Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Solving a Higgs optimization problem with quantum annealing for machine learning


The discovery of Higgs-boson decays in a background of standard-model processes was assisted by machine learning methods1,2. The classifiers used to separate signals such as these from background are trained using highly unerring but not completely perfect simulations of the physical processes involved, often resulting in incorrect labelling of background processes or signals (label noise) and systematic errors. Here we use quantum3,4,5,6 and classical7,8 annealing (probabilistic techniques for approximating the global maximum or minimum of a given function) to solve a Higgs-signal-versus-background machine learning optimization problem, mapped to a problem of finding the ground state of a corresponding Ising spin model. We build a set of weak classifiers based on the kinematic observables of the Higgs decay photons, which we then use to construct a strong classifier. This strong classifier is highly resilient against overtraining and against errors in the correlations of the physical observables in the training data. We show that the resulting quantum and classical annealing-based classifier systems perform comparably to the state-of-the-art machine learning methods that are currently used in particle physics9,10. However, in contrast to these methods, the annealing-based classifiers are simple functions of directly interpretable experimental parameters with clear physical meaning. The annealer-trained classifiers use the excited states in the vicinity of the ground state and demonstrate some advantage over traditional machine learning methods for small training datasets. Given the relative simplicity of the algorithm and its robustness to error, this technique may find application in other areas of experimental particle physics, such as real-time decision making in event-selection problems and classification in neutrino physics.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Relevant articles

Open Access articles citing this article.

Access options

Rent or buy this article

Get just this article for as long as you need it


Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1: Representative Feynman diagrams of processes that contribute to the simulated distributions of the Higgs signal and of the background standard-model processes.
Figure 2: Distributions of the eight kinematic variables used to construct weak classifiers.
Figure 3: Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves for the annealer-trained networks with f = 0.05, the DNN and XGB.
Figure 4: Area under the ROC curve (AUROC) for the annealer-trained networks with f = 0.05, the DNN and XGB.
Figure 5: Difference between the AUROCs for different algorithms.


  1. Chatrchyan, S. et al. Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC. Phys. Lett. B 716, 30–61 (2012)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Aad, G. et al. Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Phys. Lett. B 716, 1–29 (2012)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  3. Kadowaki, T. & Nishimori, H. Quantum annealing in the transverse Ising model. Phys. Rev. E 58, 5355–5363 (1998)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. Das, A. & Chakrabarti, B. K. Colloquium: Quantum annealing and analog quantum computation. Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1061–1081 (2008)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Neven, H., Denchev, V. S., Rose, G. & Macready, W. G. Training a binary classifier with the quantum adiabatic algorithm. Preprint at (2008)

  6. Pudenz, K. L. & Lidar, D. A. Quantum adiabatic machine learning. Quantum Inf. Process. 12, 2027–2070 (2013)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Kirkpatrick, S., Gelatt, C. D. & Vecchi, M. P. Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220, 671–680 (1983)

    Article  CAS  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Katzgraber, H. G., Trebst, S., Huse, D. A. & Troyer, M. Feedback-optimized parallel tempering monte carlo. J. Stat. Mech. 2006, P03018 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chollet, F. Keras, (2015)

  10. Chen, T. & Guestrin, C. XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system. Preprint at (2016)

  11. Khachatryan, V. et al. Observation of the diphoton decay of the Higgs boson and measurement of its properties. Eur. Phys. J. C 74, 3076 (2014)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Aad, G. et al. Measurement of Higgs boson production in the diphoton decay channel in pp collisions at center-of-mass energies of 7 and 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector. Phys. Rev. D 90, 112015 (2014)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  13. Patrignani, C. et al. Review of particle physics. Chin. Phys. C 40, 100001 (2016)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  14. Englert, C., Plehn, T., Zerwas, D. & Zerwas, P. M. Exploring the Higgs portal. Phys. Lett. B 703, 298–305 (2011)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  15. Morrissey, D. E. & Ramsey-Musolf, M. J. Electroweak baryogenesis. New J. Phys. 14, 125003 (2012)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  16. Buttazzo, D. et al. Investigating the near-criticality of the Higgs boson. J. High Energy Phys. 12, 89 (2013)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. Adam-Bourdarios, C. et al. The Higgs machine learning challenge. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 664, 072015 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Albash, T., Vinci, W., Mishra, A., Warburton, P. A. & Lidar, D. A. Consistency tests of classical and quantum models for a quantum annealer. Phys. Rev. A 91, 042314 (2015)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. Al-Rfou, R. et al. Theano: a Python framework for fast computation of mathematical expressions. Preprint at (2016)

  20. Chen, J. et al. Interpreting the prediction process of a deep network constructed from supervised topic models. In IEEE Int. Conf. Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing 2429–2433 (IEEE, 2016)

  21. Lloyd, S., Mohseni, M. & Rebentrost, P. Quantum principal component analysis. Nat. Phys. 10, 631–633 (2014)

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wiebe, N., Kapoor, A. & Svore, K. Quantum algorithms for nearest-neighbor methods for supervised and unsupervised learning. Quantum Inf. Comput. 15, 318–358 (2015)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Paparo, G. D., Dunjko, V., Makmal, A., Martin-Delgado, M. A. & Briegel, H. J. Quantum speedup for active learning agents. Phys. Rev. X 4, 031002 (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Rebentrost, P., Mohseni, M. & Lloyd, S. Quantum support vector machine for big data classification. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 130503 (2014)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  25. Schuld, M., Sinayskiy, I. & Petruccione, F. An introduction to quantum machine learning. Contemp. Phys. 56, 172–185 (2015)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. Cong, I. & Duan, L. Quantum discriminant analysis for dimensionality reduction and classification. New J. Phys. 18, 073011 (2016)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  27. Biamonte, J. et al. Quantum machine learning. Nature 549, 195–202 (2017)

    Article  CAS  ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. Sjöstrand, T., Mrenna, S. & Skands, P. PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual. J. High Energy Phys. 5, 26 (2006)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  29. Gleisberg, T. et al. Event generation with SHERPA 1.1. J. High Energy Phys. 2, 7 (2009)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

Download references


This project is supported in part by the United States Department of Energy, Office of High Energy Physics Research Technology Computational HEP and Fermi Research Alliance, LLC under contract no. DE-AC02-07CH11359. The project is also supported in part under ARO grant number W911NF-12-1-0523 and NSF grant number INSPIRE-1551064. The work is supported in part by the AT&T Foundry Innovation Centers through INQNET, a programme for accelerating quantum technologies. We thank the Advanced Scientific Computing Research programme of the DOE for the opportunity to present and discuss this work at the ASCR workshop on Quantum Computing for Science (2015). We acknowledge the funding agencies and all of the scientists and staff at CERN and internationally whose hard work resulted in the momentous H(125) discovery in 2012.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations



A.M. mapped the problem on the D-Wave software architecture, analysed the data, provided the machine learning methodology and, with M.S., provided knowledge of Higgs physics. J.J. provided quantum and simulated annealing research, data analysis, machine learning work and, with D.L., quantum and simulated annealing knowledge. J.-R.V. provided quantum annealing research, data analysis, machine learning methods and error analysis, with J.J. D.L. and M.S. oversaw the work, data analysis and results. D.L. conceived the quantum machine learning methodology. M.S. conceived the application. All authors contributed to writing and reviewing the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria Spiropulu.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Additional information

Reviewer Information Nature thanks S. Zohren and the other anonymous reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

This file contains Supplementary Text and Data, Supplementary Figures 1-18 and Supplementary References. (PDF 1961 kb)

Supplementary Data

This zipped file contains data relating to the figures. (ZIP 34239 kb)

PowerPoint slides

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mott, A., Job, J., Vlimant, JR. et al. Solving a Higgs optimization problem with quantum annealing for machine learning. Nature 550, 375–379 (2017).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI:

This article is cited by


By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.


Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing