Recent research has shown that alternative annealing schedules provide the means for improving performance in modern quantum annealing devices. One such type of schedule is forward annealing with a pause, in which there is a period of time when system evolution is paused. While the results from using this type of schedule have been promising, effectively using a pause is not a trivial task. One challenge associated with introducing a pause into the schedule is determining the point in the anneal at which the pause will start. Additionally, tuning the schedule in real-time requires a significant amount of time. A second challenge is that while a pause may increase the number of correct solutions returned from the annealer, the time-to-solution, a standard metric for measuring performance in quantum annealing, will not necessarily be improved. We propose a method for constructing annealing schedules containing a pause that avoids the costly process of determining the optimal pause location in an online manner. We also evaluate our method on the subset sum problem, a problem of practical significance, and show that our method is able to achieve a 70% reduction in time-to-solution from a standard schedule containing no pause.
Recent research has shown that alternative annealing schedules provide the means for improving performance in modern quantum annealing devices. One such type of schedule is forward annealing with a pause, in which there is a period of time when system evolution is paused. While the results from using this type of schedule have been promising, effectively using a pause is not a trivial task. One challenge associated with introducing a pause into the schedule is determining the point in the anneal at which the pause will start. Additionally, tuning the schedule in real-time requires a significant amount of time. A second challenge is that while a pause may increase the number of correct solutions returned from the annealer, the time-to-solution, a standard metric for measuring performance in quantum annealing, will not necessarily be improved. We propose a method for constructing annealing schedules containing a pause that avoids the costly process of determining the optimal pause location in an online manner. We also evaluate our method on the subset sum problem, a problem of practical significance, and show that our method is able to achieve a 70% reduction in time-to-solution from a standard schedule containing no pause.
Despite increases in qubit count and connectivity in quantum annealers, a quantum speedup has yet to be observed for problems of practical significance. In order to further improve annealer performance, some researchers focus on tuning annealer parameters, such as the annealing schedule. In this work, we focus on pausing, an annealing schedule modification that has been shown to improve the probability of solving an optimization problem by orders of magnitude. However, a challenge associated with pausing is selecting an appropriate pause location, as pausing is only effective in problem-dependent regions and ineffective elsewhere. Moreover, there is little advice on how to determine where pausing is effective. Thus, pausing effectively is difficult and often inaccessible to the majority of users. To address these issues, we propose a data-driven method that leverages machine learning to predict optimal pause locations. First, we construct a dataset consisting of optimization problems and their corresponding optimal pause locations. The optimal pause locations are determined using spin-vector Monte Carlo, a method known to yield results similar to quantum annealing. Next, we train a convolutional neural network on this dataset, demonstrating its ability to distinguish between problem types and accurately predict the optimal pause location. Finally, we evaluate the model on multiple types of optimization problems. Our results show that the pause locations predicted by our method improve solution quality for all selected problem types. Additionally, our model can be pre-trained and easily distributed, making the power of pausing accessible to users unfamiliar with annealing schedule modifications.
Prior work showed the efficacy of pausing midanneal: such a pause improved the probability of success by orders of magnitude in a class of native problem instances and improved the time to solution in a class of embedded problem instances. A physics-based picture provides qualitative suggestions for where pausing midanneal is effective, for the interplay between annealing schedule parameters and other annealing properties and parameters such as embedding size and strength of the ferromagnetic coupling ∣JF∣, and for the conditions under which pausing can improve the time to solution. Here, through demonstrations on an updated annealing architecture that has higher connectivity than previous annealers, and on multiple embedded problem classes, we are able to confirm various aspects of this picture. We demonstrate the robustness of the optimal pause parameters across platforms and problem classes, explore how to set ∣JF∣ to optimize performance in different scenarios, and provide empirical evidence that short pauses trump longer overall annealing times in time to solution. We also identify the number of different coefficients in a problem as a predictor of problem hardness, and explore its interplay with the optimal ∣JF∣ and embedding size. Based on these results we are able to present qualitative guidelines for parameter setting in quantum annealers.
Quantum annealing is a promising heuristic for combinatorial optimization, but on current hardware its performance degrades for larger and more complex problems due to noise and small energy gaps. Reverse annealing has been proposed as a refinement strategy, yet it remains unclear when it provides systematic advantages over standard forward annealing or simply increasing annealing time. We find that combining forward and reverse annealing consistently improves solution quality and efficiency across multiple problem classes. The benefits of reverse annealing increase with problem complexity and are strongest in regimes where forward annealing is increasingly limited. Moreover, reverse annealing yields larger efficiency gains than simply extending forward annealing times. We establish these results through a systematic experimental study on a D-Wave Advantage system, benchmarking reverse annealing across Max-Cut, Number Partitioning, and sparse clustering problems while varying reverse distance, pause duration, and annealing time. We identify a narrow optimal regime for reverse annealing parameters linked to the location of freeze-out points and energy-level crossings in the annealing schedule. These findings demonstrate that reverse annealing is most valuable for large, high-complexity optimization problems and is likely to gain importance as quantum annealing hardware scales toward more realistic applications.
Recently, many researchers are investigating quantum annealing as a solver for real-world combinatorial optimization problems. However, due to the format of problems that quantum annealing solves and the structure of the physical annealer, these problems often require additional setup prior to solving. We study how these setup steps affect performance and provide insight into the interplay among them using the job-shop scheduling problem for our evaluation. We show that the empirical probability of success is highly sensitive to problem setup and that excess variables and large embeddings reduce performance. We then show that certain problem instances are unable to be solved without the use of additional post-processing methods. Finally, we investigate the effect of pausing during the anneal. Our results show that pausing within a certain time window can improve the probability of success, which is consistent with other work. However, we also show that the performance improvement due to pausing can be masked depending on properties of the embedding, and thus, special care must be taken for embedded problems.
The current generation of experimental quantum annealers can shed light on the effects of noise and thermalization present in superconducting quantum circuits. Recent advances in this technology allow for direct probing of intermediate dynamics during the annealing process. By pausing the annealing over spans ranging from micro- to milliseconds and allowing the system to equilibrate, the authors identify several regimes of interest, characterized by the time scales of the dominant processes. It is shown that alternative annealing schedules inspired by physics may prove a fruitful avenue for designing more efficient solvers for optimization problems in quantum computing.
Annealing schedule control provides opportunities to better understand the manner and mechanisms by which putative quantum annealers operate. By appropriately modifying the annealing schedule to include a pause (keeping the Hamiltonian fixed) for a period of time, we show that it is possible to more directly probe the dissipative dynamics of the system at intermediate points along the anneal and examine thermal relaxation rates, for example, by observing the repopulation of the ground state after the minimum spectral gap. We provide a detailed comparison of experiments from a D-Wave device, simulations of the quantum adiabatic master equation, and a classical analogue of quantum annealing, spin-vector Monte Carlo, and we observe qualitative agreement, showing that the characteristic increase in success probability when pausing is not a uniquely quantum phenomena. We find that the relaxation in our system is dominated by a single timescale, which allows us to give a simple condition for when we can expect pausing to improve the time to solution, the relevant metric for classical optimization. Finally, we also explore in simulation the role of temperature whilst pausing as a means to better distinguish quantum and classical models of quantum annealers.