IP Library Granted Patent US 12,530,613
Granted Patent B2
US 12,530,613 · App. 18/514,482 · Granted Jan 20, 2026

Systems and methods for performing quantum evolution in quantum computation

Inventors: Sheir Yarkoni (Vancouver, CA); Trevor Michael Lanting (Vancouver, CA); Kelly T. R. Boothby (Vancouver, CA); Andrew Douglas King (Vancouver, CA); Evgeny A. Andriyash (Vancouver, CA); Mohammad H. Amin (Coquitlam, CA)
Assignee: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
G06N10/60B82Y10/00G06N3/044G06N3/047G06N7/08
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 12,530,613
App. No.
18/514,482
Granted
Jan 20, 2026
Kind
B2
Abstract

A computational method via a hybrid processor comprising an analog processor and a digital processor includes determining a first classical spin configuration via the digital processor, determining preparatory biases toward the first classical spin configuration, programming an Ising problem and the preparatory biases in the analog processor via the digital processor, evolving the analog processor in a first direction, latching the state of the analog processor for a first dwell time, programming the analog processor to remove the preparatory biases via the digital processor, determining a tunneling energy via the digital processor, determining a second dwell time via the digital processor, evolving the analog processor in a second direction until the analog processor reaches the tunneling energy, and evolving the analog processor in the first direction until the analog processor reaches a second classical spin configuration.

Claims (42)

1 . A method to operate a hybrid computer comprising at least one digital processor communicatively coupled to a quantum processor, the method performed by the at least one digital processor and comprising:

receiving, by the at least one digital processor, a sample solution to a computational problem represented by a problem Hamiltonian embedded onto the quantum processor by an embedded Hamiltonian, wherein the sample solution to the computational problem comprises one or more broken chains;

defining, by the at least one digital processor, a post-processing Hamiltonian representing the computational problem, the post-processing Hamiltonian having chain component variables, each one of the chain component variables corresponding to a respective set of connected qubits in one of the one or more broken chains that have a same spin direction, wherein a qubit bias of each of the chain component variables in the post-processing Hamiltonian is at least partially based on qubit biases of the embedded Hamiltonian of a respective set of connected qubits;

embedding, by the at least one digital processor, the post-processing Hamiltonian onto the quantum processor; and,

causing, by the at least one digital processor, the quantum processor to evolve based on the post-processing Hamiltonian to a state representative of the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian in which the one or more broken chains are repaired.

2 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the sample solution to the computational problem includes one or more intact chains, and the defining, by the at least one digital processor, a post-processing Hamiltonian further comprises: determining the qubit bias of each of the chain component variables through collection of qubit biases of the embedded Hamiltonian along a respective set of connected qubits in one of the one or more broken chains and determination of a spin bias contributed by one of the one or more intact chains.

3 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the sample solution to the computational problem includes one or more intact chains that each comprise a set of chained qubits, and the defining, by the at least one digital processor, a post-processing Hamiltonian further comprises: determining the qubit bias of each of the chain component variables based at least partially on interaction strengths between each qubit of the respective set of connected qubits and each qubit of at least one of the sets of chained qubits.

4 . The method of claim 3 , wherein the defining the post-processing Hamiltonian such that the qubit bias of each of the chain component variables is at least partially based on interactions between each qubit of the respective set of connected qubits and each qubit of one or more of the sets of chained qubits further comprises: defining the post-processing Hamiltonian such that a spin bias of the qubit bias of each of the chain component variables is based on a spin value shared by all qubits of the set of chained qubits.

5 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the defining, by the at least one digital processor, a post-processing Hamiltonian further comprises: determining interaction strengths between chain component variables belonging to different ones of the one or more broken chains.

6 . The method of claim 5 , wherein the determining interaction strengths between chain component variables belonging to different ones of the one or more broken chains further comprises: determining a sum of interaction strengths of the embedded Hamiltonian between each qubit of a set of connected qubits of a first broken chain and each qubit of a set of connected qubits of a second broken chain of the one or more broken chains.

7 . The method of claim 1 , wherein the causing, by the at least one digital processor, the quantum processor to evolve based on the post-processing Hamiltonian to a state representative of the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian in which the one or more broken chains are repaired comprises: causing the quantum processor to perform quantum annealing based on the post-processing Hamiltonian.

8 . The method of claim 1 , further comprising: reading out, by the at least one digital processor, the state of the quantum processor representative of the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian in which the one or more broken chains are repaired.

9 . The method of claim 1 , wherein prior to the receiving, by the at least one digital processor, a sample solution to a computational problem represented by a problem Hamiltonian embedded onto the quantum processor, the method comprises:

embedding, by the at least one digital processor, a representation of the computational problem onto the quantum processor according to the embedded Hamiltonian; and,

causing, by the at least one digital processor, the quantum processor to evolve to reach the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian,

and wherein the receiving, by the at least one digital processor, a sample solution to a computational problem represented by a problem Hamiltonian embedded onto the quantum processor comprises:

reading out, by the at least one digital processor, the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian, and

determining, by the at least one digital processor, that the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian comprises the one or more broken chains.

10 . A hybrid computing system comprising:

at least one digital processor;

a quantum processor comprising a plurality of qubits, the quantum processor communicatively coupled to the at least one digital processor; and,

at least one non-transitory processor-readable medium communicatively coupleable to the at least one digital processor, the non-transitory processor-readable medium which stores at least one of processor-executable instructions or data which, when executed by the at least one digital processor, cause the at least one digital processor to:

receive, by the at least one digital processor, a sample solution to a computational problem represented by a problem Hamiltonian embedded onto the quantum processor by an embedded Hamiltonian, wherein the sample solution to the computational problem comprises one or more broken chains,

define, by the at least one digital processor, a post-processing Hamiltonian representing the computational problem, the post-processing Hamiltonian having chain component variables, each one of the chain component variables corresponding to a respective set of connected qubits of the plurality of qubits that belong to one of the one or more broken chains, and each qubit in a same set of connected qubits having a same spin direction, wherein a qubit bias of each of the chain component variables in the post-processing Hamiltonian is at least partially based on qubit biases of the embedded Hamiltonian of a respective set of connected qubits,

embed, by the at least one digital processor, the post-processing Hamiltonian onto the quantum processor, and

cause, by the at least one digital processor, the quantum processor to evolve based on the post-processing Hamiltonian to a state representative of the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian in which the one or more broken chains are repaired.

11 . The hybrid computing system of claim 10 , wherein the quantum processor is a quantum annealer.

12 . The hybrid computing system of claim 10 , wherein the plurality of qubits comprise a plurality of superconducting qubits.

13 . The hybrid computing system of claim 10 , wherein the sample solution to the computational problem includes one or more intact chains, and the qubit bias of each of the chain component variables is based on:

a sum of qubit biases of the embedded Hamiltonian along a respective set of connected qubits in one of the one or more broken chains; and,

a spin bias contributed by one of the one or more intact chains.

14 . The hybrid computing system of claim 10 , the sample solution to the computational problem includes one or more intact chains that each comprise a set of chained qubits of the plurality of qubits, and the qubit bias of each of the chain component variables is based at least partially on interaction strengths between each qubit of the respective set of connected qubits and each qubit of at least one of the sets of chained qubits.

15 . The hybrid computing system of claim 14 , wherein a spin bias of the qubit bias of each of the chain component variables is based on a spin value shared by all qubits of the set of chained qubits.

16 . The hybrid computing system of claim 10 , wherein the post-processing Hamiltonian comprises interaction strengths between chain component variables belonging to different ones of the one or more broken chains.

17 . The hybrid computing system of claim 15 , wherein each interaction strength between chain component variables belonging to different ones of the one or more broken chains is based on a sum of interaction strengths of the embedded Hamiltonian between each qubit of a set of connected qubits of a first broken chain and each qubit of a set of connected qubits of a second broken chain of the one or more broken chains.

18 . The hybrid computing system of claim 10 , wherein the at least one digital processor reads out the state of the quantum processor representative of the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian in which the one or more broken chains are repaired.

19 . The hybrid computing system of claim 10 , wherein before the at least one digital processor receives the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian embedded onto the quantum processor, the at least one digital processor:

embeds a representation of the computational problem onto the quantum processor according to the embedded Hamiltonian; and,

causes the quantum processor to evolve based on the embedded Hamiltonian to reach the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian,

and wherein causing the at least one digital processor to receive, by the at least one digital processor, a sample solution to a computational problem represented by a problem Hamiltonian embedded onto the quantum processor includes causing the at least one digital processor to:

read out the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian, and

determine that the sample solution to the computational problem represented by the problem Hamiltonian comprises the one or more broken chains.

Assignments (4)
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Dec 18, 2025
From: YARKONI, SHEIR; LANTING, TREVOR MICHAEL; BOOTHBY, KELLY T. R.; KING, ANDREW DOUGLAS; ANDRIYASH, EVGENY A.; AMIN, MOHAMMAD H.
To: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
Reel/Frame 073259/0672 →
CHANGE OF NAME Recorded Dec 18, 2025
From: DWSI HOLDINGS INC.
To: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
Reel/Frame 073259/0897 →
CONTINUATION Recorded Dec 18, 2025
From: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
To: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
Reel/Frame 074008/0553 →
MERGER Recorded Dec 18, 2025
From: D-WAVE SYSTEMS INC.; DWSI HOLDINGS INC.
To: DWSI HOLDINGS INC.
Reel/Frame 074011/0081 →
Continuity (6)
Continuation 16858108 · Apr 24, 2020
Continuation 16308314
Provisional Application 62417940 · Nov 4, 2016
Provisional Application 62364169 · Jul 19, 2016
Provisional Application 62347421 · Jun 8, 2016
Related Publication 20240256930A1 · Aug 1, 2024
References Cited (157)
US 7135701B2 · Amin et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 7253654B2 · Amin · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7307275B2 · Lidar et al. · 2007 [cited by applicant]
US 7418283B2 · Amin · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 7533068B2 · Maassen et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7624088B2 · Johnson et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 7876248B2 · Berkley et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8008942B2 · Van et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 8169231B2 · Berkley · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8175995B2 · Amin · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8190548B2 · Choi · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8195596B2 · Rose et al. · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8244650B2 · Rose · 2012 [cited by applicant]
US 8421053B2 · Bunyk et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8494993B2 · Harris et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8504497B2 · Amin · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8560282B2 · Love et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 8854074B2 · Berkley · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 9015215B2 · Berkley et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9129224B2 · Lanting et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 9471880B2 · Williams · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9495644B2 · Chudak et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 9727824B2 · Rose et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 9881256B2 · Hamze et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10002107B2 · Lanting · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 10339466B1 · Ding et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 10552755B2 · Lanting et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 11100418B2 · Bunyk et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 11263547B2 · Reinhardt et al. · 2022 [cited by applicant]
US 20020184166A1 · Jackson et al. · 2002 [cited by applicant]
US 20040000666A1 · Lidar et al. · 2004 [cited by applicant]
US 20060225165A1 · Maassen et al. · 2006 [cited by applicant]
US 20080109500A1 · Macready et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080176750A1 · Rose et al. · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20080260257A1 · Rose · 2008 [cited by applicant]
US 20090121215A1 · Choi · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090167342A1 · Van et al. · 2009 [cited by applicant]
US 20090299947A1 · Amin · 2009 [cited by examiner]
US 20100022820A1 · Leuthardt et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100185572A1 · Bonabeau et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20100228694A1 · Le et al. · 2010 [cited by applicant]
US 20110031994A1 · Berkley · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110060710A1 · Amin · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20110060780A1 · Berkley et al. · 2011 [cited by applicant]
US 20130218974A1 · Cao et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130275351A1 · Cantin · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20130282636A1 · Macready et al. · 2013 [cited by applicant]
US 20140025606A1 · Macready · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140187427A1 · Macready et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140223224A1 · Berkley · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140250288A1 · Roy · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140324933A1 · Macready et al. · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20140344322A1 · Ranjbar · 2014 [cited by applicant]
US 20150006443A1 · Rose et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150032993A1 · Amin et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150161524A1 · Hamze · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150193692A1 · Israel · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150205759A1 · Israel et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150262073A1 · Lanting · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150269124A1 · Hamze et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150310350A1 · Niskanen et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20150363708A1 · Amin et al. · 2015 [cited by applicant]
US 20160042294A1 · Macready et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160071021A1 · Raymond · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160085616A1 · Berkley · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160132785A1 · Amin et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160217594A1 · Petschke et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160321559A1 · Rose et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160328253A1 · Majumdar · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160335558A1 · Bunyk et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160335560A1 · Mohseni et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20160343932A1 · Mohseni et al. · 2016 [cited by applicant]
US 20170161612A1 · Hastings et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170177534A1 · Mohseni et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170255629A1 · Thom et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20170264373A1 · Krovi et al. · 2017 [cited by applicant]
US 20180196780A1 · Amin et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180218279A1 · Lechner et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180246848A1 · Douglass et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20180276556A1 · Garrison et al. · 2018 [cited by applicant]
US 20190019099A1 · Hoskinson et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190080255A1 · Allen et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190258952A1 · Denchev · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20190266510A1 · Yarkoni et al. · 2019 [cited by applicant]
US 20200226197A1 · Woerner et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200234172A1 · King et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200257987A1 · Mcgeoch et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200311589A1 · Ollitrault et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20200342548A1 · Mazed et al. · 2020 [cited by applicant]
US 20210279631A1 · Pichler et al. · 2021 [cited by applicant]
US 20220101170A1 · Denchev · 2022 [cited by applicant]
CN 103249368B · 2016 [cited by applicant]
CN 112771549A · 2021 [cited by applicant]
WO 2005093649A1 · 2005 [cited by applicant]
WO 2007085074A1 · 2007 [cited by applicant]
WO 2015103375A1 · 2015 [cited by applicant]
WO 2016029172A1 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
WO 2016183213A1 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
WO 2016210018A1 · 2016 [cited by applicant]
WO 2017075246A1 · 2017 [cited by applicant]
King et al., “Algorithm Engineering for a Quantum Annealing Platform,” arXiv (2014) (Year: 2014). [cited by examiner]
Zick et al., “Experimental quantum annealing: case study involving the graph isomorphism problem,” arXiv (Mar. 2015) (Year: 2015). [cited by examiner]
King et al., “Benchmarking a Quantum Annealing Processor with the Time-to-Target Metric,” arXiv (2015) (Year: 2015). [cited by examiner]
Kristen L. Pudenz, “Parameter Setting for Quantum Annealers,” IEEE (Sep. 2016) (Year: 2016). [cited by examiner]
Altshuler, et al., “Anderson localization casts clouds over adiabatic quantum optimization”, arXiv:0912.0746v1 [quant-ph] Dec. 3, 2009, 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
Amin et al., “Quatum Boltzmann Machine”. arXiv:1601.02036v1, Jan. 8, 2016. [cited by applicant]
Amin, M., “Searching for Quantum Speedup in Quasistatic Quantum Annealers,” arXiv:1503.04216v2 [quant-ph] Nov. 19, 2015, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Berkley, A.J. et al., “Tunneling Spectroscopy Using a Probe Qubit,” arXiv:1210.6310v2 [cond-mat.supr-con], Jan. 3, 2013, 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Blume-Kohout et al., “Streaming Universal Distortion-Free Entanglement Concentration”; IEEE Transactions on Information Theory Year: 2014; vol. 60, Issue 1; Journal Article' Publisher: IEEE; 17 pages. [cited by applicant]
Bocko et al., “Prospects for Quantum Coherent Computation Using Superconducting Electronics,” IEEE Transactions on Applied Superconductivity 7(2):3638-3641, Jun. 1997. [cited by applicant]
Brown, et al., “A fault-tolerant non-Clifford gate for the surface code in two dimensions”, Science Advances, May 22, 2020, vol. 6, Issue 21, 25 pages. [cited by applicant]
Byrd. “A Limited-Memory Algorithm For Bound-Contrained Optimization”. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, Jun. 17, 2005. [cited by applicant]
Calderbank, et al., “Good quantum error-correcting codes exist”, Phys. Rev. A54, 1098—Published Aug. 1, 2996, 4 pages. [cited by applicant]
Chancellor, “Modernizing Quantum Annealing Using Local Searches”, arXiv:1606.06833v1 [quant-ph] Jun. 22, 2016, 22 pages. [cited by applicant]
Childs, “Quantum Information Processing in Continuous Time”, MIT (2004) Thesis (Year:2004), 140 pages. [cited by applicant]
Chiorescu, et al. “Coherent Quantum Dynamics of a Superconducting Flux Qubit”, arXiv:cond-mat/0305461v1, May 20, 2003. [cited by applicant]
Clarke et al., “Superconducting quantum bits,” Nature 453:1031-1042, Jun. 19, 2008. [cited by applicant]
Clausen, J., “Branch and Bound Alogrithms”, Mar. 12, 1999, 30 pages. [cited by applicant]
Devoret et al., “Superconducting Circuits for Quantum Information: An Outlook,” Science 339:1169-1174, Mar. 8, 2013. [cited by applicant]
Devoret et al., “Superconducting Qubits: A Short Review,” arXiv:cond-mat/0411174v1, Nov. 7, 2004, 41 pages. [cited by applicant]
Dickson et al., “Thermally Assisted Quantum Annealing of a 16-Qubit Problem,” Nature Communications, 2013, 6 pages. [cited by applicant]
Harris et al., “Experimental Demonstration of a Robust and Scalable Flux Qubit,” arXiv:0909.4321v1, Sep. 24, 2009, 20 pages. [cited by applicant]
Harris et al., “Experimental Investigation of an Eight-Qubit Unit Cell in a Superconducting Optimization Processor,” arXiv:1004.1628v2, Jun. 28, 2010, 16 pages. [cited by applicant]
Hen et al., “Solving the Graph Isomorphism Problem with a Quantum Annealer,” arXiv:1207.1712v2, Aug. 8, 2012, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
International Search Report for PCT Application No. PCT/US2017/036387 dated Oct. 20, 2017, 3 pages. [cited by applicant]
Johnson et al., “Scalable Control System for a Superconducting Adiabatic Quantum Optimization Processor,” arXiv:0907.3757v1. Jul. 22, 2009. [online] Available. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https:/… [cited by applicant]
Johnson et al., “Quantum annealing with manufactured spins,” Nature 473:194-198, May 12, 2011. [cited by applicant]
Kerman et al., “Quantum Enhanced Optimization: Experimental Study Overview”, IARPA, Oct. 26, 2015. [cited by applicant]
Knill, Fault-Tolerant Postselected Quantum Computation: Schemes, arXiv:quant-ph/0402171v1, Feb. 23, 2004, 17 pages. [cited by applicant]
Krzakala et al., On the path integral representation for quantum spin models and its application to the quantum cavity method and to Monte Carlo simulations, arXiv:0807.2553v2[cond-mat.stat-mech], Oct. 21, 2008. [cited by applicant]
Lanting et al., “Entanglement in a Quantum Annealing Processor,” Physical Review X 4:021041, 2014. (14 pages). [cited by applicant]
Mohseni, et al., “Environment-Assisted Quantum Walks in Photosynthetic Energy Transfer”, arXiv: 0805.2741v2 [quant-ph] Oct. 14, 2008, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
Nagayama, et al., “Sureface code error correction on a defective lattice”, IOP Publishing, New J. Phys. 19 (2017) 29 pages. [cited by applicant]
Neal, Radford M., “Annealed Importance Sampling”, arXiv:physics/9803008v2 [physics.comp-ph], Sep. 4, 1998, 25 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/785,125, mailed Aug. 8, 2022, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Non Final Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/858,108, mailed Sep. 21, 2022, 24 pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/858,108, mailed Aug. 22, 2023, 12 pages. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 17/584,600, mailed Jan. 19, 2023, 10 pages. [cited by applicant]
Zagoskin et al., “Superconducting Qubits,” arXiv:0805.0164v1, May 1, 2008. [cited by applicant]
Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 18/137,271, mailed Dec. 8, 2023, 8 pages. [cited by applicant]
Oliver, “Quantum Enhanced Optimization: Experimental Study Overview”, IARPA, Oct. 26, 2015. [cited by applicant]
Propson, T., “Robust Quantum Optimal Control”, arXiv:2103.15716v1, Mar. 29, 2021. 14 pages. [cited by applicant]
Pudenz, et al., “Error corrected quantum annealing with hundreds of qubits”, arXiv:1307.8190v1 [quant-ph] Jul. 31, 2013, 18 pages. [cited by applicant]
Santra, et al., “Exponential capacity of associative memories under quantum annealing recall,” arXiv:1602.0819 [quant-ph] Feb. 25, 2016, 9 pages. [cited by applicant]
Somma, et al., “Quantum Speedup by Quantum Annealing”, Physical Review Letters (2012) (year:2012), 5 pages. [cited by applicant]
Temme, et al., “Error mitigation for short-depth quantum circuits”, arXiv:1612.02058v3 [quant-ph], Nov. 6, 2017. [cited by applicant]
Wikipedia “Ancila bit” page from date Dec. 17, 2017, retrieved using the Way Back Machine, from https:web.archive.org/web/20171217060019/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancilla_bit (Year:2017). [cited by applicant]
Wikipedia “Quantum error Correction bit” page from date Dec. 17, 2017, retrieved using the Way Back Machine, from Https://web.archive.org/web/20171217055958/https://en./wikipedia.org/wiki/quantum_erro_correction(year:20… [cited by applicant]
Written Opinion for PCT Application No. PCT/US2017/036387 dated Oct. 20, 2017, 11 pages. [cited by applicant]
King, et al., “Performance of a Quantum Annealer on Range-limited Constraint Satisfaction Problems”, arXiv:1502.02098v2 [quant-ph], Sep. 3, 2015. [cited by applicant]
Young et al., “Adiabatic quantum optimization with the wrong Hamiltonian”, arXiv, Oct. 2, 2013. [cited by applicant]
Johnson et al., “Supplementary Information: Quantum annealing with manufactured spins,” Nature 473:s1-s20, May 12, 2011. [cited by applicant]
Johnson, et al; “A scalable control system for a superconducting adiabatic quantum optimization processor”, Superconductor Science and Technology; IOP Publishing; Supercond. Sci. Technol. 23 (2010); vol. 23, No. 6, Jun.… [cited by applicant]
Morita, et al., “Mathematical Foundation of Quantum Annealing”, arXiv:0806.1859v1 [quant-ph] Jun. 11, 2008, 51 pages. [cited by applicant]
Venturelli et al., “Quantum Optimization of Fully-Connected Spin Glasses”, arXiv, Jun. 29, 2014. [cited by applicant]
Zagoskin-Superconducting Qubits, La Physique au Canada 63(4):215-227, 2007. [cited by applicant]
Boixo, et al., “Computational Role of Multiqubit Tunneling in a Quantum Annealer”, arXiv:1502.05754v1 [quant-ph], Feb. 20, 2015, pp. 1-7. [cited by applicant]