Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Communications in computer and information science

Quantum-Enhanced Consensus Clustering Through Quantum Annealing and QAOA

Daniele Franch, Rui Wang, Amer Delilbasic, Kristel F. L. Michielsen, Gabriele Cavallaro

Published Jan 1, 2026• 0 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/978-3-032-13855-2_10

Related papers

Benchmarking Metaheuristic-Integrated QAOA Against Quantum Annealing

Arul Rhik Mazumder, Anuvab Sen, Udayon Sen

arXiv:2309.16796•Lecture notes in networks and systems•Jan 1, 2024•6 citations

GPU-accelerated simulations of quantum annealing and the quantum approximate optimization algorithm

Dennis Willsch, Madita Willsch, Fengping Jin +2 more

We study large-scale applications using a GPU-accelerated version of the massively parallel Jülich universal quantum computer simulator (JUQCS–G). First, we benchmark JUWELS Booster, a GPU cluster with 3744 NVIDIA A100 Tensor Core GPUs. Then, we use JUQCS–G to study the relation between quantum annealing (QA) and the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA). We find that a very coarsely discretized version of QA, termed approximate quantum annealing (AQA), performs surprisingly well in comparison to the QAOA. It can either be used to initialize the QAOA, or to avoid the costly optimization procedure altogether. Furthermore, we study the scaling of the success probability when using AQA for problems with 30 to 40 qubits. We find that the case with the largest discretization error scales most favorably, surpassing the best result obtained from the QAOA.

arXiv:2104.03293•Computer Physics Communications•May 9, 2022•36 citations

A Quantum Annealing-Based Approach to Extreme Clustering

Tim Jaschek, Marko Bucyk, Jaspreet S. Oberoi

arXiv:1903.08256•Advances in intelligent systems and computing•Jan 1, 2020•5 citations

Ising-Based Consensus Clustering on Specialized Hardware

Eldan Cohen, Avradip Mandal, Hayato Ushijima‐Mwesigwa +1 more

The emergence of specialized optimization hardware such as CMOS annealers and adiabatic quantum computers carries the promise of solving hard combinatorial optimization problems more efficiently in hardware. Recent work has focused on formulating different combinatorial optimization problems as Ising models, the core mathematical abstraction used by a large number of these hardware platforms, and evaluating the performance of these models when solved on specialized hardware. An interesting area of application is data mining, where combinatorial optimization problems underlie many core tasks. In this work, we focus on consensus clustering (clustering aggregation), an important combinatorial problem that has received much attention over the last two decades. We present two Ising models for consensus clustering and evaluate them using the Fujitsu Digital Annealer, a quantum-inspired CMOS annealer. Our empirical evaluation shows that our approach outperforms existing techniques and is a promising direction for future research.

arXiv:2003.01887•Lecture notes in computer science•Jan 1, 2020•16 citations

Quantum annealing for combinatorial clustering

Vaibhaw Kumar, Gideon Bass, Casey Tomlin +1 more

arXiv:1708.05753•Quantum Information Processing•Jan 12, 2018•106 citations

Comparison of QAOA with Quantum and Simulated Annealing

Michael Streif, Martin Leib

We present a comparison between the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) and two widely studied competing methods, Quantum Annealing (QA) and Simulated Annealing (SA). To achieve this, we define a class of optimization problems with respect to their spectral properties which are exactly solvable with QAOA. In this class, we identify instances for which QA and SA have an exponentially small probability to find the solution. Consequently, our results define a first demarcation line between QAOA, Simulated Annealing and Quantum Annealing, and highlight the fundamental differences between an interference-based search heuristic such as QAOA and heuristics that are based on thermal and quantum fluctuations like SA and QA respectively.

arXiv:1901.01903•Jan 7, 2019•35 citations
We study large-scale applications using a GPU-accelerated version of the massively parallel Jülich universal quantum computer simulator (JUQCS–G). First, we benchmark JUWELS Booster, a GPU cluster with 3744 NVIDIA A100 Tensor Core GPUs. Then, we use JUQCS–G to study the relation between quantum annealing (QA) and the quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA). We find that a very coarsely discretized version of QA, termed approximate quantum annealing (AQA), performs surprisingly well in comparison to the QAOA. It can either be used to initialize the QAOA, or to avoid the costly optimization procedure altogether. Furthermore, we study the scaling of the success probability when using AQA for problems with 30 to 40 qubits. We find that the case with the largest discretization error scales most favorably, surpassing the best result obtained from the QAOA.
The emergence of specialized optimization hardware such as CMOS annealers and adiabatic quantum computers carries the promise of solving hard combinatorial optimization problems more efficiently in hardware. Recent work has focused on formulating different combinatorial optimization problems as Ising models, the core mathematical abstraction used by a large number of these hardware platforms, and evaluating the performance of these models when solved on specialized hardware. An interesting area of application is data mining, where combinatorial optimization problems underlie many core tasks. In this work, we focus on consensus clustering (clustering aggregation), an important combinatorial problem that has received much attention over the last two decades. We present two Ising models for consensus clustering and evaluate them using the Fujitsu Digital Annealer, a quantum-inspired CMOS annealer. Our empirical evaluation shows that our approach outperforms existing techniques and is a promising direction for future research.
We present a comparison between the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) and two widely studied competing methods, Quantum Annealing (QA) and Simulated Annealing (SA). To achieve this, we define a class of optimization problems with respect to their spectral properties which are exactly solvable with QAOA. In this class, we identify instances for which QA and SA have an exponentially small probability to find the solution. Consequently, our results define a first demarcation line between QAOA, Simulated Annealing and Quantum Annealing, and highlight the fundamental differences between an interference-based search heuristic such as QAOA and heuristics that are based on thermal and quantum fluctuations like SA and QA respectively.