- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review A

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Quantum Wiener architecture for quantum reservoir computing

Alessio Benavoli*

Felix C. Binder†

  • School of Computer Science and Statistics, Trinity College Dublin, and Trinity Quantum Alliance, Unit 16, Trinity Technology and Enterprise Centre, Pearse Street, Dublin 2, Ireland

  • School of Physics, Trinity College Dublin, and Trinity Quantum Alliance, Unit 16, Trinity Technology and Enterprise Centre, Pearse Street, Dublin 2, Ireland

  • *Contact author: alessio.benavoli@tcd.ie
  • †Contact author: felix.binder@tcd.ie
PDF

Phys. Rev. A 114, 012433 – Published 14 July, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/ktt8-l2tw

Abstract

This work focuses on quantum reservoir computing and, in particular, on quantum Wiener architectures (qWiener), consisting of quantum linear dynamic networks with weak continuous measurements and classical nonlinear static readouts. We provide the first rigorous proof that qWiener systems retain the fading-memory property and universality of classical Wiener architectures, despite quantum constraints on linear dynamics and measurement backaction. Furthermore, we develop a kernel-theoretic interpretation showing that qWiener reservoirs naturally induce deep kernels, providing a principled framework for analyzing their expressivity. We further characterize the simplest qWiener instantiation, consisting of concatenated quantum harmonic oscillators, and show the difference with respect to the classical case. Finally, we empirically evaluate the architecture on standard reservoir computing benchmarks, demonstrating systematic performance gains over prior classical and quantum reservoir computing models.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (66)

  1. H. Jaeger, The “Echo state” Approach to Analysing and Training Recurrent Neural Networks—With an Erratum Note, GMD Technical Report, German National Research Center for information Technology (2001).
  2. W. Maass, T. Natschläger, and H. Markram, Real-time computing without stable states: A new framework for neural computation based on perturbations, Neural Comput. 14, 2531 (2002).
  3. K. Fujii and K. Nakajima, Harnessing disordered-ensemble quantum dynamics for machine learning, Phys. Rev. Appl. 8, 024030 (2017).
  4. K. Nakajima, K. Fujii, M. Negoro, K. Mitarai, and M. Kitagawa, Boosting computational power through spatial multiplexing in quantum reservoir computing, Phys. Rev. Appl. 11, 034021 (2019).
  5. A. Kutvonen, K. Fujii, and T. Sagawa, Optimizing a quantum reservoir computer for time series prediction, Sci. Rep. 10, 14687 (2020).
  6. J. Chen, H. I. Nurdin, and N. Yamamoto, Temporal information processing on noisy quantum computers, Phys. Rev. Appl. 14, 024065 (2020).
  7. J. Nokkala, R. Martínez-Peña, G. L. Giorgi, V. Parigi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Gaussian states of continuous-variable quantum systems provide universal and versatile reservoir computing, Commun. Phys. 4, 53 (2021).
  8. P. Mujal, R. Martínez-Peña, J. Nokkala, J. García-Beni, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Opportunities in quantum reservoir computing and extreme learning machines, Adv. Quantum Technol. 4, 2100027 (2021).
  9. R. Martínez-Peña, J. Nokkala, G. L. Giorgi, R. Zambrini, and M. C. Soriano, Information processing capacity of spin-based quantum reservoir computing systems, Cognit. Comput. 15, 1440 (2023).
  10. F. Hu, S. A. Khan, N. T. Bronn, G. Angelatos, G. E. Rowlands, G. J. Ribeill, and H. E. Türeci, Overcoming the coherence time barrier in quantum machine learning on temporal data, Nat. Commun. 15, 7491 (2024).
  11. I. Paparelle, J. Henaff, J. García-Beni, É. Gillet, D. Montesinos, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, R. Zambrini, and V. Parigi, Experimental memory control in continuous-variable optical quantum reservoir computing, Nat. Photon. 20, 413 (2026).
  12. M. Selimović, I. Agresti, M. Siemaszko, J. Morris, B. Dakić, R. Albiero, A. Crespi, F. Ceccarelli, R. Osellame, M. Stobińska et al., Experimental neuromorphic computing based on quantum memristor, arXiv:2504.18694.
  13. S. Ghosh, A. Opala, M. Matuszewski, T. Paterek, and T. C. Liew, Quantum reservoir processing, npj Quantum Inf. 5, 35 (2019).
  14. D. Marković and J. Grollier, Quantum neuromorphic computing, Appl. Phys. Lett. 117, 150501 (2020).
  15. R. A. Bravo, K. Najafi, X. Gao, and S. F. Yelin, Quantum reservoir computing using arrays of Rydberg atoms, PRX Quantum 3, 030325 (2022).
  16. A. Sakurai, M. P. Estarellas, W. J. Munro, and K. Nemoto, Quantum extreme reservoir computation utilizing scale-free networks, Phys. Rev. Appl. 17, 064044 (2022).
  17. J. Nokkala, Online quantum time series processing with random oscillator networks, Sci. Rep. 13, 7694 (2023).
  18. J. Dudas, B. Carles, E. Plouet, F. A. Mizrahi, J. Grollier, and D. Marković, Quantum reservoir computing implementation on coherently coupled quantum oscillators, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 64 (2023).
  19. A. Hayashi, A. Sakurai, S. Nishio, W. J. Munro, and K. Nemoto, Impact of the form of weighted networks on the quantum extreme reservoir computation, Phys. Rev. A 108, 042609 (2023).
  20. L. Grigoryeva and J.-P. Ortega, Echo state networks are universal, Neural Netw. 108, 495 (2018).
  21. S. Boyd and L. Chua, Fading memory and the problem of approximating nonlinear operators with Volterra series, IEEE Trans. Circuit Syst. 32, 1150 (1985).
  22. V. Volterra and E. Whittaker, Theory of Functionals and of Integral and Integro-differential Equations (Dover, New York, 1931).
  23. The extension to m-dimensional multi-input systems is obtained by combining m such LTI architectures in parallel (one for each input) and feed their outputs to the polynomial readout.
  24. N. Wiener, Nonlinear Problems in Random Theory (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1958).
  25. J. García-Beni, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Scalable photonic platform for real-time quantum reservoir computing, Phys. Rev. Appl. 20, 014051 (2023).
  26. J. Nokkala, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Retrieving past quantum features with deep hybrid classical-quantum reservoir computing, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 5, 035022 (2024).
  27. P. Mujal, R. Martínez-Peña, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Time-series quantum reservoir computing with weak and projective measurements, npj Quantum Inf. 9, 16 (2023).
  28. T. Yasuda, Y. Suzuki, T. Kubota, K. Nakajima, Q. Gao, W. Zhang, S. Shimono, H. I. Nurdin, and N. Yamamoto, Quantum reservoir computing with repeated measurements on superconducting devices, arXiv:2310.06706.
  29. Z. Lu, H. Pu, F. Wang, Z. Hu, and L. Wang, The expressive power of neural networks: A view from the width, in Proceedings of the 31st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (ACM, New York, 2017).
  30. C. E. Rasmussen and C. K. I. Williams, Gaussian Processes for Machine Learning (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2006), Vol. 2.
  31. A. G. Wilson, Z. Hu, R. Salakhutdinov, and E. P. Xing, Deep kernel learning, in Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, edited by A. Gretton and C. C. Robert (PMLR, Cadiz, Spain, 2016), Vol. 51, pp. 370–378.
  32. V. Belavkin, Quantum filtering of Markov signals with white quantum noise, in Quantum Communications and Measurement (Springer, Berlin, 1995), pp. 381–391.
  33. A. Voelker, I. Kajić, and C. Eliasmith, Legendre memory units: Continuous-time representation in recurrent neural networks, in Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (ACM, New York, 2019).
  34. Here we considered a deterministic, classical, stable SISO LTI system. For a stochastic LTI system with classical Wiener noise, the output y(t) becomes stochastic. In this case, the convolution ∫0th(t−τ)u(τ)dτ coincides with the mean of y(t).
  35. We do not consider here the case where A has eigenvalues with multiplicity greater than one.
  36. M. Zorzi and A. Chiuso, The harmonic analysis of kernel functions, Automatica 94, 125 (2018).
  37. Lemma 1 relies on a different convergence result than that originally used in Ref. [36]. Specifically, we employ the strong law of large numbers of Monte Carlo integration, whereas Ref. [36] relies on the convergence of Riemann sums.
  38. A. Wilson and R. Adams, Gaussian process kernels for pattern discovery and extrapolation, in Proceedings of the 30th International Conference on Machine Learning, edited by S. Dasgupta and D. McAllester (PMLR, Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 2013), Vol. 28, pp. 1067–1075.
  39. T. Chen, H. Ohlsson, and L. Ljung, On the estimation of transfer functions, regularizations and Gaussian processes—Revisited, Automatica 48, 1525 (2012).
  40. G. Pillonetto, T. Chen, A. Chiuso, G. De Nicolao, and L. Ljung, Regularized linear system identification using atomic, nuclear and kernel-based norms: The role of the stability constraint, Automatica 69, 137 (2016).
  41. V. I. Paulsen and M. Raghupathi, An Introduction to the Theory of Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Spaces (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2016), Vol. 152.
  42. G. Pillonetto, F. Dinuzzo, T. Chen, G. De Nicolao, and L. Ljung, Kernel methods in system identification, machine learning and function estimation: A survey, Automatica 50, 657 (2014).
  43. The finite case is also of interest in machine learning as technique in kernel approximation for scalability of kernel methods [66].
  44. C. P. Robert, G. Casella, and G. Casella, Monte Carlo Statistical Methods (Springer, Berlin, 2004), Vol. 2.
  45. Y. Cho and L. Saul, Kernel methods for deep learning, in Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (ACM, New York, 2009).
  46. R. Simon, N. Mukunda, and B. Dutta, Quantum-noise matrix for multimode systems: U (n) invariance, squeezing, and normal forms, Phys. Rev. A 49, 1567 (1994).
  47. H. I. Nurdin and N. Yamamoto, Linear dynamical quantum systems, in Analysis, Synthesis, and Control (Springer, Berlin, 2017).
  48. G. Zhang and Z. Dong, Linear quantum systems: A tutorial, Annu. Rev. Contr. 54, 274 (2022).
  49. D. Simon, Optimal State Estimation: Kalman, H Infinity, and Nonlinear Approaches (John Wiley & Sons, New York, 2006).
  50. J. Gough and M. R. James, The series product and its application to quantum feedforward and feedback networks, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 54, 2530 (2009).
  51. C. K. Williams, Computation with infinite neural networks, Neural Comput. 10, 1203 (1998).
  52. R. M. Neal, Bayesian Learning for Neural Networks (Springer Science & Business Media, New York, 2012), Vol. 118.
  53. M. Green and D. J. Limebeer, Linear Robust Control (Courier Corporation, North Chelmsford, MA, 2012).
  54. C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise: A Handbook of Markovian and non-Markovian Quantum Stochastic Methods with Applications to Quantum Optics, 2nd enlarged ed. (Springer, Berlin, 2000).
  55. H. I. Nurdin, M. R. James, and A. C. Doherty, Network synthesis of linear dynamical quantum stochastic systems, SIAM J. Control Optim. 48, 2686 (2009).
  56. C. Wringe, M. Trefzer, and S. Stepney, Reservoir computing benchmarks: A tutorial review and critique, Int. J. Parallel Emerg. Distrib. Syst. 40, 313 (2025).
  57. J. García-Beni, I. Paparelle, V. Parigi, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Quantum machine learning via continuous-variable cluster states and teleportation, EPJ Quantum Technol. 12, 63 (2025).
  58. W. A. Barbosa, A. Griffith, G. E. Rowlands, L. C. Govia, G. J. Ribeill, M.-H. Nguyen, T. A. Ohki, and D. J. Gauthier, Symmetry-aware reservoir computing, Phys. Rev. E 104, 045307 (2021).
  59. M. Forgione and D. Piga, Dynonet: A neural network architecture for learning dynamical systems, Int. J. Adapt. Contr. Sign. Process. 35, 612 (2021).
  60. R. de Oliveira Teloli, L. G. Villani, S. da Silva, and M. D. Todd, On the use of the GP-NARX model for predicting hysteresis effects of bolted joint structures, Mech. Syst. Sig. Process. 159, 107751 (2021).
  61. A. Benavoli, D. Piga, M. Forgione, and M. Zaffalon, Dynogp: Deep Gaussian processes for dynamic system identification, arXiv:2502.05620.
  62. https://github.com/benavoli/qWiener.
  63. T. Hillen, K. J. Painter, A. C. Swan, and A. D. Murtha, Moments of von Mises and Fisher distributions and applications, Math. Biosci. Eng. 14, 673 (2017).
  64. K. Koga and N. Yamamoto, Dissipation-induced pure Gaussian state, Phys. Rev. A 85, 022103 (2012).
  65. K. J. Åström and R. M. Murray, Analysis and Design of Feedback Systems (Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, 2004).
  66. A. Rahimi and B. Recht, Random features for large-scale kernel machines, in Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (ACM, New York, 2007).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. A 114, 012433– Published 14 July, 2026
  • Received 12 January 2026
  • Revised 30 May 2026
  • Accepted 22 June 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation