1. A measurement-driven quantum algorithm for SAT: Performance guarantees via spectral gaps and measurement parallelization, Franz J. Schreiber, Maximilian J. Kramer, Alexander Nietner, and Jens Eisert, (2025), arXiv:2511.09647
2. Hybrid real-imaginary time evolution for low-depth Hamiltonian simulation in quantum optimization, Fei Li, and Xiao-Wei Li, Physica A 693 131539, (2026), arXiv:2511.06280 doi:10.1016/j.physa.2026.131539
3. Decoded quantum interferometry under noise, Kaifeng Bu, Weichen Gu, Dax Enshan Koh, and Xiang Li, Quantum Sci. Technol. 11 (2) 025010, (2026), arXiv:2508.10725 doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ae4536
4. Asymptotic Exceptional Steady States in Dissipative Dynamics, Yu-Min Hu, and Jan Carl Budich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135 (25) 250402, (2025), arXiv:2504.02937 doi:10.1103/6lkq-8626
5. Counterdiabatic Driving with Performance Guarantees, Jernej Rudi Fin\vzgar, Simone Notarnicola, Madelyn Cain, Mikhail D. Lukin, and Dries Sels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135 (18) 180602, (2025), arXiv:2503.01958 doi:10.1103/pqhl-nbtk
6. Anomalously slow dynamics of inhomogeneous quantum annealing, Mohammadhossein Dadgar, and Christopher L. Baldwin, Phys. Rev. A 111 (6) 062601, (2025), arXiv:2502.03535 doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.111.062601
7. Targeted catalysts for quantum annealing, Natasha Feinstein, (2025)
8. Optimizing Energy Management and Load Balancing Through AI-Driven Quantum Approximate Optimization, Manjunath Kamath K, Manasa M, Anitha B. S, Mahadevi, Falguni Tlajiya, and Sangramjit Chavan, (2024), doi:10.1109/ICMNWC63764.2024.10871970
9. Fighting Exponentially Small Gaps by Counterdiabatic Driving, Andr\'as Grabarits, Federico Balducci, and Adolfo del Campo, PRX Quantum 7 (1) 010322, (2026), arXiv:2410.02520 doi:10.1103/tgzt-dy3h
10. Enhancement of quantum annealing via n-local catalysts, Roopayan Ghosh, Luca A. Nutricati, Natasha Feinstein, P. A. Warburton, and Sougato Bose, Phys. Rev. Res. 8 (1) 013301, (2026), arXiv:2409.13029 doi:10.1103/hnzj-j7kt
11. Scalable 2-local architecture for quantum annealing of Ising models with arbitrary dimensions, Ana Palacios, Artur Garcia-Saez, Bruno Julia-Diaz, and Marta P. Estarellas, Phys. Rev. Applied 23 (5) 054070, (2025), arXiv:2404.06861 doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.23.054070
12. Quantum many-body dynamics for combinatorial optimisation and machine learning, Constantin Dalyac, (2023)
13. Circumventing superexponential runtimes for hard instances of quantum adiabatic optimization, Benjamin F. Schiffer, Dominik S. Wild, Nishad Maskara, Madelyn Cain, Mikhail D. Lukin, and Rhine Samajdar, Phys. Rev. Res. 6 (1) 013271, (2024), arXiv:2306.13131 doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.6.013271
14. Multinucleon structure and dynamics via quantum computing, Weijie Du, and James P. Vary, Phys. Rev. A 108 (5) 052614, (2023), arXiv:2304.04838 doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.108.052614
15. Bounding first-order quantum phase transitions in adiabatic quantum computing, Matthias Werner, Artur Garc\'\ia-S\'aez, and Marta P. Estarellas, Phys. Rev. Res. 5 (4) 043236, (2023), arXiv:2301.13861 doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.043236
16. Rapid quantum approaches for combinatorial optimisation inspired by optimal state-transfer, Robert J. Banks, Dan E. Browne, and P. A. Warburton, Quantum 8 1253, (2024), arXiv:2301.06846 doi:10.22331/q-2024-02-13-1253
17. Mind the Gap: Achieving a Super-Grover Quantum Speedup by Jumping to the End, Alexander M. Dalzell, Nicola Pancotti, Earl T. Campbell, and Fernando G. S. L. Brand\~ao, (2022), arXiv:2212.01513 doi:10.1145/3564246.3585203
18. Deep learning optimal quantum annealing schedules for random Ising models, Pratibha Raghupati Hegde, Gianluca Passarelli, Giovanni Cantele, and Procolo Lucignano, New J. Phys. 25 (7) 073013, (2023), arXiv:2211.15209 doi:10.1088/1367-2630/ace547
19. A new post-quantum voting protocol based on physical laws, Zeyu Sun, Wenhua Gao, Hua Dong, Huiqin Xie, and Li Yang, Quant. Inf. Proc. 21 (8) 289, (2022), doi:10.1007/s11128-022-03628-0
20. A rapidly mixing Markov chain from any gapped quantum many-body system, Sergey Bravyi, Giuseppe Carleo, David Gosset, and Yinchen Liu, Quantum 7 1173, (2023), arXiv:2207.07044 doi:10.22331/q-2023-11-07-1173
21. Steered quantum annealing: improving time efficiency with partial information, Ana Palacios de Luis, Artur Garcia-Saez, and Marta P. Estarellas, (2022), arXiv:2206.07646
22. Quantum Annealing Sampling with a Bias Field, Tobias Grass, Phys. Rev. Applied 18 (4) 044036, (2022), arXiv:2205.15820 doi:10.1103/PhysRevApplied.18.044036
23. Quantum-Walk-Inspired Dynamic Adiabatic Local Search, Chen-Fu Chiang, and Paul M. Alsing, Entropy 25 (9) 1287, (2023), arXiv:2204.09830 doi:10.3390/e25091287
24. Grover search inspired alternating operator ansatz of quantum approximate optimization algorithm for search problems, Chen-Fu Chiang, and Paul M. Alsing, Quant. Inf. Proc. 22 (5) 221, (2023), arXiv:2204.10324 doi:10.1007/s11128-023-03968-5
25. Digitized counterdiabatic quantum optimization, Narendra N. Hegade, Xi Chen, and Enrique Solano, Phys. Rev. Res. 4 (4) L042030, (2022), arXiv:2201.00790 doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.4.L042030
26. Phase transitions in the frustrated Ising ladder with stoquastic and nonstoquastic catalysts, Kabuki Takada, Shigetoshi Sota, Seiji Yunoki, Bibek Pokharel, Hidetoshi Nishimori, and Daniel A. Lidar, Phys. Rev. Res. 3 043013, (2021), arXiv:2012.07144 doi:10.1103/PhysRevResearch.3.043013
27. Machine learning assisted quantum adiabatic algorithm design, Lin Jian, Ye Meng, Zhu Jia-Wei, and Li Xiao-Peng, Acta Phys. Sin. 70 (14) 140306, (2021), doi:10.7498/aps.70.20210831
28. The quantum annealing gap and quench dynamics in the exact cover problem, Bernhard Irsigler, and Tobias Grass, Quantum 6 624, (2022), arXiv:2106.08101 doi:10.22331/q-2022-01-18-624
29. Ab initio nuclear structure via quantum adiabatic algorithm, Weijie Du, James P. Vary, Xingbo Zhao, and Wei Zuo, (2021), arXiv:2105.08910
30. Essentiality of the Non-stoquastic Hamiltonians and Driver Graph Design in Quantum Optimization Annealing, Vicky Choi, (2021), arXiv:2105.02110
31. Low-Depth Mechanisms for Quantum Optimization, Jarrod R. McClean, Matthew P. Harrigan, Masoud Mohseni, Nicholas C. Rubin, Zhang Jiang, Sergio Boixo, Vadim N. Smelyanskiy, Ryan Babbush, and Hartmut Neven, PRX Quantum 2 (3) 030312, (2021), arXiv:2008.08615 doi:10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.030312
32. Adiabatic Quantum Optimization Fails to Solve the Knapsack Problem, Lauren Pusey-Nazzaro, and Prasanna Date, (2020), arXiv:2008.07456
33. Accurate Lindblad-form master equation for weakly damped quantum systems across all regimes, Gavin McCauley, Benjamin Cruikshank, Denys I. Bondar, and Kurt Jacobs, npj Quantum Inf. 6 74, (2020), arXiv:1906.08279 doi:10.1038/s41534-020-00299-6
34. Quantum Annealing with Longitudinal Bias Fields, Tobias Graß, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (12) 120501, (2019), arXiv:1906.02289 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.123.120501
35. Assessing Solution Quality of 3SAT on a Quantum Annealing Platform, Thomas Gabor, Sebastian Zielinski, Sebastian Feld, Christoph Roch, Christian Seidel, Florian Neukart, Isabella Galter, Wolfgang Mauerer, and Claudia Linnhoff-Popien, (2019), arXiv:1902.04703
36. Quantum annealing of the p-spin model under inhomogeneous transverse field driving, Yuki Susa, Yu Yamashiro, Masayuki Yamamoto, Itay Hen, Daniel A. Lidar, and Hidetoshi Nishimori, Phys. Rev. A 98 (4) 042326, (2018), arXiv:1808.01582 doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.98.042326
37. A voting scheme with post-quantum security based on physical laws, Hua Dong, and Li Yang, (2018), arXiv:1805.12480
38. Dissipation in adiabatic quantum computers: Lessons from an exactly solvable model, Maximilian Keck, Simone Montangero, Giuseppe E. Santoro, Rosario Fazio, and Davide Rossini, New J. Phys. 19 113029, (2017), arXiv:1704.03183 doi:10.1088/1367-2630/aa8cef
39. Non-stoquastic Hamiltonians in quantum annealing via geometric phases, Walter Vinci, and Daniel A. Lidar, npj Quantum Inf. 3 38, (2017), arXiv:1701.07494 doi:10.1038/s41534-017-0037-z
40. Adiabatic optimization versus diffusion Monte Carlo, Michael Jarret, Stephen P. Jordan, and Brad Lackey, Phys. Rev. A 94 042318, (2016), arXiv:1607.03389 doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.94.042318
41. Simulated Quantum Annealing Can Be Exponentially Faster than Classical Simulated Annealing, Elizabeth Crosson, and Aram W. Harrow, (2016), arXiv:1601.03030 doi:10.1109/FOCS.2016.81
42. Degeneracy, degree, and heavy tails in quantum annealing, Andrew D. King, Emile Hoskinson, Trevor Lanting, Evgeny Andriyash, and Mohammad H. Amin, (2016), arXiv:1512.07325 doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.93.052320
43. Artificial intelligence and a universal quantum computer, Andreas Wichert, AI Commun. 29 (4) 537–543, (2016), doi:10.3233/AIC-160699
44. Tales told by coloured tangles, Daniel Moskovich, and Avishy Y. Carmi, Comput. 12 71–105, (2016), arXiv:1511.04919
45. Quantum algorithms: an overview, Ashley Montanaro, (2015), arXiv:1511.04206 doi:10.1038/npjqi.2015.23
46. Challenges of adiabatic quantum evaluation of NAND trees, Lu\'\is Tarrataca, Quant. Inf. Proc. 14 (12) 4731–4749, (2015), doi:10.1007/s11128-015-1137-3
47. Adiabatic optimization without local minima, Michael Jarret, and Stephen P. Jordan, (2014), arXiv:1405.7552
48. The effect of quantum fluctuations on the coloring of random graphs, Victor Bapst, Guilhem Semerjian, and Francesco Zamponi, Phys. Rev. A 87 042322, (2013), arXiv:1302.6861 doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.87.042322
49. Performance of the quantum adiabatic algorithm on random instances of two optimization problems on regular hypergraphs, Edward Farhi, David Gosset, Itay Hen, A. W. Sandvik, Peter Shor, A. P. Young, and Francesco Zamponi, Phys. Rev. A 86 (5) 052334, (2012), arXiv:1208.3757 doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.86.052334
50. The quantum adiabatic algorithm applied to random optimization problems: The quantum spin glass perspective, Victor Bapst, Laura Foini, Florent Krzakala, Guilhem Semerjian, and Francesco Zamponi, Phys. Rept. 523 (3) 127–205, (2013), arXiv:1210.0811 doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.10.002
51. On quantum mean-field models and their quantum annealing, Victor Bapst, and Guilhem Semerjian, (2012), arXiv:1203.6003 doi:10.1088/1742-5468/2012/06/P06007
52. A Near-Term Quantum Computing Approach for Hard Computational Problems in Space Exploration, Vadim N. Smelyanskiy, Eleanor G. Rieffel, Sergey I. Knysh, Colin P. Williams, Mark W. Johnson, Murray C. Thom, William G. Macready, and Kristen L. Pudenz, (2012), arXiv:1204.2821
53. Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm and Scaling of Gaps at First-Order Quantum Phase Transitions, C. R. Laumann, R. Moessner, A. Scardicchio, and S. L. Sondhi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109 (3) 030502, (2012), arXiv:1202.3646 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.030502
54. Exponential Complexity of the Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm for certain Satisfiability Problems, Itay Hen, and A. P. Young, Phys. Rev. E 84 061152, (2011), arXiv:1109.6872 doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.84.061152
55. Avoid First Order Quantum Phase Transition by Changing Problem Hamiltonians, Vicky Choi, (2011), arXiv:1010.1220
56. Different Adiabatic Quantum Optimization Algorithms for the NP-Complete Exact Cover and 3SAT Problems, Vicky Choi, (2011), arXiv:1010.1221 doi:10.1073/pnas.1018310108
57. Elimination of Perturbative Crossings in Adiabatic Quantum Optimization, Neil G. Dickson, New J. Phys. 13 073011, (2011), arXiv:1104.2349 doi:10.1088/1367-2630/13/7/073011
58. Does Adiabatic Quantum Optimization Truly Fail for NP-complete problems?, Neil G. Dickson, and M. H. S. Amin, (2011), arXiv:1010.0669 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.050502
59. Different adiabatic quantum optimization algorithms, Vicky Choi, Quant. Inf. Comput. 11 (7-8) 0638–0648, (2011), doi:10.26421/QIC11.7-8-7
60. A solvable model of quantum random optimization problems, Laura Foini, Guilhem Semerjian, and Francesco Zamponi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 167204, (2010), arXiv:1006.1736 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.167204
61. Unstructured randomness, small gaps and localization, Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, David Gosset, Sam Gutmann, and Peter Shor, Quant. Inf. Comput. 11 (9-10) 0840–0854, (2011), arXiv:1010.0009 doi:10.26421/QIC11.9-10-8
62. Experimental investigation of an eight-qubit unit cell in a superconducting optimization processor, R. Harris, and others, Phys. Rev. B 82 (2) 024511, (2010), doi:10.1103/PhysRevB.82.024511
63. Quantum search by partial adiabatic evolution, Ying-Yu Zhang, and Song-Feng Lu, (2010), arXiv:1007.1528 doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.82.034304
64. On the relevance of avoided crossings away from quantum critical point to the complexity of quantum adiabatic algorithm, S. Knysh, and V. Smelyanskiy, (2010), arXiv:1005.3011
65. Adiabatic Quantum Algorithms for the NP-Complete Maximum-Weight Independent Set, Exact Cover and 3SAT Problems, Vicky Choi, (2010), arXiv:1004.2226
66. A study of heuristic guesses for adiabatic quantum computation, Alejandro Perdomo-Ortiz, Salvador E. Venegas-Andraca, and Al\'an Aspuru-Guzik, Quant. Inf. Proc. 10 (1) 33–52, (2011), arXiv:0807.0354 doi:10.1007/s11128-010-0168-z
67. First-Order Phase Transition in the Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm, A. P. Young, S. Knysh, and V. N. Smelyanskiy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (2) 020502, (2010), arXiv:0910.1378 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.020502
68. Training a Large Scale Classifier with the Quantum Adiabatic Algorithm, Hartmut Neven, Vasil S. Denchev, Geordie Rose, and William G. Macready, (2009), arXiv:0912.0779
69. Anderson localization makes adiabatic quantum optimization fail, Boris Altshuler, Hari Krovi, and J\'er\'emie Roland, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. 107 (28) 12446–12450, (2010), arXiv:0912.0746 doi:10.1073/pnas.1002116107
70. A Quantum Monte Carlo Method at Fixed Energy, Edward Farhi, Jeffrey Goldstone, David Gosset, and Harvey B. Meyer, Comput. Phys. Commun. 182 1663–1673, (2011), arXiv:0912.4271 doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2011.04.021
71. Adiabatic quantum optimization fails for random instances of NP-complete problems, Boris Altshuler, Hari Krovi, and Jeremie Roland, (2009), arXiv:0908.2782