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

Quantum combinatorial reasoning for large language models

Carlos Flores-Garrigós1,2,*, Gaurav Dev3, Michael Falkenthal1, Alejandro Gomez Cadavid1,4, Anton Simen1,4, Shubham Kumar1, Enrique Solano1,†, and Narendra N. Hegade1,‡

  • *Contact author: carlos.flores@kipu-quantum.com
  • †Contact author: enr.solano@gmail.com
  • ‡Contact author: narendrahegade5@gmail.com

Phys. Rev. Research 8, 033070 – Published 17 July, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/kk5d-tb9b

Abstract

We design and implement a quantum combinatorial reasoning framework for large language models (QCR-LLM), integrating a real quantum computer in the hybrid workflow. QCR-LLM reformulates reasoning aggregation as a higher-order unconstrained binary optimization problem. In this sense, reasoning fragments are represented as binary variables and their interactions encode statistical relevance, logical coherence, and semantic redundancy. We tackle the resulting high-order optimization problem both classically, via simulated annealing, and quantumly, through the bias-field digitized counterdiabatic quantum optimizer executed on IBM's superconducting digital quantum processors. Experiments on BIG-Bench Extra Hard benchmarks demonstrate that our QCR-LLM consistently improves reasoning accuracy across multiple LLM backbones, surpassing reasoning-native systems such as o3-high and DeepSeek R1 by up to +9 pp. At a matched sampling budget, QCR-LLM also outperforms standard chain-of-thought aggregation baselines (majority vote and self-consistency), as well as a pairwise Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization restriction of our formulation, indicating that the improvement arises from the higher-order energy landscape rather than from multisampling alone. Despite requiring multiple reasoning samples per query, our QCR-LLM reduces the number of generated tokens and the associated LLM-side energy relative to long hidden chain-of-thought models such as o3-high; we emphasize, however, that once the energy of the quantum backend is accounted for, we are not yet in an energy-saving or sustainability regime. These results constitute the first experimental evidence of quantum-assisted reasoning, showing that hybrid quantum-classical optimization can efficiently enhance reasoning coherence and interpretability in large-scale language models. We have opened the doors to the emergence of quantum intelligence, where the higher-order structure of harder prompts maps naturally onto quantum optimizers, opening a paradigm toward genuine quantum reasoning; while we observe a small accuracy gain of the quantum solver over simulated annealing, this result is not conclusive and may stem from statistical fluctuations.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (27)

  1. W. X. Zhao, K. Zhou, J. Li, et al., A survey of large language models, arXiv:2303.18223.
  2. J. Hoscilowicz, P. Pawlowski, M. Skorupa, et al., Large language models for expansion of spoken language understanding systems to new languages, arXiv:2404.02588.
  3. J. Wei, X. Wang, D. Schuurmans, et al., Chain-of-thought prompting elicits reasoning in large language models, in Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS’22 (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, 2022).
  4. T. Kojima, S. S. Gu, M. Reid, et al., Large language models are zero-shot reasoners, in Proceedings of the 36th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS’22 (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, 2022).
  5. J. Luo, W. Zhang, Y. Yuan, et al., Large language model agent: A survey on methodology, applications and challenges, arXiv:2503.21460.
  6. G. Team, R. Anil, S. Borgeaud, et al., Gemini: A family of highly capable multimodal models, arXiv:2312.11805.
  7. S. Yao, J. Zhao, D. Yu et al., ReAct: Synergizing reasoning and acting in language models, in The Eleventh International Conference on Learning Representations (OpenReview.net, 2022).
  8. A. Srivastava, A. Rastogi, A. Rao, et al., Beyond the imitation game: Quantifying and extrapolating the capabilities of language models, Trans. Mach. Learn. Res. 2023, 1 (2023).
  9. X. Wang, J. Wei, D. Schuurmans, Q. Le, E. Chi, S. Narang, A. Chowdhery, and D. Zhou, Self-consistency improves chain of thought reasoning in language models, arXiv:2203.11171.
  10. S. Yao, D. Yu, J. Zhao, et al., Tree of thoughts: Deliberate problem solving with large language models, in Proceedings of the 37th International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, NIPS '23 (Curran Associates Inc., Red Hook, NY, 2023).
  11. W. Wang, Y. Wang, and H. Huang, Ranked voting based self-consistency of large language models, arXiv:2505.10772.
  12. M. Esencan, T. A. Kumar, A. A. Asanjan, et al., Combinatorial reasoning: Selecting reasons in generative AI pipelines via combinatorial optimization, arXiv:2407.00071.
  13. K. Jun and H. Lee, HUBO and QUBO models for prime factorization, Sci. Rep. 13, 10080 (2023).
  14. A. G. Cadavid, A. Dalal, A. Simen, et al., Bias-field digitized counterdiabatic quantum optimization, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, L022010 (2025).
  15. S. V. Romero, A.-M. Visuri, A. Gomez Cadavid, et al., Bias-field digitized counterdiabatic quantum algorithm for higher-order binary optimization, Commun. Phys. 8, 348 (2025).
  16. N. N. Hegade, K. Paul, Y. Ding, et al., Shortcuts to adiabaticity in digitized adiabatic quantum computing, Phys. Rev. Appl. 15, 024038 (2021).
  17. N. N. Hegade, X. Chen, and E. Solano, Digitized counterdiabatic quantum optimization, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, L042030 (2022).
  18. P. Chandarana, A. G. Cadavid, S. V. Romero, et al., Runtime quantum advantage with digital quantum optimization, arXiv:2505.08663.
  19. M. Kazemi, B. Fatemi, H. Bansal, et al., BIG-bench extra hard, arXiv:2502.19187.
  20. S. Kirkpatrick, C. D. Gelatt, and M. P. Vecchi, Optimization by simulated annealing, Science 220, 671 (1983).
  21. OpenAI, A. Hurst, A. Lerer, A. P. Goucher, et al., GPT-4o system card, arXiv:2410.21276.
  22. A. Grattafiori, A. Dubey, A. Jauhri, et al., The Llama 3 herd of models, arXiv:2407.21783.
  23. F. Oviedo, F. Kazhamiaka, E. Choukse, et al., Energy use of AI inference: Efficiency pathways and test-time compute, Joule 10, 102430 (2026).
  24. A. Jaech, A. Kalai, A. Lerer, et al., OpenAI o1 system card, arXiv:2412.16720.
  25. DeepSeek-AI, D. Guo, D. Yang, et al., DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing reasoning capability in LLMs via reinforcement learning, Nature (London) 645, 633 (2025).
  26. https://github.com/google-deepmind/bbeh.p.
  27. https://huggingface.co/datasets/BBEH/bbeh.

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation