- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Applied

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

Improved Ising formulation of max-3-cut using higher-order spin interactions

Robbe De Prins1,2,*, Guy Van der Sande2, Peter Bienstman1, and Thomas Van Vaerenbergh3

  • 1Photonics Research Group, Ghent University— imec, Technologiepark-Zwijnaarde 126, 9052 Gent, Belgium
  • 2Applied Physics Research Group, Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium
  • 3Large-Scale Integrated Photonics Lab, Hewlett Packard Labs, HPE Belgium, Diegem, Belgium

  • *Contact author: robbe.deprins@ugent.be
PDF

Phys. Rev. Applied 25, 044058 – Published 21 April, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/vqsv-jzk4

Abstract

Many combinatorial optimization problems (COPs) are naturally expressed using variables that take on more than two discrete values. To solve such problems using Ising machines (IMs)—specialized analog or digital devices designed to solve COPs efficiently—these multivalued integers must be encoded using binary spin variables. A common approach is one-hot encoding, where each variable is represented by a group of spins constrained so that exactly one spin is in the “up” state. However, this encoding introduces energy barriers: changing an integer’s value requires flipping two spins and passing through an invalid intermediate state. This creates rugged energy landscapes that may hinder optimization. We propose a higher-order Ising formulation for max-3-cut, a canonical COP involving integers with three possible states that provides a minimal setting for assessing multivalued formulations on IMs. Our formulation preserves valid configurations under single-spin updates. The resulting energy landscapes are smoother, and we show that this remains true even when the binary variables are relaxed to continuous values, making it well suited for analog IMs as well. Benchmarking on such an IM, we find that the higher-order formulation leads to higher success rates and faster time-to-solution than when one-hot encoding is employed.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (49)

  1. F. Barahona, M. Grötschel, M. Jünger, and G. Reinelt, An application of combinatorial optimization to statistical physics and circuit layout design, Oper. Res. 36, 493 (1988).
  2. C. De Simone, M. Diehl, M. Jünger, P. Mutzel, G. Reinelt, and G. Rinaldi, Exact ground states of Ising spin glasses: New experimental results with a branch-and-cut algorithm, J. Stat. Phys. 80, 487 (1995).
  3. A. Perdomo, C. Truncik, I. Tubert-Brohman, G. Rose, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Construction of model Hamiltonians for adiabatic quantum computation and its application to finding low-energy conformations of lattice protein models, Phys. Rev. A 78, 012320 (2008).
  4. R. Y. Li, R. Di Felice, R. Rohs, and D. A. Lidar, Quantum annealing versus classical machine learning applied to a simplified computational biology problem, npj Quantum Inf. 4, 14 (2018).
  5. C. Hojny, I. Joormann, H. Lüthen, and M. Schmidt, Mixed-integer programming techniques for the connected max-k-cut problem, Math. Program. Comput. 13, 75 (2021).
  6. J. Poland and T. Zeugmann, in International Conference on Discovery Science (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006), p. 197.
  7. E. G. Rieffel, D. Venturelli, B. O’Gorman, M. B. Do, E. M. Prystay, and V. N. Smelyanskiy, A case study in programming a quantum annealer for hard operational planning problems, Quantum Inf. Process. 14, 1 (2015).
  8. R. Carlson and G. L. Nemhauser, Scheduling to minimize interaction cost, Oper. Res. 14, 52 (1966).
  9. A. Lucas, Ising formulations of many NP problems, Front. Phys. 2, 74887 (2014).
  10. F. Dominguez, J. Unger, M. Traube, B. Mant, C. Ertler, and W. Lechner, Encoding-independent optimization problem formulation for quantum computing, Front. Quantum Sci. Technol. 2, 1229471 (2023).
  11. M. Honari-Latifpour and M.-A. Miri, Optical Potts machine through networks of three-photon down-conversion oscillators, Nanophotonics 9, 4199 (2020).
  12. K. P. Kalinin and N. G. Berloff, Simulating Ising and n-state planar Potts models and external fields with nonequilibrium condensates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 235302 (2018).
  13. N. Mohseni, P. L. McMahon, and T. Byrnes, Ising machines as hardware solvers of combinatorial optimization problems, Nat. Rev. Phys. 4, 363 (2022).
  14. H. Goto, K. Endo, M. Suzuki, Y. Sakai, T. Kanao, Y. Hamakawa, R. Hidaka, M. Yamasaki, and K. Tatsumura, High-performance combinatorial optimization based on classical mechanics, Sci. Adv. 7, eabe7953 (2021).
  15. T. Inagaki, Y. Haribara, K. Igarashi, T. Sonobe, S. Tamate, T. Honjo, A. Marandi, P. L. McMahon, T. Umeki, K. Enbutsu, et al., A coherent Ising machine for 2000-node optimization problems, Science 354, 603 (2016).
  16. G. Pedretti, F. Böhm, T. Bhattacharya, A. Heittmann, X. Zhang, M. Hizzani, G. Hutchinson, D. Kwon, J. Moon, E. Valiante, et al., Solving Boolean satisfiability problems with resistive content addressable memories, npj Unconv. Comput. 2, 7 (2025).
  17. T. Leleu, Y. Yamamoto, P. L. McMahon, and K. Aihara, Destabilization of local minima in analog spin systems by correction of amplitude heterogeneity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 040607 (2019).
  18. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, and M. Sipser, Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution, arXiv:quant-ph/0001106.
  19. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, A quantum approximate optimization algorithm, arXiv:1411.4028.
  20. S. Hadfield, Z. Wang, B. O’gorman, E. G. Rieffel, D. Venturelli, and R. Biswas, From the quantum approximate optimization algorithm to a quantum alternating operator ansatz, Algorithms 12, 34 (2019).
  21. R. M. Karp, in 50 Years of Integer Programming 1958–2008: from the Early Years to the State-of-the-Art (Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009), p. 219.
  22. D. Dobrynin, A. Renaudineau, M. Hizzani, D. Strukov, M. Mohseni, and J. P. Strachan, Energy landscapes of combinatorial optimization in Ising machines, Phys. Rev. E 110, 045308 (2024).
  23. M. Hizzani, A. Heittmann, G. Hutchinson, D. Dobrynin, T. Van Vaerenbergh, T. Bhattacharya, A. Renaudineau, D. Strukov, and J. P. Strachan, in 2024 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems (ISCAS) (IEEE, 2024), p. 1.
  24. E. Valiante, M. Hernandez, A. Barzegar, and H. G. Katzgraber, Computational overhead of locality reduction in binary optimization problems, Comput. Phys. Commun. 269, 108102 (2021).
  25. F. Böhm, T. V. Vaerenbergh, G. Verschaffelt, and G. Van der Sande, Order-of-magnitude differences in computational performance of analog Ising machines induced by the choice of nonlinearity, Commun. Phys. 4, 149 (2021).
  26. N. G. Berloff, M. Silva, K. Kalinin, A. Askitopoulos, J. D. Töpfer, P. Cilibrizzi, W. Langbein, and P. G. Lagoudakis, Realizing the classical XY Hamiltonian in polariton simulators, Nat. Mater. 16, 1120 (2017).
  27. A. D. King, W. Bernoudy, J. King, A. J. Berkley, and T. Lanting, Emulating the coherent Ising machine with a mean-field algorithm, arXiv:1806.08422.
  28. M. Ercsey-Ravasz and Z. Toroczkai, Optimization hardness as transient chaos in an analog approach to constraint satisfaction, Nat. Phys. 7, 966 (2011).
  29. H. Goto, K. Tatsumura, and A. R. Dixon, Combinatorial optimization by simulating adiabatic bifurcations in nonlinear Hamiltonian systems, Sci. Adv. 5, eaav2372 (2019).
  30. S. K. Vadlamani, T. P. Xiao, and E. Yablonovitch, Physics successfully implements lagrange multiplier optimization, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 117, 26639 (2020).
  31. S. Reifenstein, T. Leleu, T. McKenna, M. Jankowski, M.-G. Suh, E. Ng, F. Khoyratee, Z. Toroczkai, and Y. Yamamoto, Coherent SAT solvers: A tutorial, Adv. Opt. Photonics 15, 385 (2023).
  32. M. Calvanese Strinati and C. Conti, Multidimensional hyperspin machine, Nat. Commun. 13, 7248 (2022).
  33. M. Calvanese Strinati and C. Conti, Equalized hyperspin machine, Phys. Rev. A 112, 053505 (2025).
  34. T. Kanao and H. Goto, Simulated bifurcation for higher-order cost functions, Appl. Phys. Express 16, 014501 (2022).
  35. R. De Prins, J. Lamers, P. Bienstman, G. Van der Sande, G. Verschaffelt, and T. Van Vaerenbergh, Incorporating external fields in analog Ising machines, Commun. Phys. 8, 482 (2025).
  36. H. Sakaguchi, K. Ogata, T. Isomura, S. Utsunomiya, Y. Yamamoto, and K. Aihara, Boltzmann sampling by degenerate optical parametric oscillator network for structure-based virtual screening, Entropy 18, 365 (2016).
  37. T. Leleu, Y. Yamamoto, S. Utsunomiya, and K. Aihara, Combinatorial optimization using dynamical phase transitions in driven-dissipative systems, Phys. Rev. E 95, 022118 (2017).
  38. A. Yamamura, H. Mabuchi, and S. Ganguli, Geometric landscape annealing as an optimization principle underlying the coherent Ising machine, Phys. Rev. X 14, 031054 (2024).
  39. A. Wiegele, Biq Mac library—A collection of Max-Cut and quadratic 0-1 programming instances of medium size, https://biqmac.aau.at/biqmaclib.pdf (2007).
  40. R. Fakhimi, and V. Hamidreza, The max k-cut problem on classical and quantum solvers, 2022, https://github.com/qcol-lu/maxkcut
  41. Y. Ye, Gset dataset of random graphs, https://web.stanford.edu/∼yyye/yyye/Gset/ (2003), accessed: 2025-06-19.
  42. F. Ma and J.-K. Hao, A multiple search operator heuristic for the max-k-cut problem, Ann. Oper. Res. 248, 365 (2017).
  43. R. De Prins, Solving Max-3-Cut with an analog Ising machine using multiple formulations, https://github.com/rdprins/Max3CUT_Ising (2025).
  44. A. Yamamura, H. Mabuchi, and S. Ganguli, Geometric landscape annealing as an optimization principle underlying the coherent Ising machine, Phys. Rev. X 14, 031054 (2024).
  45. J. Lamers, G. Verschaffelt, and G. Van der Sande, Using continuation methods to analyse the difficulty of problems solved by Ising machines, Commun. Phys. 7, 378 (2024).
  46. R. De Prins, G. Van der Sande, P. Bienstman, and T. Van Vaerenbergh, How to incorporate higher-order interactions in analog Ising machines, arXiv:2507.23621.
  47. F. Richoux and J.-F. Baffier, Automatic error function learning with interpretable compositional networks, Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 93, 441 (2023).
  48. F. Richoux, J.-F. Baffier, and P. Codognet, in International Conference on Computational Science (Springer, 2023), p. 153.
  49. N. Masuda, S. Islam, S. Thu Aung, and T. Watanabe, Energy landscape analysis based on the Ising model: Tutorial review, PLOS Complex Syst. 2, e0000039 (2025).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Applied 25, 044058– Published 21 April, 2026
  • Received 5 August 2025
  • Revised 14 January 2026
  • Accepted 27 March 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