arXiv:2609.27488
On Relationship Between Circuit Depth and Trainability of VQAs
Jan Michálek, Martin Friák, Petr Vašík
Abstract
The training efficiency of Variational Quantum Algorithms (VQAs) is dictated by the geometry of their loss landscapes, which can be formally analysed by mapping these functions to random fields on manifolds. Instead of VQAs, we can then directly study the corresponding random fields, in our case, the Wishart Hypertoroidal Random Fields (WHRFs). We are mostly interested in the distribution of critical points (especially local minima) of WHRFs. For this purpose, the Kac-Rice formula is presented, reformulated, and simulated. The findings identify a phase transition in the distribution of local minima. Beyond a specific threshold, local minima concentrate near the global minimum in function value, meaning that even local minima are good approximators of the global one. The threshold is governed by the ratio between the problem Hamiltonian degrees of freedom and by the number of independent parameters in the VQA. Since the degrees of freedom parameter scales exponentially, we propose symmetry reduction operations to lower the degrees of freedom. This mathematically reduces the dimension, scaling down the required parameter threshold and enabling to solve bigger problems.
AI Summary
The paper asks how ansatz parameter count affects the distribution of local minima in variational quantum algorithms, and whether symmetry restrictions can lower the parameter count associated with favourable landscapes. It uses an existing mapping from shifted VQA energies to Wishart hypertoroidal random fields, with spectral parameter $m=\|H-E_0I\|_*^2/\|H-\bar E I\|_F^2$ and overparameterisation ratio $\gamma=p/(2m)$. A pointwise critical-value density is obtained by conditioning the Kac–Rice formula on field value and vanishing gradient. The resulting Wishart-plus-GOE Hessian expectation is evaluated by Monte Carlo sampling, using batched linear algebra and, for larger cases, chunking and logarithmic arithmetic. Simulations report migration of local-minimum density toward zero shifted energy near $p=2m-2$, compared with the previously established asymptotic boundary $p\approx2m$. Examples cover a toy model with $m=8$ and spectral parameters from two- to four-site Hubbard Hamiltonians, reaching $m=749$ and $p\approx1496$. Separate calculations apply particle-number, spin-flip and spatial-parity restrictions. For seven Hubbard sites at $U=2,t=1$, the Hilbert-space dimension falls from $16{,}384$ to $326$, and $m$ from approximately $130{,}000$ to $2{,}540$. The stated limitations include rare-event sampling noise, numerical and memory constraints, and continued exponential scaling after symmetry reduction. Local-minimum statistics do not directly establish optimisation performance or exclude barren plateaus. The random-field mapping may deviate for symmetry-informed ansatzes, and hardware validation remains future work; preliminary compilation observations highlight connectivity and routing overheads.
Central claim may not hold: The real Wishart field defined in the paper has a chi-square_m/m field-value distribution and conditional gradient variance 4x/m, whereas the central calculation uses Gamma(m, rate m) and variance 2x/m. The asserted singular concentration at p=2m-2 contradicts the paper's own finite, positive limiting density there, and the energy-dependent Hessian determinant cannot generally be discarded when locating a transition. The simulations establish properties only of a random-matrix surrogate parameterized by Hamiltonian spectra, not the claimed optimization or circuit-depth consequences for actual VQAs. The reduced spectral parameter m is not shown to provide an upper bound on trainability thresholds for symmetry-preserving ansatzes, whose random-field equivalence the paper expressly leaves uncertain. For odd lattice sizes, the purported half-filled symmetry-reduction examples actually use L-1 particles, and the statement that odd-L half-filling is impossible is incorrect.
Written by gpt-6.1-sol from the paper's full text. Automated: it can be wrong.