- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

PRX Life

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 Computing for Genomics: Conceptual Challenges and Practical Perspectives

Aurora Maurizio1,* and Guglielmo Mazzola2,†

  • *Contact author: maurizio.aurora@hsr.it
  • †Contact author: guglielmo.mazzola@uzh.ch
PDF

PRX Life 3, 047001 – Published 30 October, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/h49j-bsc6

Abstract

We assess the potential of quantum computing to accelerate computation of central tasks in genomics, focusing on often-neglected theoretical limitations. We discuss state-of-the-art challenges of quantum search, optimization, and machine learning algorithms. Examining database search with Grover's algorithm, we show that the expected speedup vanishes under realistic assumptions. For combinatorial optimization prevalent in genomics, we discuss the limitations of theoretical complexity in practice and suggest carefully identifying problems genuinely suited for quantum acceleration. Given the competition from excellent classical approximate solvers, quantum computing could offer a speedup in the near future only for a specific subset of hard enough tasks in assembly, gene selection, and inference. These tasks need to be characterized by core optimization problems that are particularly challenging for classical methods while requiring relatively limited variables. We emphasize rigorous empirical validation through runtime scaling analysis to avoid misleading claims of quantum advantage. Finally, we discuss the problem of trainability and data-loading in quantum machine learning. This work advocates for a balanced perspective on quantum computing in genomics, guiding future research toward targeted applications and robust validation.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (189)

  1. A. Alyass, M. Turcotte, and D. Meyre, From big data analysis to personalized medicine for all: Challenges and opportunities, BMC Med. Genomics 8, 33 (2015).
  2. Y. Hasin, M. Seldin, and A. Lusis, Multi-omics approaches to disease, Genome Biol. 18, 83 (2017).
  3. M. Nielsen and I. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, Cambridge Series on Information and the Natural Sciences (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2000).
  4. F. Tacchino, A. Chiesa, S. Carretta, and D. Gerace, Quantum computers as universal quantum simulators: State-of-the-art and perspectives, Adv. Quantum Technol. 3, 1900052 (2020).
  5. Y. Cao, J. Romero, J. P. Olson, M. Degroote, P. D. Johnson, M. Kieferová, I. D. Kivlichan, T. Menke, B. Peropadre, N. P. Sawaya et al., Quantum chemistry in the age of quantum computing, Chem. Rev. 119, 10856 (2019).
  6. A. Di Meglio, K. Jansen, I. Tavernelli, C. Alexandrou, S. Arunachalam, C. W. Bauer, K. Borras, S. Carrazza, A. Crippa, V. Croft et al., Quantum computing for high-energy physics: State of the art and challenges, PRX Quantum 5, 037001 (2024).
  7. R. Orús, S. Mugel, and E. Lizaso, Quantum computing for finance: Overview and prospects, Rev. Phys. 4, 100028 (2019).
  8. A. Jayakumar, A. A. Adedoyin, J. J. Ambrosiano, P. M. Anisimov, A. Baertschi, W. R. Casper, G. Chennupati, C. J. Coffrin, H. N. Djidjev, D. O. Gunter et al., Quantum algorithm implementations for beginners, ACM Trans. Quantum Comput. 3, 1 (2022).
  9. C. Outeiral, M. Strahm, J. Shi, G. M. Morris, S. C. Benjamin, and C. M. Deane, The prospects of quantum computing in computational molecular biology, WIREs Comput. Mol. Sci. 11, e1481 (2021).
  10. B. A. Cordier, N. P. Sawaya, G. G. Guerreschi, and S. K. McWeeney, Biology and medicine in the landscape of quantum advantages, J. R. Soc. Interface. 19, 20220541 (2022).
  11. L. Marchetti, R. Nifosì, P. L. Martelli, E. Da Pozzo, V. Cappello, F. Banterle, M. L. Trincavelli, C. Martini, and M. D'Elia, Quantum computing algorithms: Getting closer to critical problems in computational biology, Brief. Bioinform. 23, bbac437 (2022).
  12. K. Nalecz-Charkiewicz, K. Charkiewicz, and R. M. Nowak, Quantum computing in bioinformatics: A systematic review mapping, Brief. Bioinform. 25, bbae391 (2024).
  13. F. F. Flöther, The state of quantum computing applications in health and medicine, Res. Direct.: Quant. Technol. 1, e10 (2023).
  14. M. Zinner, F. Dahlhausen, P. Boehme, J. Ehlers, L. Bieske, and L. Fehring, Quantum computing's potential for drug discovery: Early stage industry dynamics, Drug Discovery Today 26, 1680 (2021).
  15. P. S. Emani, J. Warrell, A. Anticevic, S. Bekiranov, M. Gandal, M. J. McConnell, G. Sapiro, A. Aspuru-Guzik, J. T. Baker, M. Bastiani et al., Quantum computing at the frontiers of biological sciences, Nat. Methods 18, 701 (2021).
  16. R. Ur Rasool, H. F. Ahmad, W. Rafique, A. Qayyum, J. Qadir, and Z. Anwar, Quantum computing for healthcare: A review, Future Internet 15, 94 (2023).
  17. S. Maniscalco, E.-M. Borrelli, D. Cavalcanti, C. Foti, A. Glos, M. Goldsmith, S. Knecht, K. Korhonen, J. Malmi, A. Nykänen et al., Quantum network medicine: Rethinking medicine with network science and quantum algorithms, arXiv:2206.12405.
  18. S. Basu, J. Born, A. Bose, S. Capponi, D. Chalkia, T. A. Chan, H. Doga, F. F. Flother, G. Getz, M. Goldsmith, T. Gujarati, A. Guzman-Saenz, D. Iliopoulos, G. O. Jones, S. Knecht, D. Madan, S. Maniscalco, N. Mariella, J. A. Morrone, K. Najafi et al., Towards quantum-enabled cell-centric therapeutics, arXiv:2307.05734.
  19. S. McWeeney, T. Perciano, C. Susut, L. Chatterjee, M. Fornari, L. Biven, and C. Siwy, Quantum computing for biomedical computational and data sciences: A joint DOE-NIH roundtable, Technical Report, USDOE Office of Science, Washington, D.C. (2023).
  20. T. J. Durant, E. Knight, B. Nelson, S. Dudgeon, S. J. Lee, D. Walliman, H. P. Young, L. Ohno-Machado, and W. L. Schulz, A primer for quantum computing and its applications to healthcare and biomedical research, J. Am. Med. Inf. Assoc. 31, 1774 (2024).
  21. A. M. Smaldone, Y. Shee, G. W. Kyro, C. Xu, N. P. Vu, R. Dutta, M. H. Farag, A. Galda, S. Kumar, E. Kyoseva et al., Quantum machine learning in drug discovery: Applications in academia and pharmaceutical industries, Chem. Rev. 125, 5436 (2025).
  22. F. F. Flöther, D. Blankenberg, M. Demidik, K. Jansen, R. Krishnakumar, R. Krishnakumar, N. Laanait, L. Parida, C. Y. Saab, and F. Utro, How quantum computing can enhance biomarker discovery, Patterns 6, 101236 (2025).
  23. 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 et al., Quantum Algorithms: A Survey of Applications and End-to-end Complexities (Cambridge University Press, 2025).
  24. L. K. Grover, A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search, in Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (ACM, New York, NY, 1996), pp. 212–219.
  25. S. Yarkoni, E. Raponi, T. Bäck, and S. Schmitt, Quantum annealing for industry applications: Introduction and review, Rep. Prog. Phys. 85, 104001 (2022).
  26. A. D. King, S. Suzuki, J. Raymond, A. Zucca, T. Lanting, F. Altomare, A. J. Berkley, S. Ejtemaee, E. Hoskinson, S. Huang et al., Coherent quantum annealing in a programmable 2,000 qubit Ising chain, Nat. Phys. 18, 1324 (2022).
  27. A. D. King, A. Nocera, M. M. Rams, J. Dziarmaga, R. Wiersema, W. Bernoudy, J. Raymond, N. Kaushal, N. Heinsdorf, R. Harris et al., Beyond-classical computation in quantum simulation, Science 388, 199 (2025).
  28. Z. Cai, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, W. J. Huggins, Y. Li, J. R. McClean, and T. E. O'Brien, Quantum error mitigation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 045005 (2023).
  29. Google Quantum AI, Suppressing quantum errors by scaling a surface code logical qubit, Nature (London) 614, 676 (2023).
  30. Google Quantum AI and Collaborators, Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold, Nature (London) 638, 920 (2025).
  31. S. Bravyi, A. W. Cross, J. M. Gambetta, D. Maslov, P. Rall, and T. J. Yoder, High-threshold and low-overhead fault-tolerant quantum memory, Nature (London) 627, 778 (2024).
  32. T. J. Yoder, E. Schoute, P. Rall, E. Pritchett, J. M. Gambetta, A. W. Cross, M. Carroll, and M. E. Beverland, Tour de gross: A modular quantum computer based on bivariate bicycle codes, arXiv:2506.03094.
  33. A. G. Fowler, M. Mariantoni, J. M. Martinis, and A. N. Cleland, Surface codes: Towards practical large-scale quantum computation, Phys. Rev. A 86, 032324 (2012).
  34. D. Litinski, A game of surface codes: Large-scale quantum computing with lattice surgery, Quantum 3, 128 (2019).
  35. M. E. Beverland, P. Murali, M. Troyer, K. M. Svore, T. Hoeffler, V. Kliuchnikov, G. H. Low, M. Soeken, A. Sundaram, and A. Vaschillo, Assessing requirements to scale to practical quantum advantage, arXiv:2211.07629.
  36. J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
  37. A. Das and B. K. Chakrabarti, Colloquium: Quantum annealing and analog quantum computation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 1061 (2008).
  38. T. Albash and D. A. Lidar, Adiabatic quantum computation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 015002 (2018).
  39. A. Montanaro, Quantum algorithms: An overview, npj Quantum Inf. 2, 15023 (2016).
  40. C. Gidney and A. G. Fowler, Efficient magic state factories with a catalyzed |ccz> to 2|t> transformation, Quantum 3, 135 (2019).
  41. R. Babbush, J. R. McClean, M. Newman, C. Gidney, S. Boixo, and H. Neven, Focus beyond quadratic speedups for error-corrected quantum advantage, PRX Quantum 2, 010103 (2021).
  42. G. Mazzola, Quantum computing for chemistry and physics applications from a Monte Carlo perspective, J. Chem. Phys. 160, 010901 (2024).
  43. V. Tam, N. Patel, M. Turcotte, Y. Bossé, G. Paré, and D. Meyre, Benefits and limitations of genome-wide association studies, Nat. Rev. Genet. 20, 467 (2019).
  44. E. Uffelmann, Q. Q. Huang, N. S. Munung, J. De Vries, Y. Okada, A. R. Martin, H. C. Martin, T. Lappalainen, and D. Posthuma, Genome-wide association studies, Nat. Rev. Methods Primers 1, 59 (2021).
  45. D. W. Bowden, S. S. An, N. D. Palmer, W. M. Brown, J. M. Norris, S. M. Haffner, G. A. Hawkins, X. Guo, J. I. Rotter, Y.-D. I. Chen et al., Molecular basis of a linkage peak: Exome sequencing and family-based analysis identify a rare genetic variant in the adipoq gene in the IRAS family study, Human Mol. Genet. 19, 4112 (2010).
  46. C. T. Consortium, The nature and identification of quantitative trait loci: A community's view, Nat. Rev. Genet. 4, 911 (2003).
  47. X. Wang, D. Fan, Y. Yang, R. C. Gimple, and S. Zhou, Integrative multi-omics approaches to explore immune cell functions: Challenges and opportunities, IScience 26, 106359 (2023).
  48. L. C. L. Hollenberg, Fast quantum search algorithms in protein sequence comparisons: Quantum bioinformatics, Phys. Rev. E 62, 7532 (2000).
  49. K. Prousalis and N. Konofaos, A quantum pattern recognition method for improving pairwise sequence alignment, Sci. Rep. 9, 7226 (2019).
  50. P. Niroula and Y. Nam, A quantum algorithm for string matching, npj Quantum Inf. 7, 37 (2021).
  51. A. Sarkar, Z. Al-Ars, C. G. Almudever, and K. L. Bertels, QiBAM: Approximate sub-string index search on quantum accelerators applied to DNA read alignment, Electronics 10, 2433 (2021).
  52. K. K. Soni and A. Rasool, Quantum-based exact pattern matching algorithms for biological sequences, ETRI J. 43, 483 (2021).
  53. K. Miyamoto, N. Yamamoto, and Y. Sakakibara, Quantum algorithm for position weight matrix matching, IEEE Trans. Quantum Eng. 4, 1 (2023).
  54. A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd, Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 150502 (2009).
  55. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum random access memory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 160501 (2008).
  56. S. Arunachalam, V. Gheorghiu, T. Jochym-O'Connor, M. Mosca, and P. V. Srinivasan, On the robustness of bucket brigade quantum RAM, New J. Phys. 17, 123010 (2015).
  57. B. D. Clader, B. C. Jacobs, and C. R. Sprouse, Preconditioned quantum linear system algorithm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 250504 (2013).
  58. R. Babbush, C. Gidney, D. W. Berry, N. Wiebe, J. McClean, A. Paler, A. Fowler, and H. Neven, Encoding electronic spectra in quantum circuits with linear T complexity, Phys. Rev. X 8, 041015 (2018).
  59. S. Jaques and A. G. Rattew, Qram: A survey and critique, arXiv:2305.10310.
  60. H. Tezuka, K. Nakaji, T. Satoh, and N. Yamamoto, Grover search revisited: Application to image pattern matching, Phys. Rev. A 105, 032440 (2022).
  61. K. Nakaji, S. Uno, Y. Suzuki, R. Raymond, T. Onodera, T. Tanaka, H. Tezuka, N. Mitsuda, and N. Yamamoto, Approximate amplitude encoding in shallow parameterized quantum circuits and its application to financial market indicators, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 023136 (2022).
  62. National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), Human genome overview—Genome reference consortium (2024), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/grc/human.
  63. E. S. Lander, Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome, Nature (London) 409, 860 (2001).
  64. J. C. Venter, M. D. Adams, E. W. Myers, P. W. Li, R. J. Mural, G. G. Sutton, H. O. Smith, M. Yandell, C. A. Evans, R. A. Holt et al., The sequence of the human genome, Science 291, 1304 (2001).
  65. M. Larocca, S. Thanasilp, S. Wang, K. Sharma, J. Biamonte, P. J. Coles, L. Cincio, J. R. McClean, Z. Holmes, and M. Cerezo, Barren plateaus in variational quantum computing, Nat. Rev. Phys. 7, 174 (2025).
  66. G. Scriva, N. Astrakhantsev, S. Pilati, and G. Mazzola, Challenges of variational quantum optimization with measurement shot noise, Phys. Rev. A 109, 032408 (2024).
  67. F. M. Creevey, H. T. Hassan, J. McCafferty, L. C. Hollenberg, and S. Strelchuk, Scalable quantum state preparation for encoding genomic data with matrix product states, arXiv:2508.06184.
  68. R. Chikhi, A. Limasset, and P. Medvedev, Compacting de bruijn graphs from sequencing data quickly and in low memory, Bioinformatics 32, i201 (2016).
  69. S. B. Needleman and C. D. Wunsch, A general method applicable to the search for similarities in the amino acid sequence of two proteins, J. Mol. Biol. 48, 443 (1970).
  70. T. F. Smith, M. S. Waterman et al., Identification of common molecular subsequences, J. Mol. Biol. 147, 195 (1981).
  71. S. F. Altschul, W. Gish, W. Miller, E. W. Myers, and D. J. Lipman, Basic local alignment search tool, J. Mol. Biol. 215, 403 (1990).
  72. T. Hoefler, T. Häner, and M. Troyer, Disentangling hype from practicality: On realistically achieving quantum advantage, Commun. ACM 66, 82 (2023).
  73. A. Daskin, A. Grama, and S. Kais, Multiple network alignment on quantum computers, Quantum Info. Proc. 13, 2653 (2014).
  74. K. Kishi, T. Satoh, R. Raymond, N. Yamamoto, and Y. Sakakibara, Graph Kernels encoding features of all subgraphs by quantum superposition, IEEE J. Emerg. Select. Top. Circ. Syst. 12, 602 (2022).
  75. R. M. Idury and M. S. Waterman, A new algorithm for DNA sequence assembly, J. Comput. Biol. 2, 291 (1995).
  76. M. C. Schatz, A. L. Delcher, and S. L. Salzberg, Assembly of large genomes using second-generation sequencing, Genome Res. 20, 1165 (2010).
  77. J. R. Miller, S. Koren, and G. Sutton, Assembly algorithms for next-generation sequencing data, Genomics 95, 315 (2010).
  78. P. Flicek and E. Birney, Sense from sequence reads: Methods for alignment and assembly, Nat. Methods 6, S6 (2009).
  79. H. Li, J. Ruan, and R. Durbin, Mapping short DNA sequencing reads and calling variants using mapping quality scores, Genome Res. 18, 1851 (2008).
  80. Z. Iqbal, M. Caccamo, I. Turner, P. Flicek, and G. McVean, De novo assembly and genotyping of variants using colored de Bruijn graphs, Nat. Genet. 44, 226 (2012).
  81. J. H. Moore, F. W. Asselbergs, and S. M. Williams, Bioinformatics challenges for genome-wide association studies, Bioinformatics 26, 445 (2010).
  82. R. Schwartz and A. A. Schäffer, The evolution of tumour phylogenetics: Principles and practice, Nat. Rev. Genet. 18, 213 (2017).
  83. B. Rannala and Z. Yang, Phylogenetic inference using whole genomes, Annu. Rev. Genom. Hum. Genet. 9, 217 (2008).
  84. B. Chor and T. Tuller, Maximum likelihood of evolutionary trees: Hardness and approximation, Bioinformatics 21, i97 (2005).
  85. M. D. Hendy and D. Penny, Branch and bound algorithms to determine minimal evolutionary trees, Math. Biosci. 59, 277 (1982).
  86. R. P. Trees, The neighbor-joining method: A new method for reconstructing phylogenetic trees, Mol. Biol. Evol. 4, 406 (1987).
  87. S. R. Browning and B. L. Browning, Haplotype phasing: Existing methods and new developments, Nat. Rev. Genet. 12, 703 (2011).
  88. C. H. Ding, X. He, H. Zha, M. Gu, and H. D. Simon, A min-max cut algorithm for graph partitioning and data clustering, in Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE International Conference on Data Mining (IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, 2001), pp. 107–114.
  89. P. Festa, P. M. Pardalos, M. G. Resende, and C. C. Ribeiro, Randomized heuristics for the max-cut problem, Optimiz. Methods Softw. 17, 1033 (2002).
  90. Y. Yu, L. Chen, X. Miao, and S. C. Li, Spechap: A diploid phasing algorithm based on spectral graph theory, Nucleic Acids Res. 49, e114 (2021).
  91. S. R. Browning and B. L. Browning, Rapid and accurate haplotype phasing and missing-data inference for whole-genome association studies by use of localized haplotype clustering, The American Journal of Human Genetics 81, 1084 (2007).
  92. A. Lucas, Ising formulations of many NP problems, Front. Phys. 2, 5 (2014).
  93. G. E. Crooks, Performance of the quantum approximate optimization algorithm on the maximum cut problem, arXiv:1811.08419.
  94. G. G. Guerreschi and A. Y. Matsuura, Qaoa for max-cut requires hundreds of qubits for quantum speed-up, Sci. Rep. 9, 6903 (2019).
  95. Z. Wang, S. Hadfield, Z. Jiang, and E. G. Rieffel, Quantum approximate optimization algorithm for maxcut: A fermionic view, Phys. Rev. A 97, 022304 (2018).
  96. J. Wurtz and P. Love, Maxcut quantum approximate optimization algorithm performance guarantees for p > 1, Phys. Rev. A 103, 042612 (2021).
  97. A. Abbas, A. Ambainis, B. Augustino, A. Bärtschi, H. Buhrman, C. Coffrin, G. Cortiana, V. Dunjko, D. J. Egger, B. G. Elmegreen et al., Challenges and opportunities in quantum optimization, Nat. Rev. Phys. 6, 718 (2024).
  98. S. P. Jordan, N. Shutty, M. Wootters, A. Zalcman, A. Schmidhuber, R. King, S. V. Isakov, and R. Babbush, Optimization by decoded quantum interferometry, Nature 646, 831 (2025).
  99. E. M. Arkin and R. Hassin, Approximation algorithms for the geometric covering salesman problem, Discrete Applied Mathematics 55, 197 (1994).
  100. Y. Matsumoto and S. Nakamura, Qualign: Solving sequence alignment based on quadratic unconstrained binary optimisation, EMBnet J. 28, e1020 (2022).
  101. A. Sarkar, Z. Al-Ars, and K. Bertels, Quaser: Quantum accelerated de novo DNA sequence reconstruction, PLoS ONE 16, e0249850 (2021).
  102. A. Boev, A. Rakitko, S. Usmanov, A. Kobzeva, I. Popov, V. Ilinsky, E. Kiktenko, and A. Fedorov, Genome assembly using quantum and quantum-inspired annealing, Sci. Rep. 11, 13183 (2021).
  103. K. Nalecz-Charkiewicz and R. M. Nowak, Algorithm for dna sequence assembly by quantum annealing, BMC Bioinf. 23, 122 (2022).
  104. Y. Chen, J.-H. Huang, Y. Sun, Y. Zhang, Y. Li, and X. Xu, Haplotype-resolved assembly of diploid and polyploid genomes using quantum computing, Cell Reports Methods 4, 100754 (2024).
  105. M. J. Dinneen, P. S. Ghodla, and S. Linz, A qubo formulation for the tree containment problem, Theor. Comput. Sci. 940, 60 (2023).
  106. Y. Park, J. Kim, and J. Huh, Scalable guide tree construction using quantum annealing for multiple sequence alignment, bioRxiv (2024).
  107. R. Y. Li, R. Di Felice, R. Rohs, and D. A. Lidar, Quantum annealing versus classical machine learning applied to a simplified computational biology problem, npj Quantum Inf. 4, 14 (2018).
  108. M. Hoffmann, J. M. Poschenrieder, M. Incudini, S. Baier, A. Fritz, A. Maier, M. Hartung, C. Hoffmann, N. Trummer, K. Adamowicz et al., Network medicine-based epistasis detection in complex diseases: Ready for quantum computing, Nucleic Acids Res. 52, 10144 (2024).
  109. D. M. Fox, K. M. Branson, and R. C. Walker, mRNA codon optimization with quantum computers, PLoS ONE 16, e0259101 (2021).
  110. C. S. Calude, M. J. Dinneen, and R. Hua, Quantum solutions for densest k-subgraph problems, Journal of Membrane Computing 2, 26 (2020).
  111. V. Kumar, D. Alevras, M. Metkar, E. Welling, C. Cade, I. Niesen, T. Friedhoff, J.-E. Park, S. Shivpuje, M. LaDue et al., Towards secondary structure prediction of longer mrna sequences using a quantum-centric optimization scheme, arXiv:2505.05782.
  112. T. F. Rønnow, Z. Wang, J. Job, S. Boixo, S. V. Isakov, D. Wecker, J. M. Martinis, D. A. Lidar, and M. Troyer, Defining and detecting quantum speedup, Science 345, 420 (2014).
  113. S. Mandra, Z. Zhu, W. Wang, A. Perdomo-Ortiz, and H. G. Katzgraber, Strengths and weaknesses of weak-strong cluster problems: A detailed overview of state-of-the-art classical heuristics versus quantum approaches, Phys. Rev. A 94, 022337 (2016).
  114. V. S. Denchev, S. Boixo, S. V. Isakov, N. Ding, R. Babbush, V. Smelyanskiy, J. Martinis, and H. Neven, What is the computational value of finite-range tunneling? Phys. Rev. X 6, 031015 (2016).
  115. S. Boixo, T. F. Rønnow, S. V. Isakov, Z. Wang, D. Wecker, D. A. Lidar, J. M. Martinis, and M. Troyer, Evidence for quantum annealing with more than one hundred qubits, Nat. Phys. 10, 218 (2014).
  116. E. Farhi, D. Gamarnik, and S. Gutmann, The quantum approximate optimization algorithm needs to see the whole graph: A typical case, arXiv:2004.09002.
  117. F. Glover, G. Kochenberger, and Y. Du, A tutorial on formulating and using QUBO models, arXiv:1811.11538.
  118. G. Nannicini, Performance of hybrid quantum-classical variational heuristics for combinatorial optimization, Phys. Rev. E 99, 013304 (2019).
  119. M. S. Könz, W. Lechner, H. G. Katzgraber, and M. Troyer, Embedding overhead scaling of optimization problems in quantum annealing, PRX Quantum 2, 040322 (2021).
  120. V. Panizza, P. Hauke, C. Micheletti, and P. Faccioli, Protein design by integrating machine learning and quantum-encoded optimization, PRX Life 2, 043012 (2024).
  121. M. Upadhyay and M. N. Jones, Comparative studies of quantum annealing, digital annealing, and classical solvers for reaction network pathway analysis and mrna codon selection, arXiv:2509.09862.
  122. T. Koch, D. E. B. Neira, Y. Chen, G. Cortiana, D. J. Egger, R. Heese, N. N. Hegade, A. G. Cadavid, R. Huang, T. Itoko et al., Quantum optimization benchmark library–the intractable decathlon, arXiv:2504.03832.
  123. R. E. Burkard, S. E. Karisch, and F. Rendl, Qaplib–a quadratic assignment problem library, J. Global Optim. 10, 391 (1997).
  124. M. Inostroza-Ponta, A. Mendes, R. Berretta, and P. Moscato, An integrated QAP-based approach to visualize patterns of gene expression similarity, in Progress in Artificial Life: Third Australian Conference; ACAL 2007 Gold Coast, Australia, December 4–6, 2007 Proceedings 3 (Springer, Berlin, 2007), pp. 156–167.
  125. M. Inostroza-Ponta, R. Berretta, and P. Moscato, QAPgrid: A two level QAP-based approach for large-scale data analysis and visualization, PLoS ONE 6, e14468 (2011).
  126. I. Guyon, J. Weston, S. Barnhill, and V. Vapnik, Gene selection for cancer classification using support vector machines, Mach. Learn. 46, 389 (2002).
  127. R. Díaz-Uriarte and S. Alvarez de Andrés, Gene selection and classification of microarray data using random forest, BMC Bioinf. 7, 1 (2006).
  128. J. Staples, D. A. Nickerson, and J. E. Below, Utilizing graph theory to select the largest set of unrelated individuals for genetic analysis, Genetic Epidemiology 37, 136 (2013).
  129. K. J. Abraham and C. Diaz, Identifying large sets of unrelated individuals and unrelated markers, Source Code Biol Med 9, 6 (2014).
  130. S. C. Bull, M. R. Muldoon, and A. J. Doig, Maximising the size of non-redundant protein datasets using graph theory, PLoS ONE 8, e55484 (2013).
  131. A. Hossain, E. Lopez, S. M. Halper, D. P. Cetnar, A. C. Reis, D. Strickland, E. Klavins, and H. M. Salis, Automated design of thousands of nonrepetitive parts for engineering stable genetic systems, Nat. Biotechnol. 38, 1466 (2020).
  132. B. Mau, M. A. Newton, and B. Larget, Bayesian phylogenetic inference via Markov chain Monte Carlo methods, Biometrics 55, 1 (1999).
  133. J. W. MacCluer, Monte carlo methods in human population genetics: A computer model incorporating age-specific birth and death rates, Am. J. Hum. Genet. 19, 303 (1967).
  134. G. Mazzola, Sampling, rates, and reaction currents through reverse stochastic quantization on quantum computers, Phys. Rev. A 104, 022431 (2021).
  135. D. Layden, G. Mazzola, R. V. Mishmash, M. Motta, P. Wocjan, J.-S. Kim, and S. Sheldon, Quantum-enhanced Markov chain Monte Carlo, Nature (London) 619, 282 (2023).
  136. S. Arai and T. Kadowaki, Quantum annealing enhanced Markov-Chain Monte Carlo, Sci. Rep. 15, 21427 (2025).
  137. A. Orfi and D. Sels, Bounding the speedup of the quantum-enhanced Markov-chain Monte Carlo algorithm, Phys. Rev. A 110, 052414 (2024).
  138. J. Christmann, P. Ivashkov, M. Chiurco, and G. Mazzola, From quantum-enhanced to quantum-inspired Monte Carlo, Phys. Rev. A 111, 042615 (2025).
  139. F. Slongo, P. Hauke, P. Faccioli, and C. Micheletti, Quantum-inspired encoding enhances stochastic sampling of soft matter systems, Sci. Adv. 9, eadi0204 (2023).
  140. S. Whalen, J. Schreiber, W. S. Noble, and K. S. Pollard, Navigating the pitfalls of applying machine learning in genomics, Nat. Rev. Genet. 23, 169 (2022).
  141. M. W. Libbrecht and W. S. Noble, Machine learning applications in genetics and genomics, Nat. Rev. Genet. 16, 321 (2015).
  142. C. Miller, T. Portlock, D. M. Nyaga, and J. M. O'Sullivan, A review of model evaluation metrics for machine learning in genetics and genomics, Frontiers in Bioinformatics 4, 1457619 (2024).
  143. A. Maurizio, Advances in liquid biopsy: Computational and artificial intelligence approaches in cancer research, Global Translational Medicine 3, 3063 (2024).
  144. R. Poplin, P.-C. Chang, D. Alexander, S. Schwartz, T. Colthurst, A. Ku, D. Newburger, J. Dijamco, N. Nguyen, P. T. Afshar, S. S. Gross, L. Dorfman, C. Y. McLean, and M. A. DePristo, A universal SNP and small-indel variant caller using deep neural networks, Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 983 (2018).
  145. Ž. Avsec, N. Latysheva, J. Cheng, G. Novati, K. R. Taylor, T. Ward, C. Bycroft, L. Nicolaisen, E. Arvaniti, J. Pan et al., AlphaGenome: advancing regulatory variant effect prediction with a unified DNA sequence model, bioRxiv (2025).
  146. A. Butler, P. Hoffman, P. Smibert, E. Papalexi, and R. Satija, Integrating single-cell transcriptomic data across different conditions, technologies, and species, Nat. Biotechnol. 36, 411 (2018).
  147. W. Hou and Z. Ji, Assessing GPT-4 for cell type annotation in single-cell RNA-seq analysis, Nat. Methods 21, 1462 (2024).
  148. V. Schuster, E. Dann, A. Krogh, and S. A. Teichmann, Multidgd: A versatile deep generative model for multi-omics data, Nat. Commun. 15, 10031 (2024).
  149. D. Kolobkov, S. Mishra Sharma, A. Medvedev, M. Lebedev, E. Kosaretskiy, and R. Vakhitov, Efficacy of federated learning on genomic data: A study on the UK biobank and the 1000 genomes project, Front. Big Data 7, 1266031 (2024).
  150. J. Biamonte, P. Wittek, N. Pancotti, P. Rebentrost, N. Wiebe, and S. Lloyd, Quantum machine learning, Nature (London) 549, 195 (2017).
  151. M. Cerezo, G. Verdon, H.-Y. Huang, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Challenges and opportunities in quantum machine learning, Nat. Comput. Sci. 2, 567 (2022).
  152. M. Schuld, I. Sinayskiy, and F. Petruccione, An introduction to quantum machine learning, Contemp. Phys. 56, 172 (2015).
  153. Y. Du, X. Wang, N. Guo, Z. Yu, Y. Qian, K. Zhang, M.-H. Hsieh, P. Rebentrost, and D. Tao, Quantum machine learning: A hands-on tutorial for machine learning practitioners and researchers, arXiv:2502.01146.
  154. G. Wang, J. Warrell, P. S. Emani, and M. Gerstein, Quantum variational autoencoder utilizing regularized mixed-state latent representations, Phys. Rev. A 111, 042416 (2025).
  155. 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).
  156. Y. Liu, S. Arunachalam, and K. Temme, A rigorous and robust quantum speed-up in supervised machine learning, Nat. Phys. 17, 1013 (2021).
  157. J. R. McClean, S. Boixo, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Babbush, and H. Neven, Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes, Nat. Commun. 9, 4812 (2018).
  158. Z. Holmes, K. Sharma, M. Cerezo, and P. J. Coles, Connecting ansatz expressibility to gradient magnitudes and barren plateaus, PRX Quantum 3, 010313 (2022).
  159. C. Ortiz Marrero, M. Kieferová, and N. Wiebe, Entanglement-induced barren plateaus, PRX Quantum 2, 040316 (2021).
  160. H.-K. Zhang, S. Liu, and S.-X. Zhang, Absence of barren plateaus in finite local-depth circuits with long-range entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 150603 (2024).
  161. A. Pesah, M. Cerezo, S. Wang, T. Volkoff, A. T. Sornborger, and P. J. Coles, Absence of barren plateaus in quantum convolutional neural networks, Phys. Rev. X 11, 041011 (2021).
  162. M. Cerezo, M. Larocca, D. García-Martín, N. L. Diaz, P. Braccia, E Fontana, M. S. Rudolph, P. Bermejo, A. Ijaz, S. Thanasilp, E. R. Anschuetz and Z. Holmes, Does provable absence of barren plateaus imply classical simulability? Nat. Commun. 16, 7907 (2025).
  163. P. Bermejo, P. Braccia, M. S. Rudolph, Z. Holmes, L. Cincio, and M. Cerezo, Quantum convolutional neural networks are (effectively) classically simulable, arXiv:2408.12739.
  164. F. J. Schreiber, J. Eisert, and J. J. Meyer, Classical surrogates for quantum learning models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 100803 (2023).
  165. R. Shaydulin, C. Li, S. Chakrabarti, M. DeCross, D. Herman, N. Kumar, J. Larson, D. Lykov, P. Minssen, Y. Sun et al., Evidence of scaling advantage for the quantum approximate optimization algorithm on a classically intractable problem, Sci. Adv. 10, eadm6761 (2024).
  166. J. Bowles, S. Ahmed, and M. Schuld, Better than classical? The subtle art of benchmarking quantum machine learning models, arXiv:2403.07059.
  167. L. Bai, L. Rossi, A. Torsello, and E. R. Hancock, A quantum Jensen–Shannon graph Kernel for unattributed graphs, Pattern Recogn. 48, 344 (2015).
  168. 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).
  169. P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, T. P. Orlando, S. Gustavsson, and W. D. Oliver, A quantum engineer's guide to superconducting qubits, Appl. Phys. Rev. 6, 021318 (2019).
  170. D. Gottesman, The Heisenberg representation of quantum computers, in Proceedings of the XXII International Colloquium on Group Theoretical Methods in Physics, edited by S. P. Corney, R. Delbourgo, and P. D. Jarvis (International Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999), pp. 32–43.
  171. S. Bravyi and A. Kitaev, Universal quantum computation with ideal Clifford gates and noisy ancillas, Phys. Rev. A 71, 022316 (2005).
  172. S. Bravyi and J. Haah, Magic-state distillation with low overhead, Phys. Rev. A 86, 052329 (2012).
  173. T. Haug and M. S. Kim, Scalable measures of magic resource for quantum computers, PRX Quantum 4, 010301 (2023).
  174. M. Boyer, G. Brassard, P. Høyer, and A. Tapp, Tight bounds on quantum searching, Fortschr. Phys. 46, 493 (1998).
  175. D. K. Park, F. Petruccione, and J.-K. K. Rhee, Circuit-based quantum random access memory for classical data, Sci. Rep. 9, 3949 (2019).
  176. M. W. Johnson, M. H. Amin, S. Gildert, T. Lanting, F. Hamze, N. Dickson, R. Harris, A. J. Berkley, J. Johansson, P. Bunyk et al., Quantum annealing with manufactured spins, Nature (London) 473, 194 (2011).
  177. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, A quantum approximate optimization algorithm, arXiv:1411.4028.
  178. L. Zhou, S.-T. Wang, S. Choi, H. Pichler, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum approximate optimization algorithm: Performance, mechanism, and implementation on near-term devices, Phys. Rev. X 10, 021067 (2020).
  179. A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M.-H. Yung, X.-Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. O'Brien, A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor, Nat. Commun. 5, 4213 (2014).
  180. J. R. McClean, J. Romero, R. Babbush, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, The theory of variational hybrid quantum-classical algorithms, New J. Phys. 18, 023023 (2016).
  181. M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, K. Fujii, J. R. McClean, K. Mitarai, X. Yuan, L. Cincio et al., Variational quantum algorithms, Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 625 (2021).
  182. T. Albash and D. A. Lidar, Demonstration of a scaling advantage for a quantum annealer over simulated annealing, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031016 (2018).
  183. S. H. Sack and D. J. Egger, Large-scale quantum approximate optimization on nonplanar graphs with machine learning noise mitigation, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013223 (2024).
  184. A. Miessen, D. J. Egger, I. Tavernelli, and G. Mazzola, Benchmarking digital quantum simulations above hundreds of qubits using quantum critical dynamics, PRX Quantum 5, 040320 (2024).
  185. E. Pelofske, A. Bärtschi, L. Cincio, J. Golden, and S. Eidenbenz, Scaling whole-chip QAOA for higher-order Ising spin glass models on heavy-hex graphs, npj Quantum Inf. 10, 109 (2024).
  186. H. G. Katzgraber, F. Hamze, Z. Zhu, A. J. Ochoa, and H. Munoz-Bauza, Seeking quantum speedup through spin glasses: The good, the bad, and the ugly, Phys. Rev. X 5, 031026 (2015).
  187. S. Kirkpatrick Jr., C. D. Gelatt, and M. P. Vecchi, Optimization by simulated annealing, Science 220, 671 (1983).
  188. C. Micheletti, P. Hauke, and P. Faccioli, Polymer physics by quantum computing, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 080501 (2021).
  189. G. E. Santoro, R. Martoňák, E. Tosatti, and R. Car, Theory of quantum annealing of an Ising spin glass, Science 295, 2427 (2002).

Outline

Information

PRX Life 3, 047001– Published 30 October, 2025
  • Received 7 August 2025
  • Accepted 1 October 2025
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