Can math beat gamers in Quantum Moves?

TL;DR

This paper critically examines the claim that gamers can outperform numerical methods in quantum control tasks, demonstrating that simple stochastic optimization and counter-diabatic driving can achieve superior results more efficiently.

Contribution

The authors show that simple stochastic local optimization outperforms complex game-based strategies and that counter-diabatic protocols surpass player strategies in quantum control.

Findings

Simple stochastic optimization finds high-quality solutions quickly.

Counter-diabatic driving outperforms all players.

Quantum speed limit is primarily classical in nature.

Abstract

In a recent work on quantum state preparation, S{\o}rensen and colleagues explore the possibility of using video games to help design quantum control protocols. The authors present a game called "Quantum Moves" in which gamers have to move an atom from A to B by means of optical tweezers. They report that, players succeed where purely numerical optimization fails [1]. Moreover, by harnessing the player strategies they can outperform the most prominent established numerical methods [1]. The aim of this manuscript is to analyze the problem in detail and show that those claims are untenable. In fact a simple stochastic local optimization method can easily find very good solutions to this problem in a few 1000 trials rather than the astronomical $7.4\times 10^{8}$ trials of the most successful optimization method reported in [1]. Next, counter-diabatic driving is used to generate protocols without resorting to numeric optimization; the protocols are shown to outperform virtually all players. The analysis moreover results in an accurate analytic estimate of the quantum speed limit which, apart from zero-point motion, is shown to be entirely classical in nature. The latter might explain why gamers are remarkably good at the game.