Cited by 69Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum many-body systemsQuantum Information and Cryptography

Classical versus quantum models in machine learning: insights from a finance application

Open access
Alcazar, Javier, Leyton-Ortega, Vicente, Perdomo-Ortiz, Alejandro·2020·Machine Learning: Science and Technology

Abstract

Although several models have been proposed towards assisting machine learning (ML) tasks with quantum computers, a direct comparison of the expressive power and efficiency of classical versus quantum models for datasets originating from real-world applications is one of the key milestones towards a quantum ready era. Here, we take a first step towards addressing this challenge by performing a comparison of the widely used classical ML models known as restricted Boltzmann machines (RBMs), against a recently proposed quantum model, now known as quantum circuit Born machines (QCBMs). Both models address the same hard tasks in unsupervised generative modeling, with QCBMs exploiting the probabilistic nature of quantum mechanics and a candidate for near-term quantum computers, as experimentally demonstrated in three different quantum hardware architectures to date. To address the question of the performance of the quantum model on real-world classical data sets, we construct scenarios from a probabilistic version out of the well-known portfolio optimization problem in finance, by using time-series pricing data from asset subsets of the S&P500 stock market index. It is remarkable to find that, under the same number of resources in terms of parameters for both classical and quantum models, the quantum models seem to have superior performance on typical instances when compared with the canonical training of the RBMs. Our simulations are grounded on a hardware efficient realization of the QCBMs on ion-trap quantum computers, by using their native gate sets, and therefore readily implementable in near-term quantum devices.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1088/2632-2153/ab9009

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • QCBMs have been applied to tasks such as generating images or financial data.

    “and have been applied to tasks such as generating images (Rudolph et al. , 2020) or financial data (Alcazar et al. , 2020; Coyle et al. , 2020a).”

    From Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms (2022) · cites this paper as Alcazar et al. , 2020

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alcazar, J., Leyton-Ortega, V., & Perdomo-Ortiz, A.
Affiliations
National Australia Bank (AU)
Venue
Machine Learning: Science and Technology
Published
2020-07-06
Volume
1
Issue
3
Pages
035003
ISSN
2632-2153 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2970710628
Cited by
69
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 19 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3
FWCI
3.04
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Machine Learning Science and Technology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ERKJ332)
  • Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ERKJ332)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum many-body systems
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
Keywords
quantum machine learning, restricted Boltzmann machine, generative models, portfolio optimization, ion trap quantum computer, near-term quantum devices

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review