mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Quantum Annealing vs. QAOA: 127 Qubit Higher-Order Ising Problems on NISQ Computers

arXiv 2301.00520 ↗First posted 2 Jan 2023quant-ph cs.DS cs.ETcited by 4

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Quantum annealing (QA) and Quantum Alternating Operator Ansatz (QAOA) are both heuristic quantum algorithms intended for sampling optimal solutions of combinatorial optimization problems. In this article we implement a rigorous direct comparison between QA on D-Wave hardware and QAOA on IBMQ hardware. These two quantum algorithms are also compared against classical simulated annealing. The studied problems are instances of a class of Ising models, with variable assignments of +1 or -1, that contain cubic ZZZ interactions (higher order terms) and match both the native connectivity of the Pegasus topology D-Wave chips and the heavy hexagonal lattice of the IBMQ chips. The novel QAOA implementation on the heavy hexagonal lattice has a CNOT depth of 6 per round and allows for usage of an entire heavy hexagonal lattice. Experimentally, QAOA is executed on an ensemble of randomly generated Ising instances with a grid search over 1 and 2 round angles using all 127 programmable superconducting transmon qubits of ibmwashington. The error suppression technique digital dynamical decoupling is also tested on all QAOA circuits. QA is executed on the same Ising instances with the programmable superconducting flux qubit devices D-Wave Advantagesystem4.1 and Advantagesystem6.1 using modified annealing schedules with pauses. We find that QA outperforms QAOA on all problem instances. We also find that dynamical decoupling enables 2-round QAOA to marginally outperform 1-round QAOA, which is not the case without dynamical decoupling.

Key facts. Cited by 4 papers in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). First posted on arXiv 2 Jan 2023.

Builds on

No reference list yet.

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2023: 2; 2024: 0; 2025: 2.

4 papers.