Wasserstein Solution Quality and the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm: A Portfolio Optimization Case Study
Abstract
Optimizing of a portfolio of financial assets is a critical industrial problem which can be approximately solved using algorithms suitable for quantum processing units (QPUs). We benchmark the success of this approach using the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA); an algorithm targeting gate-model QPUs. Our focus is on the quality of solutions achieved as determined by the Normalized and Complementary Wasserstein Distance, , which we present in a manner to expose the QAOA as a transporter of probability. Using as an application specific benchmark of performance, we measure it on selection of QPUs as a function of QAOA circuit depth . At (2 qubits) we find peak solution quality at for most systems and for this peak is at on a trapped ion QPU. Increasing solution quality with is also observed using variants of the more general Quantum Alternating Operator Ans\"{a}tz at for and which has not been previously reported. In identical measurements, is observed to be variable at a level exceeding the noise produced from the finite number of shots. This suggests that variability itself should be regarded as a QPU performance benchmark for given applications. While studying the ideal execution of QAOA, we find that solution quality degrades when the portfolio budget approaches and increases when or . This trend directly corresponds to the binomial coefficient and is connected with the recently reported phenomenon of reachability deficits. Derivative-requiring and derivative-free classical optimizers are benchmarked on the basis of the achieved beyond to find that derivative-free optimizers are generally more effective for the given computational resources, problem sizes and circuit depths.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2202.06782,
title = {Wasserstein Solution Quality and the Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm: A Portfolio Optimization Case Study},
author = {Jack S. Baker and Santosh Kumar Radha},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2202.06782},
year = {2022}
}
Comments
21 pages and 11 Figures in main article, 8 pages, 5 Figures and 3 tables in Supplemental Material