Abstract:Quantum annealing (QA) is a method for solving combinatorial optimization problems. We can estimate the computational time for QA using the adiabatic condition. The adiabatic condition consists of two parts: an energy gap and a transition matrix. Most past studies have focused on the relationship between the energy gap and computational time. The success probability of QA is considered to decrease exponentially owing to the exponentially decreasing energy gap at the first-order phase-transition point. In this study, through a detailed analysis of the relationship between the energy gap, transition matrix, and computational cost during QA, we propose a general method for constructing counterintuitive models wherein QA with a constant annealing time fails despite a constant energy gap, based on polynomial energy. We assume that the energy of the total Hamiltonian is at most $\Theta(L)$, where $L$ is the number of qubits. In our formalism, we choose a known model that exhibits an exponentially small energy gap during QA, and modify the model by adding a specific penalty term to the Hamiltonian. In the modified model, the transition matrix in the adiabatic condition becomes exponentially large as the number of qubits increases, while the energy gap remains constant. Moreover, we achieve a quadratic speedup, for which the upper bound for improvement in the adiabatic condition is determined by the polynomial energy. As examples, we consider the adiabatic Grover search and the $p$-spin model. In these cases, with the addition of the penalty term, although the success probability of QA on the modified models becomes exponentially small despite a constant energy gap; we can achieve a success probability considerably higher than that of conventional QA. Moreover, we numerically show the scaling of the computational cost is quadratically improved compared to the conventional QA.

Strengths and weaknesses of weak-strong cluster problems: A detailed overview of state-of-the-art classical heuristics versus quantum approaches

Strengths and weaknesses of weak-strong cluster problems: A detailed overview of state-of-the-art classical heuristics vs quantum approaches

Seeking Quantum Speedup Through Spin Glasses: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Best-case Performance of Quantum Annealers on Native Spin-Glass Benchmarks: How Chaos Can Affect Success Probabilities

Unraveling Quantum Annealers using Classical Hardness

Readiness of Quantum Optimization Machines for Industrial Applications

On the emerging potential of quantum annealing hardware for combinatorial optimization

Scaling Advantage in Approximate Optimization with Quantum Annealing

Optimizing the Optimizer: Decomposition Techniques for Quantum Annealing

Quantum Annealers Chain Strengths: A Simple Heuristic to Set Them All

Statistical Analysis of Quantum Annealing

Probing for quantum speedup in spin glass problems with planted solutions

Using machine learning for quantum annealing accuracy prediction

Exponentially Biased Ground-State Sampling of Quantum Annealing Machines with Transverse-Field Driving Hamiltonians.

Solving non-native combinatorial optimization problems using hybrid quantum-classical algorithms

Computational supremacy in quantum simulation

A Hybrid Quantum-Classical Paradigm to Mitigate Embedding Costs in Quantum Annealing

Quantum annealing showing an exponentially small success probability despite a constant energy gap with polynomial energy

Quantum annealing versus classical solvers: Applications, challenges and limitations for optimisation problems

The Quantum Tortoise and the Classical Hare: A simple framework for understanding which problems quantum computing will accelerate (and which it will not)

Quantum-Enhanced Greedy Combinatorial Optimization Solver