The invention relates to computing. More precisely, this invention pertains to a method and system for solving the Lagrangian dual problem corresponding to a binary quadratic programming problem.
Duality is an important phenomenon in optimization theory. In general, duality is a process of generating a “dual” problem for the original “primal” problem. Solving dual problems provide information about the primal problem.
In some optimization models, duality directly yields alternative viewpoints to the problems. For example, in models of electrical networks, the “primal variables” may represent current flows, whereas the “dual variables” may represent voltage differences. In models of economic markets, “primal variables” may represent production and consumption levels and the “dual variables” may represent prices of goods and service. (See “Applied Lagrange Duality for Constrained Optimization” by Robert M. Freund, 2004, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
In a wider range of scenarios, dual problems may yield more complicated information about the optimization model. For example, a good dual solution can be used to bound the values of the primal solutions. Using such information may be less trivial however very beneficial to solving optimization problems. For example, the solution to a dual problem can be used to prove optimality of a primal solution. In yet more complicated applications, solving a series of dual sub-problems can be used in iterative fashion to solve a more complicated original primal problem. Examples of such iterative applications of duality include branch and bound methods, cut and bound methods, and decomposition methods for solving integer and mixed-integer optimization problems. (see “Nonlinear Integer Programming” by Duan Li and Xiaoling Sun) (See “Deterministic Methods for Mixed Integer Nonlinear Programming” by Sven Leyffer, PhD Thesis, 1993, University of Dundee). In duality theory, several different types of dualization and dual problems are proposed. One type of dual problems are the Lagrangian dual problems. A thorough description of Lagrangian duality theory is disclosed in “Nonlinear integer programming” by Duan Li and Xiaoling Sun. Lagrangian dual problems can be used to solve many integer programming problems such as non-linear knapsack problems (see “Knapsack Problems” by Hans Kellerer, Ultich Pferschy and David Pisinger), non-linear minimum spanning tree problems (see “The quadratic minimum spanning tree problem” by Arjang Assad and Weixuan Xu), etc. These combinatorial optimization problems are models of many problems of interest in operational research; e.g. scheduling problems, job-shop problems, and resource allocation problems. For applications of Lagrangian techniques in discrete optimization refer to “A survey of Lagrangean techniques for discrete optimization” by Jeremy F. Shapiro, Operations Research Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass. and to “Lagrangean relaxation for integer programming” by A. M. Geoffrion, Mathematics Programming Study 2 (1974) 82-114, North-Holland Publishing Company.
There are several methods proposed for solving the Lagrangian dual problems, e.g. subgradient method, outer Lagrangian linearization method, and bundle method. (see Chapter 3 of “Nonlinear integer programming” by Duan Li and Xiaoling Sun). The difficulty of having efficient implementations of such algorithms is the urge to very efficient methods for solving hard nonlinear integer programming problems in various stages of these methods. For example, the single constrained quadratic 0-1 knapsack problem can be solved using an efficient branch and bound method based on Lagrangian duality as explained in Section 11.5, “Nonlinear integer programming” by Duan Li and Xiaoling Sun but the proposed method cannot be generalized for multi-dimensional knapsack problems.
There is therefore a need for a method for solving the Lagrangian dual optimization problems that will overcome the above-identified drawback.
Features of the invention will be apparent from review of the disclosure, drawings and description of the invention below.
According to a broad aspect, there is disclosed a method for solving the Lagrangian dual of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem, the method comprising use of a processor for obtaining a constrained quadratic binary programming problem; until a convergence is detected, use of a processor for iteratively performing a Lagrangian relaxation of the constrained quadratic binary programming problem to provide an unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem; providing the unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem to a quantum annealer; obtaining from the quantum annealer at least one corresponding solution; using the at least one corresponding solution to generate a new approximation for a Lagrangian dual bound and use of a processor for providing a corresponding solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem after the convergence.
In accordance with an embodiment, the use of a processor for obtaining of a constrained quadratic binary programming problem comprises use of a processor for obtaining data representative of an objective function f(x) having a degree less than or equal to two; use of a processor for obtaining data representative of equality constraints having a degree less than or equal to two; and use of a processor for obtaining data representative of inequality constraints having a degree less than or equal to two.
In accordance with an embodiment, the use of a processor for obtaining the constrained quadratic binary programming problem comprises use of a processor for obtaining the constrained quadratic binary programming problem from at least one of a user, a computer, a software package and an intelligent agent.
In accordance with an embodiment, the use of a processor for obtaining of the constrained quadratic binary programming problem further comprises use of a processor for initializing software parameters and use of a processor for initializing a linear programming procedure.
In accordance with an embodiment, the software parameters are obtained by the processor from at least one of a user, a computer, a software package and an intelligent agent.
In accordance with an embodiment, the use of a processor for initializing of the software parameters comprises use of a processor for providing an embedding of the constrained quadratic binary programming problem on the quantum annealer; use of a processor for providing an embedding solver function for providing a list of solutions; use of a processor for providing one of lower and upper bounds and default values for Lagrange multipliers; use of a processor for providing one of initial values and default values for Lagrange multipliers; and use of a processor for providing an error tolerance value for duality gap.
In accordance with an embodiment, the linear programming procedure is carried out until the convergence is detected.
In accordance with an embodiment, the using of the at least one corresponding solution to generate a new approximation for the Lagrangian dual bound comprises using the at least one corresponding solution in the linear programming procedure.
In accordance with an embodiment, the use of a processor for providing of a corresponding solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem comprises storing the corresponding solution to a file.
In accordance with a broad aspect, there is disclosed a digital computer comprising a central processing unit; a display device; a communication port for operatively connecting the digital computer to a quantum annealer; a memory unit comprising an application for solving the Lagrangian dual of a constrained binary quadratic problem, the application comprising: instructions for obtaining a constrained binary quadratic problem; instructions for iteratively performing a Lagrangian relaxation of the constrained quadratic problem to provide an unconstrained quadratic programming problem; instructions for providing the unconstrained quadratic programming problem to the quantum annealer using the communication port; instructions for obtaining from the quantum annealer via the communication port at least one corresponding solution and for using the at least one corresponding solution to generate a new approximation for a Lagrangian dual bound; instructions for providing a corresponding solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem once a convergence is detected and a data bus for interconnecting the central processing unit, the display device, the communication port and the memory unit.
In accordance with a broad aspect, there is disclosed a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium for storing computer-executable instructions which, when executed, cause a digital computer to perform a method for solving the Lagrangian dual of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem, the method comprising obtaining a constrained quadratic binary programming problem; until a convergence is detected, iteratively: performing a Lagrangian relaxation of the constrained quadratic binary programming problem to provide an unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem; providing the unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem to a quantum annealer; obtaining from the quantum annealer at least one corresponding solution; using the at least one corresponding solution to generate a new approximation for a Lagrangian dual bound and providing a corresponding solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem causing the convergence.
In accordance with an embodiment, there is disclosed a use of the method disclosed herein for solving a maximum weighted k-clique problem.
According to a broad aspect, there is disclosed a method for solving the Lagrangian dual of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem, the method comprising obtaining a constrained quadratic binary programming problem; until a convergence is detected, iteratively, performing a Lagrangian relaxation of the constrained quadratic binary programming problem to provide an unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem, providing the unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem to a quantum annealer, obtaining from the quantum annealer at least one corresponding solution, using the at least one corresponding solution to generate a new approximation for a Lagrangian dual bound; and providing a corresponding solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem after the convergence.
An advantage of the method disclosed herein is that it provides a method for using Lagrangian duality in various applications, for example finding Lagrangian based bounds to integer and mixed-integer programming problems using a quantum annealer.
It will be further appreciated that the method disclosed herein greatly improves the processing of a system for solving a Lagrangian dual of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem which is of great advantage.
In order that the invention may be readily understood, embodiments of the invention are illustrated by way of example in the accompanying drawings.
Further details of the invention and its advantages will be apparent from the detailed description included below.
In the following description of the embodiments, references to the accompanying drawings are by way of illustration of an example by which the invention may be practiced.
Terms
The term “invention” and the like mean “the one or more inventions disclosed in this application,” unless expressly specified otherwise.
The terms “an aspect,” “an embodiment,” “embodiment,” “embodiments,” “the embodiment,” “the embodiments,” “one or more embodiments,” “some embodiments,” “certain embodiments,” “one embodiment,” “another embodiment” and the like mean “one or more (but not all) embodiments of the disclosed invention(s),” unless expressly specified otherwise.
A reference to “another embodiment” or “another aspect” in describing an embodiment does not imply that the referenced embodiment is mutually exclusive with another embodiment (e.g., an embodiment described before the referenced embodiment), unless expressly specified otherwise.
The terms “including,” “comprising” and variations thereof mean “including but not limited to,” unless expressly specified otherwise.
The terms “a,” “an”, “the” and “at least one” mean “one or more,” unless expressly specified otherwise.
The term “plurality” means “two or more,” unless expressly specified otherwise.
The term “herein” means “in the present application, including anything which may be incorporated by reference,” unless expressly specified otherwise.
The term “e.g.” and like terms mean “for example,” and thus does not limit the term or phrase it explains. For example, in a sentence “the computer sends data (e.g., instructions, a data structure) over the Internet,” the term “e.g.” explains that “instructions” are an example of “data” that the computer may send over the Internet, and also explains that “a data structure” is an example of “data” that the computer may send over the Internet. However, both “instructions” and “a data structure” are merely examples of “data,” and other things besides “instructions” and “a data structure” can be “data.”
The term “i.e.” and like terms mean “that is,” and thus limits the term or phrase it explains. For example, in the sentence “the computer sends data (i.e., instructions) over the Internet,” the term “i.e.” explains that “instructions” are the “data” that the computer sends over the Internet.
The term “constrained binary quadratic programming” problem and like terms mean finding the minimum of a quadratic real polynomial y=f(x) in several binary variables x=(x1, . . . , xn) subject to a (possibly empty) family of equality constraints determined by a (possibly empty) family of m equations gj(x)=0 for j=1, . . . , m and a (possibly empty) family of inequality constraints determined by a (possibly empty) family of inequalities hj(x)≤0 for j=1, . . . ,
Here all functions gi and hj are polynomials of degree at most two.
}
The above constrained binary quadratic programming problem will be denoted by (P) and the optimal value of it will be denoted by v(P). An optimal solution x, i.e. a vector at which the objective function attains the value v(P) will be denoted by x*.
It will be appreciated that any quadratic polynomial y=q(x) can be represented in matrix notation y=q(x)=xtAx+Btx+C where the matrix A is a real symmetric positive semi-definite square matrix of size n, B is a real vector of size n, and C is a real number.
It will be further appreciated that according to the equality xi2=xi(i=1, . . . , n) for the binary variables, it can be assumed that the function q(x) is given without linear terms; that is, q(x)=xtQx+b, where the matrix Q is a real symmetric square matrix of size n, and b is a real constant.
The term “unconstrained binary quadratic programming” problem and like terms mean finding a minimum of an objective function y=xtQx+b where Q is a symmetric square real matrix of size n, and b is a real number, also known as the bias of the objective function. The domain of the function is all vectors xϵBn={0, 1}n with binary entries.
The term “Lagrangian relaxation” of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem (P), corresponding to fixed Lagrange multipliers λϵm and μϵ
and means solving the following optimization problem:
The value of the above optimization is denoted as δP(λ, μ) and is known to be a lower bound for the optimal value of the original constrained binary quadratic programming, that is, δP(λ, μ)≤v(P).
The term “Lagrangian dual” of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem, is used for the following optimization problem:
The value of the above optimization is denoted by δ(P) and is known to be a lower bound for the optimal value of the original constrained binary quadratic programming, that is, δ(P)≤v(P). This value is unique and is also called the “Lagrangian dual bound” for the original constrained binary quadratic programming problem.
The term “optimal Lagrange multiplier,” and the like, will refer to a, not necessarily unique, set of optimal points λ* and μ* at which the value δ(P) is attained for the above optimization problem.
The term “solution to the Lagrangian dual problem” of an original constrained binary quadratic programming problem, refers to the following collection of information received after solving the Lagrangian dual problem: (1) the (unique) optimal value of the Lagrangian dual problem, also known as the Lagrangian dual bound; (2) a set of (not necessarily unique) optimal Lagrange multipliers as described above; and (3) a set of (non necessarily unique) binary vectors at which the optimal value of the Lagrangian dual problem is obtained at the given optimal Lagrange multipliers.
One widely studied class of constrained binary quadratic programming problems is that of linearly constrained ones. In this case the functions gi and hj are all linear. Hence the problem can be rewritten as
where y=f(x) is a quadratic polynomial of several binary variables x=(x1, . . . , xn) subject to a (possibly empty) family of linear equality constraints determined by a linear system Aeqx=beq where Aeq is a matrix of size m×n and beq is a column matrix of size m×1 and a (possibly empty) family of inequality constraints determined by Aineqx≤bineq where Aineq is a matrix of size ×n and bineq is a column matrix of size
×1. A Lagrangian relaxation of the above problem can be written as
for given Lagrange multipliers λ and μ and the Lagrangian dual can be stated as
The term “quantum annealer” and like terms mean a system consisting of one or many types of hardware that can find optimal or sub-optimal solutions to an unconstrained binary quadratic programming problem. An example of this is a system consisting of a digital computer embedding a binary quadratic programming problem as an Ising spin model, attached to an analog computer that carries optimization of a configuration of spins in an Ising spin model using quantum annealing as described, for example, in Farhi, E. et al., “Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithms versus Simulated Annealing” arXiv.org:quant-ph/0201031 (2002), pp 1-16. An embodiment of such analog computer is disclosed by McGeoch, Catherine C. and Cong Wang, (2013), “Experimental Evaluation of an Adiabiatic Quantum System for Combinatorial Optimization” Computing Frontiers.” May 14-16, 2013 (www.cs.amherst.edu) and also disclosed in the patent application US2006/0225165. It will be appreciated that the “quantum annealer” may also be comprised of “classical components,” such as a classical computer. Accordingly, a “quantum annealer” may be entirely analog or an analog-classical hybrid.
The term “embedding” of a binary optimization problem, and the like, refer to an assignment of a set of the quantum bits {qi1, qi2, . . . , qi1
The term “embedding solver,” and the like, refer to a function, procedure, and algorithm that consist of instructions for receiving an unconstrained binary quadratic programming problem, carrying a query to the quantum annealer using a provided embedding, and returning at least one result, each result containing a vector of binary entries, representative of a binary point in the domain of the provided unconstrained binary quadratic programming, the value of the objective function of unconstrained binary quadratic programming at that point, and the number of occurrences of the result in the entire number of reads.
The term “callback function,” and the like, refer to a user function that is called iteratively by the software throughout the run time. In the system disclosed herein, there is only one callback function which determines how the queries to the quantum annealer are carried. In other words, the embedding solver explained above is provided by the user as a callback function.
Neither the Title nor the Abstract is to be taken as limiting in any way as the scope of the disclosed invention(s). The title of the present application and headings of sections provided in the present application are for convenience only, and are not to be taken as limiting the disclosure in any way.
Numerous embodiments are described in the present application, and are presented for illustrative purposes only. The described embodiments are not, and are not intended to be, limiting in any sense. The presently disclosed invention(s) are widely applicable to numerous embodiments, as is readily apparent from the disclosure. One of ordinary skill in the art will recognize that the disclosed invention(s) may be practiced with various modifications and alterations, such as structural and logical modifications. Although particular features of the disclosed invention(s) may be described with reference to one or more particular embodiments and/or drawings, it should be understood that such features are not limited to usage in the one or more particular embodiments or drawings with reference to which they are described, unless expressly specified otherwise.
It will be appreciated that the invention may be implemented in numerous ways, including as a method, a system, a computer readable medium such as a computer readable storage medium. In this specification, these implementations, or any other form that the invention may take, may be referred to as systems or techniques. A component such as a processor or a memory described as being configured to perform a task includes both a general component that is temporarily configured to perform the task at a given time or a specific component that is manufactured to perform the task.
With all this in mind, the present invention is directed to a method and system for solving the Lagrangian dual of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem.
Now referring to
The system 200 comprises a digital computer 202 and a quantum annealer 204.
The digital computer 202 receives a constrained binary quadratic programming problem and provides a solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem.
It will be appreciated that the constrained binary quadratic programming problem may be provided according to various embodiments.
In one embodiment, the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided by a user interacting with the digital computer 202.
Alternatively, the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided by another computer, not shown, operatively connected to the digital computer 202. Alternatively, the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided by an independent software package. Alternatively, the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided by an intelligent agent.
Similarly, it will be appreciated that the solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem may be provided according to various embodiments.
In accordance with an embodiment, the solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided to the user interacting with the digital computer 202.
Alternatively, the solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided to another computer operatively connected to the digital computer 202.
In fact, it will be appreciated by the skilled addressee that the digital computer 202 may be any type of computer.
In one embodiment, the digital computer 202 is selected from a group consisting of desktop computers, laptop computers, tablet PCs, servers, smartphones, etc.
Now referring to
In this embodiment, the digital computer 202 comprises a central processing unit (CPU) 302, also referred to as a microprocessor or a processor, a display device 304, input devices 306, communication ports 308, a data bus 310 and a memory unit 312.
The CPU 302 is used for processing computer instructions. The skilled addressee will appreciate that various embodiments of the CPU 302 may be provided.
In one embodiment, the central processing unit 302 is a CPU Core i5-3210M running at 2.5 GHz and manufactured by Intel™.
The display device 304 is used for displaying data to a user. The skilled addressee will appreciate that various types of display device 304 may be used.
In one embodiment, the display device 304 is a standard liquid-crystal display (LCD) monitor.
The communication ports 308 are used for sharing data with the digital computer 202.
The communication ports 308 may comprise, for instance, a universal serial bus (USB) port for connecting a keyboard and a mouse to the digital computer 202.
The communication ports 308 may further comprise a data network communication port such as an IEEE 802.3 port for enabling a connection of the digital computer 202 with another computer via a data network.
The skilled addressee will appreciate that various alternative embodiments of the communication ports 308 may be provided.
In one embodiment, the communication ports 308 comprise an Ethernet port.
The memory unit 312 is used for storing computer-executable instructions.
It will be appreciated that the memory unit 312 comprises, in one embodiment, an operating system module 314.
It will be appreciated by the skilled addressee that the operating system module 314 may be of various types.
In an embodiment, the operating system module 314 is OS X Yosemite (Version 10.10.5) manufactured by Apple™.
The memory unit 312 further comprises an application for solving the Lagrangian dual of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem 316.
The application 316 comprises instructions for obtaining a constrained quadratic binary programming problem.
The application 316 further comprises instructions for iteratively performing a Lagrangian relaxation of the constrained quadratic binary programming problem to provide an unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem; providing the unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem to a quantum annealer; obtaining from the quantum annealer at least one corresponding solution and for using the at least one corresponding solution to generate a new approximation for the Lagrangian dual bound.
The application 316 further comprises instructions for providing a corresponding solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem once a convergence is detected.
Each of the central processing unit 302, the display device 304, the input devices 306, the communication ports 308 and the memory unit 312 is interconnected via the data bus 310.
Now referring back to
It will be appreciated that the coupling of the quantum annealer 204 to the digital computer 202 may be achieved according to various embodiments.
In one embodiment, the coupling of the quantum annealer 204 to the digital computer 202 is achieved via a data network.
It will be appreciated that the quantum annealer 204 may be of various types.
In one embodiment, the quantum annealer 204 is manufactured by D-Wave Systems Inc. More information on this embodiment of a quantum annealer applicable to 204 may be found at www.dwavesys.com. The skilled addressee will appreciate that various alternative embodiments may be provided for the quantum annealer 204.
More precisely, the quantum annealer 204 receives an unconstrained binary quadratic programming problem from the digital computer 202.
The quantum annealer 204 is capable of solving the unconstrained binary quadratic programming problem and of providing at least one corresponding solution. In the case where a plurality of corresponding solutions is provided, the plurality of corresponding solutions may comprise optimal and suboptimal solutions.
The at least one corresponding solution is provided by the quantum annealer 204 to the digital computer 202.
Now referring to
Now referring to
As mentioned above, the constrained binary quadratic programming problem can be referred to as:
}
According to processing step 402, data representative of an objective function f (x) are provided. It will be appreciated that in one embodiment the processor is used for providing the data representative of an objective function f (x).
According to processing step 404, data representative of the equality constraints are provided. It will be appreciated that in one embodiment the processor is used for providing the data representative of the equality constraints.
According to processing step 406, data representative of the inequality constraints are provided. It will be appreciated that in one embodiment the processor is used for providing the data representative of the inequality constraints.
It will be appreciated that the providing of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem may be performed according to various embodiments.
As mentioned above and in one embodiment, the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided by a user interacting with the digital computer 202. Alternatively, the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided by another computer operatively connected to the digital computer 202. Alternatively, the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided by an independent software package. Alternatively, the constrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided by an intelligent agent.
Now referring to
Now referring to
In one embodiment, the software parameters are obtained by the processor from at least one of a user, a computer, a software package and an intelligent agent.
According to processing step 502, data representative of an embedding of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem on the quantum annealer are provided. In one embodiment the processor is used for providing the data representative of an embedding of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem on the quantum annealer. The embedding should be such that it respects all logical couplings between variables as they occur in the functions f (x), g1(x), . . . , gm(x) and h1(x), . . . , (x). In other words the chains of qubits corresponding to two variable xr and xs should have a coupling between them whenever there is a nonzero coefficient for the term xrxs, in at least one of the functions f (x), gi(x), . . . , gm(x) and h1(x), . . . ,
(x).
In one embodiment, the data comprise an array of n sets, with each entry being a set {qi1, . . . , qil
Still referring to
The input parameter of the callback function is a pointer to an instance of the data type ORACLE : : qubo, representative of an unconstrained binary quadratic programming neglecting the corresponding bias of it.
The output of the call back function is a pointer to an instance of the type ORACLE : : result, representative of a list of optimal and suboptimal solutions to the unconstrained binary quadratic programming problem.
The following is an example of a code snippet in C++ for providing the callback function using the API developed by DWave:
It will be appreciated that, in one embodiment, the providing of the unconstrained binary optimization problem to the quantum annealer is achieved using a processor.
More precisely, it will be appreciated that in one embodiment a token system is used over the Internet to provide access to the quantum annealer remotely and to authenticate use.
It will be appreciated that in one embodiment the at least one solution is provided in a table by the quantum annealer, according to the instructions of use of the quantum annealer. In one embodiment, the DWave system, provides these solutions in the data type sapi_IsingResult* which is then type-casted automatically to an instance of QUBO: : result*.
Still referring to
It will be appreciated that in one embodiment the providing of these real numbers of type double is achieved by overwriting the names ORACLE : : dual_1b and ORACLE : : dual_ub. Each of these types will be required to contain an array of doubles of size m+. The first m entries of these arrays represent, respectively, the lower and upper bounds for the Lagrange multipliers corresponding to the m equality constraints and the last
of them represent, respectively, the lower and upper bounds for the Lagrange multipliers corresponding to the
inequality constraints.
It will be appreciated that if these names are not overwritten, the values of them are initialized with the default values.
In the mathematical formulae below, the vector of lower bounds is denoted by 1b=(1b1, . . . , ) and the vector of upper bounds is denoted by ub=(ub1, . . . ,
).
In one embodiment, the default lower bound for a Lagrange multiplier corresponding to an equality constraint is −1e6 and the default upper bound for it is +1e6.
The default lower bound for a Lagrange multiplier corresponding to an inequality constraint is 0 and the default upper bound for it is +1e6.
Still referring to
In fact, it will be appreciated that the providing of these real valued numbers are achieved by overwriting the name ORACLE : : dual_init_val with an array of doubles of size m+. If this name is not overwritten, the values are initialized with default values.
The default initial value for any of the Lagrange multipliers, corresponding to any of equality or inequality constraints, is 0.
In the mathematical formulae below, the vector of all initial values of Lagrange multipliers is denoted by init=(init1, . . . , ).
According to processing step 510, an error tolerance value for equality and inequality conditions is provided in the software. It will be appreciated that in one embodiment the error tolerance value for equality and inequality conditions is provided using the processor.
Unless overwritten by the user and according to one embodiment, the error tolerance value is initialized to 1e-5 and stored as ORACLE : : tol. The error tolerance value is used in several points in the software.
The Lagrangian dual bound and the value of the best feasible solution are considered equal if their difference is less that ORACLE : : tol, in which case strong duality is assumed to hold.
More generally, any system of linear inequalities LHS≤RHS is considered satisfied if the value of all entries in LHS-RHS is at most ORACLE : : tol.
Similarly, any system of linear equalities LHS=RHS is considered satisfied if the absolute value of all entries in LHS-RHS is at most ORACLE : : tol.
Now referring back to
It will be appreciated that the linear programming procedure will be carried iteratively during the entire runtime of the method and will terminate once the result of it converges; i.e., it does not improve in the two consecutive iterations.
In first iteration, the linear programming problem, referred to as (L), is the following:
}
At this point, the value of y is set toy*=+∞ and the variables λi and μi play no role in the objective function or in the constraints. The vectors λ=(λ1, . . . λm) and μ=(μ1, . . . ) will represent the Lagrange multipliers in the linear programming problem (L) formulated above.
It will be appreciated that the values of the variables λi and μj may be set to any arbitrary feasible ones λ*i=initi(∀j=1, . . . , m) and μ*j32 initj+m(∀j=1, . . . , m).
It will be appreciated that in further processing steps a number of inequality constraints will be added to the linear programming problem (L) and a simplex-based linear programming method proceeds to find new optimal values for y*, λ* and μ* such that they maximize y and satisfy all added constraints.
According to processing step 108, the Lagrangian relaxation of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem corresponding to the Lagrange multipliers λ* and μ* are provided.
As mentioned above, the Lagrangian relaxation of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem corresponding to the Lagrange multipliers λ* and μ* is the following optimization problem:
It will be appreciated that this optimization problem is an unconstrained binary quadratic programming problem and therefore can be completely determined by a symmetric real matrix Q of size n and a bias constant b, representative of an objective function of the form xtQx+b in n binary variables. It will be appreciated that the unconstrained binary quadratic programming problem is provided to the quantum annealer. As mentioned above, the unconstrained binary quadratic problem may be provided to the quantum annealer according to various embodiments.
In one embodiment, the information of this unconstrained binary quadratic programming problem is stored in a variable Q of type ORACLE : : qubo forgetting the bias term.
Still referring to
It will be appreciated that the at least one corresponding solution of the unconstrained binary quadratic programming is achieved with a pointer to an instance of type ORACLE : : result.
Now referring to processing step 112, each of the at least one corresponding solution provided according to processing step 110, is used to generate a new linear constraint (a.k.a. cut) for the linear programming problem (L).
Now referring to
According to processing step 602, at least one corresponding solution is provided. In the case where the at least one corresponding solution comprises a plurality of solutions, the plurality of solutions S comprises optimal as well as suboptimal solutions as mentioned above.
According to processing step 604, a new cut corresponding to each solution is determined using the solution itself and the current Lagrange multipliers.
In fact and given a binary vector s of size n, it will be appreciated that the following inequality cuts out a half-space of the space x
x
, of the Lagrange multipliers and the variable y.
y≤f(s)+ρi=1mλ*igi(s)+μ*jhj(s)
According to processing step 606, all the new cuts corresponding to all vectors s ϵS are added to the linear programming procedure (L) in progress.
Using a simplex-based linear programming method, the previous solution to the linear programming problem (L) is now modified to a solution to the modified version of the linear programming problem (L) formulated below:
According to processing step 608, the optimal value of y* and the optimal multipliers λ* and μ* are updated by solving the modified linear programming problem (L), and y* is now recognized as an upper approximation for the Lagrangian dual bound.
Referring to
In the case where the optimal value of y* does not improve and according to processing step 116, the results of the optimization are reported. It will be appreciated that in one embodiment, the results of the optimization are provided using the processor.
It will be appreciated that in one embodiment, the output of this method comprises the value of y* representative of the optimal value, and δ(P) of the Lagrangian dual problem corresponding to the constrained binary quadratic programming problem formulated above.
The output of this method further comprises the optimal multipliers λ* and μ*, representative of a set of Lagrange multipliers at which the value δ(P) is attained by the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem.
Still in this embodiment, the output of the method further comprises the minimum value encountered for f (s) among all solutions s generated by the quantum annealer and provided by the callback function ORACLE : : solve_qubo.
Finally, the output comprises an indicator of whether δ(P) and the minimum value encountered for f (s) are at most of distance ORACLE : : tol from each other.
In one embodiment, the above information is stored using the digital computer in a file.
It will be appreciated that a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is further disclosed. The non-transitory computer-readable storage medium is used for storing computer-executable instructions which, when executed, cause a digital computer to perform a method for solving the Lagrangian dual of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem, the method comprising obtaining a constrained quadratic binary programming problem; until a convergence is detected, iteratively, performing a Lagrangian relaxation of the constrained quadratic binary programming problem to provide an unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem, providing the unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem to a quantum annealer, obtaining from the quantum annealer at least one corresponding solution, using the at least one corresponding solution to generate a new approximation for the Lagrangian dual bound; and providing a corresponding solution to the Lagrangian dual of the constrained binary quadratic programming problem after the convergence.
It will be appreciated that an advantage of the method disclosed herein is that it enables an efficient method for finding the Lagrangian dual bound for a constrained binary quadratic programming problem using a quantum annealer.
It will be further appreciated that the method disclosed herein improves the processing of a system for solving the Lagrangian dual of a constrained binary quadratic programming problem.
It will be appreciated that the method disclosed herein may be used for solving various problems.
For instance, the method disclosed herein may be used for solving the maximum weighted k-clique problem. The maximum weighted k-clique problem may be formulated as:
In this embodiment, A is a symmetric square matrix of size n representing the weights of edges of a graph with n vertices. The binary variable xi represents selection of the vertex labeled by positive integer iϵ{1, . . . , n}.
It is appreciated that the mentioned maximization problem may be written as the minimization of the negative of the objective function:
In one embodiment, let a graph with 5 vertices, represents a group of 5 coworkers. To each pair of coworkers, a utility factor is assigned for the collaboration between the two coworkers. The utilities can be represented with an upper triangular matrix:
For example, the utility of collaboration of person 3 with person 5 is 3.
The utility matrix W may as well be represented by the 5×5 symmetric matrix A=½(W+Wt).
The problem of selecting the most productive team of 3 people amongst the 5 coworkers is then an instance of the maximum weighted 3-clique problem which is denoted by (C):
The single constraint of (C), indicates that there is only a single Lagrange multiplier, denoted by λ, present in any Lagrangian relaxation of it. The lower and upper bounds −10 and 10 are provided for the Lagrange multiplier with initial value 0.
A linear programming problem is then initiated as:
which initially has +∞ as optimal solution.
At the initial Lagrange multiplier λ=0 the unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem:
is solved by a quantum annealer resulting the optimal value −24 obtained at the binary vector (1, 1, 1, 1, 1).
The linear programming problem is then modified to:
A simplex-based linear programming method gives an optimal value of −4 obtained at λ=10 for this linear programming problem.
At the new Lagrangian multiplier λ=10, the unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem:
is solved by a quantum annealer resulting the optimal value −30 obtained at the binary vector (0, 0, 0, 0, 0).
The linear programming problem is then modified to
A simplex-based linear programming method gives an optimal value of −30 obtained at λ=4.8 for this linear programming problem.
At the new Lagrangian multiplier λ=4.8, the unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem:
is solved by a quantum annealer resulting the optimal value −15.2 obtained at the binary vector (1, 0, 1, 1, 1).
The linear programming problem is then modified to:
A simplex-based linear programming method gives an optimal value of −15 obtained at λ=5 for this linear programming problem.
Finally, at the new Lagrangian multiplier λ=5, the unconstrained quadratic binary programming problem
is solved by a quantum annealer resulting the optimal value −15 obtained at the binary vector (1, 0, 1, 1, 0).
A simplex-based linear programming method gives an optimal value of −15 obtained at λ=5 for this linear programming problem.
Since the optimal value of the linear program, has not improved from the previous iteration, convergence has occurred.
The best known feasible solution is (1, 0, 1, 1, 0) and the value of the objective function of (C) at this point is −15.
Since the optimal value of the linear program is also −15 strong duality has occurred. The output of the method is (1) the Lagrangian dual bound −15, (2) the feasible binary vector (1, 0, 1, 1, 0) and (3) a flag indicating strong duality has occurred.
For the application at hand, the solution to the method disclosed is interpreted as the selection of a team of 3 people, consisting of person 1, 3 and 4 as the most productive team of size 3, amongst the 5 coworkers.
The skilled addressee will appreciate that the method disclosed herein is therefore of great advantage for solving this problem. In fact, the method disclosed greatly improves the processing of a system used for solving such problem.
Although the above description relates to specific embodiments as presently contemplated by the inventors, it will be understood that the invention in its broad aspect includes functional equivalents of the elements described herein.
Number | Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
CA 2881033 | Feb 2015 | CA | national |
The present patent application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/014,576, filed Feb. 3, 2016, which claims the benefit of Canadian Patent Application No. 2,881,033, filed on Feb. 3, 2015, each of which is incorporated herein by reference in their entireties.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
6221592 | Schwartz et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
7113967 | Cleve et al. | Sep 2006 | B2 |
7135701 | Amin et al. | Nov 2006 | B2 |
7234144 | Wilt et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7418283 | Amin et al. | Aug 2008 | B2 |
7533068 | Van Den Brink et al. | May 2009 | B2 |
7619437 | Thom et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7639035 | Berkley | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7660533 | Meyers et al. | Feb 2010 | B1 |
7805079 | Meyers et al. | Sep 2010 | B1 |
7898282 | Harris et al. | Mar 2011 | B2 |
7984012 | Coury et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8008942 | Van Den Brink et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8126649 | Frasch et al. | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8175995 | Amin | May 2012 | B2 |
8195596 | Rose et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8195726 | Macready et al. | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8219605 | Cowlishaw et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8230432 | Bryant et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8244662 | Coury et al. | Aug 2012 | B2 |
8283943 | Van Den Brink et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
8421053 | Bunyk et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8503885 | Meyers et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8655828 | Rose | Feb 2014 | B2 |
8832165 | Allen et al. | Sep 2014 | B2 |
9537953 | Dadashikelayeh et al. | Jan 2017 | B1 |
9660859 | Dadashikelayeh et al. | May 2017 | B1 |
9727824 | Rose et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9870273 | Dadashikelayeh et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
9881256 | Hamze et al. | Jan 2018 | B2 |
10044638 | Dadashikelayeh et al. | Aug 2018 | B2 |
10152358 | Dadashikelayeh et al. | Dec 2018 | B2 |
10223084 | Dunn | Mar 2019 | B1 |
10339466 | Ding et al. | Jul 2019 | B1 |
10346748 | Aspuru-Guzik et al. | Jul 2019 | B2 |
10484479 | Johnson et al. | Nov 2019 | B2 |
10558932 | Neven et al. | Feb 2020 | B1 |
10614370 | Johnson et al. | Apr 2020 | B2 |
10929294 | Brahm et al. | Feb 2021 | B2 |
11017289 | Crawford et al. | May 2021 | B2 |
11196775 | Badawy et al. | Dec 2021 | B1 |
20030005068 | Nickel et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030121028 | Coury et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20040254735 | Horn et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040267916 | Chambliss et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050027458 | Merz, Jr. et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050182614 | Meredith | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050187844 | Chalermkraivuth et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050250651 | Amin et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050273306 | Hilton et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060221978 | Venkatachalam | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060225165 | Van Den Brink et al. | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20070180586 | Amin | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070239366 | Hilton et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080059547 | Taylor | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080065573 | Macready | Mar 2008 | A1 |
20080186918 | Tinnakornsrisuphap et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080215850 | Berkley et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080218519 | Coury et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080262990 | Kapoor et al. | Oct 2008 | A1 |
20080313430 | Bunyk | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090070402 | Rose et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090078932 | Amin | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090164435 | Routt | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20090182542 | Hilton et al. | Jul 2009 | A9 |
20090306902 | Lemmen et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20090325694 | Beckman et al. | Dec 2009 | A1 |
20100076913 | Yang et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100261481 | Resende et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100306142 | Amin | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110047201 | Macready et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110231462 | Macready et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110238378 | Allen et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110238855 | Korsunsky et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110296229 | Cowlishaw et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120072579 | Teather | Mar 2012 | A1 |
20120084242 | Levin | Apr 2012 | A1 |
20120159506 | Barham et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120215821 | Macready et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20120240185 | Kapoor et al. | Sep 2012 | A1 |
20120253926 | Chen et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120254586 | Amin et al. | Oct 2012 | A1 |
20120278374 | Cowlishaw et al. | Nov 2012 | A1 |
20120326720 | Gambetta et al. | Dec 2012 | A1 |
20130026183 | Foster | Jan 2013 | A1 |
20130144925 | Macready et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130263131 | Beda, III et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130308956 | Meyers et al. | Nov 2013 | A1 |
20130336472 | Fahlgren et al. | Dec 2013 | A1 |
20140025606 | Macready | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140067808 | Narang et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140122702 | Jung et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140123325 | Jung et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140187427 | Macready et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140214257 | Williams et al. | Jul 2014 | A1 |
20140250288 | Roy | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140258730 | Stecher | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140324933 | Macready et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20140337612 | Williams | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140344322 | Ranjbar | Nov 2014 | A1 |
20140379924 | Das et al. | Dec 2014 | A1 |
20150006443 | Rose et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150032991 | Lanting et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150032993 | Amin et al. | Jan 2015 | A1 |
20150055961 | Meyers et al. | Feb 2015 | A1 |
20150106413 | Ronagh | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150111754 | Harris et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150120551 | Jung et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150120555 | Jung et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150142398 | Miller, III et al. | May 2015 | A1 |
20150169746 | Hatami-Hanza | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150178349 | Niewodniczanski et al. | Jun 2015 | A1 |
20150193692 | Israel | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150205759 | Israel et al. | Jul 2015 | A1 |
20150220852 | Hatami-Hanza | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150227559 | Hatami-Hanza | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150262074 | Bruestle et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150269124 | Hamze et al. | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150269243 | Kobayashi | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20150332994 | Mallik et al. | Nov 2015 | A1 |
20150349960 | Bagley | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150358251 | Varga et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150363358 | Ronagh et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20150363708 | Amin et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160026183 | Williams et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160071021 | Raymond | Mar 2016 | A1 |
20160132785 | Amin et al. | May 2016 | A1 |
20160162798 | Marandi et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160171368 | Aspuru-Guzik et al. | Jun 2016 | A1 |
20160224515 | Ronagh et al. | Aug 2016 | A1 |
20160321559 | Rose et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160328253 | Majumdar | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160328659 | Mohseni et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160338075 | McKibben | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20160342891 | Ross et al. | Nov 2016 | A1 |
20170011305 | Williams | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170017894 | Lanting et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170060642 | Castellano et al. | Mar 2017 | A1 |
20170109605 | Ahn | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20170147303 | Amy et al. | May 2017 | A1 |
20170147695 | Shih | May 2017 | A1 |
20170214701 | Hasan | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20170223143 | Johnson et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170242824 | Karimi et al. | Aug 2017 | A1 |
20170255592 | Karimi et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170255629 | Thom et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170255872 | Hamze et al. | Sep 2017 | A1 |
20170286852 | Rezaie et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170286858 | La Cour et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170300808 | Ronagh et al. | Oct 2017 | A1 |
20170323195 | Crawford et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20170344898 | Karimi et al. | Nov 2017 | A1 |
20170351974 | Rose et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20170372427 | Johnson et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20170373940 | Shahab et al. | Dec 2017 | A1 |
20180014970 | Conde De Paiva et al. | Jan 2018 | A1 |
20180039903 | Mosca et al. | Feb 2018 | A1 |
20180091440 | Dadashikelayeh et al. | Mar 2018 | A1 |
20180096085 | Rubin | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180107526 | Dadashikelayeh et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180114138 | Monroe et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180204126 | Galle | Jul 2018 | A1 |
20180218279 | Lechner et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180218281 | Reinhardt et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180246851 | Zaribafiyan et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20180260730 | Reagor et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
20180267937 | Pelc et al. | Sep 2018 | A1 |
20180308007 | Amin et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180375790 | Dadashikelayeh et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
20190009581 | Schalk et al. | Jan 2019 | A1 |
20190019103 | Dadashikelayeh | Jan 2019 | A1 |
20190087237 | Dadashikelayeh et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190095811 | Antonio et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190205790 | Dukatz et al. | Jul 2019 | A1 |
20190378047 | Pistoia et al. | Dec 2019 | A1 |
20200005186 | Romero et al. | Jan 2020 | A1 |
20200057957 | Johnson et al. | Feb 2020 | A1 |
20200104740 | Cao | Apr 2020 | A1 |
20200125568 | Idicula et al. | Apr 2020 | A1 |
20200143910 | Noori et al. | May 2020 | A1 |
20200191943 | Wu et al. | Jun 2020 | A1 |
20200279187 | Huang et al. | Sep 2020 | A1 |
20200410343 | Niu et al. | Dec 2020 | A1 |
20210103847 | Akzam | Apr 2021 | A1 |
20210166133 | Ronagh et al. | Jun 2021 | A1 |
20210166148 | Matsuura et al. | Jun 2021 | A1 |
20210279260 | Oberoi et al. | Sep 2021 | A1 |
20210287124 | Ronagh et al. | Sep 2021 | A1 |
20210374611 | Ronagh et al. | Dec 2021 | A1 |
20220107927 | Vedaie et al. | Apr 2022 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2840958 | Jan 2013 | CA |
2881033 | Apr 2015 | CA |
2902015 | Jan 2016 | CA |
2921711 | Aug 2017 | CA |
3026824 | Dec 2017 | CA |
106874506 | Jun 2017 | CN |
110069348 | Jul 2019 | CN |
3113084 | Jan 2017 | EP |
2004503011 | Jan 2004 | JP |
2006061926 | Mar 2006 | JP |
2008525873 | Jul 2008 | JP |
2013114366 | Jun 2013 | JP |
WO-2005122052 | Dec 2005 | WO |
WO-2006026985 | Mar 2006 | WO |
WO-2007089674 | Aug 2007 | WO |
WO-2007147243 | Dec 2007 | WO |
WO-2010148120 | Dec 2010 | WO |
WO-2013006836 | Jan 2013 | WO |
WO-2014210368 | Dec 2014 | WO |
WO-2015006494 | Jan 2015 | WO |
WO-2015060915 | Apr 2015 | WO |
WO-2015121619 | Aug 2015 | WO |
WO-2016029172 | Feb 2016 | WO |
WO-2017068228 | Apr 2017 | WO |
WO-2017111937 | Jun 2017 | WO |
WO-2017145086 | Aug 2017 | WO |
WO-2017149491 | Sep 2017 | WO |
WO-2017152289 | Sep 2017 | WO |
WO-2017201626 | Nov 2017 | WO |
WO-2017214717 | Dec 2017 | WO |
WO-2018119522 | Jul 2018 | WO |
WO-2018160599 | Sep 2018 | WO |
WO-2019104440 | Jun 2019 | WO |
WO-2019104443 | Jun 2019 | WO |
WO-2019152020 | Aug 2019 | WO |
WO-2019157228 | Aug 2019 | WO |
WO-2019222748 | Nov 2019 | WO |
WO-2019241879 | Dec 2019 | WO |
WO-2019244105 | Dec 2019 | WO |
WO-2020113339 | Jun 2020 | WO |
WO-2020223718 | Nov 2020 | WO |
WO-2020227825 | Nov 2020 | WO |
WO-2020255076 | Dec 2020 | WO |
WO-2021055000 | Mar 2021 | WO |
WO-2021111368 | Jun 2021 | WO |
WO-2021181281 | Sep 2021 | WO |
WO-2021207847 | Oct 2021 | WO |
WO-2021237350 | Dec 2021 | WO |
WO-2021243454 | Dec 2021 | WO |
WO-2022079640 | Apr 2022 | WO |
WO-2022123494 | Jun 2022 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Cowtan et al. On the qubit routing problem. arXiv:1902.08091v2 (2019). |
EP17812349.3 Third Party Observations dated Oct. 29, 2020. |
Li. Tackling the Qubit Mapping Problem for NISQ-Era Quantum Devices. arXiv:1809.02573v2 Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. (2019). |
Lu et al., Quantum chemistry simulation on quantum computers: theories and experiments. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 14(26):9411-9420 (2012). |
Moll et al., Optimizing qubit resources for quantum chemistry simulations in second quantization on quantum computer. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 49(29):295301 (2016). |
Niklasson et al., Fast method for quantum mechanical molecular dynamics. Physical Review B 86(17):174308 (2012). |
Siraichi et al. Qubit Allocation. CGO 2018—International Symposium on Code Generation and Optimization, Feb. 2018, Vienna, Austria (12 pgs) (2018). pp. 1-12. |
Tran et al. Explorations of Quantum-Classical Approaches to Scheduling a MarsLander Activity Problem. The Workshops of the Thirtieth AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence Planning for Hybrid Systems: Technical Report WS-16-12, p. 641-649, published on Mar. 29, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/888,446 3rd Party Submission dated Apr. 7, 2021. |
Whitfield et al., Simulation of electronic structure Hamiltonians using quantum computers. Molecular Physics 109(5):735-750 (2011). |
Wooters et al. The no-cloning theorem. Physics Today 62(2):76-77 (2009). |
Zulehner et al. Efficient mapping of quantum circuits to the IBM QX architectures. In Design, Automation & Test in Europe Conference & Exhibition 2018 38(7):1226-1236 (2018). |
Aggarwal et al.: Evolutionary network analysis: A survey. ACM Computing Surveys 47(1):10:1-10:36 (2014). |
Amelio et al.: Community mining in signed networks: A multiobjective approach. ASONAM 2013: Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE/ACM International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining, pp. 95-99 https://doi.org/10.1145/2492517.2492641 (2013). |
Anchuri et al.: Communities and balance in signed networks: A spectral approach. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Advances in Social Networks Analysis and Mining (ASONAM 2012), ASONAM 2012, pp. 235-242, Washington, DC, USA (2012). |
Bhagat et al.: Node Classification in Social Networks. arXiv:1101.3291v1 Social Network Data Analytics, pp. 115-148 (2011). |
Bojchevski et al.: Deep Gaussian Embedding of Graphs: Unsupervised Inductive Learning via Ranking. arXiv.org, Cornell University, arXiv:1707.03815v4 [stat.ML], pp. 1-13 (2018). |
Bromley et al.: Applications of near-term photonic quantum computers: software and algorithms. Quantum Science and Technology 5:034010DOI:10.1088/2058-9565/ab8504 arXiv:1912.07634 [1-36] (2019). |
Cai et al.: A survey on network community detection based on evolutionary computation. International Journal of Bio-Inspired Computation 8(2):84-98 (2016). |
Cao et al.: Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. Springer International, pp. 82-95 (2015). |
Carleo et al.: Constructing exact representations of quantum many-body systems with deep neural networks. Nat Commun. 9(1):5322, pp. 1-11 doi:10.1038/s41467-018-07520-3 (2018). |
Carleo et al.: Solving the quantum many-body problem with artificial neural networks, pre-print arXiv:1606.02318 Science 355(6325):602-606 doi:10.1126/science.aag2302 (2016). |
Carrasquilla et al.: Reconstructing quantum states with generative models. arXiv:1810.10584 Nature Machine Intelligence 1(3):155-161 arXiv:1810.10584 (2019). |
Chen et al.: Community Detection via Maximization of Modularity and Its Variants. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems 1(1):46-65 DOI:10.1109/TCSS.2014.2307458 (2014). |
Chen et al.: Epidemic spreading on networks with overlapping community structure. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 391(4):1848-1854 (2012). |
Chiang et al.: Exploiting longer cycles for link prediction in signed networks. In Proceedings of the 20th ACM International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM 2011, pp. 1157-1162, New York, NY, USA [1-6] (2011). |
Chowdhury et al.: Quantum algorithms for Gibbs sampling and hitting-time estimation. arXiv:1603.02940 Quant. Inf. Comp. 17(1-2):41-64 (2017). |
Chuang et al.: Experimental implementation of fast quantum searching. Physical Review Letters 80(15):3408-3411 DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.3408 (1998). |
Conforti et al.: Integer Programming: Graduate Texts in Mathematics 271. Springer [1-466] (2014). |
Debnath et al.: Demonstration of a small programmable quantum computer with atomic qubits. arXiv:1603.04512 Nature 536(7614):63-66 doi:10.1038/nature18648 (2016). |
Elvira et al.: Efficient Multiple Importance Sampling Estimators, pre-print arxiv.org/pdf/1505.05391, pp. 1-7 (2015). |
Esmailian et al.: Mesoscopic analysis of online social networks: The role of negative ties. arXiv:1411.6057v1 Phys. Rev. E90:042817, pp. 1-13 (2014). |
Ferrara et al.: Detecting criminal organizations in mobile phone networks. arXiv:1404.1295v1 Expert Systems with Applications 41(13):5733-5750 (2014). |
Fortunato: Community detection in graphs. arXiv.org, Cornell University, arXiv:0906.0612v1 [physics.soc-ph], pp. 1-89 (2009). |
Gelman et al.: Simulating normalizing constants: from importance sampling to bridge sampling to path sampling. Statist. Sci. 13(2):163-185 DOI:10.1214/ss/1028905934 (1998). |
Glover et al.: Tabu Search: Modern Heuristic Techniques for Combinatorial Problems. Colin R. Reeves (Ed.) Black Scientific Publications, Oxford [1-62] (1993). |
Glover: Tabu search—part II. ORSA Journal on computing 2(1):4-32.1 4-32 DOI:10.1287/ijoc.2.1.4 (1990). |
Hamilton et al.: Representation Learning on Graphs: Methods and Applications. arXiv.org, Cornell University, arXiv:1709.05584v3 [cs.SI], pp. 1-24 (2018). |
He et al.: MISAGA: An Algorithm for Mining Interesting Subgraphs in Attributed Graphs. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics 48(5):1369-1382 (2018). |
Heider: Attitudes and cognitive organization. The Journal of Psychology 21(1):107-112 (1946). |
Huang et al.: Predicting many properties of a quantum system from very few measurements. Nature Physics 16(10)1050-1057 doi:arxiv.org/abs/2002.08953 [1-40](2020). |
Humble et al.: Software Systems for High-performance Quantum Computing. IEEE Xplore doi:10.1109/HPEC.2016.7761628 [1-8](2016). |
Jones et al.: Implementation of a quantum algorithm to solve Deutsch's problem on a nuclear magnetic resonance quantum computer. arXiv:quant-ph/9801027v2 The Journal of chemical physics, 109(5):1648-1653 DOI:10.1063/1.476739 (1998). |
Kassal et al.: Simulating chemistry using quantum computers. Annu Rev Phys Chem. 62:185-207 (2011). |
Kochenberger et al.: The unconstrained binary quadratic programming problem: A survey. J Comb Optim. 28(1)58-81 DOI:10.1007/s10878-014-9734-0 (2014). |
Kunegis et al.: The slashdot zoo: Mining a social network with negative edges. In Proceedings of the 18th International 20 Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2009, pp. 741-750, New York, NY, USA DOI:10.1145/1526709.1526809 (2009). |
Lenstra: Integer programming with a fixed number of variables. 8(4):538-548 URL: https://doi.org/10.1287/moor.8.4.538 (1983). |
Leskovec et al.: Empirical Comparison of Algorithms for Network Community Detection. Proceedings of International World Wide Web Conference 2010, Raleigh, North Carolina, USA, pp. 1-10 (2010). |
Leskovec et al.: Predicting positive and negative links in online social networks. In Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on World Wide Web, WWW 2010, pp. 1-10, New York, NY, USA (2010). |
Liben-Nowell et al.: The link prediction problem for social networks. In Proceedings of the Twelfth International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, CIKM 2003, pp. 556-559, New York, NY, USA [1-19](2004). |
Lin et al.: Understanding community effects on information diffusion. Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, pp. 82-95 DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-18038-0_7 (2015). |
Low et al.: Hamiltonian simulation by Qubitization. arXiv:1610.06546v3 Quantum 3:163 URL:https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2019-07-12-163 [1-23] (2019). |
Lu et al.: Demonstration of Shor's quantum factoring algorithm using photonic qubits. arXiv:0705.1684v3 Physical Review Letters 99(25):250504 DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.250504 [1-5] (2007). |
Lu et al.: KKT Solution and Conic Relaxation for Solving Quadratically Constrained Quadratic Programming Problem. SIAM J. Optim. 21(4):1475-1490 DOI:10.1137/100793955 (2011). |
Massa et al.: Controversial users demand local trust metrics: An experimental study on Epinions.com community. In Proceedings of the 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence AAA Press vol. 1, AAAI-05:121-126 (2005). |
Medus et al.: Detection of community structures in networks via global optimization. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications 358(2-4):593-604 DOI:10.1016/j.physa.2005.04.022 (2005). |
Melko et al.: Restricted Boltzmann machines in quantum physics. Nature Physics 15(9):887-892 DOI:10.1038/S41567-019-0545-1 (2019). |
Monz et al.: Realization of a scalable Shor algorithm. arXiv:1507.08852 Science 351(6277):1068-1070 DOI:10.1126/science.aad9480 (2015). |
Motzkin et al.: Maxima for graphs as a new proof of a theorem of Turan. Canadian Journal of Mathematics 17:533-540 DOI:10.4153/CJM-1965-053-6 (1965). |
Nagy et al.: Variational quantum Monte Carlo method with a neural-network ansatz for open quantum systems. Phys Rev Letters 122(25):250501 doi:arxiv.org/abs/1902.09483 [1-10](2019). |
Nam et al.: Ground-state energy estimation of the water molecule on a trapped ion quantum computer. arXiv preprint arXiv:1902.10171, pp. 1-14 (2019). |
Newman et al.: Finding and evaluating community structure in networks. Phys. Rev. E. 69:026113, pp. 1-16 (2004). |
Newman: Modularity and community structure in networks. PNAS 103(23):8577-8582 (2006). |
Olsson et al.: Solving Large Scale Binary Quadratic Problems: Spectral Methods vs. Semidefinite Programming. IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 1-8, doi:10.1109/CVPR.2007.383202 (2007). |
PCT/CA2021/050709 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 3, 2021. |
PCT/CA2021/050750 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 6, 2021. |
PCT/IB2019/055226 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Nov. 26, 2019. |
PCT/IB2020/055801 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Oct. 30, 2020. |
PCT/IB2020/061464 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 4, 2021. |
PCT/IB2021/051965 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated May 31, 2021. |
Pizzuti: A multi-objective genetic algorithm for community detection in networks. IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, pp. 379-386 DOI:10.1109/ICTAI.2009.58 (2009). |
Poulin et al.: Sampling from the thermal quantum Gibbs state and evaluating partition functions with a quantum computer. arXiv:0905.2199 Physical Review Letters 103(22), pp. 1-7 DOI:10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.220502 (2009). |
Quek et al.: Adaptive Quantum State Tomography with Neural Networks. arXiv.org, Cornell University, arXiv:1812.06693v1 [quant-ph], pp. 1-13 pages (2018). |
Reiher et al.: Elucidating reaction mechanisms on quantum computers. PNAS USA 114(29):7555-7560 (2017). |
Rubin: A Hybrid Classical/Quantum Approach for Large-Scale Studies of Quantum Systems with Density Matrix Embedding Theory. Cornell University Library, Ithaca, NY arXiv doi:arxiv.org/abs/1610.06910 [1-10](2016). |
Salathe et al.: Dynamics and control of diseases in networks with community structure. PLOS Computational Biology 6(4):e1000736, pp. 1-11 (2010). |
Schuld et al., “Quantum machine learning in feature Hilbert spaces”, Phys. Rev. Lett.; Feb. 1, 2019, vol. 122, pp. 040504-1-040504-12. |
Schwabl: Quantum Mechanics. Springer, 4th Ed. [1-425] (2007). |
Shen et al.: Quantum implementation of the unitary coupled cluster for simulating molecular electronic structure. Phys. Rev. A 95, 020501(R) doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.95.020501 [1-6] (2017). |
Srinivas et al.: Muiltiobjective optimization using non-dominated sorting in genetic algorithms. Evolutionary Computation 2(3):221-248 (1994). |
Tang et al.: A Survey of Signed Network Mining in Social Media. ACM Computing Surveys 9(4):pp. 39:1 to 39:38, arXiv.org, Cornell University, arXiv:1511.07569v3 [cs.SI] (2016). |
Terhal et al.: The problem of equilibration and the computation of correlation functions on a quantum computer. arXiv:quant-ph/9810063 Phys.Rev. A61:22301, pp. 1-35 DOI:10.1103/PhysRevA.61.022301 (2000). |
Torlai et al.: Neural-network quantum state tomography, pre-print arXiv:1703.05334v2 Nature Physics 14:447-450 DOI:10.1038/s41567-018-0048-5 (2017). |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/811,479 Non-Final Office Action dated Aug. 30, 2021. |
Veis et al.: Quantum computing applied to calculations of molecular energies: CH2 benchmark. J Chem Phys. 133(19):194106 doi:10.1063/1.3503767 [1-29](2010). |
Venuti et al.: Adiabaticity in open quantum systems. arXiv:1508.05558v2 Phys. Rev. A93(3):032118, pp. 1-12 DOI:10.1103/PhysRevA.93.032118 (2016). |
Waskiewicz: Friend of a friend influence in terrorist social networks. In Proceedings on the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence (ICAO, pp. 1-5. The Steering Committee of The World Congress in Computer Science, Computer Engineering and Applied Computing (WorldComp) (2012). |
Wendin: Quantum information processing with superconducting circuits: a review. Rep Prog Phys. 80(10):106001 doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aa7e1a [1-50](2017). |
Xu et al.: Neural network state estimation for full quantum state tomography. ArXiv preprint doi:arxiv.org/abs/1811.06654 [1-8] (2018). |
Zahedinejad et al.: Multi-Community Detection in Signed Graphs Using Quantum Hardware. arXiv.org, 1QBit online research paper, Cornell University, arXiv:1901.04873v1 [quant-ph], pp. 1-10 (2019). |
Aspuru-Guzik et al. Simulated Quantum Computation of Molecular Energies. Science 309:1704 (2005). |
Bertoni et al. Quantum logic gates based on coherent electron transport in quantum wires. Physical Review Letters 84(25):5912 (2000). |
Bravyi et al. Fermionic quantum computation. arXiv:quant-ph/0003137 (2000). |
Buren. An Introduction to Quantum Computing using Cavity QED concepts. arXiv preprint arXiv:1210.6512 (2012). |
Byrnes et al. Macroscopic quantum computation using Bose-Einstein condensates. arXiv preprint quantum-ph/1103.5512 (2011). |
Carrasquilla. Machine learning for quantum matter, https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.11040.pdf (2020). |
Clarke et al. Superconducting quantum bits. Nature 453(7198):1031 (2008). |
Conway et al. An FPGA-based instrumentation platform for use at deep cryogenic temperatures, arxiv.org/abs/1509.06809 (2015). |
Co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 16/888,419, filed May 29, 2020. |
Co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 16/888,446, filed May 29, 2020. |
Co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 16/896,032, filed Jun. 8, 2020. |
Cory et al. Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy: An experimentally accessible paradigm for quantum computing. arXiv preprint quant-ph/97090 01 (1997). |
Cramer et al. Efficient quantum state tomography, Nature Communications 1:149 (2010). |
Deutsch et al. Quantum computing with neutral atoms in an optical lattice. arXiv preprint quant-ph/0003022 (2000). |
Durr et al. A Quantum Algorithm for Finding the Minimum. arXiv:quant-ph/9607014 (1996). |
Farhi et al. A Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm. arXiv:1411.4028 (2014). |
Fedichkin et al. Novel coherent quantum bit using spatial quantization levels in semiconductor quantum dot. arXiv preprint quant-ph/0006097 (2000). |
Greene et al. Simulated annealing without rejected moves. IEEE Transactions on Computer-Aided Design of Integrated Circuits and Systems 5(1):221-228 (1986). |
Harneit. Spin Quantum Computing with Endohedral Fullerenes. arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.092 98 (2017). |
Hukushima et al. Exchange Monte Carlo Method and Application to Spin Glass Simulations. Journal of the Physical Society of Japan 65:1604 (1996). |
Imamog et al. Quantum information processing using quantum dot spins and cavity QED. arXiv preprint quant-ph/9904096 (1999). |
Johnson et al. Quantum annealing with manufactured spins. Nature 473(7346):194-198 (2011). |
Jordan. Fast Quantum Algorithm for Numerical Gradient Estimation. Physical Review Letters 95:050501 (2015). |
Kane. A silicon-based nuclear spin quantum computer. Nature 393(6681):133 (1998). |
Kielpinski et al. Architecture for a large-scale ion-trap quantum computer. Nature 417(6890):709 (2002). |
Kirkpatrick et al. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220:671-680 (1983). |
Knill et al. Efficient linear optics quantum computation. arXiv preprint quant-ph/0006088 (2000). |
Kokail et al. Self-verifying variational quantum simulation of lattice models. Nature 569(7756):355-360 (2019). |
Konda et al. Actor-Critic Algorithms. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. pp. 1008-1014 (2000). |
Leuenberger et al. Quantum computing in molecular magnets. arXiv preprint cond-mat/0011415 (2001). |
Lyon. Spin-based quantum computing using electrons on liquid helium. arXiv preprint cond-mat/030158 1 (2006). |
Matsuura et al. VanQver: The Variational and Adiabatically Navigated Quantum Eigensolver. New Journal of Physics 22:053023 (2020). |
Mnih et al. Asynchronous Methods for Deep Reinforcement Learning, in International Conference on Machine Learning, pp. 1928-1937 (2016). |
Mnih et al. Playing Atari with Deep Reinforcement Learning. arXiv:1312.5602 (2013). |
Nafradi et al. Room temperature manipulation of long lifetime spins in metallic-like carbon nanospheres. Nat Commun 7:12232 (2016). |
Nizovtsev et al. A quantum computer based on NV centers in diamond: optically detected nutations of single electron and nuclear spins. Optics and spectroscopy 99(2):233-244 (2005). |
Ohlsson et al. Quantum computer hardware based on rare-earth-ion-doped inorganic crystals. Optics Communications 201(1-3):71-77 (2002). |
O'Malley et al. Scalable Quantum Simulation of Molecular Energies. Phys. Rev. X 6:031007 (2016). |
Orus. Tensor networks for complex quantum systems. Nature Reviews Physics 1:538 (2019). |
Peruzzo et al. A variational eigenvalue solver on a quantum processor. arXiv:1304.3061 (2013). |
Preskill. Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond. Quantum 2:79 arXiv:1801.00862 (2018). |
Schmidt et al. General Atomic and Molecular Electronic Structure System. Journal of Computational Chemistry 14:1347-1363 (1993). |
Schollwock. The density-matrix renormalization group. Review of Modern Physics 77:259 arxiv.org:cond-mat/0409292 (2004). |
Schulman et al. Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms. arXiv:1707.06347 (2017). |
Sloss et al. Evolutionary Algorithms Review, arXiv:1906.08870 (2019). |
Sun et al. A single-photon switch and transistor enabled by a solid-state quantum memory. arXiv preprint quant-ph/1805.01964 (2018). |
Wang et al. Population Annealing: Theory and Application in Spin Glasses. Physics Review E 92:961 (2015). |
White. Density Matrix Formulation for Quantum Renormalization Groups. Physical Review Letters 69:286 (1992). |
Wigner et al. Paulische equivalence ban. Magazine for physics 47:631 (1928) (English Abstract). |
Zimmerman et al. Strong Correlation in Incremental Full Configuration Interaction. Journal of Chemical Physics 146:224104 (2017). |
Marx et al. Chapter 1. Setting the stage: why ab initio molecular dynamics? In Ab Initio Molecular Dynamics: Basic Theory and Advanced Methods. Cambridge, UK Cambridge University Press (pp. 1-8) (2009). |
PCT/CA2020/050641 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jul. 21, 2020. |
Alidaee et al. Solving the maximum edge weight clique problem via unconstrained quadratic programming. European Journal of Operational Research 181(2):592-597 (2007). |
Anthony et al. Quadratization of symmetric pseudo-Boolean functions. Discrete Appl. Math. 203:1-12 (2016). |
Assad et al. The quadratic minimum spanning tree problem. Naval Research Logistics 39:399-417 (1992). |
Babbush et al. Resource Efficient Gadgets for Compiling Adiabatic Quantum Optimization Problems. arXiv:1307.8041v1 [quant-ph] (pp. 1-11) (Jul. 2013) Retrieved from the Internet: (https://arxiv.org/pdf/1307.8041.pdf5). |
Babbush. Towards Viable Quantum Computation for Chemistry, 2015, [Retrieved on Feb. 27, 2020], Retrieved from the internet: < url: < a=“” href=“https://pdfs.sennanticscholar.org/aff0/5ecf5f58c2206c923b767d76bed7f43b2a66.pdf” > https://pdfs.sennanticscholar.org/aff0/5ecf5f58c2206c923b767d76bed7f43b2a66.pdf? ga= 2.2412147.276222377.1582743768639821531.1551220934 376 Pages (1376) (2015) < /url: > . |
Barends et al. Digitized adiabatic quantum computing with a superconducting circuit. Nature 534(7606):222-226 (2016). |
Bartak et al. Constraint Satisfaction Techniques for Planning and Scheduling Problems (Coplas-15), Jul. 6, 2015. Retrieved on Nov. 17, 2019 at https://www.cs.bgu.ac.il/-icapsl5/workshops/Proceedings%2000PLAS%202015.pdf (pp. 1-41) (2015). |
Beasley. Integer programming solution methods. Available at URL: http://people.brunel.ac.uk/-mastjjb/jeb/natcor_ip_rest.pdf (20 pgs.) (2011). |
Berry et al. Simulating Hamiltonian dynamics with a truncated Taylor series. Phys Rev Lett 114(9):090502 (2015). |
Bian et al. The Ising model: teaching an old problem new tricks. D-Wave Systems 2 (32 pgs.) (2010). |
Boros et al. On quadratization of pseudo-Boolean functions. arXiv:1404.6538v1 [math.OC] (11 pgs.) (2014). |
Boros et al. Pseudo-boolean optimization. Discrete Applied Mathematics 123(1):155-225 (2002). |
Cai et al. A practical heuristic for finding graph minors.arXiv:1406.2741 [quant-ph] (16 pgs) (2014). |
Choi. Minor-embedding in adiabatic quantum computation: I. The parameter setting problem. Quantum Information Processing 7(5):193-209 (2008). |
Dwave, Reverse Quantum Annealing for Local Refinement of Solutions, D-Wave Whitepaper Series, Nov. 9, 2017. Retrieved online on Aug. 14, 2019 from https://www.dwavesys.com/sites/default/files/14-1018A-A_Reverse_Quantum_Annealing_for_Local_Refinement_Of_Solutions.pdf (2 pgs.). |
Farhi et al. Quantum Adiabatic Evolution Algorithms versus Simulated Annealing.arXiv.org:quant ph/0201031 pp. 1-16 (2002). |
Farhi et al. Quantum computation by adiabatic evolution. arXiv preprint quant-ph/0001106 (24 pgs) (2000). |
Freund. Applied Lagrange Duality for Constrained Optimization. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (pp. 1-35) (2004). |
Geoffrion. Lagrangean relaxation for integer programming. Mathematics Programming Study 2, North-Holland Publishing Company (pp. 1-34) (1974). |
Glover et al. Polynomial unconstrained binary optimisation Part 1, 2011, [Retrieved on Feb. 27, 2020]. Retrieved from the internet: < url: < a=“” href=“http://leedsfaculty.colorado.edu/glover/fred%2Opubs/424%20%20%20Polynonnial” > http://leedsfaculty.colorado.edu/glover/fred%2Opubs/424%20%20%20Polynonnial 25 Pages (231256) (2011) </url: > . |
Grover. A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (pp. 212-219) (1996). |
Ishikawa. Transformation of General Binary MRF Minimization to the First-Order Case. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. 33(6):1234-1249 (2011). |
Karimi et al. A subgradient approach for constrained binary programming via quantum adiabatic evolution. arXiv preprint arXiv:1605.09462 (16 pgs.) (2016). |
Karimi et al. Boosting quantum annealer performance via quantum persistence. Online publication eprint arXiv:1606.07797 (Jun. 27, 2027 and updated Aug. 30, 2016). Accessed May 17, 2017 and available from https://www.arxiv.org/pdf/1606.07797.pdf (25 pgs). |
Katzgraber et al. Seeking quantum speedup through spin glasses: the good, the bad, and the ugly. Physical Review 5(3):031026 (2015). |
Kellerer et al. Knapsack Problems. Springer (15 pgs.) (2004). |
Levit et al. Free energy-based reinforcement learning using a quantum processor. Available at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1706.00074.pdf (May 2017) (8 pgs.). |
Leyffer. Deterministic Methods for Mixed Integer Nonlinear Programming. University of Dundee (pp. 1-60 and pp. 1-58) (1993). |
Li et al. Nonlinear Integer Programming. New York, NY (pp. 1-452) (2006). |
Martinis et al. Rabi oscillations in a large Josephson-junction qubit. Physical Review Letters 89:117901 (2002). |
McClean et al. The Theory Of Variational Hybrid Quantum-Classical Algorithms, Institute of Physics. New Journal of Physics 18:023023. Retrieved online on Aug. 14, 2019 from https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/18/2/023023/ampdf (21 pgs) (2016). |
McGeoch et al. Experimental Evaluation of an Adiabatic Quantum System for Combinatorial Optimization. Computing Frontiers. Proceeding CF '13 Proceedings of the ACM International Conference on Computing Frontiers. Article No. 23. Available athttp://www.cs.amherst.edu/ccm/cf14-mcgeoch.pdf (11 pgs) (May 14-16, 2013). |
McKiernan et al. Automated quantum programming via reinforcement learning for combinatorial optimization. Quantum Physics. arXiv.org quant-ph arXiv:1908.08054 (2019). |
Metz. IBM Is Now Letting Anyone Play With Its Quantum Computer. WIRED. (5 pgs.) (May 2016). |
Montanaro. Quantum walk speedup of backtracking algorithms. arXiv:1509.02374v2 [quant-ph] (23 pgs) (2015). |
O'Gorman et al. Compiling planning into quantum optimization problems: a comparative study. Proc. of the Workshop on Constraint Satisfaction Techniques for Planning and Scheduling Problems (COPLAS-15) (pp. 11-20) (Jun. 2015) Retrieved from the Internet: < https://www.es.bgu.acilt--icaps15/workshops/Proceedings%2000PLAS%202015.pdf > . |
PCT/CA2017/050320 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jun. 27, 2017. |
PCT/CA2017/050637 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 25, 2017. |
PCT/CA2017/050709 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Sep. 19, 2017. |
PCT/CA2017/051610 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 21, 2018. |
PCT/CA2018/051531 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Feb. 20, 2019. |
PCT/CA2018/051534 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Feb. 21, 2019. |
PCT/CA2019/050852 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Aug. 15, 2019. |
PCT/CA2019/051752 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Mar. 17, 2020. |
PCT/IB2017/051038 International Search Report dated May 16, 2017. |
PCT/IB2017/051224 International Search Report dated May 18, 2017. |
Ronagh et al. Solving constrained quadratic binary problems via quantum adiabatic evolution. arXiv preprint arXiv:1509.05001 (20 pgs.) (2015). |
Rosenberg et al. Building an iterative heuristic solver for a quantum annealer. Computational Optimization and Applications 65:845 (2016). |
Sepehry et al. Smooth Structured Prediction Using Quantum and Classical Gibbs Samplers. Available at https://1qbit.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/1QBit-Research-Paper-Smooth_Structured-Prediction-Using-Quantum-And_classical-Giobbs-Samplers.pdf (Accessed Feb. 20, 2018) (32 pgs). |
Shapiro et al. A survey of Lagrangean techniques for discrete optimization. Operations Research Center, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts (pp. 1-18 and pp. 1-29) (May 1977). |
Suzuki. Fractal decomposition of exponential operators with applications to many-body theories and Monte Carlo simulations. Physics Letters A 146(6):319-323 (1990). |
Svore et al. Toward a Software Architecture for Quantum Computing Design Tools. QPL 2004, pp. 127-144, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/research/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/10Svore-Cros s-Aho-Chuang-Markov.pdf. |
SymPy Python. Internals of the Polynomial Manupulation Module. Available online at http://docs.sympy.org/latest/modules/polys/internals.html (Accessed Jun. 2016) (136 pgs). |
Tavares et al. New algorithms for Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO) with applications in engineering and social sciences. Rutgers University Community Repository. Dissertation—Retrieved from the Internet < URL: https://rucorelibrariessutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/25771/ > on Feb. 2, 2018 (460 pgs) ( May 2008). |
The D-Wave 2X™ Quantum Compute Technology Overview (12 pgs) (2015). |
The D-Wave 2X Quantum Computer Technology Overview. D-Wave Systems Inc. 2015. http://www.dwavesys.com. |
The D-Wave Quantum Computer. Brochure. D-Wave Systems Inc. 2016. http://www.dwavesys.com. |
Tran et al. A hybrid quantum-classical approach to solving scheduling problems. AAAI Publications, Ninth Annual Symposium on Combinatorial Search. pp. 98-106 (SoCS 2016). |
Trotter. On the product of semi-groups of operators. Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 10(4):545-551 (1959). |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/014,576 Office Action dated Dec. 26, 2017. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/014,576 Office Action dated Jul. 10, 2017. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/051,271 Office Action dated Mar. 13, 2018. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/051,271 Office Action dated Nov. 24, 2017. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/165,655 1st Action Interview dated Feb. 24, 2017. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/165,655 1st Action Interview dated Oct. 25, 2016. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/165,655 Office Action dated Jun. 2, 2017. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/486,960 Office Action dated Jun. 22, 2017. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/830,953 Office Action dated Feb. 14, 2018. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/831,967 Office Action dated Feb. 27, 2018. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/900,643 Miscellaneous Communication re: Third Party Submission dated Dec. 14, 2018. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/010,244 Miscellaneous Communication re: Third Party Submission dated Apr. 23, 2019. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/010,244 Office Action dated Dec. 2, 2019. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/010,244 Office Action dated Jun. 10, 2019. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/124,083 Miscellaneous Communication re: Third Party Submission dated Jul. 11, 2019. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/124,083 Office Action dated Jul. 18, 2019. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/124,083 Office Action dated Nov. 21, 2019. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/162,249 Miscellaneous Communication re: Third Party Submission dated May 2, 2019. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/162,249 Office Action dated Dec. 2, 2019. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/162,249 Office Action dated Jun. 12, 2019. |
Van Dam et al. How powerful is adiabatic quantum computation Proceedings 42nd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (pp. 279-287) (Oct. 2001). |
Vinci et al. Quantum annealing correction with minor embedding. Physical Review A 92.4 (34 pgs) (Jul. 2015). |
Akama et al. Implementation of divide-and-conquer method including Hartree-Fock exchange interaction. J Comput Chem 28(12):2003-2012 (2007). |
Co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 16/811,479, filed Mar. 6, 2020. |
Fedorov et al. Exploring chemistry with the fragment molecular orbital method. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 14:7562-7577 (2012). |
Kitaura et al. Fragment molecular orbital method: an approximate computational method for large molecules. Chemical Physics Letters 313(3-4):701-706 (1999). |
Knizia et al. Density Matrix Embedding: A Simple Alternative to Dynamical Mean-Field Theory. Phys Rev Lett 109:186404 (2012). |
Kobayashi et al. Chapter 5: Divide-and-conquer approaches to quantum chemistry: Theory and implementation, in Linear-Scaling Techniques in Computational Chemistry and Physics: Methods and Applications, edited by Zalesny et al. (Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 2011) pp. 97-127. |
Wouters et al. A Practical Guide to Density Matrix Embedding Theory in Quantum Chemistry. J Chem Theory Comput. 12(6):2706-19 (2016). |
Yang. Direct calculation of electron density in density-functional theory: Implementation for benzene and a tetrapeptide, Physical Review A 44:(11):7823-7826 (1991). |
Amin et al.: Quantum Boltzmann Machine. Phys. Rev. X8, 021050 [arXiv:1601.02036 1-11] (2018). |
European Patent Application No. 18884196.9 Extended European Search Report dated Jul. 16, 2021. |
Gwennap: Groq Rocks Neural Networks. The Linley Group Microprocessor Report www.groq.com/groq-tsp-leads-in-inference-performance/ [1-5] (2020). |
Izmaylov et al.: Revising the measurement process in the variational quantum eigensolver: is it possible to reduce the number of separately measured operators? Chem Sci. 10(13):3746-3755 (2019). |
Kaminsky et al.: Scalable architecture for adiabatic quantum computing of NP-hard problems. Quantum Computing & Quantum Bits in Mesoscopic Systems, pp. 229-236 DOI:10.1007/978-1-4419-9092-1_25 [arXiv:quant-ph/0211152 1-10] (2004). |
Kempe et al.: The Complexity of the Local Hamiltonian Problem. SIAM Journal of Computing. 35(5):1070-1097 Rev.2008 DOI: arXiv:quant-ph/0406180v2 [1-30] (2005). |
Lemieux et al.: Efficient Quantum Walk Circuits for Metropolis-Hastings Algorithm. Quantum 4:287 [1-15] (2020). |
Lemieux et al.: Resource estimate for quantum many-body ground-state preparation on a quantum computer. Physical Review A 103(5)052408 DOI:10.1103/PhysRevA.103.052408 [1-9] (2021). |
Moll et al.: Quantum optimization using variational algorithms on near-term quantum devices. Quantum Sci. Technol. 3 030503 [1-17] (2018). |
Nishikawa et al. Quantum Chemistry Grid/Gaussian Portal, Journal of the twenty second Annual Research Society, Japan Simulation Society, Jun. 18, 2003, pp. 369 to 372 (English Abstract). |
Papamakarios: Comparison of Modern Stochastic Optimization Algorithms. Scholar article. [1-13] (2014) www.richtarik.org/papers/Papamakarios.pdf. |
PCT/CA2021/050513 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jul. 14, 2021. |
Temme et al.: Quantum metropolis sampling. Nature 471(7336):87-90 (2011). |
Vartiainen: Unitary Transformations for Quantum Computing. Doctoral Dissertation. Helsinki University of Technology TKK dissertations. DOI: aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/2551 [1-56] (2005). |
Bombin, et al. Topological quantum distillation. Phys Rev Lett. Nov. 3, 2006;97(18):180501. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.180501. Epub Oct. 30, 2006. |
Fowler, A.G. Minimum weight perfect matching in O (1) parallel time. arXiv 1307 (2013). |
Gheorghiu, V. Standard form of qudit stabilizer groups. arXiv preprint arXiv:1101.1519 (2011). |
Gottesman, D. An Introduction to Quantum Error Correction and Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation. arXiv preprint arXiv:0904.2557 (2009). |
Karimi, et al. Practical integer-to-binary mapping for quantum annealers. Quantum Information Processing, vol. 18, No. 4, 94 (2019) DOI: 10.1007/s11128-019-2213-x. |
Nielsen, et al. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Chapter 10: Quantum error-correction. Cambridge University Press, pp. 425-499. (2010). |
Parekh, et al. Benchmarking adiabatic quantum optimization for complex network analysis. arXiv preprint arXiv: 1604.00319 (2016). (Year: 2016). |
PCT/IB2021/059421 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Dec. 20, 2021. |
PCT/IB2021/061527 International Search Report and Wiitlen Opinion dated Apr. 8, 2022. |
PCT/IB2022/053658 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Jun. 27, 2022. |
Pedram, et al. Layout Optimization for Quantum Circuits with Linear Nearest Neighbor Architectures. IEEE Circuits and Systems Magazine 16 (2016): 62-74. |
U.S. Appl. No. 15/900,643 Office Action dated Apr. 14, 2022. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/811,479 Office Action dated Apr. 8, 2022. |
U.S. Appl. No. 17/254,661 Office Action dated Mar. 18, 2022. |
Ushijima-Mwesigwa, et al. Graph Partitioning using Quantum Annealing on the D-Wave System. Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on Post Moores Era Supercomputing. 2017. (Year: 2017). |
Co-pending U.S. Appl. No. 17/820,301, inventors Dadashikelayeh; Majid et al., filed Aug. 17, 2022. |
Jiang, et al. Simulated annealing based influence maximization in social networks. Twenty-fifth AAAI conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI'11). AAAI Press, 127-132. (Year: 2011). |
Knill, et al. Resilient Quantum Computation: Error Models and Thresholds. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 454.1969 (1998): 365-384. |
PCT/IB2022/056124 International Search Report and Written Opinion dated Sep. 16, 2022. |
Sepehry, et al. Smooth Structured Prediction Using Quantum and Classical Gibbs Samplers. Oct. 1, 2018 (Oct. 1, 2018) Retrieved from the Internet: URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1809.04091v2.pdf [retrieved on Sep. 5, 2022]. |
U.S. Appl. No. 16/811,479 Office Action dated Sep. 22, 2022. |
U.S. Appl. No. 17/254,661 Office Action dated Sep. 14, 2022. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20200272683 A1 | Aug 2020 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 15014576 | Feb 2016 | US |
Child | 16809473 | US |