pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.16955 · v1 · pith:KYOY3KJRnew · submitted 2026-05-16 · 🪐 quant-ph

From Constraint to Code: DQI-Kit -- A Software Framework for Decoded Quantum Interferometry

Simon Thelen , Wolfgang Mauerer This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 20:48 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords DQI-KitDecoded Quantum InterferometryMax-LINSATconstrained optimizationquantum softwareproblem encodingquantum advantage
0
0 comments X

The pith

DQI-Kit automatically encodes constrained optimization problems into Max-LINSAT for Decoded Quantum Interferometry.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents DQI-Kit as a software framework to handle the conversion of industrial constrained optimization problems into a format that works with the Decoded Quantum Interferometry approach. Users describe common objectives and constraints through a unified interface, after which the framework applies a sequence of transformations to produce Max-LINSAT instances. It then generates estimates of how DQI would perform on those instances, allowing analysis of introduced inefficiencies and overheads. A sympathetic reader would care because manual transformations often add costs that can erase any quantum advantage, and this tool reduces that burden while supporting systematic comparison of different encoding paths. The ultimate intent is to create a foundation for identifying real problems where DQI delivers practical benefits.

Core claim

DQI-Kit supplies a unified, extensible interface for describing objectives and constraints typical of industrial optimization problems, converts these descriptions into Max-LINSAT instances through a series of problem transformations, and computes estimates of the expected performance of Decoded Quantum Interferometry on the resulting instances.

What carries the argument

The sequence of problem transformations that map user-described objectives and constraints into Max-LINSAT instances, together with the built-in performance estimation for DQI.

If this is right

  • Users avoid the manual encoding steps that commonly introduce inefficiencies when applying DQI to constrained problems.
  • Systematic comparison of transformation paths becomes possible, revealing which routes minimize overhead.
  • Performance estimates support early selection of problems likely to retain quantum advantage after encoding.
  • The framework serves as a starting point for building a standardized toolchain to test DQI on diverse industrial instances.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Comparable toolkits could be built for other quantum algorithms that require nonstandard input formats, allowing cross-algorithm overhead comparisons.
  • Embedding DQI-Kit inside existing classical optimization platforms might enable hybrid workflows that switch between classical and DQI solvers based on estimated cost.
  • Extending the performance estimator to include resource counts such as qubit number or circuit depth would make the overhead analysis more complete.

Load-bearing premise

The transformations will produce Max-LINSAT instances whose DQI performance estimates meaningfully reflect the overheads and potential advantage of the original constrained problem.

What would settle it

Execute actual DQI on the Max-LINSAT instances produced by the framework and check whether the observed performance matches the estimates; a large discrepancy would show that the transformations fail to preserve the relevant characteristics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.16955 by Simon Thelen, Wolfgang Mauerer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Transformations between formulations implemented by DQI-Kit. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Max-LINSAT encodings of integer constraints: Or [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Simplified class structure for the two abstraction levels of DQI-Kit: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Problem encoding and solution quality estimation in DQI-Kit: User-defined problem specifications supports two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Trying to solve hard optimisation problems with quantum techniques requires transformations of domain objectives and constraints into formats compatible with a chosen quantum algorithm. This often introduces inefficiencies and overheads that limit or even endanger potential quantum advantage for current and future approaches. To understand and mitigate these inefficiencies, software toolchains are essential for implementing transformations, analysing overheads and eventually selecting optimal transformation paths. Decoded Quantum Interferometry (DQI) is a novel approach that achieves apparent quantum advantage for certain algebraic optimisation problems. It natively operates on Max-LINSAT, which is unusual for combinatorial optimisation, and creates the need for software solutions that alleviate the burden of manually transforming problems of interest into this format. We present DQI-Kit, a software framework that provides a unified, extensible interface for automatically encoding constrained optimisation problems into Max-LINSAT. Users can describe the various types of objectives and constraints that are common in industrial optimisation problems. Our framework converts these into Max-LINSAT instances via a series of problem transformations and computes an estimate of the expected performance of DQI on these instances. We provide an initial analysis of the implemented transformations, discussing inefficiencies and ways to mitigate them. DQI-Kit is the basis for our ultimate goal of establishing a standardised framework that will enable further investigations to identify practical use cases for which quantum advantage with DQI can be achieved.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces DQI-Kit, a software framework providing a unified, extensible interface for automatically encoding constrained optimization problems into Max-LINSAT instances suitable for Decoded Quantum Interferometry (DQI). Users describe objectives and constraints typical of industrial problems; the framework applies a series of transformations to produce Max-LINSAT instances and computes estimates of expected DQI performance, accompanied by an initial analysis of transformation inefficiencies and mitigation strategies.

Significance. If the performance estimates prove reliable, DQI-Kit could reduce manual encoding overheads for a quantum algorithm operating on an atypical format and help identify concrete use cases for quantum advantage. The framework's emphasis on extensibility and standardization of transformation pipelines represents a practical contribution to quantum optimization toolchains.

major comments (1)
  1. The manuscript's central claim that DQI-Kit enables analysis of overheads and identification of quantum-advantage use cases depends on the accuracy of the computed DQI performance estimates. However, the provided description supplies no concrete validation data, benchmarks, or error analysis to support these estimates (Abstract). This is load-bearing for the stated goal of mitigating inefficiencies and selecting optimal transformation paths.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract and framework description would benefit from one or two concrete examples of supported constraint types and the corresponding Max-LINSAT output to illustrate the transformation pipeline.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review and positive assessment of DQI-Kit's potential contribution. We address the single major comment below, agreeing that additional validation is warranted to support the central claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The manuscript's central claim that DQI-Kit enables analysis of overheads and identification of quantum-advantage use cases depends on the accuracy of the computed DQI performance estimates. However, the provided description supplies no concrete validation data, benchmarks, or error analysis to support these estimates (Abstract). This is load-bearing for the stated goal of mitigating inefficiencies and selecting optimal transformation paths.

    Authors: We agree that the accuracy of the DQI performance estimates is central to the manuscript's goals and that the current version lacks explicit validation data, benchmarks, or error analysis. The estimates are currently computed from the theoretical DQI success probability formulas (as derived in the referenced DQI papers) applied to the transformed Max-LINSAT instances, together with a first-order accounting of transformation overheads. To address this limitation, we will add a dedicated subsection (likely in Section 4 or a new Section 5) containing: (i) benchmarks on small, exactly solvable instances where we compare the kit's estimated DQI performance against brute-force or classical simulation results; (ii) an error analysis quantifying the impact of the main approximation assumptions (e.g., independence of constraint violations and decoding error rates); and (iii) a short discussion of how these validated estimates can be used to rank transformation pipelines. We believe this revision will directly strengthen the load-bearing claim without altering the overall scope or conclusions of the work. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper is a description of a software framework (DQI-Kit) for encoding constrained optimisation problems into Max-LINSAT instances and estimating DQI performance. It contains no mathematical derivations, fitted parameters, predictions, or first-principles results that could reduce to their inputs by construction. The contribution consists of a unified interface, transformation pipelines, and an initial analysis of inefficiencies; these are self-contained engineering choices that do not rely on self-citation chains, ansatzes smuggled via prior work, or renaming of known results. The work is therefore self-contained as a tool description without any load-bearing circular steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review performed on abstract only; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable from the provided text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5773 in / 1114 out tokens · 59361 ms · 2026-05-19T20:48:30.935616+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Quantum annealing for industry applications: Introduction and review,

    S. Yarkoni, E. Raponi, T. Bäck, and S. Schmitt, “Quantum annealing for industry applications: Introduction and review,”Reports on Progress in Physics, vol. 85, no. 10, p. 104001, 2022

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    A review on quantum approximate optimization algorithm and its variants,

    K. Blekos, D. Brand, A. Ceschini, C.-H. Chou, R.-H. Li, K. Pandya, and A. Summer, “A review on quantum approximate optimization algorithm and its variants,”Physics Reports, vol. 1068, p. 1–66, Jun. 2024. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2024.03.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2024.03.002 2024

  3. [3]

    Predict and conquer: Navigating algorithm trade-offs with quantum design automation,

    S. Thelen and W. Mauerer, “Predict and conquer: Navigating algorithm trade-offs with quantum design automation,” inIEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), vol. 01, 2025, pp. 591–602

    work page 2025

  4. [4]

    Approximating under the influence of quantum noise and compute power,

    S. Thelen, H. Safi, and W. Mauerer, “Approximating under the influence of quantum noise and compute power,” inIEEE International Confer- ence on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), vol. 02, 2024, pp. 274–279

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Industry quantum computing applications,

    A. and Bayerstadler, G. Becquin, J. Binder, T. Botter, H. Ehm, T. Ehmer, M. Erdmann, N. Gaus, P. Harbach, M. Hess, J. Klepsch, M. Leib, S. Luber, A. Luckow, M. Mansky, W. Mauerer, F. Neukart, C. Niedermeier, L. Palackal, R. Pfeiffer, C. Polenz, J. Sepulveda, T. Sievers, B. Standen, M. Streif, T. Strohm, C. Utschig-Utschig, D. V olz, H. Weiss, and F. Winte...

    work page doi:10.1140/epjqt/s40507-021-00114-x 2021

  6. [6]

    Noisy intermediate- scale quantum algorithms,

    K. Bharti, A. Cervera-Lierta, T. H. Kyaw, T. Haug, S. Alperin- Lea, A. Anand, M. Degroote, H. Heimonen, J. S. Kottmann, T. Menke, W.-K. Mok, S. Sim, L.-C. Kwek, and A. Aspuru- Guzik, “Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms,”Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 94, p. 015004, Feb 2022. [Online]. Available: https: //link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/RevModPhys.94.015004

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.94.015004 2022

  7. [7]

    Ising formulations of many NP problems

    A. Lucas, “Ising formulations of many np problems,”Frontiers in Physics, vol. 2, 2014. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/ fphy.2014.00005

    work page arXiv 2014

  8. [8]

    Pyqubo: Python library for qubo creation,

    M. Zaman, K. Tanahashi, and S. Tanaka, “Pyqubo: Python library for qubo creation,”IEEE Transactions on Computers, 2021

    work page 2021

  9. [9]

    quark: Quantum application reformulation kernel,

    E. Lobe, “quark: Quantum application reformulation kernel,” 2023. [Online]. Available: https://dl.gi.de/handle/20.500.12116/43045

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Efficient milp decomposition in quantum computing for relu network robustness,

    N. Franco, T. Wollschläger, B. Poggel, S. Günnemann, and J. M. Lorenz, “Efficient milp decomposition in quantum computing for relu network robustness,” in2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Com- puting and Engineering (QCE), vol. 01, 2023, pp. 524–534

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Optimization by decoded quantum interferometry,

    S. P. Jordan, N. Shutty, M. Wootters, A. Zalcman, A. Schmidhuber, R. King, S. V . Isakov, T. Khattar, and R. Babbush, “Optimization by decoded quantum interferometry,”Nature, vol. 646, no. 8086, p. 831–836, Oct. 2025. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ s41586-025-09527-5

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    Autoqml: A framework for automated quantum machine learning,

    L. Schmidbauer and W. Mauerer, “Sat strikes back: Parameter and path relations in quantum toolchains,” in2025 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Software (QSW). IEEE, Jul. 2025, p. 01–12. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/QSW67625.2025.00021

    work page doi:10.1109/qsw67625.2025.00021 2025

  13. [13]

    Assessing Solution Quality of 3SAT on a Quantum Annealing Platform

    T. Gabor, S. Zielinski, S. Feld, C. Roch, C. Seidel, F. Neukart, I. Galter, W. Mauerer, and C. Linnhoff-Popien, “Assessing solution quality of 3sat on a quantum annealing platform,” inQuantum Technology and Optimization Problems, S. Feld and C. Linnhoff-Popien, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019, pp. 23–35. [Online]. Available: https://arx...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  14. [14]

    Quantum annealing-based software components: An experimental case study with sat solving,

    T. Krüger and W. Mauerer, “Quantum annealing-based software components: An experimental case study with sat solving,” in Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering Workshops, ser. ICSEW’20. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2020, p. 445–450. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3387940.3391472

    work page doi:10.1145/3387940.3391472 2020

  15. [15]

    1-2-3 reproducibility for quantum software experiments,

    W. Mauerer and S. Scherzinger, “1-2-3 reproducibility for quantum software experiments,” inIEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), 2022, pp. 1247–1248

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    Quantum data encoding patterns and their consequences,

    M. Gogeissl, H. Safi, and W. Mauerer, “Quantum data encoding patterns and their consequences,” inProceedings of the 1st Workshop on Quantum Computing and Quantum-Inspired Technology for Data- Intensive Systems and Applications, ser. Q-Data ’24. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2024, p. 27–37. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10...

    work page doi:10.1145/3665225.3665446 2024

  17. [17]

    Quantum-inspired digital annealing for join ordering,

    M. Schönberger, I. Trummer, and W. Mauerer, “Quantum-inspired digital annealing for join ordering,” inProceedings of the VLDB Endowment, vol. 17, no. 3, 11 2023. [Online]. Available: https: //doi.org/10.14778/3632093.3632112

    work page doi:10.14778/3632093.3632112 2023

  18. [18]

    It’s quick to be square: Fast quadratisation for quantum toolchains,

    L. Schmidbauer, E. Lobe, I. Schaefer, and W. Mauerer, “It’s quick to be square: Fast quadratisation for quantum toolchains,” 02 2026. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2411.19934

    work page arXiv 2026

  19. [19]

    Poly- nomial reduction methods and their impact on qaoa circuits,

    L. Schmidbauer, K. Wintersperger, E. Lobe, and W. Mauerer, “Poly- nomial reduction methods and their impact on qaoa circuits,” in2024 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Software (QSW), 2024, pp. 35–45

    work page 2024

  20. [20]

    Path matters: Industrial data meet quantum optimization,

    L. Schmidbauer, C. A. Riofrío, F. Heinrich, V . Junk, U. Schwenk, T. Husslein, and W. Mauerer, “Path matters: Industrial data meet quantum optimization,” inProceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering, 5 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.16607

    work page arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Two solutions to diluted p-spin models and xorsat problems,

    M. Mézard, F. Ricci-Tersenghi, and R. Zecchina, “Two solutions to diluted p-spin models and xorsat problems,”Journal of Statistical Physics, vol. 111, no. 3, pp. 505–533, 2003

    work page 2003

  22. [22]

    The set of solutions of random xorsat formulae,

    M. Ibrahimi, Y . Kanoria, M. Kraning, and A. Montanari, “The set of solutions of random xorsat formulae,” inProceedings of the twenty-third annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete Algorithms. SIAM, 2012, pp. 760–779

    work page 2012

  23. [23]

    The satisfiability threshold for k-xorsat,

    B. Pittel and G. B. Sorkin, “The satisfiability threshold for k-xorsat,” Combinatorics, Probability and Computing, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 236–268, 2016

    work page 2016

  24. [24]

    Lin and J

    S. Lin and J. Li,Fundamentals of Classical and Modern Error- Correcting Codes. Cambridge University Press, 2021

    work page 2021

  25. [25]

    Guruswami, A

    V . Guruswami, A. Rudra, and M. Sudan,Essential coding theory, 2025

    work page 2025

  26. [26]

    Nemhauser and L

    G. Nemhauser and L. Wolsey,Integer and Combinatorial Optimization. Wiley, Jun. 1988. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ 9781118627372

    work page 1988

  27. [27]

    H. P. Williams,Model building in mathematical programming, 5th ed. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell, Feb. 2013

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    Towards solving industrial integer linear programs with Decoded Quantum Interferometry

    F. Sabater, O. E. Harzli, G.-J. Besjes, M. Erdmann, J. Klepsch, J. Hiltrop, J.-F. Bobier, Y . Cao, and C. A. Riofrio, “Towards solving industrial integer linear programs with decoded quantum interferometry,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.08328

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Hamiltonian decoded quantum interferometry.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.07913, 2025

    A. Schmidhuber, J. Z. Lu, N. Shutty, S. Jordan, A. Poremba, and Y . Quek, “Hamiltonian decoded quantum interferometry,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.07913

    work page arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    No quantum advantage in decoded quantum interferometry for maxcut.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.19966, 2025

    O. Parekh, “No quantum advantage in decoded quantum interferometry for maxcut,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.19966

    work page arXiv 2025

  31. [31]

    P. L. Hammer and S. Rudeanu,Boolean Methods in Operations Research and Related Areas. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 1968. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-85823-9

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-85823-9 1968

  32. [32]

    Quadratization in discrete optimization and quantum mechanics,

    N. Dattani, “Quadratization in discrete optimization and quantum mechanics,” 2019. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/1901.04405

    work page arXiv 2019

  33. [33]

    Algebraic geometry codes and decoded quantum interferometry

    A. Gu and S. P. Jordan, “Algebraic geometry codes and decoded quantum interferometry,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/ abs/2510.06603

    work page arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    Verifiable quantum advantage via optimized dqi circuits.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.10967, 2025

    T. Khattar, N. Shutty, C. Gidney, A. Zalcman, N. Yosri, D. Maslov, R. Babbush, and S. P. Jordan, “Verifiable quantum advantage via optimized dqi circuits,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/ 2510.10967

    work page arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Hamiltonian decoded quantum interferometry for general pauli hamiltonians.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.18773, 2026

    K. Bu, W. Gu, and X. Li, “Hamiltonian decoded quantum interferometry for general pauli hamiltonians,” 2026. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.18773

    work page arXiv 2026

  36. [36]

    [Online]

    The Sage Developers,SageMath, the Sage Mathematics Software System (Version 10.8), 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.sagemath.org [37]PARI/GP version – version 2.15.4, The PARI Group, Univ. Bordeaux,

    work page 2025

  37. [37]

    Available: http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/

    [Online]. Available: http://pari.math.u-bordeaux.fr/

    work page

  38. [38]

    Ntl – a library for doing numbery theory – version 11.6.0,

    V . Shoup, “Ntl – a library for doing numbery theory – version 11.6.0,”

    work page

  39. [39]

    Available: https://github.com/libntl/ntl/releases/tag/v11

    [Online]. Available: https://github.com/libntl/ntl/releases/tag/v11. 6.0 [39]Givaro: C++ library for arithmetic and algebraic computations – Version 4.2.1, The Givaro Group, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://github.com/linbox-team/givaro/releases/tag/v4.2.1

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    J. Roffe. (2022) LDPC: Python tools for low density parity check codes. [Online]. Available: https://pypi.org/project/ldpc/

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    Perron and F

    L. Perron and F. Didier. Cp-sat. Google. [Online]. Available: https://developers.google.com/optimization/cp/cp_solver/

    work page

  42. [42]

    Perry and R

    M. Perry and R. J. Wagner. simanneal. [Online]. Available: https://pypi.org/project/simanneal/

    work page

  43. [43]

    Adiabatic quantum state generation and statistical zero knowledge,

    D. Aharonov and A. Ta-Shma, “Adiabatic quantum state generation and statistical zero knowledge,” inProceedings of the Thirty-Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, ser. STOC ’03. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2003, p. 20–29. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/780542.780546

    work page doi:10.1145/780542.780546 2003

  44. [44]

    Lattice problems in np∩conp,

    D. Aharonov and O. Regev, “Lattice problems in np∩conp,”J. ACM, vol. 52, no. 5, p. 749–765, Sep. 2005. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/1089023.1089025

    work page doi:10.1145/1089023.1089025 2005

  45. [45]

    On lattices, learning with errors, random linear codes, and cryptography,

    O. Regev, “On lattices, learning with errors, random linear codes, and cryptography,”J. ACM, vol. 56, no. 6, Sep. 2009. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/1568318.1568324

    work page doi:10.1145/1568318.1568324 2009

  46. [46]

    Quantum algorithms for average- case lattice problems via filtering,

    Y . Chen, Q. Liu, and M. Zhandry, “Quantum algorithms for average- case lattice problems via filtering,” inAdvances in Cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2022: 41st Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, Trondheim, Norway, May 30 – June 3, 2022, Proceedings, Part III. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2022, p. 3...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-07082-2_14 2022

  47. [47]

    Verifiable quantum advantage without structure,

    T. Yamakawa and M. Zhandry, “Verifiable quantum advantage without structure,”J. ACM, vol. 71, no. 3, Jun. 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3658665

    work page doi:10.1145/3658665 2024

  48. [48]

    Quantum reduction of finding short code vectors to the decoding problem,

    T. Debris-Alazard, M. Remaud, and J.-P. Tillich, “Quantum reduction of finding short code vectors to the decoding problem,”IEEE Trans. Inf. Theor., vol. 70, no. 7, p. 5323–5342, Jul. 2024. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1109/TIT.2023.3327759

    work page doi:10.1109/tit.2023.3327759 2024

  49. [49]

    Quantum advantage from soft decoders,

    A. Chailloux and J.-P. Tillich, “Quantum advantage from soft decoders,” inProceedings of the 57th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, ser. STOC ’25. New York, NY , USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2025, p. 738–749. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1145/3717823.3718319

    work page doi:10.1145/3717823.3718319 2025

  50. [50]

    On the Complexity of Decoded Quantum Interferometry

    K. Marwaha, B. Fefferman, A. Gheorghiu, and V . Havlicek, “On the complexity of decoded quantum interferometry,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.14443

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  51. [51]

    Decoded quantum interferometry requires structure.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.14509, 2025

    E. R. Anschuetz, D. Gamarnik, and J. Z. Lu, “Decoded quantum interferometry requires structure,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https: //arxiv.org/abs/2509.14509

    work page arXiv 2025

  52. [52]

    Tight inapproximability of max-linsat and implications for decoded quantum interferometry,

    M. J. Kramer, C. Schubert, and J. Eisert, “Tight inapproximability of max-linsat and implications for decoded quantum interferometry,”

    work page

  53. [53]

    Tight inapproximability of max-linsat and implications for decoded quantum interferometry.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.04540, 2026

    [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.04540

    work page arXiv

  54. [54]

    Optimization of quadratic constraints by decoded quantum interferometry

    D. C. Hillel, “Optimization of quadratic constraints by decoded quantum interferometry,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/ abs/2510.08061

    work page arXiv 2025

  55. [55]

    T. Yue, W. Mauerer, S. Ali, and D. Taibi,Challenges and Opportunities in Quantum Software Architecture. Springer Nature Switzerland, 2023, p. 1–23. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-031-36847-9_1

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    Challenges for Quantum Software Engineering: An Industrial Application Scenario Perspective,

    C. Carbonelli, M. Felderer, M. Jung, E. Lobe, M. Lochau, S. Luber, W. Mauerer, R. Ramler, I. Schaefer, and C. Schroth, “Challenges for Quantum Software Engineering: An Industrial Application Scenario Perspective,” inQuantum Software, I. Exman, R. Pérez-Castillo, M. Piattini, and M. Felderer, Eds. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024, pp. 311–335. [Onli...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-64136-7_12 2024

  57. [57]

    Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual,

    Gurobi Optimization, LLC, “Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual,”

    work page

  58. [58]

    Available: https://www.gurobi.com

    [Online]. Available: https://www.gurobi.com

    work page

  59. [59]

    The scip optimization suite 10.0,

    C. Hojny, M. Besançon, K. Bestuzheva, S. Borst, J. Dionísio, J. Ehls, L. Eifler, M. Ghannam, A. Gleixner, A. Göß, A. Hoen, J. von Holly-Ponientzietz, R. van der Hulst, D. Kamp, T. Koch, K. Kofler, J. Lentz, M. Lübbecke, S. J. Maher, P. M. Meinhold, G. Mexi, T. Mohr, E. Mühmer, K. K. Patel, M. E. Pfetsch, S. Pokutta, C. R. Groba, F. Serrano, Y . Shinano, M...

    work page arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Nethercote, P

    N. Nethercote, P. J. Stuckey, R. Becket, S. Brand, G. J. Duck, and G. Tack,MiniZinc: Towards a Standard CP Modelling Language. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2007, p. 529–543. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74970-7_38

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-74970-7_38 2007

  61. [61]

    Jump: A modeling language for mathematical optimization,

    I. Dunning, J. Huchette, and M. Lubin, “Jump: A modeling language for mathematical optimization,”SIAM Review, vol. 59, no. 2, p. 295–320, Jan. 2017. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/15M1020575

    work page doi:10.1137/15m1020575 2017

  62. [62]

    pyomo.dae: a modeling and automatic discretization framework for optimization with differential and algebraic equations,

    B. Nicholson, J. D. Siirola, J.-P. Watson, V . M. Zavala, and L. T. Biegler, “pyomo.dae: a modeling and automatic discretization framework for optimization with differential and algebraic equations,”Mathematical Programming Computation, vol. 10, no. 2, p. 187–223, Dec. 2017. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12532-017-0127-0

    work page doi:10.1007/s12532-017-0127-0 2017

  63. [63]

    A toolbox to understand the physics of quantum data management,

    W. Mauerer and M. Schönberger, “A toolbox to understand the physics of quantum data management,” inProceedings of the Third Workshop on Quantum Computing and Quantum-Inspired Technology for Data- Intensive Systems and Applications@IEEE SIGMOD, ser. Q-Data ’26, 5 2026

    work page 2026

  64. [64]

    Towards an Automated Framework for Realizing Quantum Computing Solutions,

    N. Quetschlich, L. Burgholzer, and R. Wille, “Towards an Automated Framework for Realizing Quantum Computing Solutions,” inInterna- tional Symposium on Multiple-Valued Logic (ISMVL), 2023

    work page 2023

  65. [65]

    A framework to formulate pathfinding problems for quantum computing,

    D. Rovara, N. Quetschlich, and R. Wille, “A framework to formulate pathfinding problems for quantum computing,” 2024. [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.10820

    work page arXiv 2024