Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Evolutionary Optimization for Designing Variational Quantum Circuits with High Model Capacity

T0 review · 4 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read EvoQAS-ED uses evolutionary search with effective dimension as fitness to discover variational quantum circuits with high model capacity.

desk verdict EvoQAS-ED does evolve circuits toward higher effective dimension, but the paper never trains a discovered circuit on a task, so its central claim about enhanced QML performance is unsupported. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.12484 v1 pith:KRI2ANUR submitted 2024-12-17 quant-ph cs.AIcs.ETcs.LGcs.NE

Samuel Yen-Chi Chen This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phcs.AIcs.ETcs.LGcs.NE
keywords quantummachinelearningarchitecturesearchevolutionaryalgorithmeffectivedimensionvariationalcircuitsmodelcapacityFisherinformation
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

The paper tries to establish that an evolutionary algorithm can automatically design variational quantum circuits whose effective dimension, a measure of model capacity, exceeds that of hand-designed or classical networks. If true, this would remove a key expert bottleneck in quantum machine learning, letting a search process guided by the Fisher information metric find circuits that can approximate complex functions. Numerical simulations on small circuits show the evolved circuits' effective dimension grows and then saturates with dataset size, and their Fisher spectra remain spread out rather than collapsing toward zero as qubit count grows.

What carries the argument

The central object is the effective dimension of a statistical model, defined through the normalized Fisher information matrix and a dataset-size parameter $n$; it quantifies how many independent parameter directions a model effectively explores at a given data budget. The paper couples this metric with a dictionary-based circuit representation (Equation 2) whose floating-point vectors are softmax-sampled into one-hot choices for gate types and entangling layers, and with a mutation operator that adds small Gaussian noise to the representation. The evolutionary loop selects the top agents by effective dimension each generation, so the search optimizes model capacity directly.

What would settle it

Train the evolved high-effective-dimension circuits and the classical baselines on the same supervised learning task, such as classifying a standard dataset like MNIST or a synthetic nonlinear function, and compare test accuracy or generalization gap. If the high-effective-dimension circuits do not outperform the baselines, the central claim that effective dimension indicates performance fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

EvoQAS-ED represents a quantum circuit as a dictionary of continuous vectors, mutates the representation by adding Gaussian noise, and selects successive generations by effective dimension. Applying this to a search space of encoding and variational layers yields circuits whose effective dimension, evaluated on dataset sizes of 1000 and 2000, is significantly higher than that of classical neural networks with comparable parameter counts. The discovered circuits also show Fisher information eigenvalue spectra that do not concentrate near zero, in contrast to classical networks, suggesting they are less prone to barren-plateau-like trainability issues.

Load-bearing premise

The paper assumes that a circuit's effective dimension, computed from the empirical Fisher information at a fixed dataset size, faithfully predicts how well that circuit will learn and generalize on real machine-learning tasks.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same evolutionary setup can be reused with any differentiable model metric by swapping the fitness function, as the paper states in its conclusion.
  • If effective dimension tracks learning capability, the discovered architectures should outperform typical hand-designed variational circuits on complex quantum machine learning tasks.
  • The observed Fisher spectra suggest the evolved circuits are less likely to suffer from vanishing gradients as the qubit count scales, which is a key obstacle in variational quantum algorithms.
  • The method requires no task-specific labels during the search phase, so it can pre-screen architectures before they are trained on a concrete dataset.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper's evidence is entirely capacity-based; a direct comparison of training accuracy and generalization error on a concrete task would be needed to confirm that high effective dimension translates to real learning performance.
  • The continuous representation could be extended to evolve data-encoding angles, measurement observables, or even the number of layers, turning the search into a joint architecture-and-hyperparameter optimizer.
  • Combining this capacity-driven search with a trainability-aware penalty (such as a variance-based cost) might yield circuits that are both high-capacity and easy to optimize.
  • A natural stress test is to run the same evolutionary search with a different Fisher approximation (for example, an empirical Fisher computed from a single batch) and see whether the selected architectures remain stable.
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.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes EvoQAS-ED, an evolutionary quantum architecture search method that encodes quantum circuit components (encoding layer and variational layers) as real-valued vectors, mutates them with Gaussian noise, and converts them into discrete circuits via softmax sampling and one-hot selection. The fitness function is the effective dimension of the resulting QNN model, computed from the empirical Fisher information matrix as defined in Eq. (3). Experiments evolve a population of 50 agents for 1000 generations at dataset sizes n=1000 and n=2000, showing convergence of the effective dimension, and then analyze three discovered circuits by plotting effective dimension versus dataset size and comparing Fisher information eigenvalue spectra against two classical feedforward networks. The paper concludes that the method discovers circuits with high model capacity and improved learning capabilities, thereby enhancing QML performance.

Significance. If validated against task-level benchmarks, EvoQAS-ED would be a useful, relatively simple method for replacing expert ansatz design with an automated search over circuit architectures, and it extends quantum architecture search to a capacity-based objective. The real-valued representation and mutation scheme are clearly described, and the paper explicitly reports convergence curves for the evolutionary optimization. However, the evaluation is entirely based on the same metric (effective dimension) that serves as the fitness function, so the optimization curves are partly a consequence of the selection rule. The Fisher-spectrum comparison is suggestive but does not establish improved learning capability. No code or exact numerical settings for the effective-dimension computation are provided, limiting reproducibility.

major comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section VI, Figure 7] The central claim that the discovered circuits 'offer improved learning capabilities, thereby enhancing the overall performance of QML models' is unsupported because no discovered circuit is ever trained on an actual learning task. All reported evidence consists of effective dimension curves and Fisher eigenvalue spectra. High effective dimension does not by itself guarantee trainability, good optimization landscapes, or good generalization on a finite dataset; a circuit family with high ED can still suffer from barren-plateau-like spectra on specific data or overfit. To support the claimed performance enhancement, add task-level experiments (e.g., classification or regression benchmarks) comparing EvoQAS-ED circuits against fixed hand-designed ansatze and against randomly sampled circuits, and report training curves, test accuracy/loss, and variance over independent runs.
  2. [Sections V and VI, Figures 4–7] The evaluation is circular in an important sense: effective dimension is used both as the fitness function being optimized and as the success metric, so the rising top-agent curves in Figures 4 and 5 demonstrate only that the search maximizes dγ,n. The comparison in Figure 7 is also selection-biased: the three QNNs are products of 1000 generations of ED maximization, while the two classical NNs are fixed, hand-chosen baselines, one deliberately without a nonlinear activation. To establish that EvoQAS-ED discovers circuits with exceptional capacity, compare against quantum baselines under identical conditions: for instance, hardware-efficient ansatze, random circuits from the same search space, and random search with the same evolution budget. Report means and standard deviations over multiple independent evolutionary runs.
  3. [Section V, Eq. (3) and surrounding text] The manuscript does not specify the statistical model p(x,y;θ) used in the Fisher information matrix, the data distribution from which (x,y) pairs are drawn, or the measurement observables. Equation (3) defines the effective dimension with respect to E_{(x,y)∼p}, but p is never made concrete for the simulated QNNs. Without this information, the reported effective dimension values are not reproducible, and the dependence of the results on the choice of p (including whether y are labels of a classification task or continuous targets) is unknown. Please state the model family, the data distribution, the number and nature of observables, and how the expectation values in the Fisher information are computed.
  4. [Section V, fitness computation] The numerical procedure for evaluating the effective dimension for each agent is not described. It is unclear how the integral over the parameter space Θ in Eq. (3) is discretized, how many parameter samples are used, how the empirical Fisher information matrix is estimated, and how gradients of the QNN expectation values are obtained (e.g., via the parameter-shift rule). These details are essential for reproducing Figures 4 and 5 and for assessing the computational cost of running 1000 generations with a population of 50. Please provide the algorithm and, if possible, release code or a detailed pseudocode.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Section V, Eq. (3)] The notation 'idd' in the determinant most likely denotes the d-dimensional identity matrix; please typeset it as \(\mathbb{I}_d\) and define the symbol.
  2. [Section IV] The dimensions of the representation vectors are introduced with symbols such as NUM_H_LAYERS and NUM_ROTATIONS but are not explicitly defined in the text; for clarity, state that NUM_H_LAYERS = 2, NUM_ROTATIONS = 3, and NUM_ENTANGLING = 2, matching Table I.
  3. [Figure 7] The x-axis label 'Dataset Size n 1e6' is ambiguous; suggest 'Dataset size n (×10^6)' or a similar unambiguous label.
  4. [Figure 8] The axis label 'Eigenvalue size' is unclear; use 'Eigenvalue magnitude' or 'Eigenvalue value'. Also, the x-axis ranges of the subplots are not fully consistent, which makes visual comparison difficult.
  5. [Section VI] The phrase 'After 1000 generations of training' is a misnomer since the process is evolutionary optimization, not training of model parameters; suggest 'After 1000 generations of evolution'.
  6. [References] Several author names contain spacing artifacts (e.g., 'Y .-C. Chen') likely from the source format; please proofread the reference list.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the high-ED circuits are the explicit objective of the evolutionary search, and the broader QML-performance claim is an unsupported extrapolation, not a circular result.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is: adopt effective dimension (ED) from [39] as a capacity metric (Sec. V, Eq. 3); run an evolutionary search with ED as the fitness function (Sec. V, 'we employ the effective dimension as the fitness function'); select parents with the highest ED scores (Sec. VI); report that evolved circuits achieve high ED and certain Fisher spectra (Figs. 7 and 8); and conclude that these circuits have improved learning capabilities (Abstract, Conclusion). No step in this chain reduces to its own input by construction. The high ED of the evolved circuits is the optimization objective, so reporting it is a standard optimization result rather than a prediction derived from the objective. The paper does not fit parameters from data and then rename them as predictions; the fitness function and the reported metric are the same, which creates a self-referential evaluation, but not a circular derivation. The link between ED and model capacity is imported from the external reference [39], not from a self-citation chain, and the Fisher-spectrum comparison is an independent computation, even if selection-biased. The abstract's claim that this 'enhanc[es] the overall performance of QML models' is not supported by any task-level training or benchmark in Sec. VI; this is a missing-support / validity gap, not a circular reduction under the hard rules. Therefore no specific circular step is established.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are introduced. The method introduces a new circuit genotype representation, but that is a data structure, not a postulated physical object. All parameters in the ledger are experimental hyperparameters or unspecified details.

free parameters (7)
  • Mutation power sigma = 0.02
    Hand-chosen Gaussian noise scale for mutations; no sensitivity analysis is reported.
  • Population size P = 50
    Chosen for the evolutionary search; no ablation or sensitivity study.
  • Number of parents selected per generation = 10
    Top 10 effective dimension agents are mutated; choice is not justified.
  • Number of generations = 1000
    Evolution runs for 1000 generations; stopping criterion is not discussed.
  • Dataset sizes n for effective dimension = 1000 and 2000
    Selected to mimic small quantum machine learning datasets; effective dimension values depend on n.
  • Number of qubits and variational layers = Unreported for the main evolution
    The main search does not state qubit count or layer count; only the Fisher spectrum study reports 4 to 7 qubits.
  • Effective dimension parameter gamma = Unreported
    The definition uses gamma in (0,1], but the chosen value is not stated.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Effective dimension as defined by Abbas et al. [39] is a valid measure of model capacity and generalization potential.
    The paper uses effective dimension as fitness and as the main success metric, but never validates it against task performance for the discovered circuits.
  • domain assumption The empirical Fisher information matrix with n samples approximates the true Fisher information well enough for the effective dimension integral.
    The effective dimension definition relies on this approximation, and the paper does not assess its error for n=1000 or n=2000.
  • ad hoc to paper Small Gaussian perturbations in the real-valued representation R produce meaningful and smooth changes in circuit architecture.
    This is the core mutation mechanism, introduced in Section VI, and it is not derived or empirically characterized.
  • ad hoc to paper Softmax sampling from R followed by one-hot conversion yields valid circuits according to Table I.
    The representation-to-circuit mapping is a design choice; its effect on search space coverage is not analyzed.
  • domain assumption Quantum neural network models are differentiable so that the Fisher information matrix can be computed.
    Stated in Section V as the primary constraint, and it is satisfied by the chosen rotation gates, but the resulting distribution p(x,y;theta) is not specified.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Evolutionary Optimization for Designing Variational Quantum Circuits with High Model Capacity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KRI2ANUR

@misc{pith2026241212484,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Evolutionary Optimization for Designing Variational Quantum Circuits with High Model Capacity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KRI2ANUR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.12484}
}
read the original abstract

Recent advancements in quantum computing (QC) and machine learning (ML) have garnered significant attention, leading to substantial efforts toward the development of quantum machine learning (QML) algorithms to address a variety of complex challenges. The design of high-performance QML models, however, requires expert-level knowledge, posing a significant barrier to the widespread adoption of QML. Key challenges include the design of data encoding mechanisms and parameterized quantum circuits, both of which critically impact the generalization capabilities of QML models. We propose a novel method that encodes quantum circuit architecture information to enable the evolution of quantum circuit designs. In this approach, the fitness function is based on the effective dimension, allowing for the optimization of quantum circuits towards higher model capacity. Through numerical simulations, we demonstrate that the proposed method is capable of discovering variational quantum circuit architectures that offer improved learning capabilities, thereby enhancing the overall performance of QML models for complex tasks.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.12484 by the authors.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Quantum neural network with multiple variational layers. search for quantum circuit combinations, we design the circuit representation as a dictionary data structure R. R =    “encoding layer” 7→ (x1, x2), “variational layer” 7→ hy (i) 1 , y (i) 2 iN i=1    (2) where x1 ∈ R NUM H LAYERS , x2 ∈ R NUM ROTATIONS , y (i) 1 ∈ R NUM ENTANGLING, y (i) 2 ∈ R NUM ROTATIONS , N = num of var layers. For example, in the… view at source ↗
Figure 1
Figure 1. Generic structure of a quantum neural network (QNN) and the scheme of hybrid quantum-classical machine learning. IV. EVOLUTIONARY QUANTUM ARCHITECTURE SEARCH Consider the task of constructing a quantum circuit C, which is composed of several sub-components S1, S2, . . . , Sn. Each sub-component Si is associated with a set of available circuit options Bi , where |Bi | represents the number of feasible choices for tha… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Examples of allowed quantum circuit components. of the “variational layer” is consistent, where y (i) 1 governs the entangling component and y (i) 2 governs the rotation com￾ponent of the i-th variational sub-circuit, respectively. Given a circuit representation R, sampling is required to get the actual circuit for performance evaluation. For example, the vector x1 ∈ R 2 will be converted into probabilities by softm… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Results: effective dimension (rewards) with respect to generation of evolution when data size = 1000. 0 200 400 600 800 1000 Generation 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 Rewards (Effective Dimension) Top Agents' Rewards Mean Rewards Top Agents Rolling Mean (100) Mean Rewards Rol…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: , we present the results of the evolutionary optimiza￾tion over 1000 generations. We conducted two experiments with slightly different configurations: the dataset size n used to evaluate the effective dimension dγ,n. As shown in both Figure4 and Figure5, there is no si…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Results: Example QNN architectures found by the proposed method. that all QNNs identified by our method achieve a significantly higher effective dimension than the classical NNs with similar model sizes. Furthermore, even without non-linear activation functions, the QN…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Results: effective dimension with respect to different dataset size n in found QNN configurations and classical NN baselines. spectrum of the Fisher information matrix for the discovered QNNs and their corresponding classical NNs. Prior research [40] has shown that the…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Supervised Quantum Machine Learning: A Future Outlook from Qubits to Enterprise Applications

    quant-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

    A review of supervised quantum machine learning techniques and a speculative roadmap for 2025-2035, concluding that practical quantum advantage will be confined to niche domains until fault-tolerant hardware arrives.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

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

    2010

  2. [2]

    Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms,

    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, vol. 94, no. 1, p. 015004, 2022

    2022

  3. [3]

    An end-to- end trainable hybrid classical-quantum classifier,

    S. Y .-C. Chen, C.-M. Huang, C.-W. Hsing, and Y .-J. Kao, “An end-to- end trainable hybrid classical-quantum classifier,” Machine Learning: Science and Technology, vol. 2, no. 4, p. 045021, 2021

    2021

  4. [4]

    Qtn-vqc: An end-to-end learning framework for quantum neural networks,

    J. Qi, C.-H. H. Yang, and P.-Y . Chen, “Qtn-vqc: An end-to-end learning framework for quantum neural networks,” Physica Scripta, vol. 99, 12 2023

    2023

  5. [5]

    Quantum circuit learning,

    K. Mitarai, M. Negoro, M. Kitagawa, and K. Fujii, “Quantum circuit learning,” Physical Review A , vol. 98, no. 3, p. 032309, 2018

    2018

  6. [6]

    Quantum convolutional neural networks for high energy physics data analysis,

    S. Y .-C. Chen, T.-C. Wei, C. Zhang, H. Yu, and S. Yoo, “Quantum convolutional neural networks for high energy physics data analysis,” Physical Review Research, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 013231, 2022

    2022

  7. [7]

    Quantum long short-term memory,

    S. Y .-C. Chen, S. Yoo, and Y .-L. L. Fang, “Quantum long short-term memory,” in ICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) . IEEE, 2022, pp. 8622–8626

    2022

  8. [8]

    Pqlm-multilingual decentralized portable quantum language model,

    S. S. Li, X. Zhang, S. Zhou, H. Shu, R. Liang, H. Liu, and L. P. Garcia, “Pqlm-multilingual decentralized portable quantum language model,” in ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–5

    2023

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    When bert meets quantum temporal convolution learning for text classification in heterogeneous computing,

    C.-H. H. Yang, J. Qi, S. Y .-C. Chen, Y . Tsao, and P.-Y . Chen, “When bert meets quantum temporal convolution learning for text classification in heterogeneous computing,” in ICASSP 2022-2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) . ...

    2022

  2. [10]

    The dawn of quantum natural language processing,

    R. Di Sipio, J.-H. Huang, S. Y .-C. Chen, S. Mangini, and M. Worring, “The dawn of quantum natural language processing,” in ICASSP 2022- 2022 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2022, pp. 8612–8616

    2022

  3. [11]

    Applying qnlp to sentiment analysis in finance,

    J. Stein, I. Christ, N. Kraus, M. B. Mansky, R. M ¨uller, and C. Linnhoff- Popien, “Applying qnlp to sentiment analysis in finance,” in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), vol. 2. IEEE, 2023, pp. 20–25

    2023

  4. [12]

    Variational quantum reinforcement learning via evolutionary optimiza- tion,

    S. Y .-C. Chen, C.-M. Huang, C.-W. Hsing, H.-S. Goan, and Y .-J. Kao, “Variational quantum reinforcement learning via evolutionary optimiza- tion,” Machine Learning: Science and Technology , vol. 3, no. 1, p. 015025, 2022

    2022

  5. [13]

    Variational quantum circuits for deep reinforcement learning,

    S. Y .-C. Chen, C.-H. H. Yang, J. Qi, P.-Y . Chen, X. Ma, and H.-S. Goan, “Variational quantum circuits for deep reinforcement learning,” IEEE access, vol. 8, pp. 141 007–141 024, 2020

    2020

  6. [14]

    Efficient quantum recurrent reinforcement learning via quantum reservoir computing,

    S. Y .-C. Chen, “Efficient quantum recurrent reinforcement learning via quantum reservoir computing,” in ICASSP 2024-2024 IEEE In- ternational Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP). IEEE, 2024, pp. 13 186–13 190

    2024

  7. [15]

    A survey on quantum reinforcement learning,

    N. Meyer, C. Ufrecht, M. Periyasamy, D. D. Scherer, A. Plinge, and C. Mutschler, “A survey on quantum reinforcement learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.03464, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Quantum deep recurrent reinforcement learning,

    S. Y .-C. Chen, “Quantum deep recurrent reinforcement learning,” in ICASSP 2023-2023 IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and Signal Processing (ICASSP) . IEEE, 2023, pp. 1–5

    2023

  9. [17]

    Quantum agents in the gym: a variational quantum algorithm for deep q-learning,

    A. Skolik, S. Jerbi, and V . Dunjko, “Quantum agents in the gym: a variational quantum algorithm for deep q-learning,” Quantum, vol. 6, p. 720, 2022

    2022

  10. [18]

    Reinforcement learning with quantum vari- ational circuit,

    O. Lockwood and M. Si, “Reinforcement learning with quantum vari- ational circuit,” in Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment , vol. 16, no. 1, 2020, pp. 245–251

    2020

  11. [19]

    Parametrized quantum policies for reinforcement learning,

    S. Jerbi, C. Gyurik, S. Marshall, H. Briegel, and V . Dunjko, “Parametrized quantum policies for reinforcement learning,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems , vol. 34, pp. 28 362–28 375, 2021

    2021

  12. [20]

    Asynchronous training of quantum reinforcement learning,

    S. Y .-C. Chen, “Asynchronous training of quantum reinforcement learning,” Procedia Computer Science , vol. 222, pp. 321–330, 2023, international Neural Network Society Workshop on Deep Learning Innovations and Applications (INNS DLIA 2023). [Online]. Available: https://www.sc...

    2023

  13. [21]

    Vqc-based reinforcement learning with data re-uploading: performance and trainability,

    R. Coelho, A. Sequeira, and L. Paulo Santos, “Vqc-based reinforcement learning with data re-uploading: performance and trainability,” Quantum Machine Intelligence, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 53, 2024

    2024

  14. [22]

    Quantum ar- chitecture search via deep reinforcement learning,

    E.-J. Kuo, Y .-L. L. Fang, and S. Y .-C. Chen, “Quantum ar- chitecture search via deep reinforcement learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.07715, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Quantum architecture search via continual reinforcement learning,

    E. Ye and S. Y .-C. Chen, “Quantum architecture search via continual reinforcement learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.05779 , 2021

    2021 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Ga4qco: genetic algorithm for quantum circuit optimization,

    L. S ¨unkel, D. Martyniuk, D. Mattern, J. Jung, and A. Paschke, “Ga4qco: genetic algorithm for quantum circuit optimization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01303, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Quantum architecture search via truly proximal policy optimization,

    X. Zhu and X. Hou, “Quantum architecture search via truly proximal policy optimization,” Scientific Reports, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 5157, 2023

    2023

  18. [26]

    Quantum reinforcement learning for quantum archi- tecture search,

    S. Y .-C. Chen, “Quantum reinforcement learning for quantum archi- tecture search,” in Proceedings of the 2023 International Workshop on Quantum Classical Cooperative , 2023, pp. 17–20

    2023

  19. [27]

    Deepqprep: Neural network augmented search for quantum state preparation,

    P. Selig, N. Murphy, D. Redmond, and S. Caton, “Deepqprep: Neural network augmented search for quantum state preparation,” IEEE Access, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    Quantum architecture search with unsupervised representation learning,

    Y . Sun, Z. Wu, Y . Ma, and V . Tresp, “Quantum architecture search with unsupervised representation learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.11576, 2024

    2024

  21. [29]

    Reinforcement learning for optimization of variational quan- tum circuit architectures,

    M. Ostaszewski, L. M. Trenkwalder, W. Masarczyk, E. Scerri, and V . Dunjko, “Reinforcement learning for optimization of variational quan- tum circuit architectures,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 34, pp. 18 182–18 194, 2021

    2021

  22. [30]

    Monte carlo tree search based hybrid optimization of variational quantum circuits,

    J. Yao, H. Li, M. Bukov, L. Lin, and L. Ying, “Monte carlo tree search based hybrid optimization of variational quantum circuits,” in Mathematical and Scientific Machine Learning . PMLR, 2022, pp. 49– 64

    2022

  23. [31]

    Quantum machine learning architecture search via deep reinforcement learning,

    X. Dai, T.-C. Wei, S. Yoo, and S. Y .-C. Chen, “Quantum machine learning architecture search via deep reinforcement learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.20147, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Evolutionary quantum architecture search for parametrized quantum circuits,

    L. Ding and L. Spector, “Evolutionary quantum architecture search for parametrized quantum circuits,” in Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion , 2022, pp. 2190– 2195

    2022

  25. [33]

    Evolutionary-based searching method for quantum circuit architecture,

    A. Zhang and S. Zhao, “Evolutionary-based searching method for quantum circuit architecture,” Quantum Information Processing, vol. 22, no. 7, p. 283, 2023

    2023

  26. [34]

    Multi-objective evolutionary architecture search for parameterized quantum circuits,

    L. Ding and L. Spector, “Multi-objective evolutionary architecture search for parameterized quantum circuits,” Entropy, vol. 25, no. 1, p. 93, 2023

    2023

  27. [35]

    Toward automated quantum variational machine learning,

    O. Subasi, “Toward automated quantum variational machine learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.01567 , 2023

    2023 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Differentiable quantum architecture search for quantum reinforcement learning,

    Y . Sun, Y . Ma, and V . Tresp, “Differentiable quantum architecture search for quantum reinforcement learning,” in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE) , vol. 2. IEEE, 2023, pp. 15–19

    2023

  29. [37]

    Neural predictor based quantum architecture search,

    S.-X. Zhang, C.-Y . Hsieh, S. Zhang, and H. Yao, “Neural predictor based quantum architecture search,” Machine Learning: Science and Technology, vol. 2, no. 4, p. 045027, 2021

    2021

  30. [38]

    Quantum circuit architecture search for variational quantum algorithms,

    Y . Du, T. Huang, S. You, M.-H. Hsieh, and D. Tao, “Quantum circuit architecture search for variational quantum algorithms,” npj Quantum Information, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 62, 2022

    2022

  31. [39]

    The power of quantum neural networks,

    A. Abbas, D. Sutter, C. Zoufal, A. Lucchi, A. Figalli, and S. Woerner, “The power of quantum neural networks,” Nature Computational Sci- ence, vol. 1, no. 6, pp. 403–409, 2021

    2021

  32. [40]

    Universal statistics of fisher information in deep neural networks: Mean field approach,

    R. Karakida, S. Akaho, and S.-i. Amari, “Universal statistics of fisher information in deep neural networks: Mean field approach,” in The 22nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics . PMLR, 2019, pp. 1032–1041

    2019

  33. [41]

    Limitations of the empirical fisher approximation for natural gradient descent,

    F. Kunstner, P. Hennig, and L. Balles, “Limitations of the empirical fisher approximation for natural gradient descent,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 32, 2019

    2019

  34. [42]

    The spectrum of the fisher information matrix of a single-hidden-layer neural network,

    J. Pennington and P. Worah, “The spectrum of the fisher information matrix of a single-hidden-layer neural network,” Advances in neural information processing systems , vol. 31, 2018

    2018

  35. [43]

    Approximate fisher information matrix to characterize the training of deep neural networks,

    Z. Liao, T. Drummond, I. Reid, and G. Carneiro, “Approximate fisher information matrix to characterize the training of deep neural networks,” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 15–26, 2018

    2018

  36. [44]

    Efficient backprop,

    Y . LeCun, L. Bottou, G. B. Orr, and K.-R. M ¨uller, “Efficient backprop,” in Neural networks: Tricks of the trade . Springer, 2002, pp. 9–50

    2002

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.