Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Comparing gate and annealing-based quantum computing for configuration-based design tasks
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Comparing gate and annealing-based quantum computing for configuration-based design tasks
Do you wish to request the book?
Comparing gate and annealing-based quantum computing for configuration-based design tasks
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Comparing gate and annealing-based quantum computing for configuration-based design tasks
2025
Overview
Complete exploration of design spaces is often computationally prohibitive. Classical search methods offer a solution but are limited by challenges like local optima and an inability to traverse dislocated design spaces. Quantum computing (QC) offers a potential solution by leveraging quantum phenomena to achieve computational speed-ups. However, the practical capability of current QC platforms to deliver these advantages remains unclear. To investigate this, we apply and compare two quantum approaches – the Gate-Based Grover’s algorithm and quantum annealing (QA) – to a generic tile placement problem. We benchmark their performance on real quantum hardware (IBM and D-Wave, respectively) against a classical brute-force search. QA on D-Wave’s hardware successfully produced usable results, significantly outperforming a classical brute-force approach (0.137 s vs 14.8 s) at the largest scale tested. Conversely, Grover’s algorithm on IBM’s gate-based hardware was dominated by noise and failed to yield solutions. While successful, the QA results exhibited a hardware-induced bias, where equally optimal solutions were not returned with the same probability (coefficient of variation: 0.248–0.463). These findings suggest that for near-term engineering applications, QA shows more immediate promise than current gate-based systems. This study’s contribution is a direct comparison of two physically implemented quantum approaches, offering practical insights, reformulation examples and clear recommendations on the utilisation of QC in engineering design.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press
Subject
