We discuss a small study on how to compare the performance of various solving techniques for quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO). Since well-known metrics are seldomly applicable, we suggest comparing the relative performance, i.e., how much the quality of solution (compared to other solutions of the same solver) for a QUBO shifts between different solving techniques. We propose looking for big shifts systematically for an empirical complexity analysis.
We discuss a small study on how to compare the performance of various solving techniques for quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO). Since well-known metrics are seldomly applicable, we suggest comparing the relative performance, i.e., how much the quality of solution (compared to other solutions of the same solver) for a QUBO shifts between different solving techniques. We propose looking for big shifts systematically for an empirical complexity analysis.
Abstract A major obstacle for quantum optimizers is the reformulation of constraints as a quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO). Current QUBO translators exaggerate the weight M of the penalty terms. Classically known as the “Big- M ” problem, the issue becomes even more daunting for quantum solvers, since it affects the physical energy scale. We take a systematic, encompassing look at the quantum big- M problem, revealing NP-hardness in finding the optimal M and establishing bounds on the Hamiltonian spectral gap Δ as a function of the weight M , inversely related to the expected run-time of quantum solvers. We propose a practical translation algorithm, based on SDP relaxation, that outperforms previous methods in numerical benchmarks. Our algorithm gives values of Δ orders of magnitude greater, e.g. for portfolio optimization instances. Solving such instances with an adiabatic algorithm on 6-qubits of an IonQ device, we observe significant advantages in time to solution and average solution quality. Our findings are relevant to quantum and quantum-inspired solvers alike.
Optimization is a crucial challenge across various domains, including finance, resource allocation, and mobility. Quantum computing has the potential to redefine the way we handle complex problems by reducing computational complexity and enhancing solution quality. Optimization, particularly of objective functions, stands to benefit significantly from quantum solvers, which leverage principles of quantum mechanics like superposition, entanglement, and tunneling. The Ising and Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO) models are the most suitable formulations for these solvers, involving binary variables and constraints treated as penalties within the overall objective function. To harness quantum approaches for optimization, two primary strategies are employed: exploiting quantum annealers—special-purpose optimization devices—and designing algorithms based on quantum circuits. This review provides a comprehensive overview of quantum optimization methods, examining their advantages, challenges, and limitations. It demonstrates their application to real-world scenarios and outlines the steps to convert generic optimization problems into quantum-compliant models. Lastly, it discusses available tools and frameworks that facilitate the exploration of quantum solutions for optimization tasks.
Due to the expected disparity in quantum vs. classical clock speeds, quantum advantage for branch and bound algorithms is more likely achievable in settings involving large search trees and low operator evaluation costs. Therefore, in this paper, we describe and experimentally validate an exact classical branch and bound solver for quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO) problems that matches these criteria. Our solver leverages cheap-to-implement bounds from the literature previously proposed for Ising models, including that of Hartwig, Daske, and Kobe from 1984. We detail a variety of techniques from high-performance computing and operations research used to boost solver performance, including a global variable reordering heuristic, a primal heuristic based on simulated annealing, and a truncated computation of the recursive bound. We also outline a number of simple and inexpensive bound extrapolation techniques. Finally, we conduct an extensive empirical analysis of our solver, comparing its performance to state-of-the-art QUBO and MaxCut solvers, and discuss the challenges of a speedup via quantum branch and bound beyond those faced by any quadratic quantum speedup.
To solve 3sat instances on quantum annealers they need to be transformed to an instance of Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO). When there are multiple transformations available, the question arises whether different transformations lead to differences in the obtained solution quality. Thus, in this paper we conduct an empirical benchmark study, in which we compare four structurally different QUBO transformations for the 3sat problem with regards to the solution quality on D-Wave's Advantage_system4.1. We show that the choice of QUBO transformation can significantly impact the number of correct solutions the quantum annealer returns. Furthermore, we show that the size of a QUBO instance (i.e., the dimension of the QUBO matrix) is not a sufficient predictor for solution quality, as larger QUBO instances may produce better results than smaller QUBO instances for the same problem. We also empirically show that the number of different quadratic values of a QUBO instance, combined with their range, can significantly impact the solution quality.
The increasing complexity of computational problems in various fields entails the development of efficient methods to solve them. Thus, the emerging technology of quantum computers comes with algorithms, such as quantum annealing, that could solve optimization problems exponentially faster. In particular, to solve the 3SAT problem on quantum annealers, it must be transformed into an instance of Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO). Given that the choice of 3SAT-to-QUBO transformation affects the solution quality on quantum annealing, an algorithmic method for creating numerous 3SAT-to-QUBO transformations has recently been proposed, aiming to investigate more deeply such effect. This represents a challenge when deciding which is the best performing 3SAT-to-QUBO transformation that should be used when solving a 3SAT instance on quantum annealing. To overcome this issue, this work investigates the impact of different 3SAT-to-QUBO transformations on the solution quality of simulated annealing, as a classical analogue to quantum annealing. We demonstrate that different QUBO encodings of the same 3SAT instance can lead to different outcomes in terms of energy and clause satisfaction. We also reveal some correlations between 3SAT features, QUBO structural properties, and solution quality. These findings underscore the importance of the choice of 3SAT-to-QUBO transformation in simulated annealing, and provide a foundation for the future development of machine learning models for guiding encoding choices in both classical and quantum environments.