Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Preprint |
| Publicado: |
2024
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.19351 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1866916304217178112 |
|---|---|
| author | McGeoch, Catherine C. Chern, Kevin Farré, Pau King, Andrew K. |
| author_facet | McGeoch, Catherine C. Chern, Kevin Farré, Pau King, Andrew K. |
| contents | Recent work [Sachdeva et al.] presented an iterative hybrid quantum variational optimization algorithm designed by Q-CTRL and executed on IBM gate-based quantum processing units (QPUs), claiming a significant performance advantage against a D-Wave quantum annealer. Here we point out major methodological problems with this comparison. Using a simple unoptimized workflow for quantum annealing, we show success probabilities multiple orders of magnitude higher than those reported by [Sachdeva et al.]. These results, which can be reproduced using open-source code and free trial access to a D-Wave quantum annealer, contradict Q-CTRL's claims of superior performance. We also provide a direct comparison between quantum annealing and a recent demonstration of digitized quantum annealing on an IBM processor, showing that analog quantum annealing on a D-Wave QPU reaches far lower energies than digitized quantum annealing on an IBM QPU. |
| format | Preprint |
| id |
arxiv_https___arxiv_org_abs_2406_19351 |
| institution | arXiv |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | arxiv |
| spellingShingle | A comment on comparing optimization on D-Wave and IBM quantum processors McGeoch, Catherine C. Chern, Kevin Farré, Pau King, Andrew K. Quantum Physics Recent work [Sachdeva et al.] presented an iterative hybrid quantum variational optimization algorithm designed by Q-CTRL and executed on IBM gate-based quantum processing units (QPUs), claiming a significant performance advantage against a D-Wave quantum annealer. Here we point out major methodological problems with this comparison. Using a simple unoptimized workflow for quantum annealing, we show success probabilities multiple orders of magnitude higher than those reported by [Sachdeva et al.]. These results, which can be reproduced using open-source code and free trial access to a D-Wave quantum annealer, contradict Q-CTRL's claims of superior performance. We also provide a direct comparison between quantum annealing and a recent demonstration of digitized quantum annealing on an IBM processor, showing that analog quantum annealing on a D-Wave QPU reaches far lower energies than digitized quantum annealing on an IBM QPU. |
| title | A comment on comparing optimization on D-Wave and IBM quantum processors |
| topic | Quantum Physics |
| url | https://arxiv.org/abs/2406.19351 |