A Quantum Platform for Multiomics Data

Michael Kubal; Sonika Johri

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 17 references

A Quantum Platform for Multiomics Data

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that a quantum learning platform with only four qubits can classify cancer versus healthy cells from protein levels as accurately as classical machine-learning models, and that its sub-net stacking strategy turns today's…

desk verdict A plausible platform proposal whose 4-qubit proof-of-concept cannot demonstrate quantum advantage: with 3 input bits the model is a classical Boolean function, so the reported accuracies measure compression, not quantum enhancement. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.14080 v1 pith:53TCLS3P submitted 2025-06-17 quant-ph

Michael Kubal , Sonika Johri This is my paper

classification quant-ph

keywords quantummachinelearningmultiomicsbit-bitencodingsub-netinitializationencode-search-buildhybridquantum-classicalcancerclassificationtemporaldynamics

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that a hybrid quantum-classical platform built on an encode-search-build workflow can make quantum machine learning usable on multiomics data today, with only a handful of qubits. The core idea is to compress high-dimensional molecular measurements into short binary strings, load them exactly into qubits, and train a parameterized quantum circuit with an optimizer-free update rule that is guaranteed to converge. On a synthetic cancer-classification dataset built from protein-level distributions, the platform reaches 82.5% accuracy with 4 qubits on 9 proteins and 95% when the feature set grows to 29 proteins, still on 4 qubits; classical baselines ranged from 75% to 88%. The paper argues that this bit-bit encoding does not require qubits to scale with features, and that sub-net initialization lets small models trained today seed larger models as hardware improves. A second use case, predicting temporal evolution of correlated biological variables, is proposed with the same machinery.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the bit-bit encoding plus the sub-net initialization strategy. Bit-bit encoding means approximating each real-valued feature vector by a truncated binary string, so the classification problem becomes learning a Boolean function from input bit strings to output bit strings; those strings are exactly loaded into computational basis states of qubits, with the number of qubits set by the compressed bit budget rather than by the original feature count. Sub-net initialization means training a smaller model on a compactly encoded problem first and using its parameters to initialize the corresponding sub-network of a larger model, so training effort carries forward as qubits are added. The third mechanism is the exact coordinate-update training rule, which updates one parameter at a time and guarantees convergence to a local minimum without a classical optimizer.

What would settle it

Run the platform's exact encode-search-build pipeline on a real cancer multiomics cohort with thousands of features and known labels, using 4 and 8 qubits, and compare test accuracy against a classical logistic-regression baseline on the same train/test split. If accuracy does not stay competitive when the feature count is increased, or if performance on real data falls well below the synthetic result, the compression claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a quantum learning model can classify biological phenotypes from molecular data with accuracy competitive with classical machine learning while using far fewer resources than the feature dimension would suggest. The construction encodes each sample as a binary string: principal component analysis reduces the feature space, mutual information with the outcome determines how many bits each retained direction receives, and the resulting bit strings are loaded as computational basis states into a register of qubits, with one extra qubit read out as the class label. The circuit is a parameterized unitary built from Euler rotations and Heisenberg-type two-qubit entangling gates; training uses an exact coordinate-update rule that updates one parameter at a time via the parameter-shift rule and provably converges to a local minimum. Because the model's output is a probability distribution over classes, repeated measurement gives the classification. The paper reports 82.5% accuracy on 9 proteins with 4 qubits, 95% on 29 proteins with the same 4 qubits, and 87.5% on 9 proteins with 8 qubits, and interprets the feature-count independence as evidence that the compression captures the predictive signal. It further claims that the same unitary structure can learn a map from the bit-encoded state of variables at time $t_n$ to the bit-encoded state at $t_{n+1}$, enabling temporal prediction.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that PCA plus mutual-information-based bit allocation can compress high-dimensional molecular data into a few qubits without discarding the predictive signal needed for classification or temporal dynamics.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Quantum classifiers can be trained on omics data with as few as four qubits, so the platform is usable on near-term quantum hardware rather than waiting for fault-tolerant machines.
Because accuracy improved from 82.5% to 95% when the feature count grew from 9 to 29 at fixed qubit count, the paper claims that adding more measured molecular features will continue to improve the compressed representation without adding qubits.
The sub-net initialization strategy means models trained on small pathways today are not wasted if hardware is delayed; their trained parameters seed larger models when more qubits become available.
The same circuit architecture, by the paper's universality argument over encoded data, can represent arbitrary nonlinear relationships and is proposed to learn temporal transitions from one bit-encoded state to the next.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

As an extension, the same PCA-plus-mutual-information bit allocation could be benchmarked against autoencoder or sparse-feature compression on the same datasets; the paper does not make that comparison.
If the temporal-evolution use case is realized, the quantum model could be tested against classical ODE solvers on a small enzyme or signaling pathway, where the paper expects quantum models to stay accurate over longer timescales.
Because the reported validation uses synthetic cells drawn from protein distributions rather than patient samples, real clinical omics data with batch effects, missing values, and measurement noise is the natural next test of whether the compression truly preserves predictive signal.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Dear [Name],

You should know two things about this paper up front. First, it is a proposal for a hybrid quantum-classical platform for multiomics data, built largely on techniques from the same second author's earlier paper [3]. Second, its proof-of-concept experiment cannot say anything about quantum advantage: with 4 qubits total and 1 output qubit, only 3 bits encode the input, so the model is a Boolean function on 8 strings. Any such function is trivially learnable by a lookup table, decision tree, or logistic regression on the same compressed bits. The reported accuracy is a measure of the PCA-plus-mutual-information compression, not of the quantum circuit.

The paper does some things well. The platform architecture is clearly described, and the choice of two use cases—phenotype classification and temporal evolution—is sensible. The synthetic data generation from the Human Protein Atlas and the apoptosis ODE model is a reasonable first step, and the writing is honest about being a conceptual paper. Extending the bit-bit encoding and sub-net initialization ideas to multiomics is a legitimate application, even if the algorithms themselves are not new.

The soft spots are significant. No error bars, no code or data, and a synthetic dataset of 200 samples make the empirical section impossible to reproduce or assess. More importantly, the paper overinterprets the 4-qubit results. The jump from 82.5% to 95% when going from 9 to 29 proteins at fixed 4 qubits is an interesting observation about feature compression, but it is not evidence for quantum enhancement. The paper's own definition of quantum advantage requires an exponential separation in Nq, which cannot occur for Nq=4. The claim that this is "the first time such a clear argument has been presented" for near-term utility is excessive, and the reliance on self-cited [3] for convergence and approximation guarantees is not independently validated.

The platform idea itself is plausible, and the paper could become a useful contribution if reframed as a roadmap rather than a validated system. But the current empirical claims overreach. I would send it to peer review, but only with a clear expectation that the authors either drop or heavily caveat the proof-of-concept section, provide code and data with error bars, and dial back the novelty claims.

For you: a maybe for the reading group. I would not cite it in my own work until the techniques are independently demonstrated. It deserves a serious referee, but the referee should be prepared to push back hard on the quantum-advantage interpretation.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a hybrid quantum-classical machine learning platform for multiomics data, built on the 'encode-search-build' approach: a bit-bit encoding scheme that compresses high-dimensional molecular data into a fixed number of qubits, an optimizer-free coordinate-update training method, and a sub-net initialization strategy for scaling up models as qubit counts increase. The platform is intended to support classification of phenotypic states and prediction of temporal evolution in biological systems. As a proof of concept, the authors present a synthetic apoptosis classification task based on protein level distributions from The Human Protein Atlas, reporting accuracies of 82.5% on 9 proteins with 4 qubits, 87.5% with 8 qubits, and 95% on 29 proteins still with 4 qubits.

Significance. If the platform's algorithmic claims hold, it could provide a useful entry point for bioinformaticians to apply quantum machine learning to high-dimensional omics data without deep quantum expertise, and the sub-net initialization strategy offers a concrete roadmap for leveraging near-term quantum hardware. The paper is explicitly conceptual and does not claim to demonstrate quantum advantage in the proof-of-concept, which is a reasonable framing. However, the empirical validation is too weak to support even the 'initial validation' the authors claim: the reported accuracies lack statistical rigor, the dataset is synthetic and small, and the architecture chosen (4 qubits, with only 3 input qubits) cannot exhibit any quantum-specific advantage. The central algorithmic guarantees are imported from a companion paper by the same author, and the proof-of-concept does not independently test them.

major comments (3)

[Section IV, Fig. 6] With 4 qubits total and 1 output qubit, the quantum model has only 3 input qubits, so its input space consists of exactly 8 binary strings. The QLM therefore implements a Boolean function f:{0,1}^3 -> {0,1}, which is trivially representable and learnable classically (e.g., a lookup table or decision tree on the same 8 inputs). Consequently, the reported accuracy of 95% on 29 proteins compared to 82.5% on 9 proteins is evidence about the quality of the PCA plus mutual-information bit allocation, not about the quantum circuit or bit-bit encoding. The statement in this section that 'our compression and bit-encoding approach does not require the number of qubits to scale with the number of features' is a claim about classical compression; it does not validate any quantum-specific capability. The authors should either add classical baselines trained on the same compressed 3-bit strings to show that the quantum model adds value beyond the encoding, or explicitly state that the proof-of-concept validates only the classical compression component.
[Section IV, dataset and reproducibility] The proof-of-concept uses a synthetic dataset of only 200 samples (100 cancer, 100 healthy), generated from protein-level distributions rather than measured patient data. Accuracies are reported as single numbers with no error bars, no cross-validation, and no repeated training runs. No code or dataset is provided. Given that the central message of the paper rests on this experiment as an 'initial validation,' the lack of statistical support and reproducibility makes the quantitative claims effectively unverifiable. The authors should provide the dataset generation details, code, error bars, and ideally an external validation on a real multiomics cohort.
[Section III B, QLM Training and Quantum Advantage] The paper's core algorithmic guarantees—universal approximation, convergence to a local minimum via coordinate updates, and the absence of barren plateaus through sub-net initialization—are all cited from reference [3] by the same author. While referencing is legitimate, the proof-of-concept does not independently validate these guarantees; it simply applies the method and reports an accuracy. The paper would be strengthened by a self-contained proof sketch or by experiments that isolate the contribution of the quantum training algorithm, for instance by comparing the coordinate-update training against a standard classical optimizer on the same circuit. Without this, the reader cannot assess whether the platform's claimed advantages are real or artifacts of the specific implementation details from the unpublished companion work.

minor comments (5)

[Section IV, paragraph 3] The sentence 'With 3 qubits, only 8 different inputs are thus possible' is correct but could be more explicit that this also limits the model to a Boolean function on 8 inputs, which is the key point for interpreting the results.
[Fig. 6] The figure caption states that 'accuracy is not monotonic, reflecting the imperfect correlation between the two.' It would be helpful to plot the classical baselines on the same figure for direct comparison, and to include error bars or shaded confidence intervals.
[Section V, Feasibility and Impact] The claim that 'the sub-net approach ensures that the models built during the extended timeline will still be of use' is plausible but not demonstrated; it would be strengthened by a reference to a concrete experiment showing that sub-net initialization improves training of larger models in any setting.
[Throughout] There are several typographical and formatting issues, e.g., 'peturbations' in Section III A, 'occurence' in Section III B, and inconsistent spacing around equations. A careful proofread is recommended.
[Section III A] The discussion of classical methods would benefit from a citation for the 'large-scale mechanistic model' reference [9] in the context of ODE-based models; the current sentence implies a contrast with neural networks but does not make the point fully explicit.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The 4-qubit proof-of-concept accuracy reduces to label-informed PCA/MI compression, while the training and scaling guarantees are imported from a same-author preprint.

fitted input called prediction [Section IV, 'Simulating Biological Abstractions with Quantum Circuits', bit-encoding and 29-protein accuracy claim]
"the bit encoding is achieved through a reduction in dimensionality using principal component analysis (PCA) followed by a scheme that assigns different numbers of bits to each PCA direction based on its mutual information with the outcome [3]. ... Increasing the number of proteins (model features) to 29, increases the accuracy of our quantum circuit to 95% while still just using 4 qubits."

The 3-bit input representation is chosen by a supervised procedure (mutual information with the outcome labels), so the compressed strings already carry label-selected signal. With 4 qubits total and 1 qubit reserved for the output, only 3 qubits encode data, so the QLM can only distinguish 8 distinct input strings; it is equivalent to choosing a Boolean function on {0,1}^3. The reported accuracy is therefore an evaluation of the label-informed PCA/MI compression, not of the quantum model's expressivity or training. Increasing the feature count from 9 to 29 leaves the quantum input space unchanged (still 8 states), so the 'improved representation' is a statement about the classical compression step.
self citation load bearing [Section III-B, 'QLM Training', and Section II, platform reliance on reference [3]]
"For training QLMs, we will use the exact coordinate update scheme described in [3]. This scheme leverages a parameter shift rule to sequentially update the parameters of the model to iteratively refine model parameters with exact updates. Unlike classical deep learning models which have to be trained using approximate techniques like gradient descent, this scheme for training QLMs guarantees convergence to a local minimum ... This platform will utilize Coherent Computing's Red Cedar software framework (Fig. 1) [3]."

The paper's 'search' step—the training algorithm that guarantees convergence to a local minimum—is load-bearing for the platform's claimed provably efficient training, yet it is imported solely from reference [3], a preprint by the same author. No proof is reproduced or sketched in this paper, and no machine-checked implementation or independent external benchmark for [3] is provided. The 'build' step (sub-net initialization) is likewise taken from [3] and is used to justify the scaling roadmap. Thus the central algorithmic guarantees reduce to a self-citation chain: the platform inherits its validity from [3], and within this paper [3] is not established by independent evidence.

full rationale

This paper is a conceptual platform proposal rather than a derivation of a new mathematical result, so much of its content is architectural specification and forward-looking integration plans. The main self-contained numerical evidence is the 4-qubit apoptosis classification experiment in Section IV. That experiment is not circular in the sense of assuming its own conclusion, but the headline accuracy (82.5% with 9 proteins, 95% with 29 proteins) is primarily a property of the label-informed PCA + mutual-information bit allocation: with 1 of 4 qubits reserved for the output, the QLM acts on 3-bit inputs and can express any Boolean function on 8 strings, so it can only realize the Bayes classifier of the compressed representation. The paper's own definition of quantum advantage (efficient approximation of U* on a quantum but not classical computer) cannot be met for 8 input states. The training-convergence and sub-net-initialization guarantees are taken entirely from reference [3], a same-author preprint with no proof or external validation reproduced here, making these load-bearing self-citations. Some independent grounding exists via the external Human Protein Atlas data and scikit-learn baselines, but those baselines are reported without error bars, code, or dataset details, which weakens the force of the comparison. The result is a partial circularity: the empirical validation reduces to the classical compression, and the algorithmic guarantees reduce to the same-author citation chain.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. Its claims rest on the correctness of techniques from the same author's prior work [3], the compressibility of biological data to few qubits, and synthetic data generation choices. Free parameters are the bit allocation vector, number of qubits, and sample size.

free parameters (3)

bit precision vector b = chosen by mutual information with outcome
The encoding of each feature to b_i bits is a hand-chosen compression that determines the input Hilbert space; the reported accuracy results depend on this choice.
number of qubits Nq = 4 or 8 in experiments
The demo uses 4 qubits (3 data qubits plus 1 output qubit) and 8 qubits (7 data qubits plus 1 output qubit), which directly affects the model's capacity and performance.
synthetic dataset size = 200 samples (100 cancer, 100 healthy)
The paper generates a small balanced synthetic dataset from protein level distributions; the small sample size likely inflates accuracy estimates and lacks statistical power.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption The exact coordinate update scheme converges to a local minimum and can avoid saddle points.
Stated in Section III-B, taken from [3] (same author) without proof in this paper. The training guarantees are load-bearing for the claimed efficiency.
domain assumption Bit-bit encoding allows universal approximation of the learned function.
Invoked in Section III-B with reference to [11]; the claim that the encoding can model arbitrary non-linear relationships is essential to the platform's generality.
ad hoc to paper PCA followed by mutual information-based bit allocation preserves the most predictive information from high-dimensional omics data.
Central to the compression strategy; the paper assumes with few bits one can retain enough signal, as in the 29-protein/4-qubit experiment.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Quantum Platform for Multiomics Data." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/53TCLS3P

@misc{pith2026250614080,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Quantum Platform for Multiomics Data},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/53TCLS3P}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.14080}
}

read the original abstract

The complexity of biological systems, governed by molecular interactions across hierarchical scales, presents a challenge for computational modeling. While advances in multiomic profiling have enabled precise measurements of biological components, classical computational approaches remain limited in capturing emergent dynamics critical for understanding disease mechanisms and therapeutic interventions. Quantum computing offers a new paradigm for addressing classically intractable problems, yet its integration into biological research remains nascent due to scalability barriers and accessibility gaps. Here, we introduce a hybrid quantum-classical machine learning platform designed to bridge this gap, with an encode-search-build approach which allows for efficiently extracting the most relevant information from biological data to \underline{encode} into a quantum state, provably efficient training algorithms to \underline{search} for optimal parameters, and a stacking strategy that allows one to systematically \underline{build} more complex models as more quantum resources become available. We propose to demonstrate the platform's utility through two initial use cases: quantum-enhanced classification of phenotypic states from molecular variables and prediction of temporal evolution in biological systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.14080 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Schematic description of the computational workflow. The quantum execution can consist of several ansatzes that are then post-processed for inclusion [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Illustration of training quantum models for classification with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** The architecture of the quantum model. (a) The circuit structure for modeling time evolution of variables in Eq. 5. (b) The unitary [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (3 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Example of an initialization from a sub-net taken from [3]. The model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Key protein receptors and signaling interactions in apoptosis, pro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Test loss and accuracy performance with 4 qubits for the apoptosis classification problem described in Section IV using a dataset with 9 protein [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_6.png]

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

[3]

Bit-bit encoding, optimizer-free training and sub-net initialization: techniques for scalable quantum machine learning

S. Johri, “Bit-bit encoding, optimizer-free training and sub-net initialization: techniques for scalable quantum machine learning,” arXiv:2501.02148, 2025

work page Pith review arXiv 2025
[1]

The human cell count and size distribution,

I. A. Hatton, E. D. Galbraith, N. S. C. Merleau, T. P. Miettinen, B. M. Smith, and J. A. Shander, “The human cell count and size distribution,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. , vol. 120, p. e2303077120, Sept. 2023

work page 2023
[2]

Physiboss 2.0: a sustainable in- tegration of stochastic boolean and agent-based modelling frameworks,

M. Ponce-de Leon, A. Montagud, V . No ¨el, A. Meert, G. Pradas, E. Barillot, L. Calzone, and A. Valencia, “Physiboss 2.0: a sustainable in- tegration of stochastic boolean and agent-based modelling frameworks,” npj Systems Biology and Applications , vol. 9, p. 54, Oct 2023

work page 2023
[4]

Quantum network medicine: rethinking medicine with network science and quantum algorithms

S. Maniscalco, E.-M. Borrelli, D. Cavalcanti, C. Foti, A. Glos, M. Gold- smith, S. Knecht, K. Korhonen, J. Malmi, A. Nyk ¨anen, M. A. C. Rossi, H. Saarinen, B. Sokolov, N. W. Talarico, J. Westergren, Z. Zimbor´as, and G. Garc´ıa-P´erez, “Quantum network medicine: rethinking medicine with network science and quantum algorithms,” arXiv:2206.12405, 2022

work page Pith review arXiv 2022
[5]

Towards quantum-enabled cell-centric therapeutics

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, P. Pati, D. Platt, M. A. Rapso- maniki, A. Ray, K. Rhrissorrakrai, O. Shehab, I. Tavernelli, M. Tolunay, F. Utro, ...

work page Pith review arXiv 2023
[6]

In- vited: Drug discovery approaches using quantum machine learning,

J. Li, M. Alam, C. M. Sha, J. Wang, N. V . Dokholyan, and S. Ghosh, “In- vited: Drug discovery approaches using quantum machine learning,” in 2021 58th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) , pp. 1356– 1359, 2021

work page 2021
[7]

Quantum generative models for small molecule drug discovery,

J. Li, R. O. Topaloglu, and S. Ghosh, “Quantum generative models for small molecule drug discovery,” IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering, vol. 2, pp. 1–8, 2021

work page 2021
[8]

Quantum computing with Qiskit,

A. Javadi-Abhari, M. Treinish, K. Krsulich, C. J. Wood, J. Lishman, J. Gacon, S. Martiel, P. D. Nation, L. S. Bishop, A. W. Cross, B. R. Johnson, and J. M. Gambetta, “Quantum computing with Qiskit,” 2024

2024

Show all 17 references

[9]

A scalable, open-source implementation of a large-scale mechanistic model for single cell proliferation and death signaling,

C. Erdem, A. Mutsuddy, E. M. Bensman, W. B. Dodd, M. M. Saint- Antoine, M. Bouhaddou, R. C. Blake, S. M. Gross, L. M. Heiser, F. A. Feltus, and M. R. Birtwistle, “A scalable, open-source implementation of a large-scale mechanistic model for single cell proliferation and death ...

2022 doi
[10]

Optimal quantum circuits for general two- qubit gates,

F. Vatan and C. Williams, “Optimal quantum circuits for general two- qubit gates,” Phys. Rev. A , vol. 69, p. 032315, Mar 2004

2004
[11]

Effect of data encoding on the expressive power of variational quantum-machine-learning models,

M. Schuld, R. Sweke, and J. J. Meyer, “Effect of data encoding on the expressive power of variational quantum-machine-learning models,” Phys. Rev. A , vol. 103, p. 032430, 2021

2021
[12]

https://www.pasqal.com/news/quantum-computing-rethinking-energy- consumption/
[13]

http://www.proteinatlas.org/
[14]

Modeling the heterogeneous apoptotic response of caspase-mediated signaling in tumor cells,

D. S. Mangrum and S. D. Finley, “Modeling the heterogeneous apoptotic response of caspase-mediated signaling in tumor cells,” Journal of Theoretical Biology, vol. 590, p. 111857, 2024

2024
[15]

Reactome diagram viewer: data structures and strategies to boost performance,

A. Fabregat, K. Sidiropoulos, G. Viteri, P. Marin-Garcia, P. Ping, L. Stein, P. D’Eustachio, and H. Hermjakob, “Reactome diagram viewer: data structures and strategies to boost performance,” Bioinformatics, vol. 34, pp. 1208–1214, Apr. 2018

2018
[16]

https://www.navipointgenomics.com/
[17]

Ionq’s accelerated roadmap: Turning quantum ambition into real- ity

“Ionq’s accelerated roadmap: Turning quantum ambition into real- ity.” https://ionq.com/blog/ionqs-accelerated-roadmap-turning-quantum- ambition-into-reality. 7

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [3]

Bit-bit encoding, optimizer-free training and sub-net initialization: techniques for scalable quantum machine learning

S. Johri, “Bit-bit encoding, optimizer-free training and sub-net initialization: techniques for scalable quantum machine learning,” arXiv:2501.02148, 2025

work page Pith review arXiv 2025

[2] [1]

The human cell count and size distribution,

I. A. Hatton, E. D. Galbraith, N. S. C. Merleau, T. P. Miettinen, B. M. Smith, and J. A. Shander, “The human cell count and size distribution,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. , vol. 120, p. e2303077120, Sept. 2023

work page 2023

[3] [2]

Physiboss 2.0: a sustainable in- tegration of stochastic boolean and agent-based modelling frameworks,

M. Ponce-de Leon, A. Montagud, V . No ¨el, A. Meert, G. Pradas, E. Barillot, L. Calzone, and A. Valencia, “Physiboss 2.0: a sustainable in- tegration of stochastic boolean and agent-based modelling frameworks,” npj Systems Biology and Applications , vol. 9, p. 54, Oct 2023

work page 2023

[4] [4]

Quantum network medicine: rethinking medicine with network science and quantum algorithms

S. Maniscalco, E.-M. Borrelli, D. Cavalcanti, C. Foti, A. Glos, M. Gold- smith, S. Knecht, K. Korhonen, J. Malmi, A. Nyk ¨anen, M. A. C. Rossi, H. Saarinen, B. Sokolov, N. W. Talarico, J. Westergren, Z. Zimbor´as, and G. Garc´ıa-P´erez, “Quantum network medicine: rethinking medicine with network science and quantum algorithms,” arXiv:2206.12405, 2022

work page Pith review arXiv 2022

[5] [5]

Towards quantum-enabled cell-centric therapeutics

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, P. Pati, D. Platt, M. A. Rapso- maniki, A. Ray, K. Rhrissorrakrai, O. Shehab, I. Tavernelli, M. Tolunay, F. Utro, ...

work page Pith review arXiv 2023

[6] [6]

In- vited: Drug discovery approaches using quantum machine learning,

J. Li, M. Alam, C. M. Sha, J. Wang, N. V . Dokholyan, and S. Ghosh, “In- vited: Drug discovery approaches using quantum machine learning,” in 2021 58th ACM/IEEE Design Automation Conference (DAC) , pp. 1356– 1359, 2021

work page 2021

[7] [7]

Quantum generative models for small molecule drug discovery,

J. Li, R. O. Topaloglu, and S. Ghosh, “Quantum generative models for small molecule drug discovery,” IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering, vol. 2, pp. 1–8, 2021

work page 2021

[8] [8]

Quantum computing with Qiskit,

A. Javadi-Abhari, M. Treinish, K. Krsulich, C. J. Wood, J. Lishman, J. Gacon, S. Martiel, P. D. Nation, L. S. Bishop, A. W. Cross, B. R. Johnson, and J. M. Gambetta, “Quantum computing with Qiskit,” 2024

2024