Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Approximation Algorithms for Quantum Max-d-Cut

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2309.10957 v2 pith:SCALLUKV submitted 2023-09-19 quant-ph

Approximation Algorithms for Quantum Max-d-Cut

classification quant-ph
keywords quantumproblemmax-modelalgorithmicapproximationheisenbergqudits
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

We initiate the algorithmic study of the Quantum Max-$d$-Cut problem, a quantum generalization of the well-known Max-$d$-Cut problem. The Quantum Max-$d$-Cut problem involves finding a quantum state that maximizes the expected energy associated with the projector onto the antisymmetric subspace of two, $d$-dimensional qudits over all local interactions. Equivalently, this problem is physically motivated by the $SU(d)$-Heisenberg model, a spin glass model that generalized the well-known Heisenberg model over qudits. We develop a polynomial-time randomized approximation algorithm that finds product-state solutions of mixed states with bounded purity that achieve non-trivial performance guarantees. Moreover, we prove the tightness of our analysis by presenting an algorithmic gap instance for Quantum Max-d-Cut problem with $d \geq 3$.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Sharp Hardness for MAX-3-CUT and Quantum MAX-CUT

    cs.CC 2026-07 conditional novelty 8.0

    Under UGC, MAX-3-CUT and product-state Quantum MAX-CUT are NP-hard to approximate beyond 0.8360 and 0.9563 times optimal, matching the best known algorithms.