Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:2009.05726 · Physical Review A

Diagonal catalysts in quantum adiabatic optimization

Tameem Albash, Matthew Kowalsky

Published Feb 15, 2021• 13 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We propose a protocol for quantum adiabatic optimization whereby an intermediary Hamiltonian that is diagonal in the computational basis is turned on and off during the interpolation. This ``diagonal catalyst'' serves to bias the energy landscape towards a given spin configuration, and we show how this can remove the first-order phase transition present in the standard protocol for the ferromagnetic $p$ spin and the weak-strong cluster problems. The success of the protocol also makes clear how it can fail: biasing the energy landscape towards a state only helps in finding the ground state if the Hamming distance from the ground state and the energy of the biased state are correlated. We present examples where biasing towards low-energy states that are nonetheless very far in Hamming distance from the ground state can severely worsen the efficiency of the algorithm compared to the standard protocol. Our results for the diagonal catalyst protocol are analogous to results exhibited by adiabatic reverse annealing, so our conclusions should apply to that protocol as well.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.103.022608

Related papers

Reshaping quantum annealing landscapes with diagonal catalysts

Andrés N. Cáliz, Carlos Ramon-Escandell, Finnley Paolella +4 more

Quantum annealing is often limited by population trapped in local minima many spin flips from the solution. We introduce a mathematical framework to understand the connection between energy and Hamming distance in optimization problems. Using this, we build ZZ-catalysts from ground-state patterns of small frustration-free subproblems that make configurations far from the solution less energetically competitive. On sparse problems they multiply the near-solution probability at short sweeps, with gains persisting on fully-connected models and tunable via subproblem choice.

quant-pharXiv:2607.14063•Jul 16, 2026•0 citations

Improving the efficiency of quantum annealing with controlled diagonal catalysts

T Hattori, Shu Tanaka

Quantum annealing is a promising algorithm for solving combinatorial optimization problems. It searches for the ground state of the Ising model, which corresponds to the optimal solution of a given combinatorial optimization problem. The guiding principle of quantum annealing is the adiabatic theorem in quantum mechanics, which guarantees that a system remains in the ground state of its Hamiltonian if the time evolution is sufficiently slow. According to the adiabatic theorem, the annealing time required for quantum annealing to satisfy the adiabaticity scales inversely proportional to the square of the minimum energy gap between the ground state and the first excited state during time evolution. As a result, finding the ground state becomes significantly more difficult when the energy gap is small, creating a major bottleneck in quantum annealing. Expanding the energy gap is one strategy for improving the performance of quantum annealing; however, its implementation in actual hardware remains difficult. This study proposes a method for efficiently solving instances with small energy gaps by introducing additional local terms to the Hamiltonian and exploiting the diabatic transition remaining in the small energy gap. The proposed method achieves an approximate quadratic speedup of the exponential scaling exponent in time to solution compared to the conventional quantum annealing. In addition, we investigate the transferability of the parameters obtained with the proposed method.

arXiv:2503.15244•Physical Review A•Feb 3, 2026•3 citations

Standard quantum annealing outperforms adiabatic reverse annealing with decoherence

Gianluca Passarelli, Ka-Wa Yip, Daniel A. Lidar +1 more

We study adiabatic reverse annealing (ARA) in an open system. In the closed system (unitary) setting, this annealing protocol allows avoidance of first-order quantum phase transitions of selected models, resulting in an exponential speedup compared with standard quantum annealing, provided that the initial state of the algorithm is close in Hamming distance to the target one. Here, we show that decoherence can significantly modify this conclusion: by resorting to the adiabatic master equation approach, we simulate the dynamics of the ferromagnetic $p$-spin model with $p=3$ under independent and collective dephasing. For both models of decoherence, we show that the performance of open system ARA is far less sensitive to the choice of the initial state than its unitary counterpart, and, most significantly, that open system ARA by and large loses its time to solution advantage compared to standard quantum annealing. These results suggest that as a stand-alone strategy ARA is unlikely to experimentally outperform standard ``forward'' quantum annealing, and that error mitigation strategies will likely be required in order to realize the benefits of ARA in realistic, noisy settings.

arXiv:2201.11997•Physical Review A•Mar 18, 2022•14 citations

Simulated outperforms quantum reverse annealing in mean-field models

Christopher L. Baldwin

Adiabatic reverse annealing (ARA) has been proposed as an improvement to conventional quantum annealing for solving optimization problems, in which one takes advantage of an initial guess at the solution to suppress problematic phase transitions. Here we interpret the performance of ARA through its effects on the free energy landscape, and use the intuition gained to introduce a classical analogue to ARA termed ``simulated reverse annealing'' (SRA). This makes it more difficult to claim that ARA provides a quantum advantage in solving a given problem, as not only must ARA succeed but the corresponding SRA must fail. As a solvable example, we analyze how both protocols behave in the infinite-range (non-disordered) $p$-spin model. Through both the thermodynamic phase diagrams and explicit dynamical behavior, we establish that the quantum algorithm has no advantage over its classical counterpart: SRA succeeds not only in every case where ARA does but even in a narrow range of parameters where ARA fails.

arXiv:2511.00150•Oct 31, 2025•0 citations

Case studies in quantum adiabatic optimization

David Gosset

Quantum adiabatic optimization is a quantum algorithm for solving classical optimization problems (E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, and M. Sipser. Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution, 2000. arXiv:quant-ph/0001106). The solution to an optimization prob-lem is encoded in the ground state of a "problem Hamiltonian " Hp which acts on the Hilbert space of n spin 1/2 particles and is diagonal in the Pauli z basis. To produce this ground state, one first initializes the quantum system in the ground state of a different Hamiltonian and then adiabatically changes the Hamiltonian into Hp. Farhi et al suggest the interpolating Hamiltonian i where the parameter s is slowly changed as a function of time between 0 and 1. The running time of this algorithm is related to the minimum spectral gap of H(s) for s E (0, 11. We study such transverse field spin Hamiltonians using both analytic and numerical techniques. Our approach is example-based, that is, we study some specific choices for the problem Hamiltonian Hp which illustrate the breadth of phenomena which can occur. We

•Jan 1, 2011•1 citation

Role of nonstoquastic catalysts in quantum adiabatic optimization

Tameem Albash

The viability of nonstoquastic catalyst Hamiltonians to deliver consistent quantum speedups in quantum adiabatic optimization remains an open question. The infinite-range ferromagnetic $p$-spin model is a rare example exhibiting an exponential advantage for nonstoquastic catalysts over its stoquastic counterpart. We revisit this model and note how the incremental changes in the ground-state wave function give an indication of how the nonstoquastic catalyst provides an advantage. We then construct two new examples that exhibit an advantage for nonstoquastic catalysts over stoquastic catalysts. The first is another infinite range model that is only 2-local, but also exhibits an exponential advantage, and the second is a geometrically local Ising example that exhibits a growing advantage up to the maximum system size we study.

arXiv:1811.09980•Physical Review A•Apr 26, 2019•52 citations
We propose a protocol for quantum adiabatic optimization whereby an intermediary Hamiltonian that is diagonal in the computational basis is turned on and off during the interpolation. This ``diagonal catalyst'' serves to bias the energy landscape towards a given spin configuration, and we show how this can remove the first-order phase transition present in the standard protocol for the ferromagnetic ppp spin and the weak-strong cluster problems. The success of the protocol also makes clear how it can fail: biasing the energy landscape towards a state only helps in finding the ground state if the Hamming distance from the ground state and the energy of the biased state are correlated. We present examples where biasing towards low-energy states that are nonetheless very far in Hamming distance from the ground state can severely worsen the efficiency of the algorithm compared to the standard protocol. Our results for the diagonal catalyst protocol are analogous to results exhibited by adiabatic reverse annealing, so our conclusions should apply to that protocol as well.
Quantum annealing is often limited by population trapped in local minima many spin flips from the solution. We introduce a mathematical framework to understand the connection between energy and Hamming distance in optimization problems. Using this, we build ZZ-catalysts from ground-state patterns of small frustration-free subproblems that make configurations far from the solution less energetically competitive. On sparse problems they multiply the near-solution probability at short sweeps, with gains persisting on fully-connected models and tunable via subproblem choice.
Quantum annealing is a promising algorithm for solving combinatorial optimization problems. It searches for the ground state of the Ising model, which corresponds to the optimal solution of a given combinatorial optimization problem. The guiding principle of quantum annealing is the adiabatic theorem in quantum mechanics, which guarantees that a system remains in the ground state of its Hamiltonian if the time evolution is sufficiently slow. According to the adiabatic theorem, the annealing time required for quantum annealing to satisfy the adiabaticity scales inversely proportional to the square of the minimum energy gap between the ground state and the first excited state during time evolution. As a result, finding the ground state becomes significantly more difficult when the energy gap is small, creating a major bottleneck in quantum annealing. Expanding the energy gap is one strategy for improving the performance of quantum annealing; however, its implementation in actual hardware remains difficult. This study proposes a method for efficiently solving instances with small energy gaps by introducing additional local terms to the Hamiltonian and exploiting the diabatic transition remaining in the small energy gap. The proposed method achieves an approximate quadratic speedup of the exponential scaling exponent in time to solution compared to the conventional quantum annealing. In addition, we investigate the transferability of the parameters obtained with the proposed method.
We study adiabatic reverse annealing (ARA) in an open system. In the closed system (unitary) setting, this annealing protocol allows avoidance of first-order quantum phase transitions of selected models, resulting in an exponential speedup compared with standard quantum annealing, provided that the initial state of the algorithm is close in Hamming distance to the target one. Here, we show that decoherence can significantly modify this conclusion: by resorting to the adiabatic master equation approach, we simulate the dynamics of the ferromagnetic ppp-spin model with p=3p=3p=3 under independent and collective dephasing. For both models of decoherence, we show that the performance of open system ARA is far less sensitive to the choice of the initial state than its unitary counterpart, and, most significantly, that open system ARA by and large loses its time to solution advantage compared to standard quantum annealing. These results suggest that as a stand-alone strategy ARA is unlikely to experimentally outperform standard ``forward'' quantum annealing, and that error mitigation strategies will likely be required in order to realize the benefits of ARA in realistic, noisy settings.
Adiabatic reverse annealing (ARA) has been proposed as an improvement to conventional quantum annealing for solving optimization problems, in which one takes advantage of an initial guess at the solution to suppress problematic phase transitions. Here we interpret the performance of ARA through its effects on the free energy landscape, and use the intuition gained to introduce a classical analogue to ARA termed ``simulated reverse annealing'' (SRA). This makes it more difficult to claim that ARA provides a quantum advantage in solving a given problem, as not only must ARA succeed but the corresponding SRA must fail. As a solvable example, we analyze how both protocols behave in the infinite-range (non-disordered) ppp-spin model. Through both the thermodynamic phase diagrams and explicit dynamical behavior, we establish that the quantum algorithm has no advantage over its classical counterpart: SRA succeeds not only in every case where ARA does but even in a narrow range of parameters where ARA fails.
Quantum adiabatic optimization is a quantum algorithm for solving classical optimization problems (E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, and M. Sipser. Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution, 2000. arXiv:quant-ph/0001106). The solution to an optimization prob-lem is encoded in the ground state of a "problem Hamiltonian " Hp which acts on the Hilbert space of n spin 1/2 particles and is diagonal in the Pauli z basis. To produce this ground state, one first initializes the quantum system in the ground state of a different Hamiltonian and then adiabatically changes the Hamiltonian into Hp. Farhi et al suggest the interpolating Hamiltonian i where the parameter s is slowly changed as a function of time between 0 and 1. The running time of this algorithm is related to the minimum spectral gap of H(s) for s E (0, 11. We study such transverse field spin Hamiltonians using both analytic and numerical techniques. Our approach is example-based, that is, we study some specific choices for the problem Hamiltonian Hp which illustrate the breadth of phenomena which can occur. We
The viability of nonstoquastic catalyst Hamiltonians to deliver consistent quantum speedups in quantum adiabatic optimization remains an open question. The infinite-range ferromagnetic ppp-spin model is a rare example exhibiting an exponential advantage for nonstoquastic catalysts over its stoquastic counterpart. We revisit this model and note how the incremental changes in the ground-state wave function give an indication of how the nonstoquastic catalyst provides an advantage. We then construct two new examples that exhibit an advantage for nonstoquastic catalysts over stoquastic catalysts. The first is another infinite range model that is only 2-local, but also exhibits an exponential advantage, and the second is a geometrically local Ising example that exhibits a growing advantage up to the maximum system size we study.