- 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

Geometric quantum machine learning for barcode similarity classification

Chukwudubem Umeano1, Stefano Scali1, and Oleksandr Kyriienko1,2

PDF

Phys. Rev. A 113, 052425 – Published 12 May, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/sylc-gclc

Abstract

We consider the problem of distinguishing two vectors (visualized as images or barcodes) and learning if they are related to one another. For this, we develop a geometric quantum machine learning (GQML) approach with embedded symmetries that allows for the classification of similar and dissimilar pairs based on global correlations, and enables generalization from just a few samples. Unlike GQML algorithms developed to date, we propose to focus on symmetry-aware measurement adaptation that outperforms unitary parametrizations. We compare GQML for similarity testing against classical deep neural networks and convolutional neural networks with Siamese architectures. We show that quantum networks demonstrate strong empirical performance gains over their classical counterparts in generalization. We explain this difference in performance by analyzing correlated distributions used for composing our dataset. We relate the similarity testing to problems that showcase a proven maximal separation between the bounded-error quantum polynomial time complexity class and the polynomial hierarchy. While the ability to achieve a formal advantage depends on how data are loaded, we discuss how similar problems can benefit from quantum machine learning. Finally, we present a 40-qubit hardware implementation of our quantum model, using a superconducting processor (IBM Kyiv), showing remarkable scalability and resilience to noise.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (119)

  1. Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton, Deep learning, Nature (London) 521, 436 (2015).
  2. A. Moskvichev, V. V. Odouard, and M. Mitchell, The conceptarc benchmark: Evaluating understanding and generalization in the ARC domain, arXiv:2305.07141.
  3. C. Biever, ChatGPT broke the turing test - the race is on for new ways to assess AI, Nature (London) 619, 686 (2023).
  4. Y. LeCun, S. Chopra, R. Hadsell, M.'A. Ranzato, and F. J. Huang, Energy based models, in Predicting Structured Data, edited by G. BakIr, T. Hofmann, B. Schölkopf, A. J. Smola, B. Taskar, and S. V. N. Vishwanathan (The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2007).
  5. M. Benedetti, E. Lloyd, S. Sack, and M. Fiorentini, Parameterized quantum circuits as machine learning models, Quantum Sci. Technol. 4, 043001 (2019).
  6. J. Biamonte, P. Wittek, N. Pancotti, P. Rebentrost, N. Wiebe, and S. Lloyd, Quantum machine learning, Nature (London) 549, 195 (2017).
  7. V. Havlíček, A. D. Córcoles, K. Temme, A. W. Harrow, A. Kandala, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces, Nature (London) 567, 209 (2019).
  8. J. Liu, M. Liu, J.-P. Liu, Z. Ye, Y. Wang, Y. Alexeev, J. Eisert, and L. Jiang, Towards provably efficient quantum algorithms for large-scale machine-learning models, Nat. Commun. 15, 434 (2024).
  9. P. W. Shor, Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer, SIAM J. Comput. 26, 1484 (1997).
  10. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2010).
  11. A. M. Dalzell, S. McArdle, M. Berta, P. Bienias, C.-F. Chen, A. Gilyén, C. T. Hann, M. J. Kastoryano, E. T. Khabiboulline, A. Kubica, G. Salton, S. Wang, and F. G. S. L. Brandão, Quantum Algorithms: A Survey of Applications and End-To-End Complexities (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2023).
  12. M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, K. Fujii, J. R. McClean, K. Mitarai, X. Yuan, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Variational quantum algorithms, Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 625 (2021).
  13. J. Tilly, H. Chen, S. Cao, D. Picozzi, K. Setia, Y. Li, E. Grant, L. Wossnig, I. Rungger, G. H. Booth, and J. Tennyson, The variational quantum eigensolver: A review of methods and best practices, Phys. Rep. 986, 1 (2022).
  14. K. Mitarai, M. Negoro, M. Kitagawa, and K. Fujii, Quantum circuit learning, Phys. Rev. A 98, 032309 (2018).
  15. A. Pérez-Salinas, A. Cervera-Lierta, E. Gil-Fuster, and J. I. Latorre, Data re-uploading for a universal quantum classifier, Quantum 4, 226 (2020).
  16. H.-Y. Huang, M. Broughton, M. Mohseni, R. Babbush, S. Boixo, H. Neven, and J. R. McClean, Power of data in quantum machine learning, Nat. Commun. 12, 2631 (2021).
  17. N. A. Nghiem, S. Y.-C. Chen, and T.-C. Wei, Unified framework for quantum classification, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 033056 (2021).
  18. W. Li and D.-L. Deng, Recent advances for quantum classifiers, Sci. China Phys., Mech. Astron. 65, 220301 (2021).
  19. I. Cong, S. Choi, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum convolutional neural networks, Nat. Phys. 15, 1273 (2019).
  20. S. Monaco, O. Kiss, A. Mandarino, S. Vallecorsa, and M. Grossi, Quantum phase detection generalization from marginal quantum neural network models, Phys. Rev. B 107, L081105 (2023).
  21. D. Herman, C. Googin, X. Liu, Y. Sun, A. Galda, I. Safro, M. Pistoia, and Y. Alexeev, Quantum computing for finance, Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 450 (2023).
  22. J.-G. Liu and L. Wang, Differentiable learning of quantum circuit born machines, Phys. Rev. A 98, 062324 (2018).
  23. C. Zoufal, A. Lucchi, and S. Woerner, Quantum generative adversarial networks for learning and loading random distributions, npj Quantum Inf. 5, 103 (2019).
  24. B. Coyle, D. Mills, V. Danos, and E. Kashefi, The born supremacy: Quantum advantage and training of an Ising born machine, npj Quantum Inf. 6, 60 (2020).
  25. A. E. Paine, V. E. Elfving, and O. Kyriienko, Quantum quantile mechanics: Solving stochastic differential equations for generating time-series, Adv. Quantum Technol. 6, 2300065 (2023).
  26. O. Kyriienko, A. E. Paine, and V. E. Elfving, Protocols for trainable and differentiable quantum generative modeling, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033291 (2024).
  27. S. Kasture, O. Kyriienko, and V. E. Elfving, Protocols for classically training quantum generative models on probability distributions, Phys. Rev. A 108, 042406 (2023).
  28. M. Hibat-Allah, M. Mauri, J. Carrasquilla, and A. Perdomo-Ortiz, A framework for demonstrating practical quantum advantage: Comparing quantum against classical generative models, Commun. Phys. 7, 68 (2024).
  29. W. Hou, M. Li, and Y.-Z. You, Sequential learning on a tensor network born machine with trainable token embedding, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 6, 025071 (2025).
  30. O. Kyriienko, A. E. Paine, and V. E. Elfving, Solving nonlinear differential equations with differentiable quantum circuits, Phys. Rev. A 103, 052416 (2021).
  31. M. Lubasch, J. Joo, P. Moinier, M. Kiffner, and D. Jaksch, Variational quantum algorithms for nonlinear problems, Phys. Rev. A 101, 010301(R) (2020).
  32. S. Markidis, On physics-informed neural networks for quantum computers, Front. Appl. Math. Stat. 8, 1036711 (2022).
  33. N. Heim, A. Ghosh, O. Kyriienko, and V. E. Elfving, Quantum model-discovery, arXiv:2111.06376.
  34. A. E. Paine, V. E. Elfving, and O. Kyriienko, Quantum kernel methods for solving regression problems and differential equations, Phys. Rev. A 107, 032428 (2023).
  35. A. E. Paine, V. E. Elfving, and O. Kyriienko, Physics-informed quantum machine learning: Solving nonlinear differential equations in latent spaces without costly grid evaluations, arXiv:2308.01827.
  36. M. Schuld and N. Killoran, Quantum machine learning in feature Hilbert spaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 040504 (2019).
  37. A. Abbas, D. Sutter, C. Zoufal, A. Lucchi, A. Figalli, and S. Woerner, The power of quantum neural networks, Nat. Comput. Sci. 1, 403 (2021).
  38. T. Goto, Q. H. Tran, and K. Nakajima, Universal approximation property of quantum machine learning models in quantum-enhanced feature spaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 090506 (2021).
  39. S. Altares-López, A. Ribeiro, and J. J. García-Ripoll, Automatic design of quantum feature maps, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 045015 (2021).
  40. C. A. Williams, A. E. Paine, H.-Y. Wu, V. E. Elfving, and O. Kyriienko, Quantum chebyshev transform: Mapping, embedding, learning and sampling distributions, arXiv:2306.17026.
  41. B. Albrecht, C. Dalyac, L. Leclerc, L. Ortiz-Gutiérrez, S. Thabet, M. D'Arcangelo, J. R. K. Cline, V. E. Elfving, L. Lassablière, H. Silvério, B. Ximenez, L.-P. Henry, A. Signoles, and L. Henriet, Quantum feature maps for graph machine learning on a neutral atom quantum processor, Phys. Rev. A 107, 042615 (2023).
  42. B. Jaderberg, A. A. Gentile, Y. Achari Berrada, E. Shishenina, and V. E. Elfving, Let quantum neural networks choose their own frequencies Phys. Rev. A 109, 042421 (2024).
  43. C. Umeano and O. Kyriienko, Ground state-based quantum feature maps, arXiv:2404.07174.
  44. H.-Y. Wu, V. E. Elfving, and O. Kyriienko, Multidimensional quantum generative modeling by quantum Hartley transform Adv. Quantum Technol. 8, 2400337 (2025).
  45. S. Thabet, M. Djellabi, I. Sokolov, S. Kasture, L.-P. Henry, and L. Henriet, Quantum positional encodings for graph neural networks, arXiv:2406.06547.
  46. S. Y. Chang, B. L. Saux, S. Vallecorsa, and M. Grossi, Quantum convolutional circuits for earth observation image classification, in IGARSS 2022-2022 IEEE International Geoscience and Remote Sensing Symposium (IEEE, New York, 2022), pp. 4907–4910.
  47. N. Schetakis, D. Aghamalyan, P. Griffin, and M. Boguslavsky, Review of some existing QML frameworks and novel hybrid classical–quantum neural networks realising binary classification for the noisy datasets, Sci. Rep. 12, 11927 (2022).
  48. A. Senokosov, A. Sedykh, A. Sagingalieva, B. Kyriacou, and A. Melnikov, Quantum machine learning for image classification, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 5, 015040 (2024).
  49. K. Shen, B. Jobst, E. Shishenina, and F. Pollmann, Classification of the fashion-MNIST dataset on a quantum computer, arXiv:2403.02405.
  50. V. Belis, S. González-Castillo, C. Reissel, S. Vallecorsa, E. F. Combarro, G. Dissertori, and F. Reiter, Higgs analysis with quantum classifiers, EPJ Web Conf. 251, 03070 (2021).
  51. S. Y.-C. Chen, T.-C. Wei, C. Zhang, H. Yu, and S. Yoo, Quantum convolutional neural networks for high energy physics data analysis, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 013231 (2022).
  52. V. Belis, K. Anna WoŹniak, E. Puljak, P. Barkoutsos, G. Dissertori, M. Grossi, M. Pierini, F. Reiter, I. Tavernelli, and S. Vallecorsa, Quantum anomaly detection in the latent space of proton collision events at the LHC, Commun. Phys. 7, 334 (2023).
  53. V. Belis, P. Odagiu, M. Grossi, F. Reiter, G. Dissertori, and S. Vallecorsa, Guided quantum compression for high dimensional data classification, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 5, 035010 (2024).
  54. A. Di Meglio, K. Jansen, I. Tavernelli, C. Alexandrou, S. Arunachalam, C. W. Bauer, K. Borras, S. Carrazza, A. Crippa, V. Croft, R. de Putter, A. Delgado, V. Dunjko, D. J. Egger, E. Fernández-Combarro, E. Fuchs, L. Funcke, D. González-Cuadra, M. Grossi, J. C. Halimeh, et al., Quantum computing for high-energy physics: State of the art and challenges, PRX Quantum 5, 037001 (2024).
  55. D. J. Egger, C. Gambella, J. Marecek, S. McFaddin, M. Mevissen, R. Raymond, A. Simonetto, S. Woerner, and E. Yndurain, Quantum computing for finance: State-of-the-art and future prospects, IEEE Trans. Quantum Eng. 1, 3101724 (2020).
  56. L. Leclerc, L. Ortiz-Gutiérrez, S. Grijalva, B. Albrecht, J. R. K. Cline, V. E. Elfving, A. Signoles, L. Henriet, G. Del Bimbo, U. A. Sheikh, M. Shah, L. Andrea, F. Ishtiaq, A. Duarte, S. Mugel, I. Cáceres, M. Kurek, R. Orús, A. Seddik, O. Hammami, et al., Financial risk management on a neutral atom quantum processor, Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 043117 (2023).
  57. O. Kyriienko and E. B. Magnusson, Unsupervised quantum machine learning for fraud detection, arXiv:2208.01203.
  58. M. Grossi, N. Ibrahim, V. Radescu, R. Loredo, K. Voigt, C. von Altrock, and A. Rudnik, Mixed quantum–classical method for fraud detection with quantum feature selection, IEEE Trans. Quantum Eng. 3, 3102812 (2022).
  59. M. Doosti, P. Wallden, C. B. Hamill, R. Hankache, O. T. Brown, and C. Heunen, A brief review of quantum machine learning for financial services, arXiv:2407.12618.
  60. N. Innan, A. Sawaika, A. Dhor, S. Dutta, S. Thota, H. Gokal, N. Patel, M. A.-Z. Khan, I. Theodonis, and M. Bennai, Financial fraud detection using quantum graph neural networks, Quantum Mach. Intell. 6, 7 (2024).
  61. B. Coecke, G. de Felice, K. Meichanetzidis, and A. Toumi, Foundations for near-term quantum natural language processing, arXiv:2012.03755.
  62. D. Widdows, A. Alexander, D. Zhu, C. Zimmerman, and A. Majumder, Near-term advances in quantum natural language processing, Ann. Math. Artif. Intell. 92, 1249 (2024).
  63. D. Widdows, W. Aboumrad, D. Kim, S. Ray, and J. Mei, Quantum natural language processing Künstl. Intell. 38, 293 (2024).
  64. G. Verdon, T. McCourt, E. Luzhnica, V. Singh, S. Leichenauer, and J. Hidary, Quantum graph neural networks, arXiv:1909.12264.
  65. L.-P. Henry, S. Thabet, C. Dalyac, and L. Henriet, Quantum evolution Kernel: Machine learning on graphs with programmable arrays of qubits, Phys. Rev. A 104, 032416 (2021).
  66. C. Dalyac, L. Leclerc, L. Vignoli, M. Djellabi, W. da Silva Coelho, B. Ximenez, A. Dareau, D. Dreon, V. E. Elfving, A. Signoles, L.-P. Henry, and L. Henriet, Graph algorithms with neutral atom quantum processors, arXiv:2403.11931.
  67. S. Yu, C. Peng, Y. Wang, A. Shehzad, F. Xia, and E. R. Hancock, Quantum graph learning: Frontiers and outlook, arXiv:2302.00892.
  68. Z. Kaseb, M. Möller, G. T. Balducci, P. Palensky, and P. P. Vergara, Quantum neural networks for power flow analysis, Electr. Power Syst. Res. 235, 110677 (2024).
  69. O. Kiss, F. Tacchino, S. Vallecorsa, and I. Tavernelli, Quantum neural networks force fields generation, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol. 3, 035004 (2022).
  70. M. Cerezo, M. Larocca, D. García-Martín, N. L. Diaz, P. Braccia, E. Fontana, M. S. Rudolph, P. Bermejo, A. Ijaz, S. Thanasilp, et al., Does provable absence of barren plateaus imply classical simulability? Nat. Commun. 16, 7907 (2025).
  71. O. Kyriienko, C. Umeano, and Z. Holmes, Advantage for discrete variational quantum algorithms in circuit recompilation, arXiv:2510.01154.
  72. M. Schuld, Supervised quantum machine learning models are kernel methods, arXiv:2101.11020.
  73. C. Gyurik, R. Molteni, and V. Dunjko, Limitations of measure-first protocols in quantum machine learning, arXiv:2311.12618.
  74. S. Jerbi, C. Gyurik, S. C. Marshall, R. Molteni, and V. Dunjko, Shadows of quantum machine learning, Nat. Commun. 15, 5676 (2024).
  75. M. Schuld and N. Killoran, Is quantum advantage the right goal for quantum machine learning? PRX Quantum 3, 030101 (2022).
  76. N. Wiebe, D. Braun, and S. Lloyd, Quantum algorithm for data fitting, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 050505 (2012).
  77. S. Lloyd, M. Mohseni, and P. Rebentrost, Quantum algorithms for supervised and unsupervised machine learning, arXiv:1307.0411.
  78. M. B. Mansky, J. Nüßlein, D. Bucher, D. Schuman, S. Zielinski, and C. Linnhoff-Popien, Sampling problems on a quantum computer, in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), Vol. 01 (IEEE, New York, 2023), pp. 485–495.
  79. D. Hangleiter and J. Eisert, Computational advantage of quantum random sampling, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 035001 (2023).
  80. K. Gili, M. Hibat-Allah, M. Mauri, C. Ballance, and A. Perdomo-Ortiz, Do quantum circuit born machines generalize? Quantum Sci. Technol. 8, 035021 (2023).
  81. Z.-Y. Han, J. Wang, H. Fan, L. Wang, and P. Zhang, Unsupervised generative modeling using matrix product states, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031012 (2018).
  82. H.-Y. Huang, M. Broughton, N. Eassa, H. Neven, R. Babbush, and J. R. McClean, Generative quantum advantage for classical and quantum problems, arXiv:2509.09033.
  83. H.-Y. Huang, M. Broughton, J. Cotler, S. Chen, J. Li, M. Mohseni, H. Neven, R. Babbush, R. Kueng, J. Preskill, and J. R. McClean, Quantum advantage in learning from experiments, Science 376, 1182 (2022).
  84. M. C. Caro, H.-Y. Huang, M. Cerezo, K. Sharma, A. Sornborger, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Generalization in quantum machine learning from few training data, Nat. Commun. 13, 4919 (2022).
  85. C. Umeano, A. E. Paine, V. E. Elfving, and O. Kyriienko, What can we learn from quantum convolutional neural networks? Adv. Quantum Technol. 8, 2400325 (2023).
  86. E. Gil-Fuster, J. Eisert, and C. Bravo-Prieto, Understanding quantum machine learning also requires rethinking generalization Nat. Commun. 15, 2277 (2023).
  87. H. Zheng, Z. Li, J. Liu, S. Strelchuk, and R. Kondor, Speeding up learning quantum states through group equivariant convolutional quantum ansätze, PRX Quantum 4, 020327 (2023).
  88. J. J. Meyer, M. Mularski, E. Gil-Fuster, A. A. Mele, F. Arzani, A. Wilms, and J. Eisert, Exploiting symmetry in variational quantum machine learning, PRX Quantum 4, 010328 (2023).
  89. M. Larocca, F. Sauvage, F. M. Sbahi, G. Verdon, P. J. Coles, and M. Cerezo, Group-invariant quantum machine learning, PRX Quantum 3, 030341 (2022).
  90. M. M. Bronstein, J. Bruna, T. Cohen, and P. Veličković, Geometric deep learning: Grids, groups, graphs, geodesics, and gauges, arXiv:2104.13478.
  91. Q. T. Nguyen, L. Schatzki, P. Braccia, M. Ragone, P. J. Coles, F. Sauvage, M. Larocca, and M. Cerezo, Theory for equivariant quantum neural networks, PRX Quantum 5, 020328 (2024).
  92. M. Ragone, P. Braccia, Q. T. Nguyen, L. Schatzki, P. J. Coles, F. Sauvage, M. Larocca, and M. Cerezo, Representation theory for geometric quantum machine learning, arXiv:2210.07980.
  93. C. Tüysüz, S. Y. Chang, M. Demidik, K. Jansen, S. Vallecorsa, and M. Grossi, Symmetry breaking in geometric quantum machine learning in the presence of noise, PRX Quantum 5, 030314 (2024).
  94. I. Nha Minh Le, O. Kiss, J. Schuhmacher, I. Tavernelli, and F. Tacchino, Symmetry-invariant quantum machine learning force fields, New J. Phys. 27, 023015 (2025).
  95. E. R. Anschuetz, A. Bauer, B. T. Kiani, and S. Lloyd, Efficient classical algorithms for simulating symmetric quantum systems, Quantum 7, 1189 (2023).
  96. T. A. Bespalova and O. Kyriienko, Quantum simulation and ground state preparation for the honeycomb Kitaev model, arXiv:2109.13883.
  97. L. G. Valiant, A theory of the learnable, Commun. ACM 27, 1134 (1984).
  98. R. Sweke, J.-P. Seifert, D. Hangleiter, and J. Eisert, On the quantum versus classical learnability of discrete distributions, Quantum 5, 417 (2021).
  99. N. Pirnay, R. Sweke, J. Eisert, and J.-P. Seifert, Superpolynomial quantum-classical separation for density modeling, Phys. Rev. A 107, 042416 (2023).
  100. C. Gyurik and V. Dunjko, Exponential separations between classical and quantum learners, arXiv:2306.16028.
  101. Y. Liu, S. Arunachalam, and K. Temme, A rigorous and robust quantum speed-up in supervised machine learning, Nat. Phys. 17, 1013 (2021).
  102. J. Jäger and R. V. Krems, Universal expressiveness of variational quantum classifiers and quantum kernels for support vector machines, Nat. Commun. 14, 576 (2023).
  103. T. Muser, E. Zapusek, V. Belis, and F. Reiter, Provable advantages of kernel-based quantum learners and quantum preprocessing based on Grover's algorithm, arXiv:2309.14406.
  104. C. Umeano, V. E. Elfving, and O. Kyriienko, Geometric quantum machine learning of BQPA protocols and latent graph classifiers, arXiv:2402.03871.
  105. J. Bowles, V. J. Wright, M. Farkas, N. Killoran, and M. Schuld, Contextuality and inductive bias in quantum machine learning, arXiv:2302.01365.
  106. R. Qu and Y. Bao, Quantum entanglement in n-qubit real equally weighted states, arXiv:1207.2518.
  107. M. Rossi, M. Huber, D. Bruß, and C. Macchiavello, Quantum hypergraph states, New J. Phys. 15, 113022 (2013).
  108. R. Molteni, C. Gyurik, and V. Dunjko, Exponential quantum advantages in learning quantum observables from classical data, npj Quantum Inf. 12, 19 (2026).
  109. J. Friedman, T. Hastie, and R. Tibshirani, Regularization paths for generalized linear models via coordinate descent, J. Stat. Softw. 33, 1 (2010).
  110. J. Bromley, I. Guyon, Y. LeCun, E. Säckinger, and R. Shah, Signature verification using a “siamese” time delay neural network, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, edited by J. Cowan, G. Tesauro, and J. Alspector, Vol. 6 (Morgan-Kaufmann, San Francisco, 1993).
  111. G. R. Koch, Siamese neural networks for one-shot image recognition, in Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning, Lille, France (JMLR, 2015), Vol. 37.
  112. IBM quantum resources, https://cloud.ibm.com/quantum/resources/systems.
  113. R. Raz and A. Tal, Oracle separation of bqp and ph, in Proceedings of the 51st Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC 2019 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, 2019), pp. 13–23.
  114. S. Aaronson, BQP and the polynomial hierarchy, in Proceedings of the Forty-Second ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '10 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, 2010), pp. 141–150.
  115. S. Aaronson and A. Ambainis, Forrelation: A problem that optimally separates quantum from classical computing, in Proceedings of the Forty-Seventh Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '15 (Association for Computing Machinery, New York, 2015), pp. 307–316.
  116. S. Bravyi, D. Gosset, D. Grier, and L. Schaeffer, Classical algorithms for forrelation, arXiv:2102.06963.
  117. E. M. Stoudenmire and X. Waintal, Grover's algorithm offers no quantum advantage, Phys. Rev. X 14, 041029 (2024).
  118. C. Umeano, S. Scali, and O. Kyriienko, Quantum community detection via deterministic elimination, Phys. Rev. A 112, 052422 (2025).
  119. S. Scali and C. Umeano, Qu-dos/dataset-barcodes [Dataset], Zenodo (2024), https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.13691943.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. A 113, 052425– Published 12 May, 2026
  • Received 6 February 2025
  • Revised 10 March 2026
  • Accepted 20 March 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