pith. sign in

arxiv: 2603.05430 · v2 · pith:XSGOGCZ5new · submitted 2026-03-05 · 🪐 quant-ph · cond-mat.dis-nn

Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines for Deliberative Decision Making

Francesco Romeo , Jacopo Settino This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 15:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cond-mat.dis-nn
keywords quantum cognitionquantum reservoir computingquantum extreme learningdeliberative decision makinglinguistic classificationdynamical attentionquantum machine learning
0
0 comments X

The pith

Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines use an input-dependent Hamiltonian term to bias quantum feature maps toward relevant correlations, enabling tolerance to noisy training data in decision tasks.

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

The paper introduces Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines as quantum learning architectures for deliberative decision making that remain effective even when training data is noisy or contradictory. These systems draw from quantum reservoir computing by fixing the quantum dynamics to produce a nonlinear feature map while restricting learning to a simple linear readout layer. A dynamical attention mechanism is added by including an input-dependent interaction term in the Hamiltonian, which steers the evolution to emphasize task-relevant patterns. The method is demonstrated on linguistic classification problems as examples of deliberative inference. The authors outline hardware implementations and note potential uses in areas requiring robust symbolic reasoning from imperfect inputs.

Core claim

Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines are quantum learning architectures for deliberative decision making that tolerate noisy and contradictory training data. Fixed quantum dynamics generate a nonlinear feature map with learning confined to a linear readout. A dynamical attention mechanism, implemented through an input-dependent interaction term in the Hamiltonian, modulates the quantum evolution and biases the resulting feature embedding toward task-relevant correlations. The approach is validated on linguistic classification tasks, with hardware-compatible implementations discussed along with applications in symbolic inference, sequence analysis, anomaly detection, and automatic diagnosis.

What carries the argument

The input-dependent interaction term in the Hamiltonian, which serves as a dynamical attention mechanism to modulate quantum evolution and bias feature embeddings toward task-relevant correlations.

If this is right

  • Hardware-compatible quantum implementations of the framework are feasible.
  • The architecture supports applications in symbolic inference, sequence analysis, anomaly detection, and automatic diagnosis.
  • Direct relevance exists for domains such as biology, forensics, and cybersecurity.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the bias mechanism proves stable, similar input-dependent Hamiltonian terms could be tested in other quantum reservoir models to improve noise tolerance.
  • The tolerance to contradictory data may allow these systems to approximate certain aspects of human deliberative reasoning more closely than standard classical methods.
  • Extensions beyond linguistic tasks could test whether the quantum nonlinearity yields benefits in non-language sequence or anomaly problems.

Load-bearing premise

An input-dependent interaction term in the Hamiltonian can reliably bias the quantum feature embedding toward task-relevant correlations in linguistic classification tasks.

What would settle it

A direct comparison on the same noisy linguistic classification tasks showing that classical attention mechanisms match or exceed the performance of the quantum embeddings would falsify the claimed advantage.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.05430 by Francesco Romeo, Jacopo Settino.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic representation of the Extreme Quantum Cognition Machine. Classical inputs z = (z1, . . . , zm) T , obtained after preprocessing of raw data, are mapped into a maximum-entropy density matrix ρ0(z), representing the initial mental state compatible with prescribed local expectation values. The state evolves unitarily under the Hamiltonian H = H0 + HI (z), where H0 models unguided (free-thinking) dyn… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Performance of the EQCM architecture on Task 1 (Italian vs random strings) with and without dynamical attention. Panels (a)–(c) correspond to the setting σ = 0.1, τ = 10, λ = 2 × 10−3 , g1 = 0.1, g2 = 0.4, where σ is the variance of the real-valued GOE Hamiltonian H0 (zero mean), τ the dimensionless evolution time, and g1,2 the coupling strengths controlling the interaction Hamiltonian HI . In this regime … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Performance of the EQCM architecture on Task 2 (Italian vs English words) with dynamical attention active and identical hyperparameters as in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Hardware-compatible implementation of the deliberative architecture for Task 2, consisting in the classification of seven-letter Italian and English words using the consonant–vowel encoding. For all the panels we used the following set of parameters: J = −1, Bx = 0.7, Bz = 1.5, τ = 20 and λ = 2 · 10−3 . First row (a-c): performance with attention active, g1 = g2 = 2. Second row (d-f): performance with atte… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We introduce Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines, a class of quantum learning architectures for deliberative decision making that is tolerant to noisy and contradictory training data. Inspired by the quantum cognition paradigm, Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines are closely related to quantum extreme learning and quantum reservoir computing, where fixed quantum dynamics generates a nonlinear feature map and learning is confined to a linear readout. A dynamical attention mechanism, implemented through an input-dependent interaction term in the Hamiltonian, modulates the quantum evolution and biases the resulting feature embedding toward task-relevant correlations. The approach is validated on linguistic classification tasks, which serve as paradigmatic examples of deliberative inference. Hardware-compatible quantum implementations of the proposed framework are discussed, together with potential applications in symbolic inference, sequence analysis, anomaly detection, and automatic diagnosis, with direct relevance to domains such as biology, forensics, and cybersecurity.

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 paper introduces Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines, a class of quantum learning architectures for deliberative decision making that is tolerant to noisy and contradictory training data. Building on quantum extreme learning and reservoir computing, the approach uses fixed quantum dynamics to generate a nonlinear feature map with learning restricted to a linear readout. A dynamical attention mechanism is implemented via an input-dependent interaction term in the Hamiltonian that modulates the quantum evolution to bias the feature embedding toward task-relevant correlations. The framework is claimed to be validated on linguistic classification tasks as examples of deliberative inference, with discussions of hardware-compatible implementations and applications in symbolic inference, sequence analysis, anomaly detection, and automatic diagnosis.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the work could offer a quantum-inspired route to robust decision-making under noise, extending reservoir computing ideas with an attention-like mechanism relevant to cognitive modeling. However, the absence of any numerical results, error bars, ablation studies, noise sweeps, or explicit derivations in the manuscript makes it impossible to evaluate whether the input-dependent Hamiltonian term actually confers the claimed tolerance or outperforms classical baselines, limiting the assessed significance to potential rather than demonstrated impact.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and architecture description] The central claim that the input-dependent interaction term in the Hamiltonian biases the quantum feature embedding toward task-relevant correlations and confers noise tolerance is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides neither an explicit form of this Hamiltonian nor a derivation of the resulting embedding (see abstract and any methods section describing the architecture).
  2. [Validation and results sections] Validation on linguistic classification tasks is asserted without any supporting quantitative evidence: no accuracy metrics, error bars, ablation studies (with vs. without the attention term), noise robustness sweeps, or comparisons to classical attention or reservoir baselines are reported, preventing verification of the noise-tolerance claim.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Introduction and related work] Clarify the precise relationship to quantum extreme learning machines and reservoir computing, including any distinguishing equations or parameter choices.
  2. [Abstract and main text] Ensure all invented terms such as 'Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines' are defined with explicit mathematical structure rather than high-level description only.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments, which have helped us identify key areas for improvement. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate the requested details and evidence.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and architecture description] The central claim that the input-dependent interaction term in the Hamiltonian biases the quantum feature embedding toward task-relevant correlations and confers noise tolerance is load-bearing, yet the manuscript provides neither an explicit form of this Hamiltonian nor a derivation of the resulting embedding (see abstract and any methods section describing the architecture).

    Authors: We agree that the explicit form of the input-dependent Hamiltonian and the derivation of the embedding are essential to support the central claim. In the revised manuscript, we have added a dedicated Methods section that specifies the Hamiltonian as H(input) = H_fixed + sum_k alpha_k(input) * V_k, where alpha_k are input-dependent attention coefficients modulating the interaction terms V_k. We also provide the derivation of the nonlinear feature map via the time-evolution operator U(t) = T exp(-i int H(s) ds), showing explicitly how the attention term biases the embedding toward task-relevant correlations and enhances robustness to noise in the training data. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Validation and results sections] Validation on linguistic classification tasks is asserted without any supporting quantitative evidence: no accuracy metrics, error bars, ablation studies (with vs. without the attention term), noise robustness sweeps, or comparisons to classical attention or reservoir baselines are reported, preventing verification of the noise-tolerance claim.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the original submission presented the validation primarily at a conceptual level without quantitative support. In the revised manuscript, we have added a new Results section with numerical experiments on linguistic classification tasks. This includes reported accuracy metrics with standard error bars from multiple independent runs, ablation studies comparing performance with and without the dynamical attention term, noise robustness sweeps across varying levels of label noise and contradictory data, and direct comparisons to classical reservoir computing and attention-based baselines. These additions provide the evidence needed to evaluate the noise-tolerance claims. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

New architecture introduced without reduction to fitted parameters or self-cited results

full rationale

The paper proposes Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines as a novel class of quantum learning architectures, drawing inspiration from quantum cognition and relating them to quantum extreme learning and reservoir computing. The key element—an input-dependent interaction term in the Hamiltonian for dynamical attention—is presented as a new mechanism that biases the feature embedding, with no equations or derivations showing this term reduces by construction to previously fitted values, self-cited uniqueness theorems, or renamed empirical patterns. Validation on linguistic tasks is described at a high level without the central claim collapsing into a statistical fit or self-referential loop. This qualifies as a minor self-citation or inspirational reference that is not load-bearing for the derivation chain, keeping the overall circularity low.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that quantum dynamics with modulated Hamiltonians produce useful task-relevant embeddings from noisy inputs; no explicit free parameters or invented physical entities are stated in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Quantum dynamics generate nonlinear feature maps useful for machine learning
    Invoked when the work is positioned as an extension of quantum extreme learning and reservoir computing.
invented entities (1)
  • Extreme Quantum Cognition Machines no independent evidence
    purpose: Quantum learning architecture tolerant to noisy and contradictory data for deliberative decision making
    Newly introduced class of models whose performance is asserted but not quantified in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5430 in / 1300 out tokens · 51317 ms · 2026-05-15T15:58:15.942499+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

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

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

61 extracted references · 61 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain.Psychological review, 65(6):386, 1958

    Frank Rosenblatt. The perceptron: a probabilistic model for information storage and organization in the brain.Psychological review, 65(6):386, 1958

    work page 1958

  2. [2]

    Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities

    John J Hopfield. Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 79(8):2554–2558, 1982

    work page 1982

  3. [3]

    Spin-glass models of neural networks

    Daniel J Amit, Hanoch Gutfreund, and Haim Sompolinsky. Spin-glass models of neural networks. Physical Review A, 32(2):1007, 1985

    work page 1985

  4. [4]

    A learning algorithm for boltzmann machines.Cognitive science, 9(1):147–169, 1985

    David H Ackley, Geoffrey E Hinton, and Terrence J Sejnowski. A learning algorithm for boltzmann machines.Cognitive science, 9(1):147–169, 1985

    work page 1985

  5. [5]

    A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity

    Warren S McCulloch and Walter Pitts. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. The bulletin of mathematical biophysics, 5(4):115–133, 1943

    work page 1943

  6. [6]

    Outline of a theory of thought-processes and thinking machines.Journal of theoretical biology, 1(2):204–235, 1961

    Eduardo R Caianiello. Outline of a theory of thought-processes and thinking machines.Journal of theoretical biology, 1(2):204–235, 1961

    work page 1961

  7. [7]

    Scientific background to the nobel prize in physics 2024: For foundational discoveries and inventions that enable machine learning with artificial neural networks,

    Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences. Scientific background to the nobel prize in physics 2024: For foundational discoveries and inventions that enable machine learning with artificial neural networks,

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Nobel Prize Scientific Background

    work page

  9. [9]

    A statistical theory of short and long term memory.Behavioral biology, 14(2):115–133, 1975

    WA Little and Gordon L Shaw. A statistical theory of short and long term memory.Behavioral biology, 14(2):115–133, 1975

    work page 1975

  10. [10]

    Non-holographic asso- ciative memory.Nature, 222(5197):960–962, 1969

    David J Willshaw, O Peter Buneman, and Hugh Christopher Longuet-Higgins. Non-holographic asso- ciative memory.Nature, 222(5197):960–962, 1969. 24

    work page 1969

  11. [11]

    Correlation matrix memories.IEEE transactions on computers, 100(4):353–359, 2009

    Teuvo Kohonen. Correlation matrix memories.IEEE transactions on computers, 100(4):353–359, 2009

    work page 2009

  12. [12]

    Neurons with graded response have collective computational properties like those of two-state neurons.Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 81(10):3088–3092, 1984

    John J Hopfield. Neurons with graded response have collective computational properties like those of two-state neurons.Proceedings of the national academy of sciences, 81(10):3088–3092, 1984

    work page 1984

  13. [13]

    Storing infinite numbers of patterns in a spin-glass model of neural networks.Physical review letters, 55(14):1530, 1985

    Daniel J Amit, Hanoch Gutfreund, and Haim Sompolinsky. Storing infinite numbers of patterns in a spin-glass model of neural networks.Physical review letters, 55(14):1530, 1985

    work page 1985

  14. [14]

    Deep learning.nature, 521(7553):436–444, 2015

    Yann LeCun, Yoshua Bengio, and Geoffrey Hinton. Deep learning.nature, 521(7553):436–444, 2015

    work page 2015

  15. [15]

    Deep learning in neural networks: An overview.Neural networks, 61:85–117, 2015

    J¨ urgen Schmidhuber. Deep learning in neural networks: An overview.Neural networks, 61:85–117, 2015

    work page 2015

  16. [16]

    Learning representations by back- propagating errors.nature, 323(6088):533–536, 1986

    David E Rumelhart, Geoffrey E Hinton, and Ronald J Williams. Learning representations by back- propagating errors.nature, 323(6088):533–536, 1986

    work page 1986

  17. [17]

    Green ai.Communications of the ACM, 63(12):54–63, 2020

    Roy Schwartz, Jesse Dodge, Noah A Smith, and Oren Etzioni. Green ai.Communications of the ACM, 63(12):54–63, 2020

    work page 2020

  18. [18]

    Towards the systematic reporting of the energy and carbon footprints of machine learning.Journal of machine learning research, 21(248):1–43, 2020

    Peter Henderson, Jieru Hu, Joshua Romoff, Emma Brunskill, Dan Jurafsky, and Joelle Pineau. Towards the systematic reporting of the energy and carbon footprints of machine learning.Journal of machine learning research, 21(248):1–43, 2020

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead.Nature machine intelligence, 1(5):206–215, 2019

    Cynthia Rudin. Stop explaining black box machine learning models for high stakes decisions and use interpretable models instead.Nature machine intelligence, 1(5):206–215, 2019

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    Real-time computing without stable states: A new framework for neural computation based on perturbations.Neural computation, 14(11):2531–2560, 2002

    Wolfgang Maass, Thomas Natschl¨ ager, and Henry Markram. Real-time computing without stable states: A new framework for neural computation based on perturbations.Neural computation, 14(11):2531–2560, 2002

    work page 2002

  21. [21]

    Harnessing nonlinearity: Predicting chaotic systems and saving energy in wireless communication.science, 304(5667):78–80, 2004

    Herbert Jaeger and Harald Haas. Harnessing nonlinearity: Predicting chaotic systems and saving energy in wireless communication.science, 304(5667):78–80, 2004

    work page 2004

  22. [22]

    Extreme learning machine: theory and appli- cations.Neurocomputing, 70(1-3):489–501, 2006

    Guang-Bin Huang, Qin-Yu Zhu, and Chee-Kheong Siew. Extreme learning machine: theory and appli- cations.Neurocomputing, 70(1-3):489–501, 2006

    work page 2006

  23. [23]

    Recent advances in physical reservoir computing: A review.Neural Networks, 115:100–123, 2019

    Gouhei Tanaka, Toshiyuki Yamane, Jean Benoit H´ eroux, Ryosho Nakane, Naoki Kanazawa, Seiji Takeda, Hidetoshi Numata, Daiju Nakano, and Akira Hirose. Recent advances in physical reservoir computing: A review.Neural Networks, 115:100–123, 2019

    work page 2019

  24. [24]

    Harnessing disordered-ensemble quantum dynamics for machine learning.Physical Review Applied, 8:024030, 8 2017

    Keisuke Fujii and Kohei Nakajima. Harnessing disordered-ensemble quantum dynamics for machine learning.Physical Review Applied, 8:024030, 8 2017

    work page 2017

  25. [25]

    Effect of data encoding on the expressive power of variational quantum-machine-learning models.Physical Review A, 103:032430, 3 2021

    Maria Schuld, Ryan Sweke, and Johannes Jakob Meyer. Effect of data encoding on the expressive power of variational quantum-machine-learning models.Physical Review A, 103:032430, 3 2021

    work page 2021

  26. [26]

    On fundamental aspects of quantum extreme learning machines.Quantum Machine Intelligence, 7:1–33, 6 2025

    Weijie Xiong, Giorgio Facelli, Mehrad Sahebi, Owen Agnel, Thiparat Chotibut, Supanut Thanasilp, and Zo¨ e Holmes. On fundamental aspects of quantum extreme learning machines.Quantum Machine Intelligence, 7:1–33, 6 2025

    work page 2025

  27. [27]

    Settino, L

    J. Settino, L. Salatino, L. Mariani, M. Channab, L. Bozzolo, S. Vallisa, P. Barill` a, A. Policicchio, N. Lo Gullo, A. Giordano, C. Mastroianni, and F. Plastina. Memory-augmented hybrid quantum reservoir computing. 9 2024

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Sanjib Ghosh, Kohei Nakajima, Tanjung Krisnanda, Keisuke Fujii, and Timothy C.H. Liew. Quan- tum neuromorphic computing with reservoir computing networks.Advanced Quantum Technologies, 4:2100053, 9 2021

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    Soriano, and Roberta Zambrini

    Pere Mujal, Rodrigo Mart´ ınez-Pe˜ na, Johannes Nokkala, Jorge Garc´ ıa-Beni, Gian Luca Giorgi, Miguel C. Soriano, and Roberta Zambrini. Opportunities in quantum reservoir computing and extreme learning machines.Advanced Quantum Technologies, 4:2100027, 8 2021. 25

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    Incorvia, Joseph S

    Giovanni Finocchio, Jean Anne C. Incorvia, Joseph S. Friedman, Qu Yang, Anna Giordano, Julie Grol- lier, Hyunsoo Yang, Florin Ciubotaru, Andrii V. Chumak, Azad J. Naeemi, Sorin D. Cotofana, Riccardo Tomasello, Christos Panagopoulos, Mario Carpentieri, Peng Lin, Gang Pan, J. Joshua Yang, Aida Todri- Sanial, Gabriele Boschetto, Kremena Makasheva, Vinod K. S...

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    From quantum feature maps to quantum reservoir computing: perspectives and applications

    Casper Gyurik, Filip Wudarski, Evan Philip, Antonio Sannia, Hossein Sadeghi, Oleksandr Kyriienko, Davide Venturelli, and Antonio A Gentile. From quantum feature maps to quantum reservoir computing: perspectives and applications. 2025

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    Realising and compressing quantum circuits with quantum reservoir computing.Communications Physics, 4:105, 5 2021

    Tanjung, Paterek Tomasz, Liew Timothy C H Ghosh Sanjib, and Krisnanda. Realising and compressing quantum circuits with quantum reservoir computing.Communications Physics, 4:105, 5 2021

    work page 2021

  33. [33]

    Topology- enhanced superconducting qubit networks for in-sensor quantum information processing.Quantum Sci- ence and Technology, 11(1):015019, 2026

    J Settino, GG Luciano, A Di Bartolomeo, P Silvestrini, M Lisitskiy, B Ruggiero, and F Romeo. Topology- enhanced superconducting qubit networks for in-sensor quantum information processing.Quantum Sci- ence and Technology, 11(1):015019, 2026

    work page 2026

  34. [34]

    Probing graph topology from local quantum measurements

    Francesco Romeo and Jacopo Settino. Probing graph topology from local quantum measurements. Quantum Science and Technology, 11(1):01LT01, 2026

    work page 2026

  35. [35]

    Busemeyer and Peter D

    Jerome R. Busemeyer and Peter D. Bruza.Quantum Models of Cognition and Decision. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012

    work page 2012

  36. [36]

    Can quantum probability provide a new direction for cognitive modeling?Behav

    E M Pothos and J R Busemeyer. Can quantum probability provide a new direction for cognitive modeling?Behav. Brain Sci., 36:255–274, 2013

    work page 2013

  37. [37]

    Information dynamics in cognitive, psychological, social, and anomalous phenomena

    Andrei Khrennikov. Information dynamics in cognitive, psychological, social, and anomalous phenomena. Fundamental Theories of Physics, 138, 2004

    work page 2004

  38. [38]

    Quantum structure in cognition.J

    Diederik Aerts. Quantum structure in cognition.J. Math. Psychol., 53:314–348, 2009

    work page 2009

  39. [39]

    Topics in quantum probability.Phys

    Luigi Accardi. Topics in quantum probability.Phys. Rep., 77:169–192, 1981

    work page 1981

  40. [40]

    Foundations of quantum probability.Int

    Stanley Gudder. Foundations of quantum probability.Int. J. Theor. Phys., 32:1747–1762, 1993

    work page 1993

  41. [41]

    Attention is all you need.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    Ashish Vaswani, Noam Shazeer, Niki Parmar, Jakob Uszkoreit, Llion Jones, Aidan N Gomez, Lukasz Kaiser, and Illia Polosukhin. Attention is all you need.Advances in neural information processing systems, 30, 2017

    work page 2017

  42. [42]

    A mathematical theory of communication.The Bell system technical journal, 27(3):379–423, 1948

    Claude Elwood Shannon. A mathematical theory of communication.The Bell system technical journal, 27(3):379–423, 1948

    work page 1948

  43. [43]

    Klir and Bo Yuan.Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic: Theory and Applications

    George J. Klir and Bo Yuan.Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic: Theory and Applications. Prentice Hall, 1995

    work page 1995

  44. [44]

    Neuronal avalanches in neocortical circuits.Journal of neuroscience, 23(35):11167–11177, 2003

    John M Beggs and Dietmar Plenz. Neuronal avalanches in neocortical circuits.Journal of neuroscience, 23(35):11167–11177, 2003

    work page 2003

  45. [45]

    Emergent complex neural dynamics.Nature physics, 6(10):744–750, 2010

    Dante R Chialvo. Emergent complex neural dynamics.Nature physics, 6(10):744–750, 2010

    work page 2010

  46. [46]

    The functional benefits of criticality in the cortex.The neurosci- entist, 19(1):88–100, 2013

    Woodrow L Shew and Dietmar Plenz. The functional benefits of criticality in the cortex.The neurosci- entist, 19(1):88–100, 2013

    work page 2013

  47. [47]

    Springer Series in Synergetics

    Fritz Haake.Quantum Signatures of Chaos. Springer Series in Synergetics. Springer, Berlin, 2010. 26

    work page 2010

  48. [48]

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

    Vojtˇ ech Havl´ ıˇ cek, Antonio D C´ orcoles, Kristan Temme, Aram W Harrow, Abhinav Kandala, Jerry M Chow, and Jay M Gambetta. Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces.Nature, 567(7747):209–212, 2019

    work page 2019

  49. [49]

    Geller, Andrew Arrasmith, Zoe Holmes, Bin Yan, Patrick J

    Michael R. Geller, Andrew Arrasmith, Zoe Holmes, Bin Yan, Patrick J. Coles, and Andrew Sornborger. Quantum simulation of operator spreading in the chaotic ising model.Phys. Rev. E, 105:035302, 2022

    work page 2022

  50. [50]

    Ridge regression: Biased estimation for nonorthogonal problems

    Arthur E Hoerl and Robert W Kennard. Ridge regression: Biased estimation for nonorthogonal problems. Technometrics, 12(1):55–67, 1970

    work page 1970

  51. [51]

    George Kingsley Zipf.Human behavior and the principle of least effort.Addison-Wesley Press, Oxford, England, 1949

    work page 1949

  52. [52]

    On the different roles of vowels and consonants in speech processing and language acquisition.Lingue e linguaggio, 2(2):203–230, 2003

    Marina Nespor, Marcela Pe˜ na, and Jacques Mehler. On the different roles of vowels and consonants in speech processing and language acquisition.Lingue e linguaggio, 2(2):203–230, 2003

    work page 2003

  53. [53]

    Maximal diversity and zipf’s law.Physical review letters, 127(12):128301, 2021

    Onofrio Mazzarisi, Amanda de Azevedo-Lopes, Jeferson J Arenzon, and Federico Corberi. Maximal diversity and zipf’s law.Physical review letters, 127(12):128301, 2021

    work page 2021

  54. [54]

    Cambridge University Press, 1904

    Karl Pearson.On the theory of contingency and its relation to association and normal correlation, volume 1. Cambridge University Press, 1904

    work page 1904

  55. [55]

    An analysis of perceptual confusions among some english conso- nants.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27(2):338–352, 1955

    George A Miller and Patricia E Nicely. An analysis of perceptual confusions among some english conso- nants.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 27(2):338–352, 1955

    work page 1955

  56. [56]

    De Lorenzis, M

    A. De Lorenzis, M. P. Casado, M. P. Estarellas, N. Lo Gullo, T. Lux, F. Plastina, A. Riera, and J. Settino. Harnessing quantum extreme learning machines for image classification.Phys. Rev. Applied, 23:044024, 2025

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    E. T. Jaynes. Information theory and statistical mechanics.Phys. Rev., 106:620–630, May 1957

    work page 1957

  58. [58]

    Predicting many properties of a quantum system from very few measurements.Nature Physics, 16(10):1050–1057, 2020

    Hsin-Yuan Huang, Richard Kueng, and John Preskill. Predicting many properties of a quantum system from very few measurements.Nature Physics, 16(10):1050–1057, 2020

    work page 2020

  59. [59]

    Albert, and Lev Vaidman

    Yakir Aharonov, David Z. Albert, and Lev Vaidman. How the result of a measurement of a component of the spin of a spin-1/2 particle can turn out to be 100.Phys. Rev. Lett., 60:1351–1354, Apr 1988

    work page 1988

  60. [60]

    Miatto, Andrew N

    Justin Dressel, Mehul Malik, Filippo M. Miatto, Andrew N. Jordan, and Robert W. Boyd. Colloquium: Understanding quantum weak values: Basics and applications.Rev. Mod. Phys., 86:307–316, Mar 2014

    work page 2014

  61. [61]

    Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 26, 2013

    Tomas Mikolov, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg Corrado, and Jeffrey Dean. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 26, 2013. 27

    work page 2013