This study presents a rigorous empirical evaluation of the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) within a hybrid quantum-classical framework for solving the NP-hard Max-Cut problem. Using Python and Qiskit Aer statevector simulations, we benchmark QAOA (depths p = 2 and p = 3) against established classical algorithms, including simulated annealing, the Goemans–Williamson algorithm, and greedy heuristics, across Erdős–Rényi and regular graphs with 4 to 20 nodes (100 instances per size). Results demonstrate that low-depth QAOA suffers from significant performance degradation, achieving a 0.467 approximation ratio at 20 nodes compared to 0.856 for Goemans–Williamson, alongside a 210× runtime overhead. Convergence analysis further reveals low optimality probabilities and high iteration costs, highlighting limitations of variational optimization in NISQ-era devices. This work provides a reproducible benchmarking framework and contributes to a realistic assessment of near-term quantum advantage.
This study presents a rigorous empirical evaluation of the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) within a hybrid quantum-classical framework for solving the NP-hard Max-Cut problem. Using Python and Qiskit Aer statevector simulations, we benchmark QAOA (depths p = 2 and p = 3) against established classical algorithms, including simulated annealing, the Goemans–Williamson algorithm, and greedy heuristics, across Erdős–Rényi and regular graphs with 4 to 20 nodes (100 instances per size). Results demonstrate that low-depth QAOA suffers from significant performance degradation, achieving a 0.467 approximation ratio at 20 nodes compared to 0.856 for Goemans–Williamson, alongside a 210× runtime overhead. Convergence analysis further reveals low optimality probabilities and high iteration costs, highlighting limitations of variational optimization in NISQ-era devices. This work provides a reproducible benchmarking framework and contributes to a realistic assessment of near-term quantum advantage.
This study presents a rigorous empirical evaluation of the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) within a hybrid quantum-classical framework for solving the NP-hard Max-Cut problem. Using Python and Qiskit Aer statevector simulations, we benchmark QAOA (depths p = 2 and p = 3) against established classical algorithms, including simulated annealing, the Goemans–Williamson algorithm, and greedy heuristics, across Erdős–Rényi and regular graphs with 4 to 20 nodes (100 instances per size). Results demonstrate that low-depth QAOA suffers from significant performance degradation, achieving a 0.467 approximation ratio at 20 nodes compared to 0.856 for Goemans–Williamson, alongside a 210× runtime overhead. Convergence analysis further reveals low optimality probabilities and high iteration costs, highlighting limitations of variational optimization in NISQ-era devices. This work provides a reproducible benchmarking framework and contributes to a realistic assessment of near-term quantum advantage.
This study presents a rigorous empirical evaluation of the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) within a hybrid quantum-classical framework for solving the NP-hard Max-Cut problem. Using Python and Qiskit Aer statevector simulations, we benchmark QAOA (depths p = 2 and p = 3) against established classical algorithms, including simulated annealing, the Goemans–Williamson algorithm, and greedy heuristics, across Erdős–Rényi and regular graphs with 4 to 20 nodes (100 instances per size). Results demonstrate that low-depth QAOA suffers from significant performance degradation, achieving a 0.467 approximation ratio at 20 nodes compared to 0.856 for Goemans–Williamson, alongside a 210× runtime overhead. Convergence analysis further reveals low optimality probabilities and high iteration costs, highlighting limitations of variational optimization in NISQ-era devices. This work provides a reproducible benchmarking framework and contributes to a realistic assessment of near-term quantum advantage.
The Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) has emerged as a promising approach for addressing combinatorial optimization problems on near-term quantum hardware. In this work, we conduct an empirical evaluation of QAOA on the Max-Cut problem, using the Goemans-Williamson (GW) algorithm as a classical baseline for comparison. Unlike many prior studies, our methodology treats QAOA implementations as black-box optimizers, relying solely on default parameter settings without manual fine-tuning. We evaluate specific off-the-shelf QAOA implementations under default settings, not the algorithmic potential of QAOA with optimized parameters. This reflects a more realistic use case for end users who may lack the resources or expertise for instance-specific optimization. To facilitate fair and informative evaluation, we construct benchmark instances using well-known graph generation models that emulate practical graph structures, avoiding synthetic constructions tailored to either quantum or classical algorithms. A central component of our analysis is a per-shot statistical framework, which tracks the quality of QAOA outputs as a function of the number of circuit executions. This enables probabilistic comparisons with the GW algorithm by examining when and how frequently QAOA surpasses classical performance baselines such as the GW expectation and lower bound. Our results provide insight into the practical applicability of QAOA for Max-Cut and highlight its current limitations, offering a framework that can guide the assessment and development of future QAOA implementations.
The transition from theoretical quantum computing to practical real-world applications heavily relies onhybrid quantum-classical architectures designed for NoisyIntermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) devices. Among these approaches, the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm(QAOA) is a prominent strategy for addressing complex combinatorial optimization challenges, such as the NP-hard MaxCut problem. Instead of performing the entire computationon a quantum processor, QAOA utilizes a quantum circuit toevaluate a parameterized cost function, whereas a classical optimizer refines the parameters iteratively. This study presentsa rigorous empirical evaluation comparing the performanceof QAOA against established classical solvers on small-scaleMax-Cut instances. All experiments were implemented andexecuted using Python (Qiskit Aer) on a state-vector simulator.Using Erdős–Rényi random graphs and regular graphs with4 to 20 nodes, we benchmark QAOA at depths p = 2 andp = 3 against simulated annealing, the Goemans–WilliamsonSDP-based algorithm, and a linear-time greedy heuristic. Ourexperimental results demonstrate that low-depth QAOA implementations exhibit severe performance degradation, prohibitive computational overhead (O(2^n) scaling), and low convergencerates compared to mature classical algorithms. At 20 nodes,QAOA (p = 2) achieves only a 0.467 approximation ratio versus0.856 for Goemans–Williamson, with a 210× runtime slowdownover greedy heuristics
Abstract The quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA) is a hybrid quantum–classical algorithm to solve binary-variable optimization problems. Due to the short circuit depth and its expected robustness to systematic errors it is a promising candidate likely to run on near-term quantum devices. We simulate the performance of QAOA applied to the Max-Cut problem and compare it with some of the best classical alternatives. When comparing solvers, their performance is characterized by the computational time taken to achieve a given quality of solution. Since QAOA is based on sampling, we utilize performance metrics based on the probability of observing a sample above a certain quality. In addition, we show that the QAOA performance varies significantly with the graph type. In particular for three-regular random graphs, QAOA performance shows improvement by up to two orders of magnitude compared to previous estimates, strongly reducing the performance gap with classical alternatives. This was possible by reducing the number of function evaluations per iteration and optimizing the variational parameters on small graph instances and transferring to large via training. Because QAOA’s performance guarantees are only known for limited applications and contexts, we utilize a framework for the search for quantum advantage which incorporates a large number of problem instances and all three classical solver modalities: exact, approximate, and heuristic.
The Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) is one of the promising near-term algorithms designed to find approximate solutions for combinatorial optimization problems. The algorithm prepares a parametrized state that is aimed to maximize the expectation value of the objective function of the problem. The circuit for QAOA consists of p layers, and it depends on 2p parameters, the determination of which can be carried out using a variational quantum eigensolver (VQE) subroutine. This is a variational approach for finding optimal parameters, where the quantum state is prepared with a quantum computer, and a classical computer is used for calculating the corresponding objective function value and performing an outer loop optimization routine in order to find optimal parameters. Earlier work on the algorithm has shown that QAOA is closely related to the Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm, which results in noticeable patterns in the optimal parameters. To this purpose, two methods, INTERP and FOURIER, were proposed to exploit this structure by Zhou et al. (2018). In this thesis, I extend upon these results by examining the effectiveness of one of their methods, the INTERP method, on the Max-Cut problem from graph theory. The performance of QAOA using this method was studied on several classes of graphs and benchmarked against the currently best-known classical algorithm Goemans-Williamson, which achieves an approximation ratio of ρ ≈ 0.878 on arbitrary graphs. The classes of graphs examined include cyclic, weighted and unweighted 3-regular, and Erdős–Rényi graphs with edge probabilities of 0.5 and 0.75 and graph sizes ranging from 4 to 16. Moreover, it was investigated if the INTERP method offers an advantage compared to random initialization of parameters and whether or not the method is polynomial in p. It was found that different graph classes lead to similar but different parameter patterns. Furthermore, the performance of QAOA using the INTERP method was dependent on the graph class considered. For the small graphs investigated it was found that QAOA outperforms Goemans-Williamson on ER-0.50, ER-0.75 and weighted 3-regular graphs from p=7 and beyond with respect to how well the expectation of the objective function approximates the optimal value, while for unweighted 3-regular graphs p=6 suffices. However, the calculation of the parameters is costly and requires a number of function evaluations that is on the order of the number of possible bipartitions of small graph with sizes n ≤ 16. Moreover, the numerical results suggested that indeed the method is polynomial in p advocating that the algorithm might be a strong alternative to Goemans-Williamson for large graph sizes, once hardware allows it.