arXiv (All)
open access
Comparing classical and quantum QUBO solvers: optimality, trajectory diagnostics, and limits of solver selection
Comparing solvers for quadratic unconstrained binary optimization (QUBO) requires distinguishing solution quality from optimality certification. We compare classical, tensor-network, and fixed-schedule quantum approaches on 180 benchmark instances from ten families with 14-48 variables, supplemented
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Sampled-Based Guided Quantum Walk: Non-variational quantum algorithm for combinatorial optimization#1156210
- Quantum-Classical Hybrid Methods for Optimization: Lessons from Classical Decomposition#1402750
- Training Variational Quantum Algorithms Is NP-Hard, Even Locally#1201141
- Learning to Rank Tensor Network Contraction Plans for GPU-Accelerated Quantum Circuit Simulation#432496
- Managing Iterative Hybrid Quantum-Classical Optimization as a First-Class Scientific Workflow#1104731
Record · ID 1458596
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive