MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416553074 · doi:10.1609/aaaiss.v7i1.36913

LLM-QUBO: An End-to-End Framework for Automated QUBOTransformation from Natural Language Problem Descriptions

2025· article· W4416553074 on OpenAlexaff
Huixiang Zhang, Mahzabeen Emu, Salimur Choudhury

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the AAAI Symposium Series · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsQueen's UniversityMemorial University of NewfoundlandLakehead University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum annealingWorkflowScalabilityCorrectnessQuadratic unconstrained binary optimizationQuantum computerTransformation (genetics)Optimization problemDecomposition

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum annealing offers a promising paradigm for solving NP-hard combinatorial optimization problems, but its practical application is severely hindered by two challenges: the complex, manual process of translating problem descriptions into the requisite Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO) format and the scalability limitations of current quantum hardware. To address these obstacles, we propose a novel end-to-end framework, LLM-QUBO, that automates this entire formulation-to-solution pipeline. Our system leverages a Large Language Model (LLM) to parse natural language, automatically generating a structured mathematical representation. To overcome hardware limitations, we integrate a hybrid quantum-classical Benders' decomposition method. This approach partitions the problem, compiling the combinatorial complex master problem into a compact QUBO format, while delegating linearly structured sub-problems to classical solvers. The correctness of the generated QUBO and the scalability of the hybrid approach are validated using classical solvers, establishing a robust performance baseline and demonstrating the framework's readiness for quantum hardware. Our primary contribution is a synergistic computing paradigm that bridges classical AI and quantum computing, addressing key challenges in the practical application of optimization problem. This automated workflow significantly reduces the barrier to entry, providing a viable pathway to transform quantum devices into accessible accelerators for large-scale, real-world optimization challenges.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0050.005
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.009

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the AAAI Symposium SeriesSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207