Effective optimization using sample persistence: A case study on quantum annealers and various Monte Carlo optimization methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present and apply a general-purpose, multistart algorithm for improving the performance of low-energy samplers used for solving optimization problems. The algorithm iteratively fixes the value of a large portion of the variables to values that have a high probability of being optimal. The resulting problems are smaller and less connected, and samplers tend to give better low-energy samples for these problems. The algorithm is trivially parallelizable since each start in the multistart algorithm is independent, and could be applied to any heuristic solver that can be run multiple times to give a sample. We present results for several classes of hard problems solved using simulated annealing, path-integral quantum Monte Carlo, parallel tempering with isoenergetic cluster moves, and a quantum annealer, and show that the success metrics and the scaling are improved substantially. When combined with this algorithm, the quantum annealer's scaling was substantially improved for native Chimera graph problems. In addition, with this algorithm the scaling of the time to solution of the quantum annealer is comparable to the Hamze-de Freitas-Selby algorithm on the weak-strong cluster problems introduced by Boixo et al. Parallel tempering with isoenergetic cluster moves was able to consistently solve three-dimensional spin glass problems with 8000 variables when combined with our method, whereas without our method it could not solve any.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".