In this exploratory numerical study, we assess the suitability of Quantum Linear Solvers(QLSs)toward providing a quantum advantage for Networks-based Linear System Problems (NLSPs). NLSPs naturally arise from graphs, and are of importance as they are connected to real-world applications. The achievable advantage with a QLS for an NLSP depends on the interplay between the scaling of condition number and sparsity of matrices associated with the graph family. We analyze 50 graph families and identify that within the scope of our study, only 21 of them exhibit prospects for an exponential advantage with the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd (HHL) algorithm relative to an efficient classical solver. We call graph families that offer advantage with HHL as good graph families. We also compare the performance of the considered 50 graph families with 7 other QLSs. Furthermore, we report that some graph families graduate from offering no advantage with HHL to promising an exponential advantage with improved algorithms such as the Childs-Kothari-Somma algorithm. We also introduce a unified graph superfamily and show the existence of infinite good graph families in it. Since the runtime expressions for linear solvers involve condition number, which in itself is not easy to compute, ascertaining advantage prospects with quantum linear solvers itself is not an easy problem. Thus, we conjecture the conditions under which one may visually examine a graph family and guess the prospects for an advantage. Finally, we very briefly touch upon some practical issues that may arise even if the aforementioned graph theoretic requirements are satisfied, including quantum hardware challenges.
In this exploratory numerical study, we assess the suitability of Quantum Linear Solvers(QLSs)toward providing a quantum advantage for Networks-based Linear System Problems (NLSPs). NLSPs naturally arise from graphs, and are of importance as they are connected to real-world applications. The achievable advantage with a QLS for an NLSP depends on the interplay between the scaling of condition number and sparsity of matrices associated with the graph family. We analyze 50 graph families and identify that within the scope of our study, only 21 of them exhibit prospects for an exponential advantage with the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd (HHL) algorithm relative to an efficient classical solver. We call graph families that offer advantage with HHL as good graph families. We also compare the performance of the considered 50 graph families with 7 other QLSs. Furthermore, we report that some graph families graduate from offering no advantage with HHL to promising an exponential advantage with improved algorithms such as the Childs-Kothari-Somma algorithm. We also introduce a unified graph superfamily and show the existence of infinite good graph families in it. Since the runtime expressions for linear solvers involve condition number, which in itself is not easy to compute, ascertaining advantage prospects with quantum linear solvers itself is not an easy problem. Thus, we conjecture the conditions under which one may visually examine a graph family and guess the prospects for an advantage. Finally, we very briefly touch upon some practical issues that may arise even if the aforementioned graph theoretic requirements are satisfied, including quantum hardware challenges.
Quantum linear solvers (QLSs) can offer the potential for exponential quantum advantage in solving quantum chemical problems, but its assessment hinges on determining the condition number (κ) scaling, which itself is computationally challenging. While a recent work applied the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd (HHL) algorithm to single-reference linearized coupled cluster equations (SRLCC), the validity of the HHL-SRLCC framework is restricted to weakly correlated regimes. A general treatment requires a formulation that can access strongly correlated regions. We thus begin by extending the QLS-SRLCC framework to its multi-reference form, which is based on the internally contracted multi-reference LCC method (QLS-icMRLCC). We then analyze κ scaling using three complementary diagnostics that range from explicit computations to use of indirect structural indicators: (i) direct calculations of κ, (ii) scaling of the ratio of maximum to minimum diagonal entries of an A matrix, and (iii) structural analyses of the A matrices based on a recently proposed conjecture, which we adapt to the QLS-LCC problem. The three approaches yield consistent predictions, indicating a polylogarithmic κ scaling in system size. This finding, when combined with our arguments on sub-linear scaling of sparsity, supports the prospects of exponential advantage using QLSs for the LCC problem. Finally, numerical calculations on potential energy curves of model systems containing up to four atoms recover the ground state energies with errors relative to benchmark classical methods not exceeding 0.009%.
Quantum computers hold promise for solving problems intractable for classical computers, especially those with high time or space complexity. Practicalquantum advantagecan be said to exist for such problems when the end-to-end time for solving such a problem using a classical algorithm exceeds that required by a quantum algorithm. Reducing the power flow (PF) problem into a linear system of equations allows for the formulation of quantum PF (QPF) algorithms, which are based on solving methods for quantum linear systems such as the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd (HHL) algorithm. Speedup from using QPF algorithms is often claimed to be exponential when compared to classical PF solved by state-of-the-art algorithms. We investigate the potential for practical quantum advantage in solving QPF compared to classical methods on gate-based quantum computers. Notably, this paper does not present a new QPF solving algorithm but scrutinizes the end-to-end complexity of the QPF approach, providing a nuanced evaluation of the purported quantum speedup in this problem. Our analysis establishes a best-case bound for the HHL-based quantum power flow complexity, conclusively demonstrating that the HHL-based method has higher runtime complexity compared to the classical algorithm for solving the direct current power flow (DCPF) and fast decoupled load flow (FDLF) problem. Notably, our analysis and conclusions can be extended to any quantum linear system solver with rigorous performance guarantees, based on the known complexity lower bounds for this problem. Additionally, we establish that for potential practical quantum advantage (PQA) to exist it is necessary to consider DCPF-type problems with a very narrow range of condition number values and readout requirements.
Solving linear systems of equations plays a fundamental role in numerous computational problems from different fields of science. The widespread use of numerical methods to solve these systems motivates investigating the feasibility of solving linear systems problems using quantum computers. In this work, we provide a survey of the main advances in quantum linear systems algorithms, together with some applications. We summarize and analyze the main ideas behind some of the algorithms for the quantum linear systems problem in the literature. The analysis begins by examining the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd (HHL) solver. We note its limitations and reliance on computationally expensive quantum methods, then highlight subsequent research efforts which aimed to address these limitations and optimize runtime efficiency and precision via various paradigms. We focus in particular on the post-HHL enhancements which have paved the way towards optimal lower bounds with respect to error tolerance and condition number. By doing so, we propose a taxonomy that categorizes these studies. Furthermore, by contextualizing these developments within the broader landscape of quantum computing, we explore the foundational work that have inspired and informed their development, as well as subsequent refinements. Finally, we discuss the potential applications of these algorithms in differential equations, quantum machine learning, and many-body physics.
Solving systems of linear equations is a key subroutine in many quantum algorithms. In the last 15 years, many quantum linear solvers (QLS) have been developed, competing to achieve the best asymptotic worst-case complexity. Most QLS assume fault-tolerant quantum computers, so they cannot yet be benchmarked on real hardware. Because an algorithm with better asymptotic scaling can underperform on instances of practical interest, the question of which of these algorithms is the most promising remains open. In this work, we implement a method to partially address this question. We consider four well-known QLS algorithms which directly implement an approximate matrix inversion function: the Harrow-Hassidim-Lloyd algorithm, two algorithms utilizing a linear combination of unitaries, and one utilizing the quantum singular value transformation (QSVT). These methods, known as functional QLS, share nearly identical assumptions about the problem setup and oracle access. Their computational cost is dominated by query calls to a matrix oracle encoding the problem one wants to solve. We provide formulas to count the number of queries needed to solve specific problem instances; these can be used to benchmark the algorithms on real-life instances, under benevolent, idealized assumptions, without requiring access to quantum hardware to implement the procedure. We select three data sets: random generated instances that obey the assumptions of functional QLS, linear systems from simplex iterations on MIPLIB, and Poisson equations. Our methods can be easily extended to other data sets and provide a high-level guide to evaluate the performance of a QLS algorithm. In particular, our work shows that HHL underperforms in comparison to the other methods across all data sets, often by orders of magnitude, while the Chebyshev-approximation based methods typically have the best performance.
Abstract In a sense, gate-based quantum computers are just machines that apply (extremely) large matrices to input states (vectors), and so it is natural to ask whether linear algebra applications can benefit from quantum computing. In the case of solving linear systems, this question has been answered with an emphatic ‘yes’. In 2009, Aram Harrow, Avinatan Hassidim, and Seth Lloyd proposed a quantum algorithm to solve linear systems exponentially faster than the best classical counterpart. The quantum linear systems solver is ubiquitously known by the initials of its inventors, ‘HHL’. As well as detailing HHL, this chapter also explores some of the quantum machine learning applications that have been proposed based on HHL along with results showing that these algorithms are often ‘dequantised’ in the problem space of interest – i.e., there exists an efficient classical ‘quantum-inspired’ algorithm.
Quantum algorithms for solving the Quantum Linear System (QLS) problem are among the most investigated quantum algorithms of recent times, with potential applications including the solution of computationally intractable differential equations and speed-ups in machine learning. A fundamental parameter governing the efficiency of QLS solvers is κ , the condition number of the coefficient matrix A , as it has been known since the inception of the QLS problem that for worst-case instances the runtime scales at least linearly in κ [Harrow, Hassidim and Lloyd, PRL 103, 150502 (2009)]. However, for the case of positive-definite matrices classical algorithms can solve linear systems with a runtime scaling as κ , a quadratic improvement compared to the the indefinite case. It is then natural to ask whether QLS solvers may hold an analogous improvement. In this work we answer the question in the negative, showing that solving a QLS entails a runtime linear in κ also when A is positive definite. We then identify broad classes of positive-definite QLS where this lower bound can be circumvented and present two new quantum algorithms featuring a quadratic speed-up in κ : the first is based on efficiently implementing a matrix-block-encoding of A−1 , the second constructs a decomposition of the form A=LL† to precondition the system. These methods are widely applicable and both allow to efficiently solve BQP-complete problems.