pith. sign in

arxiv: 2507.07018 · v1 · submitted 2025-07-09 · 🪐 quant-ph

Quantum Spectral Clustering: Comparing Parameterized and Neuromorphic Quantum Kernels

Donovan Slabbert , Dean Brand , Francesco Petruccione This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 05:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum kernelspectral clusteringneuromorphic quantum computingparameterized quantum kernelQLIFmachine learningclustering performancedata dimensionality
0
0 comments X

The pith

Parameterized quantum kernels outperform neuromorphic ones for spectral clustering on high-dimensional data.

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

The paper compares a parameterized quantum kernel using angle encoding with grid-search optimization to maximize kernel-target alignment against a quantum leaky integrate-and-fire neuromorphic kernel that turns data into spike trains and measures temporal distances with Victor-Purpura or van Rossum metrics. Both kernels feed into a standard classical spectral clustering pipeline and are tested on synthetic data, the Iris set, and a preprocessed high-dimensional Sloan Digital Sky Survey collection, alongside the classical radial basis function kernel. The neuromorphic QLIF kernel produces better classification and clustering metrics on the lower-dimensional cases, yet the parameterized kernel gains the advantage once the data dimensionality rises. The results point to a possible regime where each quantum approach becomes preferable depending on the scale of the input features.

Core claim

For the synthetic datasets and Iris, the QLIF kernel typically achieves better classification and clustering performance than pQK. However, on higher-dimensional datasets, such as a preprocessed version of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, pQK performed better, indicating a possible advantage in higher-dimensional regimes.

What carries the argument

Parameterized quantum kernel with angle encoding and grid-search optimization for kernel-target alignment, contrasted with quantum leaky integrate-and-fire neuromorphic kernel that uses population coding to produce spike trains processed by temporal distance metrics.

If this is right

  • The choice between neuromorphic and parameterized quantum kernels for spectral clustering can be guided by the dimensionality of the dataset.
  • Neuromorphic quantum approaches may suit low-feature-count problems where spike-train temporal structure captures useful similarities.
  • Grid-search parameter tuning in quantum kernels can confer benefits specifically in higher-dimensional feature spaces.
  • Both quantum kernels function as interchangeable inputs to classical spectral clustering and can be benchmarked directly against radial basis function kernels.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The performance reversal with rising dimensionality offers a practical rule of thumb for selecting quantum kernel types in larger-scale clustering tasks.
  • Mapping the exact dimensionality threshold at which one method overtakes the other would require systematic tests across intermediate-sized datasets.
  • Hardware-level implementation of these kernels could expose whether simulation-based advantages survive real-device noise and decoherence.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that parameters optimized via grid search to maximize kernel-target alignment will produce a kernel matrix that accurately reflects distances in the original feature space and thereby improves downstream spectral clustering.

What would settle it

Running the identical comparison pipeline on additional low-dimensional datasets where the parameterized kernel outperforms the neuromorphic one, or on new high-dimensional sets where the neuromorphic kernel leads, would contradict the reported dimension-dependent pattern.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.07018 by Dean Brand, Donovan Slabbert, Francesco Petruccione.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1: Architecture of the trainable parameterized encoding quantum kernel. A full kernel matrix is found for each [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2: Architecture of the quantum neuromorphic clustering algorithm. Coordinate data is encoded as spike trains [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Visualization of label predictions through majority voting after clustering. Red circles indicate samples that [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Clustering metric peak plots for each dataset using the parameterized quantum kernel during clustering. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Clustering metric peak plots for each dataset using the QLIF neuron in the neuromorphic clustering [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We compare a parameterized quantum kernel (pQK) with a quantum leaky integrate-and-fire (QLIF) neuromorphic computing approach that employs either the Victor-Purpura or van Rossum kernel in a spectral clustering task, as well as the classical radial basis function (RBF) kernel. Performance evaluation includes label-based classification and clustering metrics, as well as optimal number of clusters predictions for each dataset based on an elbow-like curve as is typically used in $K$-means clustering. The pQK encodes feature vectors through angle encoding with rotation angles scaled parametrically. Parameters are optimized through grid search to maximize kernel-target alignment, producing a kernel that reflects distances in the feature space. The quantum neuromorphic approach uses population coding to transform data into spike trains, which are then processed using temporal distance metrics. Kernel matrices are used as input into a classical spectral clustering pipeline prior to performance evaluation. For the synthetic datasets and \texttt{Iris}, the QLIF kernel typically achieves better classification and clustering performance than pQK. However, on higher-dimensional datasets, such as a preprocessed version of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (\texttt{SDSS}), pQK performed better, indicating a possible advantage in higher-dimensional regimes.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript compares a parameterized quantum kernel (pQK) using angle encoding with grid-search optimization to maximize kernel-target alignment against a quantum leaky integrate-and-fire (QLIF) neuromorphic approach employing Victor-Purpura or van Rossum kernels (and classical RBF) for spectral clustering. Kernel matrices feed a classical spectral clustering pipeline. On synthetic datasets and Iris, QLIF typically yields better classification and clustering metrics; on preprocessed high-dimensional SDSS, pQK performs better, suggesting a possible high-dimensional advantage. Optimal cluster count is also predicted via an elbow-like curve.

Significance. If the reported performance differences are statistically robust, the work would provide concrete empirical evidence that neuromorphic quantum kernels can outperform parameterized quantum kernels on low-dimensional clustering tasks while the reverse may hold in higher dimensions, helping delineate regimes where each quantum approach is preferable for spectral clustering.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the assertion that grid-search maximization of kernel-target alignment 'producing a kernel that reflects distances in the feature space' is unsupported. Kernel-target alignment quantifies label agreement but does not enforce metric properties or manifold preservation required by the subsequent Laplacian eigenmap step; no verification (e.g., kernel eigenvalue spectra or embedding quality metrics) is supplied to close this gap, which is especially relevant for the high-dimensional SDSS claim.
  2. [Results] Results (performance tables/figures): reported classification and clustering metric differences across datasets lack error bars, statistical tests, or explicit details on train/test splits and preprocessing steps. This leaves the central claim that QLIF outperforms pQK on synthetic/Iris data and pQK outperforms on SDSS only partially supported.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Methods] The precise form of the 'elbow-like curve' used to predict optimal cluster number should be stated explicitly (e.g., as an equation or pseudocode) rather than described only qualitatively.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment point by point below, indicating where revisions will be made to strengthen the presentation and support for our claims.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the assertion that grid-search maximization of kernel-target alignment 'producing a kernel that reflects distances in the feature space' is unsupported. Kernel-target alignment quantifies label agreement but does not enforce metric properties or manifold preservation required by the subsequent Laplacian eigenmap step; no verification (e.g., kernel eigenvalue spectra or embedding quality metrics) is supplied to close this gap, which is especially relevant for the high-dimensional SDSS claim.

    Authors: We agree that the phrasing in the abstract overstates what kernel-target alignment optimization achieves. The method selects parameters to maximize agreement with label-derived targets but does not inherently enforce metric properties or manifold preservation for the Laplacian eigenmap. We will revise the abstract to qualify this statement, clarifying that the optimization improves label alignment for better clustering performance rather than directly reflecting feature-space distances. To address the SDSS claim, we will add kernel eigenvalue spectra analysis and a brief discussion of embedding quality in the revised text or supplementary material. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results (performance tables/figures): reported classification and clustering metric differences across datasets lack error bars, statistical tests, or explicit details on train/test splits and preprocessing steps. This leaves the central claim that QLIF outperforms pQK on synthetic/Iris data and pQK outperforms on SDSS only partially supported.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current results section lacks the statistical details needed for robust support of the performance comparisons. In the revision we will add error bars derived from multiple runs with varied random seeds, include statistical significance tests (e.g., paired t-tests or Wilcoxon tests) between methods, and expand the methods section with explicit descriptions of train/test splits (noting the unsupervised nature of spectral clustering) and the full preprocessing steps applied to the SDSS data. These additions will better substantiate the reported differences. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results are direct experimental measurements on fixed datasets.

full rationale

The paper performs empirical comparisons of quantum kernels on synthetic, Iris, and SDSS datasets using angle encoding, grid-search optimization of parameters for kernel-target alignment, spike-train population coding with temporal metrics, and a standard classical spectral clustering pipeline. All reported classification, clustering, and elbow-curve metrics are computed directly from the resulting kernel matrices on held-out or full data; no equation or claim reduces a performance number to a quantity defined by the same fitted parameters, and no self-citation chain is invoked to justify uniqueness or force the outcome. The optimization step selects parameters but does not redefine the downstream evaluation, keeping the derivation chain non-circular.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The reported performance differences rest on the validity of angle encoding, population coding to spike trains, grid-search optimization, and the assumption that kernel matrices transfer directly to classical spectral clustering without quantum hardware noise.

free parameters (1)
  • rotation angle scaling factor
    Used in pQK angle encoding and tuned by grid search to maximize kernel-target alignment.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Quantum kernel matrices can be computed and inserted unchanged into a classical spectral clustering pipeline
    The entire evaluation pipeline described in the abstract relies on this transfer.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5742 in / 1307 out tokens · 57933 ms · 2026-05-19T05:50:29.645528+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 82 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Parameterized Encoding Quantum kernels refer to kernel functions evaluated on a quantum computer, where the feature space is the quantum mechanical Hilbert space in which the quan- tum state exists after data encoding, typically defined by a quantum circuit known as a feature map or state prepa- ration circuit [20, 54]. These quantum-enhanced kernels are ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Since we have access to ground truth labels, we can utilize the labels during training

    Kernel Target Alignment (KTA) In order to find a quantum kernel that is representa- tive of distance in the feature-embedded Hilbert space, it should be trained in some way before being used for spec- tral clustering purposes. Since we have access to ground truth labels, we can utilize the labels during training. We choose the kernel target alignment (KTA...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Neuromorphic spiking neurons use binary activation pulses of current that encode tem- poral information as well as input intensity

    Leaky Integrate-and-Fire Neuron In the realm of neuromorphic computing, there are a myriad of options for computational units, which ex- tend far beyond the typical classical neuron used in many machine learning tasks. Neuromorphic spiking neurons use binary activation pulses of current that encode tem- poral information as well as input intensity. Classi...

    work page 1907

  4. [4]

    In short, the aspects of the LIF neuron that need to be im- plemented are the 3 basic ingredients: spiking, decaying, and thresholding

    Quantum Leaky Integrate-and-Fire Neuron To mimic the dynamics of the LIF neuron on a quan- tum computer, we follow the proposal and derivation of the original QLIF by Brand and Petruccione [39]. In short, the aspects of the LIF neuron that need to be im- plemented are the 3 basic ingredients: spiking, decaying, and thresholding. To encode an input stimulu...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Spike Encoding Due to the versatility of these spiking neurons, there are also many ways to embed data within a framework that they can process. However, the fundamental link between all of these is the biological plausibility that they communicate and process based on spikes of current, or another transmitter, between neurons. In the case of biological L...

    work page

  6. [6]

    Van Rossum Distance Kernel Once all of the coordinate points of a dataset have been processed through a spike encoding and spiking neuron pipeline, the spike trains need to be compared in some way to find patterns in the data. Classically, a kernel matrix is a distance metric between data points which can give a consolidated measure of similarity across a...

    work page

  7. [7]

    elbow-like

    Victor-Purpura Distance Kernel Another approach is the Victor-Purpura (VP) distance [71, 72], which is often interchangeable with the vR dis- tance depending on the context of the data. This method has a different approach to measuring spike train similar- ity, and does so through an edit distance. It is a metric composed of the minimum cost to transform ...

    work page

  8. [8]

    Quantum computing and the entanglement frontier

    J. Preskill, Quantum computing and the entanglement frontier, arXiv preprint arXiv:1203.5813 (2012)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  9. [9]

    Arute, K

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. Brandao, D. A. Buell, et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature 574, 505 (2019)

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    Y. Kim, A. Eddins, S. Anand, K. X. Wei, E. Van Den Berg, S. Rosenblatt, H. Nayfeh, Y. Wu, M. Zale- tel, K. Temme, et al. , Evidence for the utility of quan- tum computing before fault tolerance, Nature 618, 500 (2023)

    work page 2023

  11. [11]

    Biamonte, P

    J. Biamonte, P. Wittek, N. Pancotti, P. Rebentrost, N. Wiebe, and S. Lloyd, Quantum machine learning, Na- ture 549, 195 (2017)

    work page 2017

  12. [12]

    Schuld, I

    M. Schuld, I. Sinayskiy, and F. Petruccione, An intro- duction to quantum machine learning, Contemporary Physics 56, 172 (2015)

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    Schuld and F

    M. Schuld and F. Petruccione, Machine Learning with Quantum Computers , 2nd ed., Quantum Science and Technology (Springer Cham, 2021)

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Preskill, Quantum computing in the nisq era and be- yond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018)

    J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the nisq era and be- yond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018)

    work page 2018

  15. [15]

    Bharti, A

    K. Bharti, A. Cervera-Lierta, T. H. Kyaw, T. Haug, S. Alperin-Lea, A. Anand, M. Degroote, H. Heimonen, J. S. Kottmann, T. Menke, et al. , Noisy intermediate- scale quantum algorithms, Reviews of Modern Physics 94, 015004 (2022)

    work page 2022

  16. [16]

    P. W. Shor, Scheme for reducing decoherence in quantum computer memory, Physical review A 52, R2493 (1995)

    work page 1995

  17. [17]

    H. E. Brandt, Qubit devices and the issue of quantum decoherence, Progress in Quantum Electronics 22, 257 (1999)

    work page 1999

  18. [18]

    N. M. Linke, D. Maslov, M. Roetteler, S. Debnath, C. Figgatt, K. A. Landsman, K. Wright, and C. Mon- roe, Experimental comparison of two quantum comput- ing architectures, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114, 3305 (2017)

    work page 2017

  19. [19]

    A. M. Steane, Error correcting codes in quantum theory, Physical Review Letters 77, 793 (1996)

    work page 1996

  20. [20]

    D. A. Lidar and T. A. Brun, Quantum error correction (Cambridge university press, 2013)

    work page 2013

  21. [21]

    Cerezo, G

    M. Cerezo, G. Verdon, H.-Y. Huang, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Challenges and opportunities in quantum machine learning, Nature computational science 2, 567 (2022)

    work page 2022

  22. [22]

    J. Liu, K. H. Lim, K. L. Wood, W. Huang, C. Guo, and H.-L. Huang, Hybrid quantum-classical convolu- tional neural networks, Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy 64, 290311 (2021)

    work page 2021

  23. [23]

    Benedetti, E

    M. Benedetti, E. Lloyd, S. Sack, and M. Fiorentini, Pa- rameterized quantum circuits as machine learning mod- els, Quantum science and technology 4, 043001 (2019)

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    Slabbert and F

    D. Slabbert and F. Petruccione, Classical-quantum ap- proach to image classification: Autoencoders and quan- tum svms, AVS Quantum Science 7 (2025)

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    Huang, M

    H.-Y. Huang, M. Broughton, M. Mohseni, R. Babbush, S. Boixo, H. Neven, and J. R. McClean, Power of data in quantum machine learning, Nature communications 12, 2631 (2021)

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    Y. Liu, S. Arunachalam, and K. Temme, A rigorous and robust quantum speed-up in supervised machine learn- ing, Nature Physics 17, 1013 (2021)

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Schuld and N

    M. Schuld and N. Killoran, Quantum machine learning in feature hilbert spaces, Physical review letters 122, 040504 (2019)

    work page 2019

  28. [28]

    Havl´ ıˇ cek, A

    V. Havl´ ıˇ cek, A. D. C´ orcoles, K. Temme, A. W. Harrow, A. Kandala, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Super- vised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces, Nature 567, 209 (2019)

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    Schuld, Kernel-based training of quantum models with scikit-learn, https://pennylane.ai/qml/demos/ tutorial_kernel_based_training/ (2021), date Ac- cessed: 2024-10-08

    M. Schuld, Kernel-based training of quantum models with scikit-learn, https://pennylane.ai/qml/demos/ tutorial_kernel_based_training/ (2021), date Ac- cessed: 2024-10-08

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.11020 , year=

    M. Schuld, Supervised quantum machine learning mod- els are kernel methods, arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.11020 (2021)

    work page arXiv 2021

  31. [31]

    J. S. Otterbach, R. Manenti, N. Alidoust, A. Bestwick, M. Block, B. Bloom, S. Caldwell, N. Didier, E. S. Fried, S. Hong, P. Karalekas, C. B. Osborn, A. Papageorge, E. C. Peterson, G. Prawiroatmodjo, N. Rubin, C. A. Ryan, D. Scarabelli, M. Scheer, E. A. Sete, P. Sivarajah, R. S. Smith, A. Staley, N. Tezak, W. J. Zeng, A. Hud- son, B. R. Johnson, M. Reagor,...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  32. [32]

    Quantum algorithms for supervised and unsupervised machine learning

    S. Lloyd, M. Mohseni, and P. Rebentrost, Quantum algo- rithms for supervised and unsupervised machine learning (2013), arXiv:1307.0411 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  33. [33]

    A. Ng, M. Jordan, and Y. Weiss, On spectral clustering: Analysis and an algorithm, Advances in neural informa- tion processing systems 14 (2001)

    work page 2001

  34. [34]

    Von Luxburg, A tutorial on spectral clustering, Statis- tics and computing 17, 395 (2007)

    U. Von Luxburg, A tutorial on spectral clustering, Statis- tics and computing 17, 395 (2007)

    work page 2007

  35. [35]

    Poggiali, A

    A. Poggiali, A. Berti, A. Bernasconi, G. M. Del Corso, R. Guidotti, et al. , Clustering classical data with quan- tum k-means., in ICTCS (2022) pp. 188–200

    work page 2022

  36. [36]

    Poggiali, A

    A. Poggiali, A. Berti, A. Bernasconi, G. M. Del Corso, and R. Guidotti, Quantum clustering with k-means: A hybrid approach, Theoretical Computer Science 992, 114466 (2024)

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Kavitha and N

    S. Kavitha and N. Kaulgud, Quantum k-means clustering method for detecting heart disease using quantum circuit approach, Soft Computing 27, 13255 (2023). 17

    work page 2023

  38. [38]

    S. U. Khan, A. J. Awan, and G. Vall-Llosera, K-means clustering on noisy intermediate scale quantum comput- ers, arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.12183 (2019)

    work page arXiv 1909

  39. [39]

    Kerenidis and J

    I. Kerenidis and J. Landman, Quantum spectral cluster- ing, Physical Review A 103, 042415 (2021)

    work page 2021

  40. [40]

    Q. Li, Y. Huang, S. Jin, X. Hou, and X. Wang, Quantum spectral clustering algorithm for unsupervised learning, Science China Information Sciences 65, 200504 (2022)

    work page 2022

  41. [41]

    Schuld, R

    M. Schuld, R. Sweke, and J. J. Meyer, Effect of data en- coding on the expressive power of variational quantum- machine-learning models, Phys. Rev. A 103, 032430 (2021)

    work page 2021

  42. [42]

    Kerenidis, J

    I. Kerenidis, J. Landman, A. Luongo, and A. Prakash, q- means: A quantum algorithm for unsupervised machine learning, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 32, edited by H. Wallach, H. Larochelle, A. Beygelzimer, F. d 'Alch´ e-Buc, E. Fox, and R. Garnett (Curran Associates, Inc., 2019)

    work page 2019

  43. [43]

    Hubregtsen, D

    T. Hubregtsen, D. Wierichs, E. Gil-Fuster, P.-J. H. Derks, P. K. Faehrmann, and J. J. Meyer, Training quan- tum embedding kernels on near-term quantum comput- ers, Physical Review A 106, 042431 (2022)

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    Alvarez-Estevez, Benchmarking quantum machine learning kernel training for classification tasks, IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering (2025)

    D. Alvarez-Estevez, Benchmarking quantum machine learning kernel training for classification tasks, IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering (2025)

    work page 2025

  45. [45]

    Rodriguez-Grasa, R

    P. Rodriguez-Grasa, R. Farzan Rodr´ ıguez, G. Novelli, Y. Ban, and M. Sanz, Satellite image classification with neural quantum kernels, Machine Learning: Science and Technology (2024)

    work page 2024

  46. [46]

    Brand and F

    D. Brand and F. Petruccione, A quantum leaky integrate- and-fire spiking neuron and network, npj Quantum Infor- mation 10, 125 (2024)

    work page 2024

  47. [47]

    Markovi´ c and J

    D. Markovi´ c and J. Grollier, Quantum neuro- morphic computing, Applied Physics Letters 117, 10.1063/5.0020014 (2020)

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0020014 2020

  48. [48]

    Ghosh, K

    S. Ghosh, K. Nakajima, Kohei Nakajima, Kohei Naka- jima, T. Krisnanda, Keisuke Fujii, Keisuke Fujii, K. Fujii, and T. C. H. Liew, Quantum Neuromorphic Computing with Reservoir Computing Networks, Advanced Quan- tum Technologies 4, 2100053 (2021)

    work page 2021

  49. [49]

    J. K. Eshraghian, M. Ward, E. Neftci, X. Wang, G. Lenz, G. Dwivedi, M. Bennamoun, D. S. Jeong, and W. D. Lu, Training Spiking Neural Networks Using Lessons From Deep Learning (2023), arXiv:2109.12894 [cs]

    work page arXiv 2023

  50. [50]

    D. G. York, J. Adelman, J. E. Anderson Jr, S. F. Ander- son, J. Annis, N. A. Bahcall, J. Bakken, R. Barkhouser, S. Bastian, E. Berman, et al., The sloan digital sky sur- vey: Technical summary, The Astronomical Journal120, 1579 (2000)

    work page 2000

  51. [51]

    N. M. Ball and R. J. Brunner, Data mining and machine learning in astronomy, International Journal of Modern Physics D 19, 1049 (2010)

    work page 2010

  52. [52]

    A. J. Smola and B. Sch¨ olkopf, Learning with kernels , Vol. 4 (Citeseer, 1998)

    work page 1998

  53. [53]

    Abbas, D

    A. Abbas, D. Sutter, C. Zoufal, A. Lucchi, A. Figalli, and S. Woerner, The power of quantum neural networks, Nature Computational Science 1, 403 (2021)

    work page 2021

  54. [54]

    Pedregosa, G

    F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg,et al., Scikit-learn: Machine learn- ing in python, the Journal of machine Learning research 12, 2825 (2011)

    work page 2011

  55. [55]

    R. A. Fisher, Iris, UCI Machine Learning Repository (1936), DOI: https://doi.org/10.24432/C56C76

    work page doi:10.24432/c56c76 1936

  56. [56]

    A. O. Clarke, A. M. M. Scaife, R. Greenhalgh, and V. Griguta, Identifying galaxies, quasars and stars with machine learning: a new catalogue of classifications for 111 million sdss sources without spectra, 10.5281/zen- odo.3768398 (2020)

    work page doi:10.5281/zen- 2020

  57. [57]

    Clarke, A

    A. Clarke, A. Scaife, R. Greenhalgh, and V. Griguta, Identifying galaxies, quasars, and stars with machine learning: A new catalogue of classifications for 111 mil- lion sdss sources without spectra, Astronomy & Astro- physics 639, A84 (2020)

    work page 2020

  58. [58]

    Sch¨ olkopf, C

    B. Sch¨ olkopf, C. Burges, and A. Smola,Advances in Ker- nel Methods: Support Vector Learning , Mit Press (MIT Press, 1999)

    work page 1999

  59. [59]

    B. E. Boser, I. M. Guyon, and V. N. Vapnik, A training algorithm for optimal margin classifiers, in Proceedings of the fifth annual workshop on Computational learning theory (1992) pp. 144–152

    work page 1992

  60. [60]

    Shi and J

    J. Shi and J. Malik, Normalized cuts and image segmen- tation, IEEE Transactions on pattern analysis and ma- chine intelligence 22, 888 (2000)

    work page 2000

  61. [61]

    Schuld, A

    M. Schuld, A. Bocharov, K. M. Svore, and N. Wiebe, Circuit-centric quantum classifiers, Physical Review A 101, 032308 (2020)

    work page 2020

  62. [62]

    Cortes and V

    C. Cortes and V. Vapnik, Support-vector networks, Ma- chine learning 20, 273 (1995)

    work page 1995

  63. [63]

    Schuld, M

    M. Schuld, M. Fingerhuth, and F. Petruccione, Imple- menting a distance-based classifier with a quantum inter- ference circuit, Europhysics Letters 119, 60002 (2017)

    work page 2017

  64. [64]

    T. Wang, D. Zhao, and S. Tian, An overview of kernel alignment and its applications, Artificial Intelligence Re- view 43, 179 (2015)

    work page 2015

  65. [65]

    Cristianini, J

    N. Cristianini, J. Shawe-Taylor, A. Elisseeff, and J. Kan- dola, On kernel-target alignment, Advances in neural in- formation processing systems 14 (2001)

    work page 2001

  66. [66]

    C. M. Bishop and N. M. Nasrabadi, Pattern recognition and machine learning , Vol. 4 (Springer, 2006)

    work page 2006

  67. [67]

    J. R. McClean, S. Boixo, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Bab- bush, and H. Neven, Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes, Nature communications 9, 4812 (2018)

    work page 2018

  68. [68]

    M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum computation and quantum information (Cambridge university press, 2010)

    work page 2010

  69. [69]

    Wu and S.-D

    K.-P. Wu and S.-D. Wang, Choosing the kernel parame- ters for support vector machines by the inter-cluster dis- tance in the feature space, Pattern Recognition 42, 710 (2009)

    work page 2009

  70. [70]

    S. S. Haykin and S. S. Haykin,Neural networks and learn- ing machines , 3rd ed. (Prentice Hall, New York, 2009) oCLC: ocn237325326

    work page 2009

  71. [71]

    Brunel and M

    N. Brunel and M. C. W. Van Rossum, Lapicque’s 1907 paper: from frogs to integrate-and-fire, Biological Cyber- netics 97, 337 (2007)

    work page 1907

  72. [72]

    A. N. Burkitt, A review of the integrate-and-fire neuron model: I. Homogeneous synaptic input, Biological Cy- bernetics 95, 1 (2006)

    work page 2006

  73. [73]

    Yamazaki, V.-K

    K. Yamazaki, V.-K. Vo-Ho, D. Bulsara, and N. Le, Spik- ing neural networks and their applications: a review, Brain Sciences 12, 863 (2022)

    work page 2022

  74. [74]

    X. Wang, X. Lin, and X. Dang, Supervised learning in spiking neural networks: a review of algorithms and eval- uations, Neural Networks 125, 258 (2020)

    work page 2020

  75. [75]

    A. L. Hodgkin and A. F. Huxley, A quantitative descrip- tion of membrane current and its application to conduc- 18 tion and excitation in nerve, The Journal of Physiology 117, 500 (1952)

    work page 1952

  76. [76]

    Brand, I

    D. Brand, I. Sinayskiy, and F. Petruccione, Markovian noise modelling and parameter extraction framework for quantum devices, Scientific Reports 14, 4769 (2024)

    work page 2024

  77. [77]

    M. C. W. v. Rossum, A novel spike distance, Neural Com- putation 13, 751 (2001)

    work page 2001

  78. [78]

    J. D. Victor and K. P. Purpura, Nature and preci- sion of temporal coding in visual cortex: a metric-space analysis, Journal of Neurophysiology 76, 1310 (1996), https://doi.org/10.1152/jn.1996.76.2.1310

    work page doi:10.1152/jn.1996.76.2.1310 1996

  79. [79]

    J. D. Victor and K. P. P. and, Metric-space analysis of spike trains: theory, algorithms and application, Net- work: Computation in Neural Systems 8, 127 (1997), https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-898X 8 2 003

    work page doi:10.1088/0954-898x 1997

  80. [80]

    Alpaydin, Introduction to machine learning (MIT press, 2020)

    E. Alpaydin, Introduction to machine learning (MIT press, 2020)

    work page 2020

Showing first 80 references.