Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Quantum Simulation
Performance Benchmarking of Quantum Algorithms for Hard Combinatorial Optimization Problems: A Comparative Study of non-FTQC Approaches
arXiv
Authors: Santaro Kikuura, Ryoya Igata, Yuta Shingu, Shohei Watabe
Year
2024
Paper ID
37471
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
129
Citations
N/A
Abstract
This study systematically benchmarks several non-fault-tolerant quantum computing algorithms across four distinct optimization problems: max-cut, number partitioning, knapsack, and quantum spin glass. Our benchmark includes noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) algorithms, such as the variational quantum eigensolver, quantum approximate optimization algorithm, quantum imaginary time evolution, and imaginary time quantum annealing, with both ansatz-based and ansatz-free implementations, alongside tensor network methods and direct simulations of the imaginary-time Schrödinger equation. For comparative analysis, we also utilize classical simulated annealing and quantum annealing on D-Wave devices. Employing default configurations, our findings reveal that no single non-FTQC algorithm performs optimally across all problem types, underscoring the need for tailored algorithmic strategies. This work provides an objective performance baseline and serves as a critical reference point for advancing NISQ algorithms and quantum annealing platforms.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2024 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- This study systematically benchmarks several non-fault-tolerant quantum computing algorithms across four distinct optimization problems: max-cut, number partitioning, knapsack...
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
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
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.