# Training variational quantum algorithms is NP-hard -- even for logarithmically many qubits and free fermionic systems

Lennart Bittel, Martin Kliesch

## Main idea

• using a classical computer to optimize VQE or QAOA is NP-hard.

## Implications

• It is hard to figure out what parameters are best for a quantum circuit!
• It’s not about the hardness of “finding the ground state” (QMA hardness), it’s about the optimization procedure
• local approaches to minimize variational algorithms can get stuck in very bad local minima

## Four settings showing hardness

1. oracle: quantum computer; proving the optimization is NP-hard even if constant relative precision
2. ground state problem is easy; log(n) qubits
3. ground state problem is easy; free fermions
4. ground state problem is easy; QAOA setup

## Details

• Considers “Continuous MaxCut” which is equivalent to MaxCut. Continuous MaxCut has d real parameters to tune.
• Proof: reduce Continuous MaxCut to a “minimize a variational algorithm” problem, showing NP-hardness
• Use a “boosting technique” to amplify errors – showing that efficiently solving a variational algorithm could improve beyond approximation bounds for MaxCut.
• with log(n) qubits, can still be reduced from continuous max cut (since hamiltonian still is size n). Uses ergodic energy spectrum to show this is true even for 1 layer circuits. This shows that minimizing the expectation of a time-evoled observable is also NP-hard.
• This then reduces to QAOA, even for depth 1!

tags: QAOA  quantum-complexity  variational-quantum-algorithms