- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review A

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Frustration-enhanced quantum annealing correction models with additional inter-replica interactions

Tomohiro Hattori1 and Shu Tanaka1,2,3,4,*

  • 1Graduate School of Science and Technology, Keio University, 3-14-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa 223-8522, Japan
  • 2Department of Applied Physics and Physico-Informatics, Keio University, 3-14-1 Hiyoshi, Kohoku-ku, Yokohama-shi, Kanagawa 223-8522, Japan
  • 3Keio University Sustainable Quantum Artificial Intelligence Center (KSQAIC), Keio University, Tokyo 108-8345, Japan
  • 4Human Biology-Microbiome-Quantum Research Center (WPI-Bio2Q), Keio University, Tokyo 108-8345, Japan

  • *Contact author: shu.tanaka@appi.keio.ac.jp
PDF

Phys. Rev. A 114, 022470 – Published 31 August, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/5k5x-zjq9

Abstract

Quantum annealing correction (QAC) models provide a promising approach for mitigating errors in quantum annealers. Previous studies have established that QAC models are crucial for ensuring the robustness of the ground state of the Ising model on hardware. In this work, the effects of QAC models incorporating replicas with additional interactions, specifically, the penalty spin model and the stacked model, are investigated for problems characterized by a small energy gap between the ground and first excited states during quantum annealing, a well-known bottleneck to reaching the ground state. The results demonstrate that these QAC models can obtain the optimal solution within short annealing times by exploiting diabatic transitions, even for problems with a small energy gap. These findings highlight the potential of QAC models as practical near-term algorithms for hardware subject to runtime limitations and control noise.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (76)

  1. T. Kadowaki and H. Nishimori, Quantum annealing in the transverse Ising model, Phys. Rev. E 58, 5355 (1998).
  2. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, and M. Sipser, Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution, arXiv:quant-ph/0001106.
  3. C. C. McGeoch, Adiabatic Quantum Computation and Quantum Annealing: Theory and Practice (Morgan & Claypool, San Rafael, 2014).
  4. S. Tanaka, R. Tamura, and B. K. Chakrabarti, Quantum Spin Glasses, Annealing and Computation (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2017).
  5. T. Albash and D. A. Lidar, Adiabatic quantum computation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015002 (2018).
  6. B. K. Chakrabarti, H. Leschke, P. Ray, T. Shirai, and S. Tanaka, Quantum annealing and computation: Challenges and perspectives, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 381, 20210419 (2023).
  7. H. Karimi and G. Rosenberg, Boosting quantum annealer performance via sample persistence, Quantum Inf. Process. 16, 166 (2017).
  8. H. Karimi, G. Rosenberg, and H. G. Katzgraber, Effective optimization using sample persistence: A case study on quantum annealers and various Monte Carlo optimization methods, Phys. Rev. E 96, 043312 (2017).
  9. H. Irie, H. Liang, T. Doi, S. Gongyo, and T. Hatsuda, Hybrid quantum annealing via molecular dynamics, Sci. Rep. 11, 8426 (2021).
  10. Y. Atobe, M. Tawada, and N. Togawa, Hybrid annealing method based on subQUBO model extraction with multiple solution instances, IEEE Trans. Comput. 71, 2606 (2022).
  11. S. Kikuchi, N. Togawa, and S. Tanaka, Hybrid optimization method using simulated-annealing-based Ising machine and quantum annealer, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 92, 124002 (2023).
  12. T. Hattori, H. Irie, T. Kadowaki, and S. Tanaka, Advantages of fixing spins in quantum annealing, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 94, 013001 (2025).
  13. T. Hattori, H. Irie, T. Kadowaki, and S. Tanaka, Impact of fixing spins in a quantum annealer with energy rescaling, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 94, 074001 (2025).
  14. S. Hirama and M. Ohzeki, Efficient algorithm for binary quadratic problem by column generation and quantum annealing, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 92, 113002 (2023).
  15. H. Kanai, M. Yamashita, K. Tanahashi, and S. Tanaka, Annealing-assisted column generation for inequality-constrained combinatorial optimization problems, IEEE Access 12, 157669 (2024).
  16. T. Hattori and S. Tanaka, Improving the efficiency of quantum annealing with controlled diagonal catalysts, Phys. Rev. A 113, 022433 (2026).
  17. J. Raymond, M. H. Amin, A. D. King, R. Harris, W. Bernoudy, A. J. Berkley, K. Boothby, A. Smirnov, F. Altomare, M. Babcock, et al., Quantum error mitigation in quantum annealing, npj Quantum Inf. 11, 38 (2025).
  18. Y. Shingu, T. Nikuni, S. Kawabata, and Y. Matsuzaki, Quantum annealing with error mitigation, Phys. Rev. A 109, 042606 (2024).
  19. K. Tanahashi, S. Takayanagi, T. Motohashi, and S. Tanaka, Application of Ising machines and a software development for Ising machines, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 88, 061010 (2019).
  20. K. Kitai, J. Guo, S. Ju, S. Tanaka, K. Tsuda, J. Shiomi, and R. Tamura, Designing metamaterials with quantum annealing and factorization machines, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 013319 (2020).
  21. S. Izawa, K. Kitai, S. Tanaka, R. Tamura, and K. Tsuda, Continuous black-box optimization with an Ising machine and random subspace coding, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023062 (2022).
  22. T. Inoue, Y. Seki, S. Tanaka, N. Togawa, K. Ishizaki, and S. Noda, Towards optimization of photonic-crystal surface-emitting lasers via quantum annealing, Opt. Express 30, 43503 (2022).
  23. T. Matsumori, M. Taki, and T. Kadowaki, Application of QUBO solver using black-box optimization to structural design for resonance avoidance, Sci. Rep. 12, 12143 (2022).
  24. K. Nawa, T. Suzuki, K. Masuda, S. Tanaka, and Y. Miura, Quantum annealing optimization method for the design of barrier materials in magnetic tunnel junctions, Phys. Rev. Appl. 20, 024044 (2023).
  25. Y. Couzinié, Y. Seki, Y. Nishiya, H. Nishi, T. Kosugi, S. Tanaka, and Y.-i. Matsushita, Machine learning supported annealing for prediction of grand canonical crystal structures, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 94, 044802 (2025).
  26. R. Tamura, Y. Seki, Y. Minamoto, K. Kitai, Y. Matsuda, S. Tanaka, and K. Tsuda, Black-box optimization using factorization and Ising machines, Appl. Phys. Rev. 13, 021307 (2026).
  27. R. Harris, Y. Sato, A. J. Berkley, M. Reis, F. Altomare, M. Amin, K. Boothby, P. Bunyk, C. Deng, C. Enderud, et al., Phase transitions in a programmable quantum spin glass simulator, Science 361, 162 (2018).
  28. A. D. King, J. Carrasquilla, J. Raymond, I. Ozfidan, E. Andriyash, A. Berkley, M. Reis, T. Lanting, R. Harris, F. Altomare, et al., Observation of topological phenomena in a programmable lattice of 1,800 qubits, Nature (London) 560, 456 (2018).
  29. K. Endo, Y. Matsuda, S. Tanaka, and M. Muramatsu, A phase-field model by an Ising machine and its application to the phase-separation structure of a diblock polymer, Sci. Rep. 12, 10794 (2022).
  30. R. Honda, K. Endo, T. Kaji, Y. Suzuki, Y. Matsuda, S. Tanaka, and M. Muramatsu, Development of optimization method for truss structure by quantum annealing, Sci. Rep. 14, 13872 (2024).
  31. Z. Xu, W. Shang, S. Kim, E. Lee, and T. Luo, Quantum annealing-assisted lattice optimization, npj Comput. Mater. 11, 4 (2025).
  32. G. Rosenberg, P. Haghnegahdar, P. Goddard, P. Carr, K. Wu, and M. L. De Prado, Solving the optimal trading trajectory problem using a quantum annealer, in Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on High Performance Computational Finance (ACM Digital, New York, 2015), pp. 1–7.
  33. E. Grant, T. S. Humble, and B. Stump, Benchmarking quantum annealing controls with portfolio optimization, Phys. Rev. Appl. 15, 014012 (2021).
  34. T. Kato, On the adiabatic theorem of quantum mechanics, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 5, 435 (1950).
  35. A. Lucas, Ising formulations of many NP problems, Front. Phys. 2, 5 (2014).
  36. B. Altshuler, H. Krovi, and J. Roland, Anderson localization makes adiabatic quantum optimization fail, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 107, 12446 (2010).
  37. A. Pearson, A. Mishra, I. Hen, and D. A. Lidar, Analog errors in quantum annealing: Doom and hope, npj Quantum Inf. 5, 107 (2019).
  38. T. Albash and D. A. Lidar, Decoherence in adiabatic quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 91, 062320 (2015).
  39. Y. Seki and H. Nishimori, Quantum annealing with antiferromagnetic fluctuations, Phys. Rev. E 85, 051112 (2012).
  40. R. D. Somma, D. Nagaj, and M. Kieferová, Quantum speedup by quantum annealing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 050501 (2012).
  41. Y. Susa, Y. Yamashiro, M. Yamamoto, and H. Nishimori, Exponential speedup of quantum annealing by inhomogeneous driving of the transverse field, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 87, 023002 (2018).
  42. Y. Susa, Y. Yamashiro, M. Yamamoto, I. Hen, D. A. Lidar, and H. Nishimori, Quantum annealing of the p-spin model under inhomogeneous transverse field driving, Phys. Rev. A 98, 042326 (2018).
  43. J. I. Adame and P. L. McMahon, Inhomogeneous driving in quantum annealers can result in orders-of-magnitude improvements in performance, Quantum Sci. Technol. 5, 035011 (2020).
  44. T. Albash and M. Kowalsky, Diagonal catalysts in quantum adiabatic optimization, Phys. Rev. A 103, 022608 (2021).
  45. T. Zaborniak and R. Sousa, Benchmarking Hamiltonian noise in the D-wave quantum annealer, IEEE Trans. Quantum Eng. 2, 1 (2021).
  46. N. Feinstein, L. Fry-Bouriaux, S. Bose, and P. A. Warburton, Effects of XX catalysts on quantum annealing spectra with perturbative crossings, Phys. Rev. A 110, 042609 (2024).
  47. R. Ghosh, L. A. Nutricati, N. Feinstein, P. Warburton, and S. Bose, Enhancement of quantum annealing via n-local catalysts, Phys. Rev. Res. 8, 013301 (2026).
  48. E. Crosson and D. Lidar, Prospects for quantum enhancement with diabatic quantum annealing, Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 466 (2021).
  49. J. Côté, F. Sauvage, M. Larocca, M. Jonsson, L. Cincio, and T. Albash, Diabatic quantum annealing for the frustrated ring model, Quantum Sci. Technol. 8, 045033 (2023).
  50. N. Feinstein, I. Shalashilin, S. Bose, and P. Warburton, Robustness of diabatic enhancement in quantum annealing, Quantum Sci. Technol. 10, 025011 (2025).
  51. E. Pelofske, G. Hahn, and H. N. Djidjev, Parallel quantum annealing, Sci. Rep. 12, 4499 (2022).
  52. K. L. Pudenz, T. Albash, and D. A. Lidar, Error-corrected quantum annealing with hundreds of qubits, Nat. Commun. 5, 3243 (2014).
  53. K. L. Pudenz, T. Albash, and D. A. Lidar, Quantum annealing correction for random Ising problems, Phys. Rev. A 91, 042302 (2015).
  54. W. Vinci, T. Albash, G. Paz-Silva, I. Hen, and D. A. Lidar, Quantum annealing correction with minor embedding, Phys. Rev. A 92, 042310 (2015).
  55. W. Vinci, T. Albash, and D. A. Lidar, Nested quantum annealing correction, npj Quantum Inf. 2, 16017 (2016).
  56. S. Matsuura, H. Nishimori, T. Albash, and D. A. Lidar, Mean field analysis of quantum annealing correction, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 220501 (2016).
  57. A. Mishra, T. Albash, and D. A. Lidar, Performance of two different quantum annealing correction codes, Quantum Inf. Process. 15, 609 (2016).
  58. S. Matsuura, H. Nishimori, W. Vinci, T. Albash, and D. A. Lidar, Quantum-annealing correction at finite temperature: Ferromagnetic p-spin models, Phys. Rev. A 95, 022308 (2017).
  59. W. Vinci and D. A. Lidar, Scalable effective-temperature reduction for quantum annealers via nested quantum annealing correction, Phys. Rev. A 97, 022308 (2018).
  60. S. Matsuura, H. Nishimori, W. Vinci, and D. A. Lidar, Nested quantum annealing correction at finite temperature: p-spin models, Phys. Rev. A 99, 062307 (2019).
  61. J. Bennett, A. Callison, T. O'Leary, M. West, N. Chancellor, and V. Kendon, Using copies can improve precision in continuous-time quantum computing, Quantum Sci. Technol. 8, 035031 (2023).
  62. K. Hino and S. Tanaka, Physical properties of error reduction algorithms for Ising machines, in 2024 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 2024), Vol. 2, pp. 434–435.
  63. R. Y. Li, T. Albash, and D. A. Lidar, Limitations of error corrected quantum annealing in improving the performance of Boltzmann machines, Quantum Sci. Technol. 5, 045010 (2020).
  64. K. C. Young, R. Blume-Kohout, and D. A. Lidar, Adiabatic quantum optimization with the wrong Hamiltonian, Phys. Rev. A 88, 062314 (2013).
  65. D. Roberts, L. Cincio, A. Saxena, A. Petukhov, and S. Knysh, Noise amplification at spin-glass bottlenecks of quantum annealing: A solvable model, Phys. Rev. A 101, 042317 (2020).
  66. R. Wang, V. R. Arezzo, K. Thengil, G. Pecci, and G. E. Santoro, From exponential to quadratic: Optimal control for a frustrated Ising ring model, Quantum Sci. Technol. 10, 035052 (2025).
  67. S. Kirkpatrick, C. D. Gelatt, Jr., and M. P. Vecchi, Optimization by simulated annealing, Science 220, 671 (1983).
  68. Per-QPU solver properties and schedules, https://docs.dwavequantum.com/en/latest/quantum_research/solver_properties_specific.html#advantage2-system1-10 (accessed 2025-1-20).
  69. K. Boothby, A. King, and J. Raymond, D-Wave Quantum Inc., “Per-QPU Solver Properties and Schedules,” D-Wave Quantum Documentation, (2021), https://docs.dwavequantum.com/en/latest/quantum_research/solver_properties_specific.html.
  70. V. Choi, Minor-embedding in adiabatic quantum computation: I. The parameter setting problem, Quantum Inf. Process. 7, 193 (2008).
  71. V. Choi, Minor-embedding in adiabatic quantum computation: II. Minor-universal graph design, Quantum Inf. Process. 10, 343 (2011).
  72. J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, QuTiP: An open-source Python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems., Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 1760 (2012).
  73. J. R. Johansson, P. D. Nation, and F. Nori, QuTiP 2: A Python framework for the dynamics of open quantum systems., Comput. Phys. Commun. 184, 1234 (2013).
  74. A. D. King, S. Suzuki, J. Raymond, A. Zucca, T. Lanting, F. Altomare, A. J. Berkley, S. Ejtemaee, E. Hoskinson, S. Huang, E. Ladizinsky, A. J. R. MacDonald, G. Marsden, T. Oh, G. Poulin-Lamarre, M. Reis, C. Rich, Y. Sato, J. D. Whittaker, J. Yao, et al., Coherent quantum annealing in a programmable 2,000 qubit Ising chain, Nat. Phys. 18, 1324 (2022).
  75. G. E. Santoro, R. Martonák, E. Tosatti, and R. Car, Theory of quantum annealing of an Ising spin glass, Science 295, 2427 (2002).
  76. A. G. Redfield, On the theory of relaxation processes, IBM J. Res. Dev. 1, 19 (1957).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. A 114, 022470– Published 31 August, 2026
  • Received 23 September 2025
  • Accepted 14 August 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation