Quick Navigation

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing Quantum Simulation

Achieving fair sampling in quantum annealing

arXiv
Authors: Vaibhaw Kumar, Casey Tomlin, Curt Nehrkorn, Daniel O'Malley, Joseph Dulny

Year

2020

Paper ID

22174

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

80

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Sampling all ground states of a Hamiltonian with equal probability is a desired feature of a sampling algorithm, but recent studies indicate that common variants of transverse field quantum annealing sample the ground state subspace unfairly. In this note, we present perturbation theory arguments suggesting that this deficiency can be corrected by employing reverse annealing-inspired paths. We confirm that this conclusion holds in simulations of previously studied small instances with degeneracy, as well as larger instances on quantum annealing hardware.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • Sampling all ground states of a Hamiltonian with equal probability is a desired feature of a sampling algorithm, but recent studies indicate that common variants of transverse...

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #22174 #69038 Physically Constrained Ensemble... #69023 Scalable Quantum Algorithms for... #68990 Driving Exchange Interaction in... #68985 Floquet Entanglement Generation...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.