The pitfalls of planar spin-glass benchmarks: raising the bar for quantum annealers (again)

In an effort to overcome the limitations of random spin-glass benchmarks for quantum annealers, focus has shifted to carefully-crafted gadget-based problems whose logical structure has typically a planar topology. Recent experiments on these gadget problems using a commercially-available quantum annealer have demonstrated an impressive performance over a selection of commonly-used classical optimization heuristics. Here we show that efficient classical optimization techniques, such as minimum-weight perfect matching, can solve these gadget problems exactly and in polynomial time. We present approaches on how to mitigate this shortcoming of commonly-used benchmark problems based on planar logical topologies.

[1]  Vladimir Kolmogorov,et al.  Blossom V: a new implementation of a minimum cost perfect matching algorithm , 2009, Math. Program. Comput..

[2]  M. Silaghi,et al.  A new optimization algorithm , 2000 .

[3]  S. Knysh,et al.  Quantum Optimization of Fully-Connected Spin Glasses , 2014, 1406.7553.

[4]  Firas Hamze,et al.  Seeking Quantum Speedup Through Spin Glasses: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly , 2015, 1505.01545.

[5]  Daniel A. Lidar,et al.  Defining and detecting quantum speedup , 2014, Science.

[6]  Alex Selby Efficient subgraph-based sampling of Ising-type models with frustration , 2014, 1409.3934.

[7]  Mark W. Johnson,et al.  Architectural Considerations in the Design of a Superconducting Quantum Annealing Processor , 2014, IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity.

[8]  Alejandro Perdomo-Ortiz,et al.  Strengths and weaknesses of weak-strong cluster problems: A detailed overview of state-of-the-art classical heuristics versus quantum approaches , 2016, 1604.01746.

[9]  H. Rieger,et al.  New Optimization Algorithms in Physics: HARTMANN:NEW OPT.ALG.PHY. O-BK , 2004 .

[10]  Daniel A. Lidar,et al.  Evidence for quantum annealing with more than one hundred qubits , 2013, Nature Physics.

[11]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[12]  Itay Hen,et al.  Practical engineering of hard spin-glass instances , 2016, 1605.03607.

[13]  Andrew J. Ochoa,et al.  Efficient Cluster Algorithm for Spin Glasses in Any Space Dimension. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[14]  Daniel A. Lidar,et al.  Probing for quantum speedup in spin-glass problems with planted solutions , 2015, 1502.01663.

[15]  Firas Hamze,et al.  Erratum: Glassy Chimeras could be blind to quantum speedup: Designing better benchmarks for quantum annealing machines (Phys. Rev. X 4, 021008 (2014)) , 2015 .

[16]  Dimitri P. Bertsekas,et al.  Convex Optimization Algorithms , 2015 .

[17]  Ryan Babbush,et al.  What is the Computational Value of Finite Range Tunneling , 2015, 1512.02206.

[18]  Catherine C. McGeoch,et al.  Quantum Annealing amid Local Ruggedness and Global Frustration , 2017, Journal of the Physical Society of Japan.

[19]  Firas Hamze,et al.  Glassy Chimeras could be blind to quantum speedup: Designing better benchmarks for quantum annealing machines , 2014, 1401.1546.

[20]  Óscar Promio Muñoz Quantum Annealing in the transverse Ising Model , 2018 .

[21]  M. Sipser,et al.  Quantum Computation by Adiabatic Evolution , 2000, quant-ph/0001106.