Diabatic quantum annealing for the frustrated ring model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Quantum annealing (QA) is a continuous-time heuristic quantum algorithm for solving or approximately solving classical optimization problems. The algorithm uses a schedule to interpolate between a driver Hamiltonian with an easy-to-prepare ground state and a problem Hamiltonian whose ground state encodes solutions to an optimization problem. The standard implementation relies on the evolution being adiabatic: keeping the system in the instantaneous ground state with high probability and requiring a time scale inversely related to the minimum energy gap between the instantaneous ground and excited states. However, adiabatic evolution can lead to evolution times that scale exponentially with the system size, even for computationally simple problems. Here, we study whether non-adiabatic evolutions with optimized annealing schedules can bypass this exponential slowdown for one such class of problems called the frustrated ring model. For sufficiently optimized annealing schedules and system sizes of up to 39 qubits, we provide numerical evidence that we can avoid the exponential slowdown. Our work highlights the potential of highly-controllable QA to circumvent bottlenecks associated with the standard implementation of QA.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".