Robustness of Quantum Algorithms for Nonconvex Optimization
Weiyuan Gong, Chenyi Zhang, Tongyang Li

TL;DR
This paper investigates the robustness of quantum algorithms for nonconvex optimization, demonstrating their ability to find approximate stationary points under noisy conditions with polynomial speedups over classical methods.
Contribution
It provides the first systematic analysis of quantum algorithms' robustness to noise in nonconvex optimization, introducing new algorithms and bounds for noisy quantum oracle settings.
Findings
Quantum algorithms can find approximate stationary points with noise tolerance up to certain bounds.
Quantum algorithms achieve polynomial speedup over classical counterparts in noisy nonconvex optimization.
The paper characterizes domains where quantum algorithms are efficient or infeasible based on query complexity.
Abstract
Recent results suggest that quantum computers possess the potential to speed up nonconvex optimization problems. However, a crucial factor for the implementation of quantum optimization algorithms is their robustness against experimental and statistical noises. In this paper, we systematically study quantum algorithms for finding an -approximate second-order stationary point (-SOSP) of a -dimensional nonconvex function, a fundamental problem in nonconvex optimization, with noisy zeroth- or first-order oracles as inputs. We first prove that, up to noise of , accelerated perturbed gradient descent with quantum gradient estimation takes quantum queries to find an -SOSP. We then prove that perturbed gradient descent is robust to the noise of and for on…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2025 Poster
The paper provides a comprehensive analysis of upper and lower bounds on query complexities of quantum algorithms for an important problem in non-convex optimization, and thus, the contributions are important to the community. The paper is well-written.
No major weaknesses. See questions.
The paper provides a comprehensive set of results that cover a wide range of noise scale regimes, and oracle assumptions. The comparison with the classical results are meaningful and well presented.
The quantum query complexity bounds established are far from being tight. Most of the algorithms are almost identical to the classical version with the gradient estimation replaced by Jordan’s algorithm. The analysis also looks like a rehash of the classical proofs by substituting the guarantees from Jordan’s algorithm. The lower bound constructions seem to be just borrowed from Jin et al., 2018a and Carmon et al., 2021 (up to a unitary rotation and a scaling factor).
- Applying quantum oracles to speedup existing results is a timely and meaningful interesting problem. - This work gives a dense collection of results. - The summarization of the results in Tables 1, 2 and 3 is informative and clear.
- The presentation of technical results in this paper feels somewhat vague; for instance, there is no pseudocode or intuitive explanation of the underlying algorithms. This lack of detail impacts the paper's clarity and readability. - The current presentation makes it challenging to assess the paper's novelty. For instance, when referencing Jordan's algorithm, the paper points to [2] for details on Jordan's gradient estimation (line 223) and states that it "replaces the gradient queries in PAGD
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture · Stochastic Gradient Optimization Techniques · Quantum Information and Cryptography
