Skip to main content
U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Lower Bounds on Quantum Annealing Times

Journal Article · · Physical Review Letters
 [1];  [2];  [3];  [4]
  1. Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD (United States). Joint Quantum Institute and Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science; Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)
  2. NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA (United States). Quantum Artificial Intelligence Laboratory; KBR, Houston, TX (United States)
  3. Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD (United States). Joint Quantum Institute and Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science
  4. Univ. of Maryland, College Park, MD (United States). Joint Center for Quantum Information and Computer Science; National Inst. of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, MD (United States)

The adiabatic theorem provides sufficient conditions for the time needed to prepare a target ground state. While it is possible to prepare a target state much faster with more general quantum annealing protocols, rigorous results beyond the adiabatic regime are rare. Here, we provide such a result, deriving lower bounds on the time needed to successfully perform quantum annealing. The bounds are asymptotically saturated by three toy models where fast annealing schedules are known: the Roland and Cerf unstructured search model, the Hamming spike problem, and the ferromagnetic p-spin model. Our bounds demonstrate that these schedules have optimal scaling. Herein, our results also show that rapid annealing requires coherent superpositions of energy eigenstates, singling out quantum coherence as a computational resource.

Research Organization:
Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Los Alamos, NM (United States)
Sponsoring Organization:
USDOE National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA); USDOE Office of Science (SC), Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR); National Science Foundation (NSF)
Grant/Contract Number:
89233218CNA000001; AC52-06NA25396; PHY-1748958; SC0020312; OMA-2120757
OSTI ID:
2008288
Report Number(s):
LA-UR-23-21139; TRN: US2406435
Journal Information:
Physical Review Letters, Vol. 130, Issue 14; ISSN 0031-9007
Publisher:
American Physical Society (APS)Copyright Statement
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English

References (39)

Relation between quantum fluctuations and the performance enhancement of quantum annealing in a nonstoquastic Hamiltonian journal April 2017
Prospects for quantum enhancement with diabatic quantum annealing journal May 2021
Adiabatic quantum computation journal January 2018
Nonstoquastic Hamiltonians and quantum annealing of an Ising spin glass journal May 2017
Anderson localization makes adiabatic quantum optimization fail journal June 2010
Bounds for the adiabatic approximation with applications to quantum computation journal October 2007
Bang-bang control as a design principle for classical and quantum optimization algorithms journal May 2019
Tunneling and Speedup in Quantum Optimization for Permutation-Symmetric Problems journal July 2016
Necessary adiabatic run times in quantum optimization journal March 2017
Shortcuts to Adiabaticity by Counterdiabatic Driving journal September 2013
Non-stoquastic Hamiltonians in quantum annealing via geometric phases journal September 2017
Counterdiabatic driving in the quantum annealing of the p -spin model: A variational approach journal March 2020
Analog nature of quantum adiabatic unstructured search journal November 2019
Quantifying Coherence journal September 2014
Polynomial scaling of the quantum approximate optimization algorithm for ground-state preparation of the fully connected p -spin ferromagnet in a transverse field journal December 2020
Quantum annealing in the transverse Ising model journal November 1998
Necessary condition for the quantum adiabatic approximation journal March 2010
Many-body transverse interactions in the quantum annealing of thep-spin ferromagnet journal October 2012
Adiabatic Quantum Computation Is Equivalent to Standard Quantum Computation journal January 2008
Coherence as a Resource for Shor’s Algorithm journal September 2022
Quantum annealing with antiferromagnetic fluctuations journal May 2012
Spectral-gap analysis for efficient tunneling in quantum adiabatic optimization journal September 2016
Adiabatic Population Transfer with Control Fields journal November 2003
Quantum search by local adiabatic evolution journal March 2002
Genetic optimization of quantum annealing journal January 2022
Focus on Shortcuts to Adiabaticity journal May 2019
Analog quantum approximate optimization algorithm journal September 2022
Coherence depletion in the Grover quantum search algorithm journal March 2017
How quantum is the speedup in adiabatic unstructured search? journal April 2019
Quantum adiabatic algorithms, small gaps, and different paths journal March 2011
Colloquium : Quantum coherence as a resource journal October 2017
Diffusion Monte Carlo approach versus adiabatic computation for local Hamiltonians journal February 2018
Coherence as a resource in decision problems: The Deutsch-Jozsa algorithm and a variation journal January 2016
Beweis des Adiabatensatzes journal March 1928
On quantum mean-field models and their quantum annealing journal June 2012
De-Signing Hamiltonians for Quantum Adiabatic Optimization journal September 2020
Trace-distance measure of coherence journal January 2016
Transitionless quantum driving journal August 2009
Perspectives of quantum annealing: methods and implementations journal May 2020