pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.21286 · v1 · pith:MMR5TWP4new · submitted 2026-05-20 · 🪐 quant-ph

Software Between Quantum and Machine Learning -- And Down to Pulses

Maja Franz , Melvin Strobl , Jonathan Hunz , Lukas Scheller , Lucas van der Horst , Eileen Kuehn , Achim Streit , Wolfgang Mauerer This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 04:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum machine learningpulse-level modelingquantum optimal controlsoftware frameworkansatz constructionFourier analysisentanglement measuresJAX implementation
0
0 comments X

The pith

A software framework extends quantum machine learning to pulse-level modeling by integrating optimal control techniques with gate-based methods.

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

The paper introduces a software framework inside the QML-Essentials package that adds pulse-level modeling to quantum machine learning. Gate abstractions hide hardware details that could support better error handling and optimization, while direct pulse work is more expressive but increases development complexity. The framework supplies composable ansatz blocks, end-to-end pulse-parameter optimization, Fourier diagnostics, and extended entanglement measures, all running in a high-performance JAX environment with a built-in simulator. This setup supports reproducible studies that connect abstract circuit models to hardware-aware control.

Core claim

The authors present a software framework integrated within the QML-Essentials package that extends quantum machine learning methodologies to encompass pulse-level modelling. By embedding quantum optimal control techniques within a QML setting, the approach enables the seamless combination of gate-based and pulse-level representations. The framework provides composable ansatz constructions based on interchangeable building blocks, support for end-to-end optimisation of pulse parameters, Fourier-analytic diagnostics motivated by quantum Fourier models, and extended measures of entanglement. All performance-critical components are implemented using JAX and backed by a dedicated quantum simulat

What carries the argument

Composable ansatz constructions from interchangeable building blocks together with end-to-end optimization of pulse parameters, supported by Fourier-analytic diagnostics and entanglement measures.

If this is right

  • End-to-end optimization of pulse parameters becomes available directly inside QML workflows.
  • Gate-based and pulse-level representations can be mixed in the same model without separate tooling.
  • Fourier-analytic diagnostics and extended entanglement measures apply to pulse-level QML models.
  • Systematic, reproducible investigations become possible at the intersection of QML and quantum control.
  • Performance-critical modeling runs efficiently in a JAX environment backed by a dedicated simulator.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Pulse-level optimization may expose error-mitigation routes that remain hidden when models stay at the gate level.
  • The modular building blocks could support testing whether hardware-specific pulse shapes improve generalization on noisy devices.
  • Direct comparison of pulse-optimized versus gate-only models on the same task could quantify practical gains in accuracy versus runtime cost.

Load-bearing premise

Seamless integration of gate-based and pulse-level representations is practically achievable and beneficial without new errors or complexity that outweigh the gains.

What would settle it

Running an end-to-end pulse-optimized QML model from the framework on a real quantum device and comparing its accuracy and error rates to an equivalent gate-only model would show whether the pulse approach delivers net improvement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.21286 by Achim Streit, Eileen Kuehn, Jonathan Hunz, Lucas van der Horst, Lukas Scheller, Maja Franz, Melvin Strobl, Wolfgang Mauerer.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of our contributions to QML-ESSENTIALS with + indicating novel additions, and (+) major changes. The code example in Python on the left-hand side describes the main functionality of the framework. The solid yellow blocks on the right hand show the possibilities for defining a quantum Fourier model, based on different ansätze and encodings. Dashed red blocks show the possibilities of utilising the … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Pulse sequence diagram showing an Rˆ X and Rˆ Y gate on the first-, a Rˆ Z on the second, and a CZˆ gate on both qubits. Shaded areas show envelopes with carrier frequencies marked by thin lines. Vertical lines delimit the gate duration. CRˆ Y 24 CYˆ 11 CRˆ X 20 CRˆ Z 26 CXˆ 9 Hˆ 4 Rˆ Z 1 CZˆ 1 Rˆ Y 3 Rˆ X 3 Rot3 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Overview of the connectivity between basis gates and composed gates. The line type (dotted/solid) represents the number of child gates (1/2) the parent gate depends on. Labels at the bottom of each node represent the total number of pulse parameters including redundancies. In the context of this work, we choose the universal gate set {Rˆ X, Rˆ Y, Rˆ Z, CZˆ} as our basis gates, on which we build other singl… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: (top) Infidelities for all available ansätze, ordered by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Inverse of the expressibility, that is the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Comparison of different entangling measures on all pre [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_8.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Contemporary quantum computing platforms remain, in essence, programmable physical systems whose control is typically mediated through unitary gate abstractions. While such abstractions provide a uniform interface, they obscure important aspects of the underlying hardware and may limit the exploitation of its full capabilities. Direct operation at the control-pulse level offers a more expressive and physically faithful paradigm, enabling, for instance, the implementation of tailored error-mitigation and optimisation strategies. However, this increased expressivity comes at the cost of greater quantum software development complexity, necessitating structured and accessible tooling. We present a software framework, integrated within the QML-Essentials package, that extends quantum machine learning (QML) methodologies to encompass pulse-level modelling. By embedding quantum optimal control techniques within a QML setting, our approach enables the seamless combination of gate-based and pulse-level representations. The framework provides a comprehensive suite of modelling and analytical capabilities. In particular, we introduce composable ansatz constructions based on interchangeable building blocks, and support for end-to-end optimisation of pulse parameters. Motivated by the central role of quantum Fourier models, we further incorporate a range of Fourier-analytic diagnostics, complemented by extended measures of entanglement. All performance-critical components are implemented in a high-performance environment using JAX and supported by a dedicated quantum simulator. Taken together, the framework facilitates reproducible and systematic investigations, while bridging the conceptual and practical divide between abstract circuit models and hardware-aware optimisation. It provides a robust foundation for future developments at the intersection of QML and quantum control.

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

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a software framework integrated into the QML-Essentials package that extends quantum machine learning to pulse-level modeling. It supports composable ansatz constructions from interchangeable blocks, end-to-end optimization of pulse parameters, Fourier-analytic diagnostics, extended entanglement measures, and JAX-backed simulation to bridge gate-based abstractions with hardware-aware pulse control.

Significance. If validated, the framework could enable more physically faithful QML workflows by allowing direct incorporation of quantum optimal control into differentiable pipelines. The JAX implementation and dedicated simulator are positive for reproducibility and performance; however, the absence of quantitative benchmarks leaves the practical benefit of hybrid gate-pulse modeling unverified.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract and optimization section] The central claim that the framework enables a 'seamless combination of gate-based and pulse-level representations' without offsetting complexity or error (Abstract; § on end-to-end optimization) is not supported by any reported error metrics, convergence curves, or wall-clock comparisons between pure-gate, pure-pulse, and hybrid modes on the same task. This is load-bearing for the contribution as a practical extension of QML.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Framework description] Notation for pulse parameters and ansatz blocks should be defined more explicitly in the first usage to aid readers unfamiliar with quantum control.
  2. [Fourier-analytic diagnostics] The Fourier diagnostics are motivated but their specific implementation details (e.g., how they integrate with JAX autodiff) could be clarified with a small pseudocode example.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive comments. The primary concern is the lack of quantitative benchmarks supporting the seamless integration of gate-based and pulse-level representations. We address this directly below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and optimization section] The central claim that the framework enables a 'seamless combination of gate-based and pulse-level representations' without offsetting complexity or error (Abstract; § on end-to-end optimization) is not supported by any reported error metrics, convergence curves, or wall-clock comparisons between pure-gate, pure-pulse, and hybrid modes on the same task. This is load-bearing for the contribution as a practical extension of QML.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current manuscript does not include direct quantitative comparisons such as error metrics, convergence curves, or wall-clock timings across pure-gate, pure-pulse, and hybrid modes. This is a fair observation, as the presented work emphasizes the framework architecture, composable ansatz design, and JAX implementation rather than exhaustive benchmarking. In the revised version we will add a new subsection with side-by-side evaluations on a representative QML task, reporting fidelity/error metrics, optimization trajectories, and runtime data for all three modes. These additions will provide concrete evidence on whether the hybrid approach incurs offsetting costs. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: software architecture description with no derivations or fitted predictions

full rationale

The manuscript is a software framework description integrated into the QML-Essentials package. It introduces composable ansatz constructions, end-to-end pulse-parameter optimization, Fourier-analytic diagnostics, and JAX-backed simulation, but contains no mathematical derivation chain, no fitted parameters renamed as predictions, and no load-bearing self-citations that reduce claims to prior author work by construction. The central statements about enabling seamless gate-pulse combinations are presented as design outcomes of the described tooling rather than as results derived from equations or data fits that would be equivalent to their inputs. No steps match any of the enumerated circularity patterns; the contribution is self-contained as an implementation report.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a software framework paper, the central contribution does not rest on mathematical axioms or fitted parameters in the theoretical sense; the work assumes standard quantum mechanics and optimal control techniques from prior literature.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5822 in / 995 out tokens · 20627 ms · 2026-05-21T04:31:05.635366+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 82 canonical work pages · 8 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Schuld and F

    M. Schuld and F. Petruccione,Supervised Learning with Quantum Computers(Quantum Science and Technology), en. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2018.DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-96424-9

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-319-96424-9 2018

  2. [2]

    Uncovering instabilities in variational-quantum deep q-networks,

    M. Franz, L. Wolf, M. Periyasamy, et al., “Uncovering instabilities in variational-quantum deep q-networks,”Journal of The Franklin Institute, Aug. 2022.DOI: 10.1016/j.jfranklin.2022.08.021

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jfranklin.2022.08.021 2022

  3. [3]

    Challenges and opportunities in quantum software architecture,

    T. Yue, W. Mauerer, S. Ali, et al., “Challenges and opportunities in quantum software architecture,” inSoftware Architecture: Research Roadmaps from the Community, P. Pelliccione, R. Kazman, I. Weber, et al., Eds. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2023, pp. 1–23.DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-36847-9_1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-031-36847-9_1 2023

  4. [5]

    2016.Practical Hadoop Ecosystem: A Definitive Guide to Hadoop- Related Frameworks and Tools(1st ed.)

    C. Carbonelli, M. Felderer, M. Jung, et al., “Challenges for quantum software engineering: An industrial application scenario perspective,” inQuantum Software: Aspects of Theory and System Design, I. Exman, R. Pérez-Castillo, M. Piattini, et al., Eds. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024, pp. 311–335.DOI: 10.1007/978- 3- 031- 64136-7_12

    work page doi:10.1007/978- 2024

  5. [6]

    Mind the gaps: The fraught road to quantum advantage

    J. Eisert and J. Preskill,Mind the gaps: The fraught road to quantum advantage, 2025.DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2510.19928 arXiv: 2510.19928 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2510.19928 2025

  6. [7]

    Huang, M

    H.-Y . Huang, M. Broughton, N. Eassa, et al.,Generative quantum advantage for classical and quantum problems, 2025.DOI: 10.48550/ arxiv.2509.09033 arXiv: 2509.09033[quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  7. [8]

    Data re- uploading for a universal quantum classifier,

    A. Pérez-Salinas, A. Cervera-Lierta, E. Gil-Fuster, et al., “Data re- uploading for a universal quantum classifier,”Quantum, vol. 4, p. 226, Feb. 2020.DOI: 10.22331/q-2020-02-06-226 arXiv: 1907.02085

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2020-02-06-226 2020

  8. [9]

    The effect of data encoding on the expressive power of variational quantum machine learning models,

    M. Schuld, R. Sweke, and J. J. Meyer, “The effect of data encoding on the expressive power of variational quantum machine learning models,”Physical Review A, vol. 103, no. 3, p. 032 430, Mar. 2021. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.103.032430 arXiv: 2008.08605

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.103.032430 2021

  9. [10]

    (12) Chatzakis, I.; Krishna, A.; Culbertson, J.; Sharac, N.; Giles, A

    S. Wang, E. Fontana, M. Cerezo, et al., “Noise-Induced Barren Plateaus in Variational Quantum Algorithms,”Nature Communica- tions, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 6961, Nov. 2021.DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021- 27045-6 arXiv: 2007.14384

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-021- 2021

  10. [11]

    Barren plateaus in variational quantum computing,

    M. Larocca, S. Thanasilp, S. Wang, et al., “Barren plateaus in variational quantum computing,”Nature Reviews Physics, vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 174–189, Mar. 2025.DOI: 10.1038/s42254-025-00813-9

    work page doi:10.1038/s42254-025-00813-9 2025

  11. [12]

    Limitations of variational quantum algorithms: A quantum optimal transport approach,

    G. De Palma, M. Marvian, C. Rouzé, et al., “Limitations of variational quantum algorithms: A quantum optimal transport approach,”PRX Quantum, vol. 4, p. 010 309, 1 Jan. 2023.DOI: 10.1103/PRXQuantum. 4.010309

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum 2023

  12. [13]

    Into the Holocene, anatomy of the Younger Dryas cold re- versal and preboreal oscillation,

    T. Ahmed, M. Kashif, A. Marchisio, et al., “A comparative analysis and noise robustness evaluation in quantum neural networks,”Scien- tific Reports, vol. 15, no. 1, Sep. 2025.DOI: 10.1038/s41598- 025- 17769-6

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598- 2025

  13. [14]

    Spectral analysis for noise diagnostics and filter-based digital error mitigation,

    E. Fontana, I. Rungger, R. Duncan, et al., “Spectral analysis for noise diagnostics and filter-based digital error mitigation,” arXiv, Tech. Rep., Nov. 2022.DOI: 10 . 48550 / arXiv. 2206 . 08811 arXiv: 2206 . 08811

    work page 2022

  14. [16]

    Challenges and opportu- nities in quantum machine learning,

    M. Cerezo, G. Verdon, H.-Y . Huang, et al., “Challenges and opportu- nities in quantum machine learning,”Nature Computational Science, vol. 2, no. 9, pp. 567–576, Sep. 2022.DOI: 10.1038/s43588- 022- 00311-3

    work page doi:10.1038/s43588- 2022

  15. [17]

    Noisy intermediate- scale quantum algorithms,

    K. Bharti, A. Cervera-Lierta, T. H. Kyaw, et al., “Noisy intermediate- scale quantum algorithms,”Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 94, p. 015 004, 1 Feb. 2022.DOI: 10.1103/RevModPhys.94.015004

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.94.015004 2022

  16. [18]

    Krantz, M

    P. Krantz, M. Kjaergaard, F. Yan, et al., “A Quantum Engineer’s Guide to Superconducting Qubits,”Applied Physics Reviews, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 021 318, Jun. 2019.DOI: 10.1063/1.5089550 arXiv: 1904.06560 [quant-ph]

    work page doi:10.1063/1.5089550 2019

  17. [19]

    O. R. Meitei, B. T. Gard, G. S. Barron, et al.,Gate-free state preparation for fast variational quantum eigensolver simulations: Ctrl-VQE, May 2021.DOI: 10 . 48550 / arXiv . 2008 . 04302 arXiv: 2008.04302[quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  18. [20]

    Variational quantum pulse learning,

    Z. Liang, H. Wang, J. Cheng, et al., “Variational quantum pulse learning,” in2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Com- puting and Engineering (QCE), 2022, pp. 556–565.DOI: 10.1109/ QCE53715.2022.00078

    work page arXiv 2022

  19. [21]

    Pulse-efficient quantum machine learning,

    A. Melo, N. Earnest-Noble, and F. Tacchino, “Pulse-efficient quantum machine learning,”Quantum, vol. 7, p. 1130, Oct. 2023.DOI: 10. 22331/q-2023-10-09-1130

    work page 2023

  20. [22]

    On the role of controllability in pulse-based quantum machine learning models,

    H.-X. Tao and R.-B. Wu, “On the role of controllability in pulse-based quantum machine learning models,” in2024 IEEE 63rd Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), 2024, pp. 13–18.DOI: 10 . 1109 / CDC56724.2024.10886070

    work page arXiv 2024

  21. [23]

    Mart ´ınez-Losa del Rinc ´on, I

    B. Sarma and M. J. Hartmann, “Designing fast quantum gates using optimal control with a reinforcement-learning ansatz,”Phys. Rev. Appl., vol. 23, p. 014 015, 1 Jan. 2025.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevApplied. 23.014015

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied 2025

  22. [24]

    H.-X. Tao, X. Wang, and R.-B. Wu,On the design of expressive and trainable pulse-based quantum machine learning models, 2025.DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2508.05559 arXiv: 2508.05559[quant-ph]

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2508.05559 2025

  23. [25]

    Adaptive quantum error mitiga- tion using pulse-based inverse evolutions,

    I. Henao, J. P. Santos, and R. Uzdin, “Adaptive quantum error mitiga- tion using pulse-based inverse evolutions,”npj Quantum Information, vol. 9, no. 1, Nov. 2023.DOI: 10.1038/s41534-023-00785-7

    work page doi:10.1038/s41534-023-00785-7 2023

  24. [26]

    Effects of imperfections on quantum algorithms: A software engineering perspective,

    F. Greiwe, T. Krüger, and W. Mauerer, “Effects of imperfections on quantum algorithms: A software engineering perspective,” in2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Software (QSW), 2023, pp. 31–42.DOI: 10.1109/QSW59989.2023.00014

    work page doi:10.1109/qsw59989.2023.00014 2023

  25. [27]

    Approximating under the influence of quantum noise and compute power,

    S. Thelen, H. Safi, and W. Mauerer, “Approximating under the influence of quantum noise and compute power,” inProceedings of WIHPQC@IEEE QCE, Sep. 2024.DOI: 10.1109/QCE60285.2024. 10291 arXiv: 2408.02287

    work page doi:10.1109/qce60285.2024 2024

  26. [28]

    Make some noise! measuring noise model quality in real-world quantum software,

    S. R. Maschek, J. Schwittalla, M. Franz, et al., “Make some noise! measuring noise model quality in real-world quantum software,” en, inProceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Quantum Software (QSW), Jul. 2025.DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.2506.03636 arXiv: 2506.03636

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2506.03636 2025

  27. [29]

    Autoqml: A framework for automated quantum machine learning,

    M. Strobl, M. Franz, E. Kuehn, et al., “QML-essentials – a framework for working with quantum fourier models,” in2025 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Quantum Software (QSW), 2025, pp. 238–243. DOI: 10.1109/QSW67625.2025.00035

    work page doi:10.1109/qsw67625.2025.00035 2025

  28. [31]

    1-2-3 reproducibility for quantum software experiments,

    W. Mauerer and S. Scherzinger, “1-2-3 reproducibility for quantum software experiments,” in2022 IEEE International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER), 2022, pp. 1247–1248.DOI: 10.1109/SANER53432.2022.00148

    work page doi:10.1109/saner53432.2022.00148 2022

  29. [32]

    Bradbury, R

    J. Bradbury, R. Frostig, P. Hawkins, et al.,JAX: Composable trans- formations of Python+NumPy programs, version 0.4.28, 2024

    work page 2024

  30. [33]

    Quantum computing with Qiskit

    A. Javadi-Abhari, M. Treinish, K. Krsulich, et al.,Quantum computing with Qiskit, Jun. 2024.DOI: 10 . 48550 / arXiv. 2405 . 08810 arXiv: 2405.08810[quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  31. [34]

    T|ket〉: A retargetable compiler for nisq devices,

    S. Sivarajah, S. Dilkes, A. Cowtan, et al., “T|ket〉: A retargetable compiler for nisq devices,”Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 014 003, Nov. 2020.DOI: 10.1088/2058-9565/ab8e92

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ab8e92 2020

  32. [35]

    Developers,Cirq, Aug

    C. Developers,Cirq, Aug. 2025.DOI: 10.5281/ZENODO.4062499

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.4062499 2025

  33. [36]

    SimuQ: A framework for program- ming quantum hamiltonian simulation with analog compilation,

    Y . Peng, J. Young, P. Liu, et al., “SimuQ: A framework for program- ming quantum hamiltonian simulation with analog compilation,”Proc. ACM Program. Lang., vol. 8, no. POPL, Jan. 2024.DOI: 10.1145/ 3632923

    work page 2024

  34. [38]

    PennyLane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations

    V . Bergholm, J. Izaac, M. Schuld, et al.,PennyLane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations, Jul. 2022. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.1811.04968 arXiv: 1811.04968[quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1811.04968 2022

  35. [39]

    Broughton, G

    M. Broughton, G. Verdon, T. McCourt, et al.,Tensorflow quantum: A software framework for quantum machine learning, 2021.DOI: 10. 48550/arxiv.2003.02989 arXiv: 2003.02989[quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  36. [40]

    Qibo: A framework for quantum simulation with hardware acceleration,

    S. Efthymiou, S. Ramos-Calderer, C. Bravo-Prieto, et al., “Qibo: A framework for quantum simulation with hardware acceleration,” Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 015 018, Jan. 2022. DOI: 10.1088/2058-9565/ac39f5 arXiv: 2009.01845[quant-ph]

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/ac39f5 2022

  37. [41]

    Robbiati, A

    M. Robbiati, A. Papaluca, A. Pasquale, et al.,Qiboml: Towards the orchestration of quantum-classical machine learning, 2025.DOI: 10. 48550/arxiv.2510.11773 arXiv: 2510.11773[quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  38. [43]

    Martín Abadi, Ashish Agarwal, Paul Barham, et al.,TensorFlow: Large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous systems, Software available from tensorflow.org, 2015

    work page 2015

  39. [44]

    Autoqml: A framework for automated quantum machine learning,

    M. Roth, D. A. Kreplin, D. Basilewitsch, et al., “Autoqml: A framework for automated quantum machine learning,” in2025 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Software (QSW), 2025, pp. 81– 91.DOI: 10.1109/QSW67625.2025.00019

    work page doi:10.1109/qsw67625.2025.00019 2025

  40. [45]

    Variational quantum pulse learning,

    J. R. Finžgar, P. Ross, L. Hölscher, et al., “Quark: A framework for quantum computing application benchmarking,” in2022 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), 2022, pp. 226–237.DOI: 10.1109/QCE53715.2022.00042

    work page doi:10.1109/qce53715.2022.00042 2022

  41. [46]

    Gierisch and W

    V . Gierisch and W. Mauerer,Qef: Reproducible and exploratory quantum software experiments, 2025.DOI: 10 . 48550 / arxiv. 2511 . 04563 arXiv: 2511.04563[quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  42. [47]

    Circuit-centric quantum classifiers,

    M. Schuld, A. Bocharov, K. Svore, et al., “Circuit-centric quantum classifiers,”Physical Review A, vol. 101, no. 3, p. 032 308, Mar. 2020.DOI: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevA . 101 . 032308 arXiv: 1804 . 00633 [quant-ph]

    work page 2020

  43. [48]

    Expressibility and Entangling Capability of Parameterized Quantum Circuits for Hybrid Quantum-Classical Algorithms,

    S. Sim, P. D. Johnson, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, “Expressibility and Entangling Capability of Parameterized Quantum Circuits for Hybrid Quantum-Classical Algorithms,” en,Advanced Quantum Technolo- gies, vol. 2, no. 12, p. 1 900 070, 2019.DOI: 10.1002/qute.201900070

    work page doi:10.1002/qute.201900070 2019

  44. [49]

    Mhiri, L

    H. Mhiri, L. Monbroussou, M. Herrero-Gonzalez, et al.,Constrained and Vanishing Expressivity of Quantum Fourier Models, Mar. 2024. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2403.09417 arXiv: 2403.09417

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.09417 2024

  45. [50]

    Classical surrogates for quantum learning models,

    F. J. Schreiber, J. Eisert, and J. J. Meyer, “Classical surrogates for quantum learning models,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 131, p. 100 803, 10 Sep. 2023.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.100803

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.100803 2023

  46. [51]

    Potential and limita- tions of random Fourier features for dequantizing quantum machine learning,

    R. Sweke, E. Recio-Armengol, S. Jerbi, et al., “Potential and limita- tions of random Fourier features for dequantizing quantum machine learning,”Quantum, vol. 9, p. 1640, Feb. 2025.DOI: 10.22331/q- 2025-02-20-1640 arXiv: 2309.11647[quant-ph]

    work page doi:10.22331/q- 2025

  47. [52]

    Multidimensional fourier series with quantum circuits,

    B. Casas and A. Cervera-Lierta, “Multidimensional fourier series with quantum circuits,”Phys. Rev. A, vol. 107, p. 062 612, 6 Jun. 2023. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.107.062612

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.107.062612 2023

  48. [53]

    Fourier expan- sion in variational quantum algorithms,

    N. A. Nemkov, E. O. Kiktenko, and A. K. Fedorov, “Fourier expan- sion in variational quantum algorithms,”Physical Review A, vol. 108, no. 3, p. 032 406, Sep. 2023.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.108.032406 arXiv: 2304.03787[quant-ph]

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.108.032406 2023

  49. [54]

    Let Quantum Neural Networks Choose Their Own Frequencies,

    B. Jaderberg, A. A. Gentile, Y . A. Berrada, et al., “Let Quantum Neural Networks Choose Their Own Frequencies,”Physical Review A, vol. 109, no. 4, p. 042 421, Apr. 2024.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA. 109.042421 arXiv: 2309.03279[quant-ph]

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva 2024

  50. [55]

    Wiedmann, M

    M. Wiedmann, M. Periyasamy, and D. D. Scherer,Fourier Analysis of Variational Quantum Circuits for Supervised Learning, Nov. 2024. DOI: 10.48550/arXiv.2411.03450 arXiv: 2411.03450

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2411.03450 2024

  51. [56]

    Duffy and M

    C. Duffy and M. Jastrzebski,Spectral bias in variational quantum machine learning, 2026.DOI: 10 . 48550 / arxiv. 2506 . 22555 arXiv: 2506.22555[quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2026

  52. [57]

    Quantum data encoding patterns and their consequences,

    M. Gogeissl, H. Safi, and W. Mauerer, “Quantum data encoding patterns and their consequences,” inProceedings of the 1st Workshop on Quantum Computing and Quantum-Inspired Technology for Data- Intensive Systems and Applications, ser. Q-Data ’24, Santiago, AA, Chile: Association for Computing Machinery, 2024, pp. 27–37.DOI: 10.1145/3665225.3665446

    work page doi:10.1145/3665225.3665446 2024

  53. [58]

    Optimal control of coupled spin dynamics: Design of nmr pulse sequences by gradient ascent algorithms,

    N. Khaneja, T. Reiss, C. Kehlet, et al., “Optimal control of coupled spin dynamics: Design of nmr pulse sequences by gradient ascent algorithms,”Journal of Magnetic Resonance, vol. 172, no. 2, pp. 296– 305, 2005.DOI: 10.1016/j.jmr.2004.11.004

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jmr.2004.11.004 2005

  54. [59]

    Hutter, G

    S. Machnes, E. Assémat, D. Tannor, et al., “Tunable, flexible, and efficient optimization of control pulses for practical qubits,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 120, p. 150 401, 15 Apr. 2018.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 120.150401

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2018

  55. [60]

    Krotov method for optimal control of closed quantum systems,

    O. V . Morzhin and A. N. Pechen, “Krotov method for optimal control of closed quantum systems,”Russian Mathematical Surveys, vol. 74, no. 5, p. 851, Oct. 2019.DOI: 10.1070/RM9835

    work page doi:10.1070/rm9835 2019

  56. [61]

    Generalization despite overfitting in quan- tum machine learning models,

    E. Peters and M. Schuld, “Generalization despite overfitting in quan- tum machine learning models,”Quantum, vol. 7, p. 1210, Dec. 2023. DOI: 10.22331/q-2023-12-20-1210

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2023-12-20-1210 2023

  57. [62]

    Franz and M

    M. Franz and M. Strobl,Qml-essentials–a framework for working with quantum fourier models.DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.18503388

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.18503388

  58. [63]

    Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets,

    A. Kandala, A. Mezzacapo, K. Temme, et al., “Hardware-efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets,”Nature, vol. 549, no. 7671, pp. 242–246, Sep. 2017.DOI: 10.1038/nature23879

    work page doi:10.1038/nature23879 2017

  59. [64]

    A family of embedded Runge- Kutta formulae,

    J. R. Dormand and P. J. Prince, “A family of embedded Runge- Kutta formulae,”Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 19–26, Mar. 1980.DOI: 10.1016/0771- 050X(80) 90013-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0771- 1980

  60. [65]

    Kidger,On neural differential equations, 2022.DOI: 10

    P. Kidger,On neural differential equations, 2022.DOI: 10 . 48550 / arxiv.2202.02435 arXiv: 2202.02435[cs.LG]

    work page arXiv 2022

  61. [66]

    Do large language models perform latent multi-hop reasoning without exploiting shortcuts? abs/2411.16679, 2024

    A. Kay,Tutorial on the quantikz package, 2023.DOI: 10.48550/arxiv. 1809.03842 arXiv: 1809.03842[quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv 2023

  62. [67]

    Evaluation of pulse level quantum fourier models,

    T. Rothe Santos, “Evaluation of pulse level quantum fourier models,” 46.21.02; LK 01, Abschlussarbeit - Bachelor, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie (KIT), 2025.DOI: 10.5445/IR/1000184129

    work page doi:10.5445/ir/1000184129 2025

  63. [68]

    Strong-Coupling Theory of Periodically Driven Two-Level Systems,

    Y . Wu and X. Yang, “Strong-Coupling Theory of Periodically Driven Two-Level Systems,”Physical Review Letters, vol. 98, no. 1, p. 013 601, Jan. 2007.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.013601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.98.013601 2007

  64. [69]

    Qiskit pulse: Programming quantum computers through the cloud with pulses,

    T. Alexander, N. Kanazawa, D. J. Egger, et al., “Qiskit pulse: Programming quantum computers through the cloud with pulses,” Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 5, no. 4, p. 044 006, Aug. 2020.DOI: 10.1088/2058-9565/aba404

    work page doi:10.1088/2058-9565/aba404 2020

  65. [70]

    Universal quantum processors in spin systems via robust local pulse sequences,

    M. V otto, J. Zeiher, and B. Vermersch, “Universal quantum processors in spin systems via robust local pulse sequences,”Quantum, vol. 8, p. 1513, Oct. 2024.DOI: 10.22331/q-2024-10-29-1513

    work page doi:10.22331/q-2024-10-29-1513 2024

  66. [71]

    Simple pulses for elimination of leakage in weakly nonlinear qubits

    F. Motzoi, J. M. Gambetta, P. Rebentrost, et al., “Simple pulses for elimination of leakage in weakly nonlinear qubits,”Physical Review Letters, vol. 103, no. 11, p. 110 501, Sep. 2009.DOI: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.103.110501 arXiv: 0901.0534[cond-mat]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  67. [72]

    D. P. Kingma and J. Ba,Adam: A method for stochastic optimization, 2017.DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 arXiv: 1412.6980[cs.LG]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1412.6980 2017

  68. [73]

    SGDR: Stochastic Gradient Descent with Warm Restarts

    I. Loshchilov and F. Hutter,Sgdr: Stochastic gradient descent with warm restarts, 2017.DOI: 10.48550/arxiv.1608.03983 arXiv: 1608. 03983[cs.LG]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.1608.03983 2017

  69. [74]

    Single-qubit gates with errors at the10 −7 level,

    M. C. Smith, A. D. Leu, K. Miyanishi, et al., “Single-qubit gates with errors at the10 −7 level,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 134, p. 230 601, 23 Jun. 2025.DOI: 10.1103/42w2-6ccy

    work page doi:10.1103/42w2-6ccy 2025

  70. [75]

    Statistics (international student edition),

    D. Freedman, R. Pisani, and R. Purves, “Statistics (international student edition),”Pisani, R. Purves, 4th edn. WW Norton & Company, New York, 2007

    work page 2007

  71. [76]

    Quantifying entangle- ment,

    V . Vedral, M. B. Plenio, M. A. Rippin, et al., “Quantifying entangle- ment,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 78, pp. 2275–2279, 12 Mar. 1997.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.2275

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.78.2275 1997

  72. [77]

    An introduction to entanglement measures,

    M. B. Plenio and S. Virmani, “An introduction to entanglement measures,”Quantum Info. Comput., vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 1–51, Jan. 2007

    work page 2007

  73. [78]

    Global entanglement in multiparticle systems

    D. A. Meyer and N. R. Wallach, “Global entanglement in multiparticle systems,”Journal of Mathematical Physics, vol. 43, no. 9, pp. 4273– 4278, Sep. 2002.DOI: 10.1063/1.1497700 arXiv: quant-ph/0108104 [quant-ph]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1063/1.1497700 2002

  74. [79]

    An observable measure of entanglement for pure states of multi-qubit systems,

    G. K. Brennen, “An observable measure of entanglement for pure states of multi-qubit systems,” arXiv, Tech. Rep., Nov. 2003.DOI: 10 . 48550 / arXiv . quant - ph / 0305094 arXiv: quant - ph / 0305094 [quant-ph]

    work page 2003

  75. [80]

    The controlled SW AP test for determining quantum entanglement,

    S. Foulds, V . Kendon, and T. Spiller, “The controlled SW AP test for determining quantum entanglement,”Quantum Science and Tech- nology, vol. 6, no. 3, p. 035 002, Jul. 2021.DOI: 10 . 1088 / 2058 - 9565/abe458 arXiv: 2009.07613[quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  76. [81]

    Scalable measures of magic resource for quantum computers,

    T. Haug and M. S. Kim, “Scalable measures of magic resource for quantum computers,”PRX Quantum, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 010 301, Jan. 2023.DOI: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.4.010301 arXiv: 2204.10061

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.4.010301 2023

  77. [82]

    Entanglement of a pair of quantum bits,

    S. A. Hill and W. K. Wootters, “Entanglement of a pair of quantum bits,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 78, pp. 5022–5025, 26 Jun. 1997.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.78.5022

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.78.5022 1997

  78. [83]

    Computable and operationally meaningful multipartite entanglement measures,

    J. L. Beckey, N. Gigena, P. J. Coles, et al., “Computable and operationally meaningful multipartite entanglement measures,”Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 127, p. 140 501, 14 Sep. 2021.DOI: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett.127.140501

    work page 2021

  79. [84]

    R., Millman, K

    C. R. Harris, K. J. Millman, S. J. van der Walt, et al., “Array programming with NumPy,”Nature, vol. 585, no. 7825, pp. 357–362, Sep. 2020.DOI: 10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2649-2 2020

  80. [85]

    Multipartite entanglement measures via Bell-basis measurements,

    J. L. Beckey, G. Pelegrí, S. Foulds, et al., “Multipartite entanglement measures via Bell-basis measurements,”Physical Review A, vol. 107, no. 6, p. 062 425, Jun. 2023.DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.107.062425

    work page doi:10.1103/physreva.107.062425 2023

Showing first 80 references.