Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3457388.3458672acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescfConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Reducing quantum annealing biases for solving the graph partitioning problem

Published: 11 May 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Quantum annealers offer an efficient way to compute high quality solutions of NP-hard problems when expressed in a QUBO (quadratic unconstrained binary optimization) or an Ising form. This is done by mapping a problem onto the physical qubits and couplers of the quantum chip, from which a solution is read after a process called quantum annealing. However, this process is subject to multiple sources of biases, including poor calibration, leakage between adjacent qubits, control biases, etc., which might negatively influence the quality of the annealing results. In this work, we aim at mitigating the effect of such biases for solving constrained optimization problems, by offering a two-step method, and apply it to Graph Partitioning. In the first step, we measure and reduce any biases that result from implementing the constraints of the problem. In the second, we add the objective function to the resulting bias-corrected implementation of the constraints, and send the problem to the quantum annealer. We apply this concept to Graph Partitioning, an important NP-hard problem, which asks to find a partition of the vertices of a graph that is balanced (the constraint) and minimizes the cut size (the objective). We first quantify the bias of the implementation of the constraint on the quantum annealer, that is, we require, in an unbiased implementation, that any two vertices have the same likelihood of being assigned to the same or to different parts of the partition. We then propose an iterative method to correct any such biases. We demonstrate that, after adding the objective, solving the resulting bias-corrected Ising problem on the quantum annealer results in a higher solution accuracy.

References

[1]
T. Albash, T.F. Rønnow, M. Troyer, and D.A. Lidar. 2015. Reexamining classical and quantum models for the D-Wave One processor. Eur. Phys. J. Spec. Top. 224 (2015), 111--129.
[2]
R. Ayanzadeh, J. Dorband, M. Halem, and T. Finin. 2020. Post-Quantum Error-Correction for Quantum Annealers. arXiv:2010.00115
[3]
A. Barbosa, E. Pelofske, G. Halm, and H.N. Djidjev. 2020. Optimizing embedding-related quantum annealing parameters for reducing hardware bias. arXiv:2011.00719
[4]
S. Boixo, T. Albash, F.M. Spedalieri, N. Chancellor, and D.A. Lidar. 2013. Experimental signature of programmable quantum annealing. Nat Commun 4, 2067 (2013), 1--8.
[5]
A.D. Bookatz, E. Farhi, and L. Zhou. 2015. Error suppression in Hamiltonian based quantum computation using energy penalties. Phys Rev A 92, 022317 (2015), 1--26.
[6]
N. Chancellor. 2017. Modernizing quantum annealing using local searches. New Journal of Physics 19, 2 (2017), 023024.
[7]
G. Chapuis, H.N. Djidjev, G. Hahn, and G. Rizk. 2019. Finding Maximum Cliques on the D-Wave Quantum Annealer. J Sign Process Syst 91, 3--4 (2019), 363--377.
[8]
D-Wave Systems. 2020. QPU Properties: D-Wave 2000Q Online System.
[9]
Z. Jiang and E.G. Rieffel. 2017. Non-commuting two-local Hamiltonians for quantum error suppression. Quantum Inf Process 16, 89 (2017), 1--24.
[10]
A.D. King, E. Hoskinson, T. Lanting, E. Andriyash, and M.H. Amin. 2016. Degeneracy, degree, and heavy tails in quantum annealing. Phys. Rev. A 93, 052320 (2016), 1--12.
[11]
M.S. Könz, G. Mazzola, A.J. Ochoa, H.G. Katzgraber, and M. Troyer. 2019. Uncertain fate of fair sampling in quantum annealing. Phys Rev A 100, 030303(R) (2019), 1--8.
[12]
R.Y. Li, T. Albash, and D.A. Lidar. 2020. Limitations of error corrected quantum annealing in improving the performance of Boltzmann machines. Quantum Sci Technol 5 (2020), 045010.
[13]
A. Lucas. 2014. Ising formulations of many NP problems. Frontiers in Physics 2 (2014), 1--5.
[14]
S. Mandrà, Z. Zhu, and H.G. Katzgraber. 2017. Exponentially Biased Ground-State Sampling of Quantum Annealing Machines with Transverse-Field Driving Hamiltonians. Phys Rev Lett 118, 070502 (2017), 1--6.
[15]
M. Ohkuwa, H. Nishimori, and D.A. Lidar. 2018. Reverse annealing for the fully connected p-spin model. Phys. Rev. A 98, 2 (2018), 022314.
[16]
A. Pearson, A. Mishra, I. Hen, and D.A. Lidar. 2019. Analog errors in quantum annealing: doom and hope. npj Quantum Information 5, 107 (2019), 1--9.
[17]
E. Pelofske, G. Hahn, and H.N. Djidjev. 2020. Advanced anneal paths for improved quantum annealing. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE). IEEE, Denver, CO, USA, USA, 256--266.
[18]
E. Pelofske, G. Hahn, and H.N. Djidjev. 2020. Advanced unembedding techniques for quantum annealers. arXiv:2009.05028
[19]
A. Perdomo-Ortiz, B. O'Gorman, J. Fluegemann, R. Biswas, and V.N. Smelyanskiy. 2016. Determination and correction of persistent biases in quantum annealers. Scientific Reports 6, 18628 (2016), 1--8.
[20]
K.L. Pudenz, T. Albash, and D.A. Lidar. 2014. Error-corrected quantum annealing with hundreds of qubits. Nature Communications 5 (2014), 3243.
[21]
J. Roffe, S. Zohren, D. Horsman, and N. Chancellor. 2019. Decoding quantum error correction with Ising model hardware. arXiv:1903.10254
[22]
D-Wave Systems. 2019. D-Wave System Documentation: gauge transform. https://docs.dwavesys.com/docs/latest/
[23]
D-Wave Systems. 2019. D-Wave System Documentation: uniform torque compensation. https://docs.ocean.dwavesys.com/projects/system/en/stable/reference/generated/dwave.embedding.chain_strength.uniform_torque_compensation.html

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Analysis of a Programmable Quantum Annealer as a Random Number GeneratorIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security10.1109/TIFS.2024.336405419(3636-3643)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2024

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
CF '21: Proceedings of the 18th ACM International Conference on Computing Frontiers
May 2021
254 pages
ISBN:9781450384049
DOI:10.1145/3457388
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 11 May 2021

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. D-Wave
  2. NP-hard problem
  3. bias correction
  4. graph partitioning
  5. quadratic unconstrained binary optimization
  6. quantum annealing

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

CF '21
Sponsor:
CF '21: Computing Frontiers Conference
May 11 - 13, 2021
Virtual Event, Italy

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 273 of 785 submissions, 35%

Upcoming Conference

CF '25

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)11
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
Reflects downloads up to 09 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Analysis of a Programmable Quantum Annealer as a Random Number GeneratorIEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security10.1109/TIFS.2024.336405419(3636-3643)Online publication date: 8-Feb-2024

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media