Papers › A Predictive Approach for Selecting the Best Quantum Solver for an Optimization Problem

A Predictive Approach for Selecting the Best Quantum Solver for an Optimization Problem

7 Aug 2024arXiv:2408.03613links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Deborah Volpe, Nils Quetschlich, Mariagrazia Graziano, Giovanna Turvani, Robert Wille

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

Leveraging quantum computers for optimization problems holds promise across various application domains. Nevertheless, utilizing respective quantum computing solvers requires describing the optimization problem according to the Quadratic Unconstrained Binary Optimization (QUBO) formalism and selecting a proper solver for the application of interest with a reasonable setting. Both demand significant proficiency in quantum computing, QUBO formulation, and quantum solvers, a background that usually cannot be assumed by end users who are domain experts rather than quantum computing specialists. While tools aid in QUBO formulations, support for selecting the best-solving approach remains absent. This becomes even more challenging because selecting the best solver for a problem heavily depends on the problem itself. In this work, we are accepting this challenge and propose a predictive selection approach, which aids end users in this task. To this end, the solver selection task is first formulated as a classification task that is suitable to be solved by supervised machine learning. Based on that, we then propose strategies for adjusting solver parameters based on problem size and characteristics. Experimental evaluations, considering more than 500 different QUBO problems, confirm the benefits of the proposed solution. In fact, we show that in more than 70% of the cases, the best solver is selected, and in about 90% of the problems, a solver in the top two, i.e., the best or its closest suboptimum, is selected. This exploration proves the potential of machine learning in quantum solver selection and lays the foundations for its automation, broadening access to quantum optimization for a wider range of users.

PaperPDFCode

Code

cda-tum/mqt-qao officialmentioned in paper report

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections