- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

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

Boltzmann sampling of frustrated J1−J2 Ising models with programmable quantum annealers

Elijah Pelofske*

  • *Contact author: epelofske@lanl.gov
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 033280 – Published 8 September, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/2xc3-815x

Abstract

One of the surprising, and potentially very useful, capabilities of analog quantum computers, such as D-Wave quantum annealers, is sampling from the Boltzmann, or Gibbs, distribution defined by a classical Hamiltonian. In this study, we thoroughly examine the ability of D-Wave quantum annealers to sample from the Boltzmann distribution defined by a canonical type of competing magnetic frustration J1−J2 model, the one-dimensional ANNNI (axial next-nearest-neighbor Ising) model. Boltzmann sampling error rate is quantified for standard linear-ramp anneals ranging from 5 ns annealing times up to 2000 µs on two different D-Wave quantum annealing processors. Interestingly, we find some analog hardware parameters that result in a very high accuracy (down to a total variation distance of 0.0003) and low-temperature sampling (down to β=32.2) in a frustrated region of the ANNNI model magnetic phase diagram. This bolsters the viability of current analog quantum computers for thermodynamic sampling applications of highly frustrated magnetic spin systems.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (100)

  1. R. J. Elliott, Phenomenological discussion of magnetic ordering in the heavy rare-earth metals, Phys. Rev. 124, 346 (1961).
  2. M. E. Fisher and W. Selke, Infinitely many commensurate phases in a simple Ising model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 44, 1502 (1980).
  3. W. Selke, The ANNNI model—Theoretical analysis and experimental application, Phys. Rep. 170, 213 (1988).
  4. M. E. Fisher and W. Selke, Low temperature analysis of the axial next-nearest neighbour Ising model near its multiphase point, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 302, 1 (1981).
  5. F. Sciortino, S. Mossa, E. Zaccarelli, and P. Tartaglia, Equilibrium cluster phases and low-density arrested disordered states: The role of short-range attraction and long-range repulsion, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 055701 (2004).
  6. H. Rieger and G. Uimin, The one-dimensional ANNNI model in a transverse field: Analytic and numerical study of effective Hamiltonians, Z. Phys. B 101, 597 (1996).
  7. E. Rastelli, S. Regina, and A. Tassi, Specific heat and structure factor in the square ANNNI model by Monte Carlo simulation, Phys. Rev. B 81, 094425 (2010).
  8. M. D. Grynberg and B. Tanatar, Square Ising model with second-neighbor interactions and the Ising chain in a transverse field, Phys. Rev. B 45, 2876 (1992).
  9. A. Dutta, G. Aeppli, B. K. Chakrabarti, U. Divakaran, T. F. Rosenbaum, and D. Sen, Quantum phase transitions in transverse field spin models: From statistical physics to quantum information, arXiv:1012.0653.
  10. A. K. Chandra and S. Dasgupta, Floating phase in a 2D ANNNI model, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 40, 6251 (2007).
  11. T. Kadowaki and H. Nishimori, Quantum annealing in the transverse Ising model, Phys. Rev. E 58, 5355 (1998).
  12. G. E. Santoro and E. Tosatti, Optimization using quantum mechanics: Quantum annealing through adiabatic evolution, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 39, R393 (2006).
  13. G. E. Santoro, R. Martoňák, E. Tosatti, and R. Car, Theory of quantum annealing of an Ising spin glass, Science 295, 2427 (2002).
  14. S. Morita and H. Nishimori, Mathematical foundation of quantum annealing, J. Math. Phys. 49, 125210 (2008).
  15. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, S. Gutmann, and M. Sipser, Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution, arXiv:quant-ph/0001106.
  16. 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).
  17. A. D. King, A. Nocera, M. M. Rams, J. Dziarmaga, R. Wiersema, W. Bernoudy, J. Raymond, N. Kaushal, N. Heinsdorf, R. Harris, et al., Beyond-classical computation in quantum simulation, Science 388, 199 (2025).
  18. A. D. King, C. D. Batista, J. Raymond, T. Lanting, I. Ozfidan, G. Poulin-Lamarre, H. Zhang, and M. H. Amin, Quantum annealing simulation of out-of-equilibrium magnetization in a spin-chain compound, PRX Quantum 2, 030317 (2021).
  19. A. D. King, C. Nisoli, E. D. Dahl, G. Poulin-Lamarre, and A. Lopez-Bezanilla, Qubit spin ice, Science 373, 576 (2021).
  20. P. Kairys, A. D. King, I. Ozfidan, K. Boothby, J. Raymond, A. Banerjee, and T. S. Humble, Simulating the Shastry-Sutherland Ising model using quantum annealing, PRX Quantum 1, 020320 (2020).
  21. E. Pelofske, A. Bärtschi, and S. Eidenbenz, Simulating heavy-hex transverse field Ising model magnetization dynamics using programmable quantum annealers, arXiv:2311.01657.
  22. P. Narasimhan, S. Humeniuk, A. Roy, and V. Drouin-Touchette, Simulating the transverse-field Ising model on the kagome lattice using a programmable quantum annealer, Phys. Rev. B 110, 054432 (2024).
  23. J. Marshall, D. Venturelli, I. Hen, and E. G. Rieffel, Power of pausing: Advancing understanding of thermalization in experimental quantum annealers, Phys. Rev. Appl. 11, 044083 (2019).
  24. Z. G. Izquierdo, I. Hen, and T. Albash, Testing a quantum annealer as a quantum thermal sampler, ACM Trans. Quantum Comput. 2, 1 (2021).
  25. J. Marshall, E. G. Rieffel, and I. Hen, Thermalization, freeze-out, and noise: Deciphering experimental quantum annealers, Phys. Rev. Appl. 8, 064025 (2017).
  26. J. Nelson, M. Vuffray, A. Y. Lokhov, and C. Coffrin, Single-qubit fidelity assessment of quantum annealing hardware, IEEE Trans. Quantum Eng. 2, 1 (2021).
  27. M. Vuffray, C. Coffrin, Y. A. Kharkov, and A. Y. Lokhov, Programmable quantum annealers as noisy Gibbs samplers, PRX Quantum 3, 020317 (2022).
  28. J. Nelson, M. Vuffray, A. Y. Lokhov, T. Albash, and C. Coffrin, High-quality thermal Gibbs sampling with quantum annealing hardware, Phys. Rev. Appl. 17, 044046 (2022).
  29. L. Buffoni and M. Campisi, Thermodynamics of a quantum annealer, Quantum Sci. Technol. 5, 035013 (2020).
  30. P. Sathe, A. D. King, S. M. Mniszewski, C. Coffrin, C. Nisoli, and F. Caravelli, Classical criticality via quantum annealing, Nat. Commun. 17, 856 (2025).
  31. J. Raymond, S. Yarkoni, and E. Andriyash, Global warming: Temperature estimation in annealers, Front. ICT 3, 23 (2016).
  32. R. Sandt and R. Spatschek, Efficient low temperature Monte Carlo sampling using quantum annealing, Sci. Rep. 13, 6754 (2023).
  33. R. Shibukawa, R. Tamura, and K. Tsuda, Boltzmann sampling with quantum annealers via fast Stein correction, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 043050 (2024).
  34. N. Chancellor, S. Szoke, W. Vinci, G. Aeppli, and P. A. Warburton, Maximum-entropy inference with a programmable annealer, Sci. Rep. 6, 22318 (2016).
  35. X. Tan, J. Li, and P. Stoica, Efficient sparse Bayesian learning via Gibbs sampling, in 2010 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (IEEE, New York, 2010), pp. 3634–3637.
  36. N. Metropolis, A. W. Rosenbluth, M. N. Rosenbluth, A. H. Teller, and E. Teller, Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines, J. Chem. Phys. 21, 1087 (1953).
  37. S. Andrews, H. De Sterck, S. Inglis, and R. G. Melko, Monte Carlo study of degenerate ground states and residual entropy in a frustrated honeycomb lattice Ising model, Phys. Rev. E 79, 041127 (2009).
  38. N. Huang, W. Perkins, and A. Potechin, Hardness of sampling for the anti-ferromagnetic Ising model on random graphs, arXiv:2409.03974.
  39. L. Spiridon and D. D. Minh, Hamiltonian Monte Carlo with constrained molecular dynamics as Gibbs sampling, J. Chem. Theory Comput. 13, 4649 (2017).
  40. O. Bodini and Y. Ponty, Multi-dimensional Boltzmann sampling of languages, Discrete Math. Theor. Comput. Sci. (2010).
  41. F. Noé, S. Olsson, J. Köhler, and H. Wu, Boltzmann generators: Sampling equilibrium states of many-body systems with deep learning, Science 365, eaaw1147 (2019).
  42. H. Goto, Z. Lin, and Y. Nakamura, Boltzmann sampling from the Ising model using quantum heating of coupled nonlinear oscillators, Sci. Rep. 8, 7154 (2018).
  43. G. Margiani, O. Ameye, O. Zilberberg, and A. Eichler, Three strongly coupled Kerr parametric oscillators forming a Boltzmann machine, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 097201 (2025).
  44. G. Margiani, J. del Pino, T. L. Heugel, N. E. Bousse, S. Guerrero, T. W. Kenny, O. Zilberberg, D. Sabonis, and A. Eichler, Deterministic and stochastic sampling of two coupled Kerr parametric oscillators, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, L012029 (2023).
  45. H. Hasegawa and N. Shibata, Residual errors after quantum annealing in the axial next nearest neighbor Ising model: Impact of critical points and modulated correlation, J. Phys. Soc. Jpn. 94, 094004 (2025).
  46. G. E. L. Pexe, L. A. M. Rattighieri, A. L. Malvezzi, and F. F. Fanchini, Using a feedback-based quantum algorithm to analyze the critical properties of the ANNNI model without classical optimization, Phys. Rev. B 110, 224422 (2024).
  47. M. Cea, M. Grossi, S. Monaco, E. Rico, L. Tagliacozzo, and S. Vallecorsa, Exploring the phase diagram of the quantum one-dimensional ANNNI model, arXiv:2402.11022.
  48. C. Marin, A. Fontana, V. Bellani, F. Pederiva, A. Quaranta, F. Rossella, A. Salamon, and G. Salina, Modeling a frustrated Ising square lattice with the D-Wave quantum annealer, arXiv:2409.11259.
  49. M. W. Johnson, M. H. Amin, S. Gildert, T. Lanting, F. Hamze, N. Dickson, R. Harris, A. J. Berkley, J. Johansson, P. Bunyk, et al., Quantum annealing with manufactured spins, Nature (London) 473, 194 (2011).
  50. P. I. Bunyk, E. M. Hoskinson, M. W. Johnson, E. Tolkacheva, F. Altomare, A. J. Berkley, R. Harris, J. P. Hilton, T. Lanting, A. J. Przybysz, and J. Whittaker, Architectural considerations in the design of a superconducting quantum annealing processor, IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 24, 1 (2014).
  51. N. G. Dickson, M. W. Johnson, M. Amin, R. Harris, F. Altomare, A. J. Berkley, P. Bunyk, J. Cai, E. Chapple, P. Chavez, et al., Thermally assisted quantum annealing of a 16-qubit problem, Nat. Commun. 4, 1903 (2013).
  52. R. Harris, M. W. Johnson, T. Lanting, A. J. Berkley, J. Johansson, P. Bunyk, E. Tolkacheva, E. Ladizinsky, N. Ladizinsky, T. Oh, et al., Experimental investigation of an eight-qubit unit cell in a superconducting optimization processor, Phys. Rev. B 82, 024511 (2010).
  53. M. W. Johnson, P. Bunyk, F. Maibaum, E. Tolkacheva, A. J. Berkley, E. M. Chapple, R. Harris, J. Johansson, T. Lanting, I. Perminov, E. Ladizinsky, T. Oh, and G. Rose, A scalable control system for a superconducting adiabatic quantum optimization processor, Supercond. Sci. Technol. 23, 065004 (2010).
  54. Y. Matsuda, H. Nishimori, and H. G. Katzgraber, Quantum annealing for problems with ground-state degeneracy, in Journal of Physics: Conference Series (IOP Publishing, 2009), Vol. 143, p. 012003.
  55. E. Pelofske, J. Golden, A. Bärtschi, D. O’Malley, and S. Eidenbenz, Sampling on NISQ Devices “Who's the Fairest One of All?”, in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) (IEEE, New York, 2021), pp. 207–217.
  56. M. S. Könz, G. Mazzola, A. J. Ochoa, H. G. Katzgraber, and M. Troyer, Uncertain fate of fair sampling in quantum annealing, Phys. Rev. A 100, 030303 (2019).
  57. S. Mandrà, Z. Zhu, and H. G. Katzgraber, Exponentially biased ground-state sampling of quantum annealing machines with transverse-field driving Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 070502 (2017).
  58. Z. Zhu, A. J. Ochoa, and H. G. Katzgraber, Fair sampling of ground-state configurations of binary optimization problems, Phys. Rev. E 99, 063314 (2019).
  59. J. Job and D. Lidar, Test-driving 1000 qubits, Quantum Sci. Technol. 3, 030501 (2018).
  60. T. Albash, W. Vinci, A. Mishra, P. A. Warburton, and D. A. Lidar, Consistency tests of classical and quantum models for a quantum annealer, Phys. Rev. A 91, 042314 (2015).
  61. T. Albash and D. A. Lidar, Decoherence in adiabatic quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 91, 062320 (2015).
  62. S. Boixo, T. Albash, F. M. Spedalieri, N. Chancellor, and D. A. Lidar, Experimental signature of programmable quantum annealing, Nat. Commun. 4, 2067 (2013).
  63. S. Redner, One-dimensional Ising chain with competing interactions: Exact results and connection with other statistical models, J. Stat. Phys. 25, 15 (1981).
  64. Y. Hu and P. Charbonneau, Resolving the two-dimensional axial next-nearest-neighbor Ising model using transfer matrices, Phys. Rev. B 103, 094441 (2021).
  65. J. Stephenson, Ising model with antiferromagnetic next-nearest-neighbor coupling: Spin correlations and disorder points, Phys. Rev. B 1, 4405 (1970).
  66. Y. Hu and P. Charbonneau, Numerical transfer matrix study of frustrated next-nearest-neighbor Ising models on square lattices, Phys. Rev. B 104, 144429 (2021).
  67. T. Shirakura, F. Matsubara, and N. Suzuki, Kosterlitz-Thouless phase transition of the axial next-nearest-neighbor Ising model in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. B 90, 144410 (2014).
  68. A. Dhar, B. S. Shastry, and C. Dasgupta, Equilibrium and dynamical properties of the axial next-nearest-neighbor Ising chain at the multiphase point, Phys. Rev. E 62, 1592 (2000).
  69. J. M. Yeomans, Splitting the multiphase point, arXiv:cond-mat/9506129.
  70. G. Torre, A. G. Catalano, S. B. Kožić, F. Franchini, and S. M. Giampaolo, Interplay between local and non-local frustration in the 1D ANNNI chain: I. The even case, J. Stat. Mech. (2025) 053101.
  71. C. McCreesh, P. Prosser, and J. Trimble, in International Conference on Graph Transformation (Springer, Cham, 2020), pp. 316–324.
  72. K. Chern, K. Boothby, J. Raymond, P. Farré, and A. D. King, Tutorial: Calibration refinement in quantum annealing, Front. Comput. Sci. 5, 1238988 (2023).
  73. J. Cai, W. G. Macready, and A. Roy, A practical heuristic for finding graph minors, arXiv:1406.2741.
  74. E. Pelofske, G. Hahn, and H. N. Djidjev, Parallel quantum annealing, Sci. Rep. 12, 4499 (2022).
  75. E. Pelofske, G. Hahn, D. O’Malley, H. N. Djidjev, and B. S. Alexandrov, Quantum annealing algorithms for Boolean tensor networks, Sci. Rep. 12, 8539 (2022).
  76. N. Dattani, S. Szalay, and N. Chancellor, Pegasus: The second connectivity graph for large-scale quantum annealing hardware, arXiv:1901.07636.
  77. K. Boothby, P. Bunyk, J. Raymond, and A. Roy, Next-generation topology of D-Wave quantum processors, arXiv:2003.00133.
  78. K. Boothby, A. D. King, and J. Raymond, Zephyr topology of D-Wave quantum processors (2021), https://www.dwavesys.com/media/2uznec4s/14-1056a-a_zephyr_topology_of_dwave_quantum_processors.pdf.
  79. J. Marshall, A. Di Gioacchino, and E. G. Rieffel, Perils of embedding for sampling problems, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023020 (2020).
  80. T. W. Kibble, Topology of cosmic domains and strings, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. 9, 1387 (1976).
  81. W. H. Zurek, Cosmological experiments in superfluid helium? Nature (London) 317, 505 (1985).
  82. However, these very fast anneals are really quenches given the timescales involved.
  83. Y. Bando, Y. Susa, H. Oshiyama, N. Shibata, M. Ohzeki, F. J. Gómez-Ruiz, D. A. Lidar, S. Suzuki, A. Del Campo, and H. Nishimori, Probing the universality of topological defect formation in a quantum annealer: Kibble-Zurek mechanism and beyond, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 033369 (2020).
  84. A. D. King, J. Raymond, T. Lanting, R. Harris, A. Zucca, F. Altomare, A. J. Berkley, K. Boothby, S. Ejtemaee, C. Enderud, et al., Quantum critical dynamics in a 5,000-qubit programmable spin glass, Nature (London) 617, 61 (2023).
  85. A. D. King, S. Suzuki, J. Raymond, A. Zucca, T. Lanting, F. Altomare, A. J. Berkley, S. Ejtemaee, E. Hoskinson, S. Huang, et al., Coherent quantum annealing in a programmable 2,000 qubit Ising chain, Nat. Phys. 18, 1324 (2022).
  86. M. H. Amin, Searching for quantum speedup in quasistatic quantum annealers, Phys. Rev. A 92, 052323 (2015).
  87. E. Pelofske, G. Hahn, and H. N. Djidjev, Noise dynamics of quantum annealers: Estimating the effective noise using idle qubits, Quantum Sci. Technol. 8, 035005 (2023).
  88. Z. Morrell, M. Vuffray, A. Y. Lokhov, A. Bärtschi, T. Albash, and C. Coffrin, Signatures of open and noisy quantum systems in single-qubit quantum annealing, Phys. Rev. Appl. 19, 034053 (2023).
  89. T. Zaborniak and R. de Sousa, Benchmarking Hamiltonian noise in the D-Wave quantum annealer, IEEE Trans. Quantum Eng. 2, 1 (2021).
  90. C. Tüysüz, A. Jayakumar, C. Coffrin, M. Vuffray, and A. Y. Lokhov, Learning response functions of analog quantum computers: Analysis of neutral-atom and superconducting platforms, arXiv:2503.12520.
  91. T. Lanting, M. H. Amin, C. Baron, M. Babcock, J. Boschee, S. Boixo, V. N. Smelyanskiy, M. Foygel, and A. G. Petukhov, Probing environmental spin polarization with superconducting flux qubits, arXiv:2003.14244.
  92. P. Virtanen, R. Gommers, T. E. Oliphant, M. Haberland, T. Reddy, D. Cournapeau, E. Burovski, P. Peterson, W. Weckesser, J. Bright, et al., SciPy 1.0: Fundamental algorithms for scientific computing in Python, Nat. Methods 17, 261 (2020).
  93. F. Gao and L. Han, Implementing the Nelder-Mead simplex algorithm with adaptive parameters, Comput. Optim. Appl. 51, 259 (2012).
  94. J. Nocedal and S. J. Wright, Numerical Optimization (Springer, Cham, 2006).
  95. A. R. Conn, N. I. Gould, and P. L. Toint, Trust Region Methods (SIAM, 2000).
  96. S. K. Lam, A. Pitrou, and S. Seibert, in Proceedings of the Second Workshop on the LLVM Compiler Infrastructure in HPC, LLVM ’15 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, 2015).
  97. C. R. Harris, K. J. Millman, S. J. van der Walt, R. Gommers, P. Virtanen, D. Cournapeau, E. Wieser, J. Taylor, S. Berg, N. J. Smith, et al., Array programming with NumPy, Nature (London) 585, 357 (2020).
  98. S. Suzuki, J.-I. Inoue, and B. K. Chakrabarti, Quantum Ising Phases and Transitions in Transverse Ising Models (Springer, Cham, 2012), Vol. 862.
  99. Perhaps analogous to similar types of quenches performed in Ref.  [100], the difference being that in that study the quench was performed across frustration parameters, such as from the ferromagnetic phase into the antiphase.
  100. A. Haldar, K. Mallayya, M. Heyl, F. Pollmann, M. Rigol, and A. Das, Signatures of quantum phase transitions after quenches in quantum chaotic one-dimensional systems, Phys. Rev. X 11, 031062 (2021).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 033280– Published 8 September, 2026
  • Received 5 November 2025
  • Accepted 13 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