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

arXiv:quant-ph/0208135

Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithms with Different Paths

Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, Sam Gutmann

Published Aug 21, 2002• 64 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

In quantum adiabatic evolution algorithms, the quantum computer follows the ground state of a slowly varying Hamiltonian. The ground state of the initial Hamiltonian is easy to construct; the ground state of the final Hamiltonian encodes the solution of the computational problem. These algorithms have generally been studied in the case where the "straight line" path from initial to final Hamiltonian is taken. But there is no reason not to try paths involving terms that are not linear combinations of the initial and final Hamiltonians. We give several proposals for randomly generating new paths. Using one of these proposals, we convert an algorithmic failure into a success.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0208135

Related papers

Quantum Computation by Adiabatic Evolution

Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, Sam Gutmann +1 more

We give a quantum algorithm for solving instances of the satisfiability problem, based on adiabatic evolution. The evolution of the quantum state is governed by a time-dependent Hamiltonian that interpolates between an initial Hamiltonian, whose ground state is easy to construct, and a final Hamiltonian, whose ground state encodes the satisfying assignment. To ensure that the system evolves to the desired final ground state, the evolution time must be big enough. The time required depends on the minimum energy difference between the two lowest states of the interpolating Hamiltonian. We are unable to estimate this gap in general. We give some special symmetric cases of the satisfiability problem where the symmetry allows us to estimate the gap and we show that, in these cases, our algorithm runs in polynomial time.

•Jan 28, 2000•696 citations

Quantum Computation by Adiabatic Evolution

Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, Sam Gutmann +1 more

We give a quantum algorithm for solving instances of the satisfiability problem, based on adiabatic evolution. The evolution of the quantum state is governed by a time-dependent Hamiltonian that interpolates between an initial Hamiltonian, whose ground state is easy to construct, and a final Hamiltonian, whose ground state encodes the satisfying assignment. To ensure that the system evolves to the desired final ground state, the evolution time must be big enough. The time required depends on the minimum energy difference between the two lowest states of the interpolating Hamiltonian. We are unable to estimate this gap in general. We give some special symmetric cases of the satisfiability problem where the symmetry allows us to estimate the gap and we show that, in these cases, our algorithm runs in polynomial time.

arXiv:quant-ph/0001106•Jan 28, 2000•536 citations

On Models of Nonlinear Evolution Paths in Adiabatic Quantum Algorithms

Jie Sun, Songfeng Lu, Samuel L. Braunstein

In this paper, we study two different nonlinear interpolating paths in adiabatic evolution algorithms for solving a particular class of quantum search problems where both the initial and final Hamiltonian are one-dimensional projector Hamiltonians on the corresponding ground state. If the overlap between the initial state and final state of the quantum system is not equal to zero, both of these models can provide a constant time speedup over the usual adiabatic algorithms by increasing some another corresponding "complexity". But when the initial state has a zero overlap with the solution state in the problem, the second model leads to an infinite time complexity of the algorithm for whatever interpolating functions being applied while the first one can still provide a constant running time. However, inspired by a related reference, a variant of the first model can be constructed which also fails for the problem when the overlap is exactly equal to zero if we want to make up the "intrinsic" fault of the second model — an increase in energy. Two concrete theorems are given to serve as explanations why neither of these two models can improve the usual adiabatic evolution algorithms for the phenomenon above. These just tell us what should be noted when using certain nonlinear evolution paths in adiabatic quantum algorithms for some special kind of problems.

arXiv:1301.1115•Communications in Theoretical Physics•Jan 1, 2013•8 citations

On the General Class of Models of Adiabatic Evolution

Jie Sun, Songfeng Lu, Fang Liu

The general class of models of adiabatic evolution was proposed to speed up the usual adiabatic computation in the case of quantum search problem. It was shown [8] that, by temporarily increasing the ground state energy of a time-dependent Hamiltonian to a suitable quantity, the quantum computation can perform the calculation in time complexity O(1). But it is also known that if the overlap between the initial and final states of the system is zero, then the computation based on the generalized models of adiabatic evolution can break down completely. In this paper, we find another severe limitation for this class of adiabatic evolution-based algorithms, which should be taken into account in applications. That is, it is still possible that this kind of evolution designed to deal with the quantum search problem fails completely if the interpolating paths in the system Hamiltonian are chosen inappropriately, while the usual adiabatic evolutions can do the same job relatively effectively. This implies that it is not always recommendable to use nonlinear paths in adiabatic computation. On the contrary, the usual simple adiabatic evolution may be sufficient for effective use.

Open Systems & Information Dynamics•Sep 1, 2016•3 citations

A Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithm Applied to Random Instances of an NP-Complete Problem

Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, Sam Gutmann +3 more

A quantum system will stay near its instantaneous ground state if the Hamiltonian that governs its evolution varies slowly enough. This quantum adiabatic behavior is the basis of a new class of algorithms for quantum computing. We tested one such algorithm by applying it to randomly generated hard instances of an NP-complete problem. For the small examples that we could simulate, the quantum adiabatic algorithm worked well, providing evidence that quantum computers (if large ones can be built) may be able to outperform ordinary computers on hard sets of instances of NP-complete problems.

arXiv:quant-ph/0104129•Science•Apr 20, 2001•2,055 citations

On Models of Nonlinear Evolution Paths in Adiabatic Quantum Algorithms4

孙杰, 路松峰

In this paper,we study two different nonlinear interpolating paths in adiabatic evolution algorithms for solving a particular class of quantum search problems where both the initial and final Hamiltonian are one-dimensional projector Hamiltonians on the corresponding ground state.If the overlap between the initial state and final state of the quantum system is not equal to zero,both of these models can provide a constant time speedup over the usual adiabatic algorithms by increasing some another corresponding complexity.But when the initial state has a zero overlap with the solution state in the problem,the second model leads to an infinite time complexity of the algorithm for whatever interpolating functions being applied while the first one can still provide a constant running time.However,inspired by a related reference,a variant of the first model can be constructed which also fails for the problem when the overlap is exactly equal to zero if we want to make up the intrinsic fault of the second model - an increase in energy.Two concrete theorems are given to serve as explanations why neither of these two models can improve the usual adiabatic evolution algorithms for the phenomenon above.These just tell us what should be noted when using certain nonlinear evolution paths in adiabatic quantum algorithms for some special kind of problems.

理论物理通讯：英文版•Jan 1, 2013•0 citations
In quantum adiabatic evolution algorithms, the quantum computer follows the ground state of a slowly varying Hamiltonian. The ground state of the initial Hamiltonian is easy to construct; the ground state of the final Hamiltonian encodes the solution of the computational problem. These algorithms have generally been studied in the case where the "straight line" path from initial to final Hamiltonian is taken. But there is no reason not to try paths involving terms that are not linear combinations of the initial and final Hamiltonians. We give several proposals for randomly generating new paths. Using one of these proposals, we convert an algorithmic failure into a success.
We give a quantum algorithm for solving instances of the satisfiability problem, based on adiabatic evolution. The evolution of the quantum state is governed by a time-dependent Hamiltonian that interpolates between an initial Hamiltonian, whose ground state is easy to construct, and a final Hamiltonian, whose ground state encodes the satisfying assignment. To ensure that the system evolves to the desired final ground state, the evolution time must be big enough. The time required depends on the minimum energy difference between the two lowest states of the interpolating Hamiltonian. We are unable to estimate this gap in general. We give some special symmetric cases of the satisfiability problem where the symmetry allows us to estimate the gap and we show that, in these cases, our algorithm runs in polynomial time.
We give a quantum algorithm for solving instances of the satisfiability problem, based on adiabatic evolution. The evolution of the quantum state is governed by a time-dependent Hamiltonian that interpolates between an initial Hamiltonian, whose ground state is easy to construct, and a final Hamiltonian, whose ground state encodes the satisfying assignment. To ensure that the system evolves to the desired final ground state, the evolution time must be big enough. The time required depends on the minimum energy difference between the two lowest states of the interpolating Hamiltonian. We are unable to estimate this gap in general. We give some special symmetric cases of the satisfiability problem where the symmetry allows us to estimate the gap and we show that, in these cases, our algorithm runs in polynomial time.
In this paper, we study two different nonlinear interpolating paths in adiabatic evolution algorithms for solving a particular class of quantum search problems where both the initial and final Hamiltonian are one-dimensional projector Hamiltonians on the corresponding ground state. If the overlap between the initial state and final state of the quantum system is not equal to zero, both of these models can provide a constant time speedup over the usual adiabatic algorithms by increasing some another corresponding "complexity". But when the initial state has a zero overlap with the solution state in the problem, the second model leads to an infinite time complexity of the algorithm for whatever interpolating functions being applied while the first one can still provide a constant running time. However, inspired by a related reference, a variant of the first model can be constructed which also fails for the problem when the overlap is exactly equal to zero if we want to make up the "intrinsic" fault of the second model — an increase in energy. Two concrete theorems are given to serve as explanations why neither of these two models can improve the usual adiabatic evolution algorithms for the phenomenon above. These just tell us what should be noted when using certain nonlinear evolution paths in adiabatic quantum algorithms for some special kind of problems.
The general class of models of adiabatic evolution was proposed to speed up the usual adiabatic computation in the case of quantum search problem. It was shown [8] that, by temporarily increasing the ground state energy of a time-dependent Hamiltonian to a suitable quantity, the quantum computation can perform the calculation in time complexity O(1). But it is also known that if the overlap between the initial and final states of the system is zero, then the computation based on the generalized models of adiabatic evolution can break down completely. In this paper, we find another severe limitation for this class of adiabatic evolution-based algorithms, which should be taken into account in applications. That is, it is still possible that this kind of evolution designed to deal with the quantum search problem fails completely if the interpolating paths in the system Hamiltonian are chosen inappropriately, while the usual adiabatic evolutions can do the same job relatively effectively. This implies that it is not always recommendable to use nonlinear paths in adiabatic computation. On the contrary, the usual simple adiabatic evolution may be sufficient for effective use.
A quantum system will stay near its instantaneous ground state if the Hamiltonian that governs its evolution varies slowly enough. This quantum adiabatic behavior is the basis of a new class of algorithms for quantum computing. We tested one such algorithm by applying it to randomly generated hard instances of an NP-complete problem. For the small examples that we could simulate, the quantum adiabatic algorithm worked well, providing evidence that quantum computers (if large ones can be built) may be able to outperform ordinary computers on hard sets of instances of NP-complete problems.
In this paper,we study two different nonlinear interpolating paths in adiabatic evolution algorithms for solving a particular class of quantum search problems where both the initial and final Hamiltonian are one-dimensional projector Hamiltonians on the corresponding ground state.If the overlap between the initial state and final state of the quantum system is not equal to zero,both of these models can provide a constant time speedup over the usual adiabatic algorithms by increasing some another corresponding complexity.But when the initial state has a zero overlap with the solution state in the problem,the second model leads to an infinite time complexity of the algorithm for whatever interpolating functions being applied while the first one can still provide a constant running time.However,inspired by a related reference,a variant of the first model can be constructed which also fails for the problem when the overlap is exactly equal to zero if we want to make up the intrinsic fault of the second model - an increase in energy.Two concrete theorems are given to serve as explanations why neither of these two models can improve the usual adiabatic evolution algorithms for the phenomenon above.These just tell us what should be noted when using certain nonlinear evolution paths in adiabatic quantum algorithms for some special kind of problems.