MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283766420 · doi:10.1103/physreva.105.032433

Automatic depth optimization for a quantum approximate optimization algorithm

2022· article· en· W4283766420 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Pan, Yifan Tong, Yi Yang

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical review. A/Physical review, A · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsOptimization algorithmAlgorithmComputer scienceQuantumQuantum algorithmMathematical optimizationMathematicsPhysicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum approximate optimization algorithm (QAOA) is a hybrid algorithm whose control parameters are classically optimized. In addition to the variational parameters, the right choice of hyperparameter is crucial for improving the performance of any optimization model. Control depth, or the number of variational parameters, is considered as the most important hyperparameter for QAOA. In this paper we investigate the control depth selection with an automatic algorithm based on proximal gradient descent. The performances of the automatic algorithm are demonstrated on seven-node and ten-node max-cut problems, which show that the control depth can be significantly reduced during the iteration whereas achieving an sufficient level of optimization accuracy. With theoretical convergence guarantee, the proposed algorithm can be used as an efficient tool for choosing the appropriate control depth as a replacement of random search or empirical rules. Moreover, the reduction of control depth will induce a significant reduction in the number of quantum gates in circuit, which improves the applicability of QAOA on noisy intermediate-scale quantum devices.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.603
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.306 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical review. A/Physical review, ASame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207