Pre- and post-processing in quantum-computational hydrologic inverse analysis

It was recently shown that certain subsurface hydrological inverse problems -- here framed as determining the composition of an aquifer from pressure readings -- can be solved on a quantum annealer. However, the quantum annealer performance suffered when solving problems where the aquifer was composed of materials with vastly different permeability, which is often encountered in practice. In this paper, we study why this regime is difficult and use several pre- and post-processing tools to address these issues. This study has three benefits: it improves quantum annealing performance for real-world problems in hydrology, it studies the scaling behavior for these problems (which were previously studied at a fixed size), and it elucidates a challenging class of problems that are amenable to quantum annealers.

[1]  Velimir V. Vesselinov,et al.  A Combined Probabilistic/Nonprobabilistic Decision Analysis for Contaminant Remediation , 2014, SIAM/ASA J. Uncertain. Quantification.

[2]  Endre Boros,et al.  Preprocessing of unconstrained quadratic binary optimization , 2006 .

[3]  Peter K. Kitanidis,et al.  Large‐scale hydraulic tomography and joint inversion of head and tracer data using the Principal Component Geostatistical Approach (PCGA) , 2014 .

[4]  Daniel O'Malley,et al.  Learning to regularize with a variational autoencoder for hydrologic inverse analysis , 2019, ArXiv.

[5]  Daniel O'Malley.  An approach to quantum-computational hydrologic inverse analysis , 2018, Scientific Reports.

[6]  Wolfgang Mauerer,et al.  Approximate approximation on a quantum annealer , 2020, CF.

[7]  Fengqi You,et al.  Quantum computing for energy systems optimization: Challenges and opportunities , 2019, Energy.

[8]  Laurent Trenty,et al.  A benchmark study on problems related to CO2 storage in geologic formations , 2009 .

[9]  H. S. Viswanathan,et al.  Understanding hydraulic fracturing: a multi-scale problem , 2016, Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[10]  Zunsheng Jiao,et al.  Development of robust pressure management strategies for geologic CO2 sequestration , 2017 .

[11]  Jichun Wu,et al.  Deep Autoregressive Neural Networks for High‐Dimensional Inverse Problems in Groundwater Contaminant Source Identification , 2018, Water Resources Research.

[12]  John A. Cherry,et al.  Groundwater contamination: pump-and-treat remediation , 1989 .

[13]  Velimir V. Vesselinov,et al.  Large‐scale inverse model analyses employing fast randomized data reduction , 2017 .

[14]  Endre Boros,et al.  A max-flow approach to improved lower bounds for quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO) , 2008, Discret. Optim..

[15]  John E. Dorband,et al.  A Method of Finding a Lower Energy Solution to a QUBO/Ising Objective Function , 2018, ArXiv.

[16]  S Karra,et al.  Where Does Water Go During Hydraulic Fracturing? , 2016, Ground water.

[17]  Gili Rosenberg,et al.  Boosting quantum annealer performance via sample persistence , 2016, Quantum Inf. Process..

[18]  Velimir V. Vesselinov,et al.  A computationally efficient parallel Levenberg‐Marquardt algorithm for highly parameterized inverse model analyses , 2016 .