pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.21327 · v1 · pith:QQQEV5QYnew · submitted 2026-06-19 · 🪐 quant-ph

Temporal processing of quantum states with hybrid quantum-classical reservoirs

Mateu Coll-Comas , Gian Luca Giorgi , Roberta Zambrini This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 14:11 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum reservoir computinghybrid quantum-classicalecho state networknonlinear functional approximationtemporal processingpartial measurementsmeasurement back-actionquantum machine learning
0
0 comments X

The pith

A hybrid quantum-classical reservoir architecture enables nonlinear functional approximation and temporal processing of quantum input states.

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

Pure quantum reservoir computing embeds quantum states directly but produces only linear outputs for a single input, blocking tasks such as computing purity or entropy. The paper introduces a hybrid system that feeds the dynamics of a qubit quantum reservoir into a classical echo state network, supplying the missing nonlinearity while retaining temporal memory. Systematic tests show the hybrid outperforms either component alone under both full tomography and single-axis partial measurements. The architecture is further evaluated with an online protocol that incorporates measurement back-action and finite sampling, confirming viability on near-term hardware.

Core claim

By combining a qubit quantum reservoir, which embeds quantum input states into its dynamics, with a classical echo state network that performs nonlinear readout, the hybrid architecture computes both linear and nonlinear functionals of quantum states while handling temporal sequences, even when only partial single-axis measurements are available and measurement back-action is present.

What carries the argument

Hybrid quantum-classical reservoir formed by a qubit quantum reservoir whose outputs are fed to a classical echo state network for nonlinear transformation.

If this is right

  • The hybrid system can approximate nonlinear functionals such as purity and entropy of quantum states.
  • Effective temporal processing of sequences of quantum inputs becomes possible within the same architecture.
  • Performance gains persist under partial information regimes with only single-axis measurements.
  • An online monitoring protocol that accounts for measurement back-action and finite ensembles still yields usable results.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same hybrid layering could be applied to other quantum machine learning primitives that require nonlinearity beyond reservoir dynamics.
  • Scaling the quantum reservoir size while keeping the classical layer fixed might reveal whether the information bottleneck shifts.
  • Replacing the echo state network with other classical recurrent models could test how much of the gain is specific to echo-state dynamics.

Load-bearing premise

The classical echo state network can reliably extract and nonlinearly transform information from the quantum reservoir even when only single-axis measurements are taken and measurement back-action occurs.

What would settle it

A test in which the hybrid system's accuracy on nonlinear tasks such as purity estimation drops to match the standalone classical echo state network when restricted to single-axis measurements of the quantum reservoir.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.21327 by Gian Luca Giorgi, Mateu Coll-Comas, Roberta Zambrini.

Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: illustrates this behavior by displaying the sys￾tem’s capacity to recall the Bloch vector components of qubit 1, with each component represented by a different color, at the optimized parameters found for linear tasks (see table I). The analysis is performed separately for the three reservoir-qubit projections (x, y, z), each shown in a different subplot. For a single axis α, the local projec￾tions {⟨σ α i… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3: Performance of the purity memory task [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Quantum state memory task: Infidelity of state [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: HRC performance comparison with a two-qubit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6: Comparison between the performance obtained [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7: State memory task for a single-qubit input as a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: FIG. 9: Concurrence and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: FIG. 10: Total memory capacity (equation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: FIG. 11: HRC performance for different values of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: FIG. 12: Performance of the hybrid architecture for the purity memory task (top row) and state memory task [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_12.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

A distinctive feature of Quantum Reservoir Computing (QRC) is the ability to directly embed quantum input states into the reservoir dynamics. However, the resulting output is fundamentally linear for a single input state, preventing QRC from naturally computing nonlinear functionals such as purity or entropy. We overcome this limitation with a quantum-classical hybrid architecture combining a qubit quantum reservoir with a classical echo state network (ESN), allowing both nonlinear functional approximation and effective temporal processing. We systematically study performance under two information regimes: full-tomography and partial information (single-axis measurements), with the latter demonstrating that the hybrid system outperforms its standalone components in both linear and nonlinear tasks due to the enhanced information retrieval provided by the quantum reservoir. Building on these results, we apply an online monitoring protocol that explicitly accounts for measurement back-action and finite measurement ensembles, enabling a realistic assessment of performance under experimental conditions. These results establish hybrid quantum-classical reservoir computing (HRC) architectures as a practical and scalable route for enhanced quantum machine learning on near-term qubit hardware.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a hybrid quantum-classical reservoir computing (HRC) architecture that pairs a qubit quantum reservoir with a classical echo state network (ESN). It claims this overcomes the inherent linearity of single-state QRC, enabling nonlinear tasks such as purity and entropy estimation alongside temporal processing. Systematic comparisons are presented between full tomography and partial single-axis measurements, with the hybrid reported to outperform both pure quantum and pure classical reservoirs under partial information; an online protocol is introduced to incorporate measurement back-action and finite ensemble effects for realistic evaluation on near-term hardware.

Significance. If the performance claims are substantiated with quantitative evidence, the work would offer a concrete route to nonlinear quantum state processing on current qubit devices by combining quantum embedding with classical nonlinearity, while addressing experimental constraints such as back-action. The focus on partial measurements and online correction is a practical strength.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and online monitoring protocol section] Abstract and the section describing the online monitoring protocol: the central claim that the hybrid outperforms standalone components under single-axis measurements relies on the ESN reliably extracting nonlinear features from quantum reservoir dynamics despite projective back-action; the manuscript must demonstrate (via explicit simulation parameters or timescales) that temporal correlations survive repeated measurements long enough for the ESN to learn, rather than the advantage being an artifact of idealized dynamics without back-action.
  2. [Systematic studies section] The section on systematic studies under partial information: the abstract asserts outperformance in both linear and nonlinear tasks but supplies no numerical metrics, error bars, or baseline comparisons; without these, the load-bearing assertion that the hybrid provides enhanced information retrieval cannot be evaluated for statistical significance or robustness across the reported regimes.
minor comments (2)
  1. Clarify the precise definition of the 'online monitoring protocol' and how training data are generated under back-action (e.g., ensemble size, measurement frequency relative to reservoir evolution time).
  2. Ensure all figures comparing hybrid vs. standalone performance include error bars and specify the number of random realizations or training instances used.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback. We address each major comment below with clarifications and proposed revisions where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and online monitoring protocol section] Abstract and the section describing the online monitoring protocol: the central claim that the hybrid outperforms standalone components under single-axis measurements relies on the ESN reliably extracting nonlinear features from quantum reservoir dynamics despite projective back-action; the manuscript must demonstrate (via explicit simulation parameters or timescales) that temporal correlations survive repeated measurements long enough for the ESN to learn, rather than the advantage being an artifact of idealized dynamics without back-action.

    Authors: The online monitoring protocol section already incorporates measurement back-action and finite ensemble effects explicitly in the simulations. To address the concern directly, we will add explicit simulation parameters (such as measurement rate per time step, ensemble sizes, and the timescales over which reservoir correlations persist) to demonstrate that temporal correlations remain sufficient for ESN training under realistic back-action. This will confirm the reported advantage is robust rather than an artifact of idealized dynamics. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Systematic studies section] The section on systematic studies under partial information: the abstract asserts outperformance in both linear and nonlinear tasks but supplies no numerical metrics, error bars, or baseline comparisons; without these, the load-bearing assertion that the hybrid provides enhanced information retrieval cannot be evaluated for statistical significance or robustness across the reported regimes.

    Authors: The systematic studies section already includes quantitative performance metrics for the hybrid versus pure quantum and classical reservoirs on linear and nonlinear tasks, with error bars from multiple independent runs and direct baseline comparisons to support evaluation of statistical significance and robustness. The abstract provides only a high-level summary without specific numbers, consistent with standard practice. We can enhance the section with additional tabulated metrics or emphasis if needed for clarity. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: hybrid architecture and performance claims are independent of input definitions

full rationale

The paper introduces a hybrid qubit quantum reservoir plus classical ESN architecture to address the linearity limitation of standalone QRC for nonlinear tasks. It evaluates this via systematic numerical studies under full tomography and single-axis partial measurements, plus an online protocol accounting for back-action. No equations, fitted parameters, or self-citations are shown that would make reported outperformance equivalent to the architecture definition by construction. The central claims rest on simulation outcomes rather than tautological reductions, making the derivation self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated. The central claim rests on the unstated assumption that the quantum reservoir dynamics remain useful when fed into a classical ESN under partial measurements.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5705 in / 1076 out tokens · 21385 ms · 2026-06-26T14:11:49.167163+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

89 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Jaeger,The ”echo state” approach to analysing and training recurrent neural networks, GMD Report 148 (GMD - German National Research Institute for Com- puter Science, 2001)

    H. Jaeger,The ”echo state” approach to analysing and training recurrent neural networks, GMD Report 148 (GMD - German National Research Institute for Com- puter Science, 2001)

    2001

  2. [2]

    Maass, T

    W. Maass, T. Natschl¨ ager, and H. Markram, Neural Computation14, 2531 (2002)

    2002

  3. [3]

    Lukoˇ seviˇ cius and H

    M. Lukoˇ seviˇ cius and H. Jaeger, Computer Science Re- view3, 127 (2009)

    2009

  4. [4]

    G. V. der Sande, D. Brunner, and M. C. Soriano, Nanophotonics6, 561 (2017)

    2017

  5. [5]

    Appeltant, M

    L. Appeltant, M. C. Soriano, G. Van der Sande, J. Danck- aert, S. Massar, J. Dambre, B. Schrauwen, C. R. Mirasso, and I. Fischer, Nature Communications2, 468 (2011)

    2011

  6. [6]

    Hauser, A

    H. Hauser, A. J. Ijspeert, R. M. F¨ uchslin, R. Pfeifer, and W. Maass, Biological Cybernetics106, 595 (2012)

    2012

  7. [7]

    Vandoorne, P

    K. Vandoorne, P. Mechet, T. Van Vaerenbergh, M. Fiers, G. Morthier, D. Verstraeten, B. Schrauwen, J. Dambre, and P. Bienstman, Nature Communications5, 3541 (2014)

    2014

  8. [8]

    Fujii and K

    K. Fujii and K. Nakajima, Physical Review Applied8, 10.1103/physrevapplied.8.024030 (2017)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevapplied.8.024030 2017

  9. [9]

    K. Goto, K. Nakajima, and H. Notsu, Computing with vortices: Bridging fluid dynamics and its information- processing capability (2020), arXiv:2001.08502 [physics.flu-dyn]

    arXiv 2020

  10. [10]

    Nakajima, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics59, 060501 (2020)

    K. Nakajima, Japanese Journal of Applied Physics59, 060501 (2020)

    2020

  11. [11]

    Z. Chen, W. Li, Z. Fan, S. Dong, Y. Chen, M. Qin, M. Zeng, X. Lu, G. Zhou, X. Gao, and J.-M. Liu, Nature Communications14, 10.1038/s41467-023-39371- y (2023)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-023-39371- 2023

  12. [12]

    Adamatzky,Advances in unconventional computing: Volume 1: Theory, Vol

    A. Adamatzky,Advances in unconventional computing: Volume 1: Theory, Vol. 22 (Springer, 2016)

    2016

  13. [13]

    Grigoryeva and J

    L. Grigoryeva and J. Ortega, Neural networks : the offi- cial journal of the International Neural Network Society 108, 495 (2018)

    2018

  14. [14]

    Mujal, R

    P. Mujal, R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, J. Nokkala, J. Garc´ ıa-Beni, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Advanced Quantum Technologies4, 10.1002/qute.202100027 (2021)

    work page doi:10.1002/qute.202100027 2021

  15. [15]

    Fujii and K

    K. Fujii and K. Nakajima, Quantum reservoir computing: A reservoir approach toward quantum machine learn- ing on near-term quantum devices, inReservoir Com- puting: Theory, Physical Implementations, and Applica- tions, edited by K. Nakajima and I. Fischer (Springer Singapore, Singapore, 2021) pp. 423–450

    2021

  16. [16]

    L. C. G. Govia, G. J. Ribeill, G. E. Rowlands, H. K. Krovi, and T. A. Ohki, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 013077 (2021)

    2021

  17. [17]

    Nokkala, R

    J. Nokkala, R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, G. L. Giorgi, V. Pa- rigi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Communications Physics4, 53 (2021)

    2021

  18. [18]

    Spagnolo, J

    M. Spagnolo, J. Morris, S. Piacentini, M. Antesberger, F. Massa, A. Crespi, F. Ceccarelli, R. Osellame, and P. Walther, Nature Photonics16, 318 (2022)

    2022

  19. [19]

    R. A. Bravo, K. Najafi, X. Gao, and S. F. Yelin, PRX Quantum3, 030325 (2022)

    2022

  20. [20]

    Advanced Coherent X-ray Diffraction and Electron Microscopy of Individual InP Nanocrys- tals on Si Nanotips for III-V -on-Si Electronics and Optoelectron- ics

    J. Garc´ ıa-Beni, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zam- brini, Physical Review Applied20, 10.1103/physrevap- plied.20.014051 (2023)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevap- 2023

  21. [21]

    F. Hu, S. A. Khan, N. T. Bronn, G. Angelatos, G. E. Rowlands, G. J. Ribeill, and H. E. T¨ ureci, Nature Com- munications15, 7491 (2024)

    2024

  22. [22]

    Kornjaˇ ca, H.-Y

    M. Kornjaˇ ca, H.-Y. Hu, C. Zhao, J. Wurtz, P. Wein- berg, M. Hamdan, A. Zhdanov, S. H. Cantu, H. Zhou, R. A. Bravo, K. Bagnall, J. I. Basham, J. Campo, A. Choukri, R. DeAngelo, P. Frederick, D. Haines, J. Hammett, N. Hsu, M.-G. Hu, F. Huber, P. N. Jepsen, N. Jia, T. Karolyshyn, M. Kwon, J. Long, J. Lopatin, A. Lukin, T. Macr` ı, O. Markovi´ c, L. A. Mart...

    arXiv 2024

  23. [23]

    Senanian, S

    A. Senanian, S. Prabhu, V. Kremenetski, S. Roy, Y. Cao, J. Kline, T. Onodera, L. G. Wright, X. Wu, V. Fatemi, and P. L. McMahon, Nature Communications15, 7490 (2024)

    2024

  24. [24]

    S. Das, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Phys. Rev. Res. 8, 023148 (2026)

    2026

  25. [25]

    Llodr` a, P

    G. Llodr` a, P. Mujal, R. Zambrini, and G. L. Giorgi, Chaos, Solitons & Fractals195, 116289 (2025)

    2025

  26. [26]

    Carles, J

    B. Carles, J. Dudas, L. Balembois, J. Grollier, and D. Markovi´ c, Phys. Rev. Appl.25, 054005 (2026)

    2026

  27. [27]

    Paparelle, J

    I. Paparelle, J. Henaff, J. Garc´ ıa-Beni,´E. Gillet, D. Mon- tesinos, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, R. Zambrini, and V. Parigi, Nature Photonics20, 413 (2026)

    2026

  28. [28]

    Suzuki, Q

    Y. Suzuki, Q. Gao, K. C. Pradel, K. Yasuoka, and N. Ya- mamoto, Scientific Reports12, 1353 (2022)

    2022

  29. [29]

    ˇCindrak, B

    S. ˇCindrak, B. Donvil, K. L¨ udge, and L. Jaurigue, Phys- ical Review Research 10.1103/physrevresearch.6.013051 (2023)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.6.013051 2023

  30. [30]

    Mujal, R

    P. Mujal, R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, npj Quantum Information9, 16 (2023)

    2023

  31. [31]

    Dudas, B

    J. Dudas, B. Carles, E. Plouet, F. A. Mizrahi, J. Grollier, and D. Markovi´ c, npj Quantum Information9, 64 (2023)

    2023

  32. [32]

    G¨ otting, F

    N. G¨ otting, F. Lohof, and C. Gies, Phys. Rev. A108, 052427 (2023)

    2023

  33. [33]

    C. Zhu, P. J. Ehlers, H. Nurdin, and D. Soh, Physical Review Research 10.1103/wsyq-jyxd (2024)

    work page doi:10.1103/wsyq-jyxd 2024

  34. [34]

    Sannia, R

    A. Sannia, R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, M. C. Soriano, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Quantum8, 1291 (2024)

    2024

  35. [35]

    Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na and J.-P

    R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na and J.-P. Ortega, Phys. Rev. E111, 065306 (2025)

    2025

  36. [36]

    Ghosh, A

    S. Ghosh, A. Opala, M. Matuszewski, T. Paterek, and T. C. H. Liew, npj Quantum Information5, 35 (2019)

    2019

  37. [37]

    Ghosh, A

    S. Ghosh, A. Opala, M. Matuszewski, T. Paterek, and T. C. H. Liew, IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems32, 3148 (2021)

    2021

  38. [38]

    Ghosh, K

    S. Ghosh, K. Nakajima, T. Krisnanda, K. Fujii, and T. C. H. Liew, Advanced Quantum Technologies4, 2100053 (2021)

    2021

  39. [39]

    Ghosh, T

    S. Ghosh, T. Krisnanda, T. Paterek, and T. C. H. Liew, Communications Physics4, 105 (2021)

    2021

  40. [40]

    Q. H. Tran and K. Nakajima, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 260401 (2021)

    2021

  41. [41]

    Nokkala, Scientific Reports13, 7694 (2023)

    J. Nokkala, Scientific Reports13, 7694 (2023)

    2023

  42. [42]

    D. Zia, L. Innocenti, G. Minati, S. Lorenzo, A. Suprano, R. D. Bartolo, N. Spagnolo, T. Giordani, V. Ci- 12 mini, G. M. Palma, A. Ferraro, F. Sciarrino, and M. Paternostro, Science Advances11, eady7987 (2025), https://www.science.org/doi/pdf/10.1126/sciadv.ady7987

    work page doi:10.1126/sciadv.ady7987 2025

  43. [43]

    Innocenti, S

    L. Innocenti, S. Lorenzo, I. Palmisano, A. Ferraro, M. Pa- ternostro, and G. M. Palma, Communications Physics6, 118 (2023)

    2023

  44. [44]

    L. C. G. Govia, G. Ribeill, G. E. Rowlands, and T. A. Ohki, Neuromorphic Computing and Engineering2, 10.1088/2634-4386/ac4fcd (2021)

    work page doi:10.1088/2634-4386/ac4fcd 2021

  45. [45]

    Mujal, J

    P. Mujal, J. Nokkala, R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, G. L. Giorgi, M. C. Soriano, and R. Zambrini, Journal of Physics: Complexity2, 045008 (2021)

    2021

  46. [46]

    M. Gili, E. Fiorelli, A. Bl´ azquez-Garc´ ıa, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Quantum Machine Intelligence8, 63 (2026)

    2026

  47. [47]

    Nokkala, G

    J. Nokkala, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Machine Learning: Science and Technology5, 10.1088/2632- 2153/ad5f12 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1088/2632- 2024

  48. [48]

    Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, G

    R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, G. L. Giorgi, J. Nokkala, M. C. So- riano, and R. Zambrini, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 100502 (2021)

    2021

  49. [49]

    J. Chen, H. I. Nurdin, and N. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. Appl.14, 024065 (2020)

    2020

  50. [50]

    Kubota, Y

    T. Kubota, Y. Suzuki, S. Kobayashi, Q. H. Tran, N. Ya- mamoto, and K. Nakajima, Phys. Rev. Res.5, 023057 (2023)

    2023

  51. [51]

    Domingo, G

    L. Domingo, G. Carlo, and F. Borondo, Scientific Reports 13, 8790 (2023)

    2023

  52. [52]

    Mifune, T

    S. Mifune, T. Kanao, and T. Tanamoto, Japanese Jour- nal of Applied Physics64, 10.35848/1347-4065/adbf9e (2024)

    work page doi:10.35848/1347-4065/adbf9e 2024

  53. [53]

    Cheamsawat and T

    K. Cheamsawat and T. Chotibut, Entropy27, 10.3390/e27010088 (2024)

    work page doi:10.3390/e27010088 2024

  54. [54]

    Palacios, R

    A. Palacios, R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, M. C. Soriano, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, Communications Physics7, 10.1038/s42005-024-01859-4 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-024-01859-4 2024

  55. [55]

    Pfeffer, F

    P. Pfeffer, F. Heyder, and J. Schumacher, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 033176 (2022)

    2022

  56. [56]

    P. R. Pfeffer, F. Heyder, and J. Schumacher, Physical Re- view Research 10.1103/physrevresearch.5.043242 (2023)

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevresearch.5.043242 2023

  57. [57]

    Wudarski, D

    F. Wudarski, D. O‘Connor, S. Geaney, A. A. Asanjan, M. Wilson, E. Strbac, P. A. Lott, and D. Venturelli, Hy- brid quantum-classical reservoir computing for simulat- ing chaotic systems (2024), arXiv:2311.14105 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2024

  58. [58]

    Kobayashi, K

    K. Kobayashi, K. Fujii, and N. Yamamoto, PRX Quan- tum5, 10.1103/prxquantum.5.040325 (2024)

    work page doi:10.1103/prxquantum.5.040325 2024

  59. [59]

    Sakurai, A

    A. Sakurai, A. Hayashi, W. Munro, and K. Nemoto, Op- tica Quantum3, 238 (2025)

    2025

  60. [60]

    Settino, L

    J. Settino, L. Salatino, L. Mariani, F. D’Amore, M. Channab, L. Bozzolo, S. Vallisa, P. Barill` a, A. Poli- cicchio, N. Lo Gullo, A. Giordano, C. Mastroianni, and F. Plastina, Phys. Rev. Appl.24, 024019 (2025)

    2025

  61. [61]

    Monomi, W

    T. Monomi, W. Setoyama, and Y. Hasegawa, Feedback- enhanced quantum reservoir computing with weak mea- surements (2025), arXiv:2503.17939 [quant-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, J

    R. Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, J. Nokkala, G. Giorgi, R. Zambrini, and M. C. Soriano, Cognitive Computation15, 1440 (2020)

    2020

  63. [63]

    I. B. Yildiz, H. Jaeger, and S. J. Kiebel, Neural Networks 35, 1 (2012)

    2012

  64. [64]

    Zhang, D

    B. Zhang, D. J. Miller, and Y. Wang, IEEE Transac- tions on Neural Networks and Learning Systems23, 175 (2012)

    2012

  65. [65]

    Zyczkowski and H.-J

    K. Zyczkowski and H.-J. Sommers, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General34, 7111–7125 (2001)

    2001

  66. [66]

    Jozsa, Journal of Modern Optics41, 2315 (1994)

    R. Jozsa, Journal of Modern Optics41, 2315 (1994)

    1994

  67. [67]

    Fette and J

    G. Fette and J. Eggert, inArtificial Neural Networks: Bi- ological Inspirations – ICANN 2005, edited by W. Duch, J. Kacprzyk, E. Oja, and S. Zadro˙ zny (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2005) pp. 13–18

    2005

  68. [68]

    W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett.80, 2245 (1998)

    1998

  69. [69]

    R. F. Werner, Phys. Rev. A40, 4277 (1989)

    1989

  70. [70]

    Assil, A

    H. Assil, A. El Allati, and G. L. Giorgi, Phys. Rev. A 111, 022412 (2025)

    2025

  71. [71]

    Gauthier, E

    D. Gauthier, E. Bollt, A. Griffith, and W. A. Barbosa, Nature Communications12, 10.1038/s41467-021-25801- 2 (2021)

    work page doi:10.1038/s41467-021-25801- 2021

  72. [72]

    L. Wang, P. Sun, L.-J. Kong, Y. Sun, and X. Zhang, Phys. Rev. A111, 022609 (2025)

    2025

  73. [73]

    Naghiloo, Introduction to experimental quan- tum measurement with superconducting qubits (2019), arXiv:1904.09291 [quant-ph]

    M. Naghiloo, Introduction to experimental quan- tum measurement with superconducting qubits (2019), arXiv:1904.09291 [quant-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  74. [74]

    Y. Pan, J. Zhang, E. Cohen, C.-w. Wu, P.-X. Chen, and N. Davidson, Nature Physics16, 1206–1210 (2020)

    2020

  75. [75]

    O. M. Sancho, G. L. Giorgi, and R. Zambrini, A general framework for online monitoring in quantum circuits for machine learning (2026), in preparation

    2026

  76. [76]

    Franceschetto, M

    G. Franceschetto, M. Plodzie´ n, M. Lewenstein, A. Ac´ ın, and P. Mujal, Phys. Rev. X16, 021002 (2026)

    2026

  77. [77]

    Arute, K

    F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. S. L. Brandao, D. A. Buell, B. Burkett, Y. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chiaro, R. Collins, W. Courtney, A. Dunsworth, E. Farhi, B. Foxen, A. Fowler, C. Gidney, M. Giustina, R. Graff, K. Guerin, S. Habegger, M. P. Harrigan, M. J. Hartmann, A. Ho, M. Hoffmann, T. Huang, T. S...

    2019

  78. [78]

    Xu, J.-J

    K. Xu, J.-J. Chen, Y. Zeng, Y.-R. Zhang, C. Song, W. Liu, Q. Guo, P. Zhang, D. Xu, H. Deng, K. Huang, H. Wang, X. Zhu, D. Zheng, and H. Fan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 050507 (2018)

    2018

  79. [79]

    Zhang, G

    J. Zhang, G. Pagano, P. W. Hess, A. Kyprianidis, P. Becker, H. Kaplan, A. V. Gorshkov, Z.-X. Gong, and C. Monroe, Nature551, 601 (2017)

    2017

  80. [80]

    J.-y. Choi, S. Hild, J. Zeiher, P. Schauß, A. Rubio- Abadal, T. Yefsah, V. Khemani, D. A. Huse, I. Bloch, and C. Gross, Science352, 1547–1552 (2016)

    2016

Showing first 80 references.