!
You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.
Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Simulation
Proposal of a new quantum annealing schedule for studying quantum annealing of transverse field Ising models
arXiv
Authors: Chiaki Yamaguchi
Year
2017
Paper ID
45098
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
184
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Recently, Heim, Ronnow, Isakov and Troyer [Science 348 (2015) 215] have reported that Monte Carlo simulations for the Ising spin glass model on the square lattice in the physically relevant continuous-imaginary-time limit do not show superiority of quantum annealing (QA) using transverse field against classical annealing (CA). Although the QA schedule that they had used has been using conventionally, however the QA schedule mathematically has no guarantee that the used schedule is the best QA schedule for performance of optimization. We propose a new QA schedule for studying transverse-field-based quantum versus classical annealing of the Ising model. The present QA schedule utilizes a smallest effective transverse field derived in this article. This QA schedule is made for the comparison between the system with no transverse field and the system with the smallest effective transverse field. As a case study, we study QA of the Ising spin glass model on the square lattice at low but finite temperature. A Monte Carlo algorithm using the physically relevant continuous-imaginary-time limit is performed. As the simulation results, we show superiority of QA against CA when the annealing time is sufficiently spent.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2017 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Recently, Heim, Ronnow, Isakov and Troyer [Science 348 (2015) 215] have reported that Monte Carlo simulations for the Ising spin glass model on the square lattice in the...
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.