithm to inspire novel circuit algorithms as well. Our approach is potentially applicable to different quantum hardware from trapped ions and optical lattices to superconducting-qubit devices.

[1]  C. Monroe,et al.  Co-designing a scalable quantum computer with trapped atomic ions , 2016, npj Quantum Information.

[2]  Anthony D. Castellano,et al.  Genuine 12-Qubit Entanglement on a Superconducting Quantum Processor. , 2018, Physical review letters.

[3]  M. Yung,et al.  Neural-network-designed pulse sequences for robust control of singlet-Triplet qubits , 2017, 1708.00238.

[4]  R Bellman,et al.  On the Theory of Dynamic Programming. , 1952, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[5]  Shane Legg,et al.  Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning , 2015, Nature.

[6]  Michael J. Bremner,et al.  Quantum sampling problems, BosonSampling and quantum supremacy , 2017, npj Quantum Information.

[7]  E. Farhi,et al.  A Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithm Applied to Random Instances of an NP-Complete Problem , 2001, Science.

[8]  M. Lukin,et al.  Probing many-body dynamics on a 51-atom quantum simulator , 2017, Nature.

[9]  John Preskill,et al.  Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond , 2018, Quantum.

[10]  Demis Hassabis,et al.  Mastering the game of Go without human knowledge , 2017, Nature.

[11]  Aram W. Harrow,et al.  Quantum computational supremacy , 2017, Nature.

[12]  Edward Farhi,et al.  Analog analogue of a digital quantum computation , 1996 .

[13]  M. Berry,et al.  Transitionless quantum driving , 2009 .

[14]  Travis S. Humble,et al.  Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor , 2019, Nature.

[15]  Peter W. Shor,et al.  Polynomial-Time Algorithms for Prime Factorization and Discrete Logarithms on a Quantum Computer , 1995, SIAM Rev..

[16]  H Neven,et al.  A blueprint for demonstrating quantum supremacy with superconducting qubits , 2017, Science.

[17]  Aishwarya Kumar,et al.  Stern–Gerlach detection of neutral-atom qubits in a state-dependent optical lattice , 2018, Nature Physics.

[18]  N. Cerf,et al.  Quantum search by local adiabatic evolution , 2001, quant-ph/0107015.

[19]  Biao Wu,et al.  Exact Equivalence between Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm and Quantum Circuit Algorithm , 2017, Chinese Physics Letters.

[20]  J. G. Muga,et al.  Shortcut to adiabatic passage in two- and three-level atoms. , 2010, Physical review letters.

[21]  Hartmut Neven,et al.  Universal quantum control through deep reinforcement learning , 2019 .

[22]  N. Spagnolo,et al.  Photonic quantum information processing: a review , 2018, Reports on progress in physics. Physical Society.

[23]  Ming-Cheng Chen,et al.  Boson Sampling with 20 Input Photons and a 60-Mode Interferometer in a 10^{14}-Dimensional Hilbert Space. , 2019, Physical review letters.

[24]  Pankaj Mehta,et al.  Reinforcement Learning in Different Phases of Quantum Control , 2017, Physical Review X.

[25]  I. Chuang,et al.  Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: Bibliography , 2010 .

[26]  Daniel A. Lidar,et al.  Adiabatic quantum computation , 2016, 1611.04471.

[27]  R. Schoelkopf,et al.  Superconducting Circuits for Quantum Information: An Outlook , 2013, Science.

[28]  Mark W. Johnson,et al.  Observation of topological phenomena in a programmable lattice of 1,800 qubits , 2018, Nature.

[29]  I. Bloch Quantum simulations come of age , 2018, Nature Physics.

[30]  Lev Barash,et al.  Analog nature of quantum adiabatic unstructured search , 2019, New Journal of Physics.

[31]  Seth Lloyd,et al.  Adiabatic Quantum Computation Is Equivalent to Standard Quantum Computation , 2008, SIAM Rev..