Using a specially constructed set of hard 2-satisfiability problems with four satisfying assignments, we study the scaling and sampling performance of numerical simulation of quantum annealing as well as that of the physical quantum annealers offered by D-Wave. To this end, we use both the standard quantum annealing and reverse annealing protocols in both our simulations and on the D-Wave quantum annealer. In the case of ideal quantum annealing the sampling behavior can be explained by perturbation theory and the scaling behavior of the time to solution depends on the scaling behavior of the minimum energy gap between the ground state and the first-excited state of the annealing Hamiltonian. The corresponding results from the D-Wave quantum annealers do not fit to this ideal picture, but suggest that the scaling of the time to solution from the quantum annealers matches those calculated from the equilibrium probability distribution.
Using a specially constructed set of hard 2-satisfiability problems with four satisfying assignments, we study the scaling and sampling performance of numerical simulation of quantum annealing as well as that of the physical quantum annealers offered by D-Wave. To this end, we use both the standard quantum annealing and reverse annealing protocols in both our simulations and on the D-Wave quantum annealer. In the case of ideal quantum annealing the sampling behavior can be explained by perturbation theory and the scaling behavior of the time to solution depends on the scaling behavior of the minimum energy gap between the ground state and the first-excited state of the annealing Hamiltonian. The corresponding results from the D-Wave quantum annealers do not fit to this ideal picture, but suggest that the scaling of the time to solution from the quantum annealers matches those calculated from the equilibrium probability distribution.
Using a specially constructed set of hard 2-satisfiability problems with four satisfying assignments, we study the scaling and sampling performance of numerical simulation of quantum annealing as well as that of the physical quantum annealers offered by D-Wave. To this end, we use both the standard quantum annealing and reverse annealing protocols in both our simulations and on the D-Wave quantum annealer. In the case of ideal quantum annealing the sampling behavior can be explained by perturbation theory and the scaling behavior of the time to solution depends on the scaling behavior of the minimum energy gap between the ground state and the first-excited state of the annealing Hamiltonian. The corresponding results from the D-Wave quantum annealers do not fit to this ideal picture, but suggest that the scaling of the time to solution from the quantum annealers matches those calculated from the equilibrium probability distribution.
In recent years, quantum annealing has gained the status of being a promising candidate for solving various optimization problems. Using a set of hard 2-satisfiability (2-SAT) problems, consisting of problems of up to 18 variables, we analyze the scaling complexity of the quantum annealing algorithm and study the distributions of the minimum energy gap and the success probability. We extend the analysis of the standard quantum annealing Hamiltonian by introducing an additional term, the trigger Hamiltonian, which can be of two types: ferromagnetic and antiferromagnetic. We use these trigger Hamiltonians to study their influence on the success probability for solving the selected 2-SAT problems. We find that although the scaling of the runtime is exponential for the standard and modified quantum annealing Hamiltonians, the scaling constant in the case of adding the trigger Hamiltonians can be significantly smaller. Furthermore, certain choices for the trigger Hamiltonian and annealing times can result in a better scaling than that for simulated annealing. Finally, we also use the quantum annealers of D-Wave Systems Inc. to study their performance in solving the 2-SAT problems and compare it with the simulation results.
We study the effect of the anneal path control per qubit, a new user control feature offered on the D-Wave 2000Q quantum annealer, on the performance of quantum annealing for solving optimization problems by numerically solving the time-dependent Schrödinger equation for the time-dependent Hamiltonian modeling the annealing problems. The anneal path control is thereby modeled as a modified linear annealing scheme, resulting in an advanced and retarded scheme. The considered optimization problems are 2-SAT problems with 12 Boolean variables, a known unique ground state and a highly degenerate first excited state. We show that adjustment of the anneal path control can result in a widening of the minimal spectral gap by one or two orders of magnitude and an enhancement of the success probability of finding the solution of the optimization problem. We scrutinize various iterative methods based on the spin floppiness, the average spin value, and on the average energy and describe their performance in boosting the quantum annealing process.
Quantum annealing is a computational paradigm in which optimisation problems are mapped onto the energy landscape of an interacting quantum system and explored through its dynamical evolution. By continuously transforming a simple initial Hamiltonian into one whose ground state encodes the solution, the system traverses a complex landscape via a combination of quantum fluctuations, tunnelling processes, and dissipative dynamics. Unlike gate-based quantum computing, quantum annealing is a specialised and near-term approach aimed primarily at discrete optimisation and sampling tasks. While it is not expected to provide polynomial-time solutions to NP-hard problems in the worst case, it offers a physically motivated heuristic for navigating rugged energy landscapes that arise across science and engineering. Modern quantum annealers realise programmable spin systems with thousands of qubits, placing them among the largest controllable quantum devices currently available. As a result, their significance extends beyond optimisation: they also function as experimental platforms for studying non-equilibrium many-body quantum dynamics in regimes that are difficult to access using classical simulation. In this review we present an accessible introduction to the principles of quantum annealing, describe the main hardware platforms and algorithmic techniques, and analyse how tunnelling, spectral gaps, and open-system effects shape computational performance. We survey applications ranging from optimisation and machine learning to quantum simulation and many-body physics, and discuss the central challenges in benchmarking, scaling, and control. These perspectives position quantum annealing as a distinctive framework at the interface of optimisation, stochastic sampling, and programmable quantum dynamics, with a role that is complementary to both classical algorithms and gate-based quantum computing.
The path integral Monte Carlo simulated quantum annealing algorithm is applied to the optimization of a large hard instance of the random satisfiability problem (N = 10,000). The dynamical behavior of the quantum and the classical annealing are compared, showing important qualitative differences in the way of exploring the complex energy landscape of the combinatorial optimization problem. At variance with the results obtained for the Ising spin glass and for the traveling salesman problem, in the present case the linear-schedule quantum annealing performance is definitely worse than classical annealing. Nevertheless, a quantum cooling protocol based on field-cycling and able to outperform standard classical simulated annealing over short time scales is introduced.
We benchmark Quantum Annealing (QA) vs. Simulated Annealing (SA) with a focus on the impact of the embedding of problems onto the different topologies of the D-Wave quantum annealers. The series of problems we study are especially designed instances of the maximum cardinality matching problem that are easy to solve classically but difficult for SA and, as found experimentally, not easy for QA either. In addition to using several D-Wave processors, we simulate the QA process by numerically solving the time-dependent Schrödinger equation. We find that the embedded problems can be significantly more difficult than the unembedded problems, and some parameters, such as the chain strength, can be very impactful for finding the optimal solution. Thus, finding a good embedding and optimal parameter values can improve the results considerably. Interestingly, we find that although SA succeeds for the unembedded problems, the SA results obtained for the embedded version scale quite poorly in comparison with what we can achieve on the D-Wave quantum annealers.