More Like this

1. Quantum approximate optimization of the long-range Ising model with a trapped-ion quantum simulator

   https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2006373117  

   Pagano, Guido ; Bapat, Aniruddha ; Becker, Patrick ; Collins, Katherine S. ; De, Arinjoy ; Hess, Paul W. ; Kaplan, Harvey B. ; Kyprianidis, Antonis ; Tan, Wen Lin ; Baldwin, Christopher ; et al ( October 2020 , Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences)

   null (Ed.)

   Quantum computers and simulators may offer significant advantages over their classical counterparts, providing insights into quantum many-body systems and possibly improving performance for solving exponentially hard problems, such as optimization and satisfiability. Here, we report the implementation of a low-depth Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) using an analog quantum simulator. We estimate the ground-state energy of the Transverse Field Ising Model with long-range interactions with tunable range, and we optimize the corresponding combinatorial classical problem by sampling the QAOA output with high-fidelity, single-shot, individual qubit measurements. We execute the algorithm with both an exhaustive search and closed-loop optimization of the variational parameters, approximating the ground-state energy with up to 40 trapped-ion qubits. We benchmark the experiment with bootstrapping heuristic methods scaling polynomially with the system size. We observe, in agreement with numerics, that the QAOA performance does not degrade significantly as we scale up the system size and that the runtime is approximately independent from the number of qubits. We finally give a comprehensive analysis of the errors occurring in our system, a crucial step in the path forward toward the application of the QAOA to more general problem instances. 

   more » « less
2. On the approximability of random-hypergraph MAX-3-XORSAT problems with quantum algorithms

   Eliot Kapit, Brandon A. ( December 2023 , arXivorg)

   Constraint satisfaction problems are an important area of computer science. Many of these problems are in the complexity class NP which is exponentially hard for all known methods, both for worst cases and often typical. Fundamentally, the lack of any guided local minimum escape method ensures the hardness of both exact and approximate optimization classically, but the intuitive mechanism for approximation hardness in quantum algorithms based on Hamiltonian time evolution is poorly understood. We explore this question using the prototypically hard MAX-3-XORSAT problem class. We conclude that the mechanisms for quantum exact and approximation hardness are fundamentally distinct. We qualitatively identify why traditional methods such as quantum adiabatic optimization are not good approximation algorithms. We propose a new spectral folding optimization method that does not suffer from these issues and study it analytically and numerically. We consider random rank-3 hypergraphs including extremal planted solution instances, where the ground state satisfies an anomalously high fraction of constraints compared to truly random problems. We show that, if we define the energy to be E=Nunsat−Nsat, then spectrally folded quantum optimization will return states with energy E≤AEGS (where EGS is the ground state energy) in polynomial time, where conservatively, A≃0.6. We thoroughly benchmark variations of spectrally folded quantum optimization for random classically approximation-hard (planted solution) instances in simulation, and find performance consistent with this prediction. We do not claim that this approximation guarantee holds for all possible hypergraphs, though our algorithm's mechanism can likely generalize widely. These results suggest that quantum computers are more powerful for approximate optimization than had been previously assumed. 

   more » « less
3. How many qubits are needed for quantum computational supremacy?

   https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2020-05-11-264  

   Dalzell, Alexander M. ; Harrow, Aram W. ; Koh, Dax Enshan ; La Placa, Rolando L. ( May 2020 , Quantum)

   null (Ed.)

   Quantum computational supremacy arguments, which describe a way for a quantum computer to perform a task that cannot also be done by a classical computer, typically require some sort of computational assumption related to the limitations of classical computation. One common assumption is that the polynomial hierarchy ( P H ) does not collapse, a stronger version of the statement that P ≠ N P , which leads to the conclusion that any classical simulation of certain families of quantum circuits requires time scaling worse than any polynomial in the size of the circuits. However, the asymptotic nature of this conclusion prevents us from calculating exactly how many qubits these quantum circuits must have for their classical simulation to be intractable on modern classical supercomputers. We refine these quantum computational supremacy arguments and perform such a calculation by imposing fine-grained versions of the non-collapse conjecture. Our first two conjectures poly3-NSETH( a ) and per-int-NSETH( b ) take specific classical counting problems related to the number of zeros of a degree-3 polynomial in n variables over F 2 or the permanent of an n × n integer-valued matrix, and assert that any non-deterministic algorithm that solves them requires 2 c n time steps, where c ∈ { a , b } . A third conjecture poly3-ave-SBSETH( a ′ ) asserts a similar statement about average-case algorithms living in the exponential-time version of the complexity class S B P . We analyze evidence for these conjectures and argue that they are plausible when a = 1 / 2 , b = 0.999 and a ′ = 1 / 2 .Imposing poly3-NSETH(1/2) and per-int-NSETH(0.999), and assuming that the runtime of a hypothetical quantum circuit simulation algorithm would scale linearly with the number of gates/constraints/optical elements, we conclude that Instantaneous Quantum Polynomial-Time (IQP) circuits with 208 qubits and 500 gates, Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) circuits with 420 qubits and 500 constraints and boson sampling circuits (i.e. linear optical networks) with 98 photons and 500 optical elements are large enough for the task of producing samples from their output distributions up to constant multiplicative error to be intractable on current technology. Imposing poly3-ave-SBSETH(1/2), we additionally rule out simulations with constant additive error for IQP and QAOA circuits of the same size. Without the assumption of linearly increasing simulation time, we can make analogous statements for circuits with slightly fewer qubits but requiring 10 4 to 10 7 gates. 

   more » « less
4. Constrained quantum optimization for extractive summarization on a trapped-ion quantum computer

   https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-20853-w  

   Niroula, Pradeep ; Shaydulin, Ruslan ; Yalovetzky, Romina ; Minssen, Pierre ; Herman, Dylan ; Hu, Shaohan ; Pistoia, Marco ( October 2022 , Scientific Reports)

   Realizing the potential of near-term quantum computers to solve industry-relevant constrained-optimization problems is a promising path to quantum advantage. In this work, we consider the extractive summarization constrained-optimization problem and demonstrate the largest-to-date execution of a quantum optimization algorithm that natively preserves constraints on quantum hardware. We report results with the Quantum Alternating Operator Ansatz algorithm with a Hamming-weight-preserving XY mixer (XY-QAOA) on trapped-ion quantum computer. We successfully execute XY-QAOA circuits that restrict the quantum evolution to the in-constraint subspace, using up to 20 qubits and a two-qubit gate depth of up to 159. We demonstrate the necessity of directly encoding the constraints into the quantum circuit by showing the trade-off between the in-constraint probability and the quality of the solution that is implicit if unconstrained quantum optimization methods are used. We show that this trade-off makes choosing good parameters difficult in general. We compare XY-QAOA to the Layer Variational Quantum Eigensolver algorithm, which has a highly expressive constant-depth circuit, and the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm. We discuss the respective trade-offs of the algorithms and implications for their execution on near-term quantum hardware.

    

   more » « less
5. Provably efficient machine learning for quantum many-body problems

   https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abk3333  

   Huang, Hsin-Yuan ; Kueng, Richard ; Torlai, Giacomo ; Albert, Victor V. ; Preskill, John ( September 2022 , Science)

   INTRODUCTION Solving quantum many-body problems, such as finding ground states of quantum systems, has far-reaching consequences for physics, materials science, and chemistry. Classical computers have facilitated many profound advances in science and technology, but they often struggle to solve such problems. Scalable, fault-tolerant quantum computers will be able to solve a broad array of quantum problems but are unlikely to be available for years to come. Meanwhile, how can we best exploit our powerful classical computers to advance our understanding of complex quantum systems? Recently, classical machine learning (ML) techniques have been adapted to investigate problems in quantum many-body physics. So far, these approaches are mostly heuristic, reflecting the general paucity of rigorous theory in ML. Although they have been shown to be effective in some intermediate-size experiments, these methods are generally not backed by convincing theoretical arguments to ensure good performance. RATIONALE A central question is whether classical ML algorithms can provably outperform non-ML algorithms in challenging quantum many-body problems. We provide a concrete answer by devising and analyzing classical ML algorithms for predicting the properties of ground states of quantum systems. We prove that these ML algorithms can efficiently and accurately predict ground-state properties of gapped local Hamiltonians, after learning from data obtained by measuring other ground states in the same quantum phase of matter. Furthermore, under a widely accepted complexity-theoretic conjecture, we prove that no efficient classical algorithm that does not learn from data can achieve the same prediction guarantee. By generalizing from experimental data, ML algorithms can solve quantum many-body problems that could not be solved efficiently without access to experimental data. RESULTS We consider a family of gapped local quantum Hamiltonians, where the Hamiltonian H ( x ) depends smoothly on m parameters (denoted by x ). The ML algorithm learns from a set of training data consisting of sampled values of x , each accompanied by a classical representation of the ground state of H ( x ). These training data could be obtained from either classical simulations or quantum experiments. During the prediction phase, the ML algorithm predicts a classical representation of ground states for Hamiltonians different from those in the training data; ground-state properties can then be estimated using the predicted classical representation. Specifically, our classical ML algorithm predicts expectation values of products of local observables in the ground state, with a small error when averaged over the value of x . The run time of the algorithm and the amount of training data required both scale polynomially in m and linearly in the size of the quantum system. Our proof of this result builds on recent developments in quantum information theory, computational learning theory, and condensed matter theory. Furthermore, under the widely accepted conjecture that nondeterministic polynomial-time (NP)–complete problems cannot be solved in randomized polynomial time, we prove that no polynomial-time classical algorithm that does not learn from data can match the prediction performance achieved by the ML algorithm. In a related contribution using similar proof techniques, we show that classical ML algorithms can efficiently learn how to classify quantum phases of matter. In this scenario, the training data consist of classical representations of quantum states, where each state carries a label indicating whether it belongs to phase A or phase B . The ML algorithm then predicts the phase label for quantum states that were not encountered during training. The classical ML algorithm not only classifies phases accurately, but also constructs an explicit classifying function. Numerical experiments verify that our proposed ML algorithms work well in a variety of scenarios, including Rydberg atom systems, two-dimensional random Heisenberg models, symmetry-protected topological phases, and topologically ordered phases. CONCLUSION We have rigorously established that classical ML algorithms, informed by data collected in physical experiments, can effectively address some quantum many-body problems. These rigorous results boost our hopes that classical ML trained on experimental data can solve practical problems in chemistry and materials science that would be too hard to solve using classical processing alone. Our arguments build on the concept of a succinct classical representation of quantum states derived from randomized Pauli measurements. Although some quantum devices lack the local control needed to perform such measurements, we expect that other classical representations could be exploited by classical ML with similarly powerful results. How can we make use of accessible measurement data to predict properties reliably? Answering such questions will expand the reach of near-term quantum platforms. Classical algorithms for quantum many-body problems. Classical ML algorithms learn from training data, obtained from either classical simulations or quantum experiments. Then, the ML algorithm produces a classical representation for the ground state of a physical system that was not encountered during training. Classical algorithms that do not learn from data may require substantially longer computation time to achieve the same task. 

   more » « less