
A Comparative Study On Solving Optimization Problems With Exponentially Fewer Qubits
2 Background
2.1 Preliminaries
Considering a weighted graph G= (V, E), we denote as V={1, . . . , n}the set of vertices, and E={(i, j)|(i, j)∈
V×V}the set of edges, with weights wij ∈Rfor (i, j)∈E. In the weighted MaxCut problem, a cut is defined as a
partition of the original set Vinto two subsets. Given a binary vector x∈R|V|, the cost function to be maximized is
given by ˜
C(x) = Pi,j wij xi(1 −xj). It represents the sum of weights of edges connecting points in the two different
subsets, i.e. crossing the cut. MaxCut is a specific case of a more general class of optimization problems that fall under
the QUBO umbrella. In the context of QUBO, one wants to minimize the following cost function: f(x) = xTQx,
where x∈ {0,1}nis a binary vector and Q∈Rn×nis a square matrix of real values. We can rewrite a QUBO
problem to its Ising variant by setting xi=1
2vi+1
2where vi∈ {−1,1}denotes an Ising spin, and further reduce it to
MaxCut [Barahona et al., 1989].
2.2 MaxCut with exponentially less qubits
0π
2π3π
22π
α1
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
Rf(α1, q, m = 8)
q= 0 q= 1 q= 2
(a) Rf(α1, q, m = 6)
0π
2π3π
22π
α1
10−26
10−17
10−8
101
1010
1019
1028
exp(2m−qsin(2qα1+α0(q, m)))
q= 0 q= 1 q= 2
(b) exp(2m−qsin(2qα1+α0(q, m)))
Figure 1: Rf(α1, q, m = 6) for q∈ {0,1,2}.
We start by considering that the number of cuts in MaxCut can be ex-
pressed as NCU T S =1
4vTL(G)v, where v∈ {−1,1}|V|and L(G)
describes the Laplacian matrix of a graph. As presented in Ranˇ
ci´
c
[2021], it is possible to map a continuous vector α∈Rk, with
0≤αi≤2π∀i∈N+, and 1≤k≤ |V| − 1, into the spins vector
vby utilizing a continuous differentiable function Rf:R→[0,1]
defined as:
Rf(αi, q, m) = exp(−exp(2m−qsin(2qαi+α0(q, m)))),(1)
where α0(q, m) = arcsin(log2(−log2(0.5))
/2m−q)and m, q ∈N+
0
with m≥ |V|and 0≤q≤ |V| − 2. In Figure 1a we see
that for different values of q, the function alters between 0 and 1
with different frequencies when changing α1from 0to 2π. Fol-
lowing Ranˇ
ci´
c [2021], we fix mand construct the vector of spins
vas output of Rfby enumerating all qvalues: v(αi, m) =
(eiπRf(αi,0,m),...eiπRf(αi,di,m)). One can create such vectors v∈
{0,1}difor each αi, where Pk
i=1 di=|V|−1, which leads towards
the diagonal gate U(α), specified as follows:
U(α) = diag(v(α1),...v(αk),1, . . . 1)
=diag(eiπRf(α1,0,m), . . . , eiπRf(αk,dk,m),1, . . . 1),
where the size of U(α)is 2dlog2(|V|)e.U(α)can be realized using
multiplexor gates as outlined in Shende et al. [2004]. Next, assuming that the Laplacian is a d-sparse matrix and can
be effectively embedded on a quantum device Pothen et al. [1990]1, the variational ansatz is given by:
NCU T S =1
4vTL(G)v= 2n−2h0|HU (α)L(G)U(α)H|0i,(2)
where, Hdescribes the Hadamard transform and L(G)is represented as a sum of tensor products of unitary matrices,
and denoted as L(G)in such form.
The Rffunction in Equation 1 serves as a key point for the exponential qubits reduction presented in Ranˇ
ci´
c [2021].
Despite this advantage, the function is highly numerically unstable for larger graphs. To make this clear, let us assume
a graph with |V|= 6, then set m= 6 (since according to Ranˇ
ci´
c [2021], m≥ |V|) and compute Rffor α1=π
2
and q= 0. In Figure 1b one can see, that partially evaluating exp(26−0·sin (20π
2+α0(0,6))) ≈6.2×1027 already
results in a large number. Hence computing this function for large graphs with not enough dimensions for αis not
feasible.
1Note that while this is possible, we used a less efficient method and just decomposed the matrix as a tensor-product of pauli
matrices
2