Quantum Circuits in Diffusion Models: A Fair-Comparison Study and a Mechanistic Analysis of Angle-Embedding Failures

Jaeuk Kim; Sanghoon Yoo

Quantum Circuits in Diffusion Models: A Fair-Comparison Study and a Mechanistic Analysis of Angle-Embedding Failures

T0 review · 0 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-13 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Under matched controls, quantum cores in diffusion models match classical performance and reveal an angle-embedding failure.

desk verdict Careful fair-comparison study of VQCs in diffusion SE gates: no-difference result under matched controls plus a clean, measured diagnosis of angle-embedding aliasing on NCSN. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.09108 v1 pith:4L7JUPBE submitted 2026-07-10 cs.LG

Jaeuk Kim , Sanghoon Yoo This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.LG

keywords variationalquantumcircuitsdiffusionmodelsangleembeddingsqueeze-and-excitationfaircomparisonphasealiasingscore-basedgenerativeparameterefficiency

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 asks whether a variational quantum circuit is a useful inductive bias inside diffusion models once capacity and architecture are held fixed. The authors insert either a quantum core or a classical multilayer perceptron into the same squeeze-and-excitation channel gate at the U-Net bottleneck, keep every wrapper and training schedule identical, and compare on DDPM, latent diffusion, and score-based NCSN. On DDPM and latent diffusion the quantum cores produce mean FID scores statistically indistinguishable from a higher-parameter classical control while using far fewer core parameters; parameter-matched classical cores, however, reach similar FID, so no quantum efficiency advantage is established. The single clear failure is NCSN: its unbounded score target drives angle-embedding inputs hundreds of multiples past the 2π period of rotation gates, aliasing the encoder and collapsing the quantum modulator. Bounding the angles with π tanh removes the aliasing and substantially improves both quantum cores. Because every circuit is classically simulated at eight qubits, the work claims neither quantum advantage nor superiority; it claims a fair-comparison protocol and a transferable mechanical diagnosis of when angle embeddings break.

What carries the argument

The SE channel-modulation scaffold: a fixed residual gate at the U-Net bottleneck whose only interchangeable piece is the core (quantum VQC, classical MLP, or none), zero-initialized so every variant starts from the identical unmodulated network.

What would settle it

Retrain the same SE scaffold with a parameter-matched classical core of 16 or 32 parameters on DDPM/MNIST and DDPM/CIFAR-10 under five independent training seeds and five generation seeds each; if the quantum core then shows a consistent, statistically significant FID advantage, the claim of no efficiency edge would be overturned.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under a fixed SE scaffold that isolates only the core, 8-qubit variational quantum circuits achieve mean FID comparable to a role-matched classical MLP on DDPM and latent diffusion for MNIST and CIFAR-10, with no statistically significant difference under paired sampling-seed tests; parameter-matched classical cores attain similar FID, so no quantum parameter-efficiency advantage is established. The NCSN failure is not capacity but phase aliasing of unbounded score targets through 2π-periodic angle embeddings, which a simple π tanh bound repairs.

Load-bearing premise

That an eight-qubit, depth-two, classically simulated circuit placed only at the U-Net bottleneck and scored by FID on a thousand samples is enough to decide whether a variational quantum parameterization is a useful inductive bias for diffusion models in general.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Any hybrid generative model that inserts a quantum block can be evaluated by swapping only that block inside an identity-initialized residual scaffold and reporting paired multi-seed effect sizes.
Pipelines that feed unbounded learned signals into angle embeddings will suffer the same wrap-around collapse; bounding the angles with π tanh is a cheap generic safeguard.
At few-qubit scale the variational quantum core is a viable but not superior inductive bias relative to a classical core of equal parameter budget.
Reported gains in quantum generative models that lack role-matched classical controls remain uninterpretable until those controls are supplied.

Reading between the lines

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

The same aliasing pathology should appear in any quantum-classical hybrid that angle-embeds unbounded score or residual signals outside diffusion, for example continuous-time score matching or certain physics-informed networks.
Because the SE core is only ~0.001 % of a 23 M-parameter model, even a genuine quantum advantage at the core would be invisible in whole-model latency or memory until the insertion point is enlarged or repeated.
Hardware runs of the identical trained circuits would isolate shot noise, connectivity, and decoherence as new failure modes distinct from the classical aliasing already diagnosed.

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

The useful part of this paper is not a quantum win; it is a controlled no-difference result plus a concrete failure mode. They fix an SE scaffold at the U-Net bottleneck, swap only the core (RealAmplitudes 16 params, EfficientSU2 32, role-matched MLP 144, or none), identity-init the up-projection, and run multi-seed FID on DDPM and LDM for MNIST/CIFAR-10. Quantum cores match the higher-parameter classical control (paired SNR < 0.3 for su2). Parameter-matched tiny MLPs land in the same ballpark, so they correctly refuse to claim a quantum efficiency edge. That protocol is cleaner than the feasibility papers they cite.

The real mechanistic contribution is Sec. 5. On NCSN the quantum cores collapse. They measure the angle-embedding inputs: median ~1000 rad (~159×2π) versus O(1) on DDPM, show the resulting SE gate is essentially flat across noise scales, and fix it with θ ← π tanh(·). Both quantum cores improve substantially; the classical core also improves a bit, so they note the generic normalization benefit while still isolating the extra aliasing pathology. Figures 3–4 and Table 7 make the argument easy to check.

Soft spots are the usual ones for this scale and are already stated: 8-qubit depth-2 circuits, classical simulation only, single insertion point, FID on 1000 samples, and some NCSN numbers from a single training run. The SE core itself is ~0.001 % of the model and barely moves FID from the no-SE baseline on DDPM/MNIST, so the inductive-bias claim is local. No code release. None of that breaks the scoped claims.

Math and tables look solid; citations cover the relevant quantum-diffusion and fair-comparison critiques without padding. This is for people who care about evaluation standards in hybrid generative models or who use angle embeddings with unbounded targets. I would send it to peer review; a serious referee can tighten the NCSN stats and push for code, but the core results deserve the airtime.

Referee Report

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies variational quantum circuits (VQCs) as cores inside a fixed squeeze-and-excitation (SE) channel-modulation scaffold inserted at the U-Net bottleneck of diffusion models. By swapping only the core (RealAmplitudes 16 params, EfficientSU2 32 params, role-matched classical MLP 144 params, or none) while holding wrappers, zero-init of W↑, and training fixed, and evaluating with multi-seed FID/SSIM on DDPM and latent diffusion (MNIST/CIFAR-10) plus NCSN (MNIST), the authors report that quantum cores achieve mean FID statistically indistinguishable from the higher-parameter classical control on DDPM/LDM (paired SNR < 0.3 for EfficientSU2). Parameter-matched classical cores (16/32 params) yield numerically comparable FID, so no quantum parameter-efficiency advantage is claimed. On NCSN they diagnose angle-embedding aliasing from the unbounded score target (∝1/σ), with measured input magnitudes ~10^{3} rad, causing gate collapse; a heta o π tanh(·) bound repairs it and improves both quantum cores (and the classical core). All circuits are classically simulated at 8 qubits; no quantum advantage is claimed. Contributions are a fair-comparison protocol and a mechanistic account of angle-embedding failure.

Significance. If the results hold, the work supplies a transparent, role-matched evaluation standard that prevents capacity confounds from being misread as quantum effects—an important corrective for the hybrid generative QML literature. The multi-seed SNR tests, training-seed robustness (Table 6), parameter-matched controls (Tables 4–5), direct angle histograms (Fig. 3) and gate-response measurements (Fig. 4), and the explicit refusal to claim advantage or efficiency wins that the data do not support are methodological strengths. The aliasing diagnosis and cheap π tanh fix are transferable beyond diffusion. Within the stated 8-qubit simulated regime the central no-difference and mechanistic claims are well-supported and useful.

minor comments (4)

Abstract and Sec. 1 slightly differ in wording on the parameter-matched result (“slightly lower mean FID” vs. “numerically comparable”); align the two for consistency.
Table 1 caption and surrounding text correctly emphasize that the core is ~0.001 % of total parameters; a one-sentence reminder of this scale in the Discussion would further guard against over-reading the local efficiency numbers.
Fig. 3 and Fig. 4 are clear; adding the exact number of held-out samples used for the angle histogram and gate-response curves would aid exact reproducibility.
Appendix A notes that expectation values are analytic (shots=None). A brief parenthetical in Sec. 3 or 4 would make this design choice visible without requiring the appendix.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: empirical fair-comparison and measured aliasing diagnosis, not a derivation that reduces to its inputs by construction.

full rationale

The paper's load-bearing claims are experimental outcomes under a fixed SE scaffold (Eq. 1) that swaps only the core (quantum VQC vs. role-matched or parameter-matched classical MLP vs. none). Comparability of mean FID (Tables 2–6), paired SNR values (Table 3), and the absence of a statistically established parameter-efficiency advantage are reported from multi-seed runs against external classical controls; they are not forced by definition or by fitting a quantity that is then re-presented as a prediction. The NCSN failure is diagnosed from measured angle-embedding input magnitudes (Fig. 3: median ~1000 rad vs. DDPM median 2.7 rad) and the consequent collapse of the SE gate response (Fig. 4), then repaired by the explicit bounding map θ ← π tanh(·) (Table 7). That map is an engineering fix motivated by the known 2π-periodicity of rotation gates, not a fitted parameter renamed as a first-principles result. Citations are to standard diffusion, SE, and VQC literature; none is a self-citation that uniquely forces the central claim. The authors explicitly disclaim quantum advantage and efficiency wins unsupported by the data. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained empirical comparison plus mechanistic measurement; no step reduces by construction to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard diffusion and VQC mathematics plus a small set of experimental design choices (qubit count, depth, seed counts, SNR threshold, bounding function). No new physical entities are postulated; the SE scaffold and angle_norm are engineering constructs whose behavior is measured inside the paper. Free parameters are the usual hyper-parameters and design knobs that any empirical ML study must fix; they do not enter a fitted “prediction” that is then re-sold as theory.

free parameters (6)

number of qubits nq = 8
Fixed at 8 for all quantum cores; determines both expressivity and classical simulability. Chosen by hand for the study scale.
circuit depth = 2
Fixed at 2 for RealAmplitudes and EfficientSU2; controls parameter count (16/32) and trainability. Design choice, not fitted to FID.
role-matched classical core size = 144
Two Linear(8,8)+tanh blocks = 144 parameters; deliberately larger than quantum cores to serve as higher-parameter control.
SNR significance threshold = 2
|SNR| > 2 used as conservative flag corresponding to paired t > 4.5 (p ≈ 0.01) with n = 5 seeds. Arbitrary but disclosed threshold.
angle bounding constant = π
π in θ ← π tanh(·) chosen so that the image of the map lies strictly inside (−π, π), the non-aliasing fundamental domain of rotation gates.
generation and training seed counts = 5
5 generation seeds for primary tables; 5 training seeds for robustness table. Sample-size choices that affect statistical power.

assumptions (4)

standard math Rotation gates (RY, RZ) are 2π-periodic, so angle embeddings alias under inputs whose magnitude greatly exceeds π.
Invoked throughout Sec. 5 and Fig. 3; standard quantum-gate fact.
domain assumption FID computed on 1000 generated vs 1000 real images (500 for NCSN) with 100 sampling steps is a sufficient quality metric for ranking the SE cores.
Used for all primary claims in Tables 2–7; conventional but sample-size limited.
ad hoc to paper Holding the SE wrapper, zero-init of W↑, and training schedule fixed while swapping only the core isolates the contribution of the quantum parameterization.
Core methodological premise of Sec. 3 and Fig. 1; not independently validated outside this scaffold.
domain assumption Classical simulation of 8-qubit statevector circuits (PennyLane default.qubit, shots=None) is an adequate proxy for assessing inductive bias of the variational parameterization.
Stated in abstract, Sec. 6 and Limitations; excludes noise, shot noise, and connectivity effects.

invented entities (2)

Quantum SE modulation scaffold (se_mode axis)
purpose: Provides a fixed residual channel-gating wrapper so that only the core (VQC vs MLP vs none) changes, enabling role-matched comparison.
Engineering construct introduced in Sec. 3; behavior measured via FID and gate-response plots, but no independent existence outside the paper’s architecture.
angle_norm transform θ ← π tanh(·) independent evidence
purpose: Maps unbounded pre-embedding activations into (−π, π) to eliminate phase aliasing for rotation-gate embeddings.
Introduced in Sec. 5 as the fix; empirically validated inside the paper’s NCSN runs, and the functional form is a standard saturating map, but the specific application to quantum angle embeddings is paper-specific.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Circuits in Diffusion Models: A Fair-Comparison Study and a Mechanistic Analysis of Angle-Embedding Failures." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4L7JUPBE

@misc{pith2026260709108,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Circuits in Diffusion Models: A Fair-Comparison Study and a Mechanistic Analysis of Angle-Embedding Failures},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4L7JUPBE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.09108}
}

abstract

We study the integration of variational quantum circuits (VQCs) into diffusion models through a squeeze-and-excitation (SE) channel-modulation scaffold that isolates the quantum contribution. Using a role-matched classical control and multi-seed significance testing across DDPM and latent diffusion on MNIST and CIFAR-10, with a score-based NCSN study on MNIST, we find that quantum cores achieve comparable mean FID to the classical control across DDPM and latent diffusion, while paired sampling-seed tests for EfficientSU2 detect no statistically significant difference. Although the quantum cores use $4.5$--$9\times$ fewer core parameters than the role-matched control, parameter-matched classical controls attain comparable mean FID, so the experiments do not establish a quantum parameter-efficiency advantage. We further identify a structural failure in score-based NCSN: the unbounded score target, proportional to $1/\sigma$, drives angle-embedding inputs far beyond the $2\pi$ period of rotation gates, causing phase aliasing and collapse of the quantum modulator. A bounding transformation, $\theta \leftarrow \pi \tanh(\cdot)$, maps inputs to the non-aliasing domain and substantially improves both quantum cores. Since all circuits are classically simulated at a few-qubit scale, we do not claim quantum advantage. Instead, the study provides a fair-comparison protocol for quantum-enhanced generative models and a mechanistic account of when and why angle embeddings fail.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.09108 by the authors.

**Figure 2.** Generated samples (DDPM/MNIST, 100 steps, shared seed). Sample quality is visually comparable across the no-SE baseline, the classical-SE control, and the quantum-su2 core, consistent with the comparable FID results in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Magnitudes of the angles entering AngleEmbedding in a trained quantum-SE model (fraction of samples per log-spaced bin). DDPM activations remain O(1) (median 2.7 rad), whereas NCSN’s unbounded 1/σ target pushes the inputs to a median of ∼103 rad (≈ 159 × 2π), deep into the aliasing regime. The dashed line marks π [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Consequence of aliasing: the batch- and channel-averaged SE gate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

22 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith

[1]

A generative modeling approach for benchmarking and training shallow quantum circuits.npj Quantum Information, 5(1):45, 2019

Marcello Benedetti, Delfina Garcia-Pintos, Oscar Perdomo, Vicente Leyton-Ortega, Yunseong Nam, and Alejandro Perdomo-Ortiz. A generative modeling approach for benchmarking and training shallow quantum circuits.npj Quantum Information, 5(1):45, 2019

2019
[2]

Pennylane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations.arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.04968, 2018

Ville Bergholm, Josh Izaac, Maria Schuld, Christian Gogolin, et al. Pennylane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations.arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.04968, 2018

arXiv 2018
[3]

Better than classical? the subtle art of benchmarking quantum machine learning models, 2024

Joseph Bowles, Shahnawaz Ahmed, and Maria Schuld. Better than classical? the subtle art of benchmarking quantum machine learning models, 2024. arXiv:2403.07059

arXiv 2024
[4]

Variational quantum algorithms.Nature Reviews Physics, 3(9):625–644, 2021

Marco Cerezo, Andrew Arrasmith, Ryan Babbush, Simon C Benjamin, Suguru Endo, Keisuke Fujii, Jarrod R McClean, Kosuke Mitarai, Xiao Yuan, Lukasz Cincio, and Patrick J Coles. Variational quantum algorithms.Nature Reviews Physics, 3(9):625–644, 2021

2021
[5]

Quantum generative adversarial networks

Pierre-Luc Dallaire-Demers and Nathan Killoran. Quantum generative adversarial networks. Physical Review A, 98(1):012324, 2018

2018
[6]

Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces.Nature, 567(7747):209–212, 2019

Vojtěch Havlíček, Antonio D Córcoles, Kristan Temme, Aram W Harrow, Abhinav Kandala, Jerry M Chow, and Jay M Gambetta. Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces.Nature, 567(7747):209–212, 2019

2019
[7]

Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilibrium

Martin Heusel, Hubert Ramsauer, Thomas Unterthiner, Bernhard Nessler, and Sepp Hochre- iter. Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilibrium. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2017

2017
[8]

Denoising diffusion probabilistic models

Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2020

2020

Show all 22 references

[9]

Squeeze-and-excitation networks

Jie Hu, Li Shen, and Gang Sun. Squeeze-and-excitation networks. 2018

2018
[10]

Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets.Nature, 549(7671):242–246, 2017

Abhinav Kandala, Antonio Mezzacapo, Kristan Temme, Maika Takita, Markus Brink, Jerry M Chow, and Jay M Gambetta. Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets.Nature, 549(7671):242–246, 2017

2017
[11]

Quantum denoising diffusion models, 2024

Michael Kölle, Gerhard Stenzel, Jonas Stein, Sebastian Zielinski, Björn Ommer, and Claudia Linnhoff-Popien. Quantum denoising diffusion models, 2024. arXiv:2401.07049. 11

2024 arXiv
[12]

Differentiable learning of quantum circuit born machines.Physical Review A, 98(6):062324, 2018

Jin-Guo Liu and Lei Wang. Differentiable learning of quantum circuit born machines.Physical Review A, 98(6):062324, 2018

2018
[13]

Quantum generative adversarial learning.Physical Review Letters, 121(4):040502, 2018

Seth Lloyd and Christian Weedbrook. Quantum generative adversarial learning.Physical Review Letters, 121(4):040502, 2018

2018
[14]

Quantum-noise-driven generative diffusion models.Advanced Quantum Technologies, 7(6):2300401, 2024

Marco Parigi, Stefano Martina, and Filippo Caruso. Quantum-noise-driven generative diffusion models.Advanced Quantum Technologies, 7(6):2300401, 2024

2024
[15]

Data re- uploading for a universal quantum classifier.Quantum, 4:226, 2020

Adrián Pérez-Salinas, Alba Cervera-Lierta, Elies Gil-Fuster, and José I Latorre. Data re- uploading for a universal quantum classifier.Quantum, 4:226, 2020

2020
[16]

High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models

Robin Rombach, Andreas Blattmann, Dominik Lorenz, Patrick Esser, and Björn Ommer. High-resolution image synthesis with latent diffusion models. InIEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2022

2022
[17]

Is quantum advantage the right goal for quantum machine learning?PRX Quantum, 3(3):030101, 2022

Maria Schuld and Nathan Killoran. Is quantum advantage the right goal for quantum machine learning?PRX Quantum, 3(3):030101, 2022

2022
[18]

Circuit-centric quantum classifiers.Physical Review A, 101(3):032308, 2020

Maria Schuld, Alex Bocharov, Krysta M Svore, and Nathan Wiebe. Circuit-centric quantum classifiers.Physical Review A, 101(3):032308, 2020

2020
[19]

Generative modeling by estimating gradients of the data distribution

Yang Song and Stefano Ermon. Generative modeling by estimating gradients of the data distribution. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2019

2019
[20]

Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equations

Yang Song, Jascha Sohl-Dickstein, Diederik P Kingma, Abhishek Kumar, Stefano Ermon, and Ben Poole. Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equations. In International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2021

2021
[21]

Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity.IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 13(4): 600–612, 2004

Zhou Wang, Alan C Bovik, Hamid R Sheikh, and Eero P Simoncelli. Image quality assessment: From error visibility to structural similarity.IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, 13(4): 600–612, 2004

2004
[22]

Generative quantum machine learning via denoising diffusion probabilistic models.Physical Review Letters, 132(10):100602, 2024

Bingzhi Zhang, Peng Xu, Xiaohui Chen, and Quntao Zhuang. Generative quantum machine learning via denoising diffusion probabilistic models.Physical Review Letters, 132(10):100602, 2024. A Circuit and Training Details Cores.TheRealAmplitudesansatz usesdepth = 2layers ofR Y rotat...

2024

Pith tools

Reviewed July 13, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

A generative modeling approach for benchmarking and training shallow quantum circuits.npj Quantum Information, 5(1):45, 2019

Marcello Benedetti, Delfina Garcia-Pintos, Oscar Perdomo, Vicente Leyton-Ortega, Yunseong Nam, and Alejandro Perdomo-Ortiz. A generative modeling approach for benchmarking and training shallow quantum circuits.npj Quantum Information, 5(1):45, 2019

2019

[2] [2]

Pennylane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations.arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.04968, 2018

Ville Bergholm, Josh Izaac, Maria Schuld, Christian Gogolin, et al. Pennylane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations.arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.04968, 2018

arXiv 2018

[3] [3]

Better than classical? the subtle art of benchmarking quantum machine learning models, 2024

Joseph Bowles, Shahnawaz Ahmed, and Maria Schuld. Better than classical? the subtle art of benchmarking quantum machine learning models, 2024. arXiv:2403.07059

arXiv 2024

[4] [4]

Variational quantum algorithms.Nature Reviews Physics, 3(9):625–644, 2021

Marco Cerezo, Andrew Arrasmith, Ryan Babbush, Simon C Benjamin, Suguru Endo, Keisuke Fujii, Jarrod R McClean, Kosuke Mitarai, Xiao Yuan, Lukasz Cincio, and Patrick J Coles. Variational quantum algorithms.Nature Reviews Physics, 3(9):625–644, 2021

2021

[5] [5]

Quantum generative adversarial networks

Pierre-Luc Dallaire-Demers and Nathan Killoran. Quantum generative adversarial networks. Physical Review A, 98(1):012324, 2018

2018

[6] [6]

Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces.Nature, 567(7747):209–212, 2019

Vojtěch Havlíček, Antonio D Córcoles, Kristan Temme, Aram W Harrow, Abhinav Kandala, Jerry M Chow, and Jay M Gambetta. Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces.Nature, 567(7747):209–212, 2019

2019

[7] [7]

Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilibrium

Martin Heusel, Hubert Ramsauer, Thomas Unterthiner, Bernhard Nessler, and Sepp Hochre- iter. Gans trained by a two time-scale update rule converge to a local nash equilibrium. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2017

2017

[8] [8]

Denoising diffusion probabilistic models

Jonathan Ho, Ajay Jain, and Pieter Abbeel. Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), 2020

2020