CoChat
Sign Up
PreprintCited by 343Quantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum many-body systemsQuantum Information and Cryptography

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

Absence of Barren Plateaus in Quantum Convolutional Neural Networks

Open access
Pesah, Arthur, Cerezo, M., Wang, Samson, Volkoff, Tyler, Sornborger, Andrew T., Coles, Patrick J.·2020·arXiv
DOI 10.48550/arxiv.2011.02966arXiv 2011.02966
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Quantum neural networks (QNNs) have generated excitement around the possibility of efficiently analyzing quantum data. But this excitement has been tempered by the existence of exponentially vanishing gradients, known as barren plateau landscapes, for many QNN architectures. Recently, Quantum Convolutional Neural Networks (QCNNs) have been proposed, involving a sequence of convolutional and pooling layers that reduce the number of qubits while preserving information about relevant data features. In this work we rigorously analyze the gradient scaling for the parameters in the QCNN architecture. We find that the variance of the gradient vanishes no faster than polynomially, implying that QCNNs do not exhibit barren plateaus. This provides an analytical guarantee for the trainability of randomly initialized QCNNs, which highlights QCNNs as being trainable under random initialization unlike many other QNN architectures. To derive our results we introduce a novel graph-based method to analyze expectation values over Haar-distributed unitaries, which will likely be useful in other contexts. Finally, we perform numerical simulations to verify our analytical results.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2011.02966

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Ref [177] introduced Quantum Convolutional Neural Networks (QCNNs).

    “In addition, Ref. [177] introduced Quantum Convolutional Neural Networks (QCNNs).”

    From Variational quantum algorithms (2021) · cites this paper as [177]

    The Introduction attributes the introduction of the QCNN architecture to Cong et al., Ref. [34], not to this paper. This paper says it analyzes that architecture’s trainability and barren plateaus. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • QCNNs have been used for error correction, image recognition, and to discriminate quantum states belonging to different topological phases.

    “QCNNs have been used for error correction [177], image recognition [178], and to discriminate quantum state belonging to different topological phases [177].”

    From Variational quantum algorithms (2021) · cites this paper as [177]

    The Introduction reports that QCNNs have been used for error correction, quantum phase detection, and image recognition. It does not specify that the phase-detection application discriminates quantum states belonging to different topological phases, so that more specific part is not established by our copy. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 72

  1. Y. LeCun, B. E. Boser, J. S. Denker, D. Henderson, R. E. Howard, W. E. Hubbard, and L. D. Jackel, in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc., San Francisco, CA, USA, 1990), pp. 396- 404.
  2. Y. LeCun, L. Bottou, Y. Bengio, and P. Haffner, Gradient- Based Learning Applied to Document Recognition, Proc. IEEE 86, 2278 (1998). · DOI · Paper page
  3. D. H. Hubel and T. N. Wiesel, Receptive Fields and Func- tional Architecture of Monkey Striate Cortex, J. Physiol. 195, 215 (1968). · DOI
  4. K. Fukushima and S. Miyake, in Competition and Cooperation in Neural Nets (Springer, New York, 1982), pp. 267-285.
  5. W. Rawat and Z. Wang, Deep Convolutional Neural Net- works for Image Classification: A Comprehensive Review, Neural Comput. 29, 2352 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  6. N. Sharma, V. Jain, and A. Mishra, An Analysis of Convolu- tional Neural Networks for Image Classification, Proc. Comput. Sci. 132, 377 (2018). · DOI
  7. A. A. M. Al-Saffar, H. Tao, and M. A. Talab, in Proceedings of the 2017 International Conference on Radar, Antenna, Microwave, Electronics, and Telecommunications (ICRA- MET) (IEEE, New York, 2017), pp. 26-31.
  8. M. Minsky and S. A. Papert, Perceptrons: An Introduction to Computational Geometry (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2017).
  9. D. E. Rumelhart, G. E. Hinton, and R. J. Williams, Learn- ing Representations by Back-Propagating Errors, Nature (London) 323, 533 (1986). · DOI · Paper page
  10. S. Hochreiter, Y. Bengio, P. Frasconi, J. Schmidhuber et al., Gradient Flow in Recurrent Nets: The Difficulty of Learning Long-Term Dependencies, in A Field Guide to Dynamical Recurrent Neural Networks, edited by S. C. Kremer and J. F. Kolen (IEEE Press, 2001), https://www.bibsonomy.org/ bibtex/279df6721c014a00bfac62abd7d5a9968/schaul.
  11. X. Glorot, A. Bordes, and Y. Bengio, Deep Sparse Rectifier Neural Networks, in Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA, edited by G. Gordon, D. Dunson, and M. Dudík Proceedings of Machine Learn- ing Research (PMLR, 2011), pp. 315-323, http:// proceedings.mlr.press/v15/glorot11a/glorot11a.pdf.
  12. M. Schuld, I. Sinayskiy, and F. Petruccione, An Introduction to Quantum Machine Learning, Contemp. Phys. 56, 172 (2015). · DOI · Paper page
  13. J. Biamonte, P. Wittek, N. Pancotti, P. Rebentrost, N. Wiebe, and S. Lloyd, Quantum Machine Learning, Nature (London) 549, 195 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  14. W. Guan, G. Perdue, A. Pesah, M. Schuld, K. Terashi, S. Vallecorsa, and J.-R. Vlimant, Quantum Machine Learn- ing in High Energy Physics, Mach. Learn. 2, 011003 (2021). · DOI
  15. K. Sharma, M. Cerezo, Z. Holmes, L. Cincio, A. Sorn borger, and P. J. Coles, Reformulation of the No-Free-Lunch Theorem for Entangled Data Sets, arXiv:2007.04900. · arXiv
  16. A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M.-H. Yung, X.-Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. O'Brien, A Variational Eigenvalue Solver on a Photonic Quantum Processor, Nat. Commun. 5, 4213 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  17. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, A Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm, arXiv:1411.4028. · arXiv
  18. S. Khatri, R. LaRose, A. Poremba, L. Cincio, A. T. Sornborger, and P. J. Coles, Quantum-Assisted Quantum Compiling, Quantum 3, 140 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  19. K. Sharma, S. Khatri, M. Cerezo, and P. J. Coles, Noise Resilience of Variational Quantum Compiling, New J. Phys. 22, 043006 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  20. C. Bravo-Prieto, R. LaRose, M. Cerezo, Y. Subasi, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Variational Quantum Linear Solver: A Hybrid Algorithm for Linear Systems, arXiv:1909.05820. · arXiv
  21. C. Cirstoiu, Z. Holmes, J. Iosue, L. Cincio, P. J. Coles, and A. Sornborger, Variational Fast Forwarding for Quantum Simulation beyond the Coherence Time, npj Quantum Inf. 6, 82 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  22. A. Arrasmith, L. Cincio, A. T. Sornborger, W. H. Zurek, and P. J. Coles, Variational Consistent Histories as a Hybrid Algorithm for Quantum Foundations, Nat. Commun. 10, 3438 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  23. M. Cerezo, A. Poremba, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Varia- tional Quantum Fidelity Estimation, Quantum 4, 248 (2020). · DOI
  24. M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, K. Fujii, J. R. McClean, K. Mitarai, X. Yuan, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Variational Quantum Algorithms, arXiv:2012.09265. · arXiv
  25. K. Bharti, A. Cervera-Lierta, T. H. Kyaw, T. Haug, S. Alperin-Lea, A. Anand, M. Degroote, H. Heimonen, J. S. Kottmann, T. Menke et al., Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) Algorithms, arXiv:2101.08448. · arXiv
  26. M. Schuld, I. Sinayskiy, and F. Petruccione, The Quest for a Quantum Neural Network, Quantum Inf. Process. 13, 2567 (2014). · DOI · Paper page
  27. J. Romero, J. P. Olson, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Quantum Autoencoders for Efficient Compression of Quantum Data, Quantum Sci. Technol. 2, 045001 (2017). · DOI · Paper page
  28. E. Farhi and H. Neven, Classification with Quantum Neural Networks on Near Term Processors, arXiv:1802.06002/ · arXiv
  29. N. Killoran, T. R. Bromley, J. M. Arrazola, M. Schuld, N. Quesada, and S. Lloyd, Continuous-Variable Quantum Neural Networks, Phys. Rev. Research 1, 033063 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  30. G. Verdon, J. Marks, S. Nanda, S. Leichenauer, and J. Hidary, Quantum Hamiltonian-Based Models and the Variational Quantum Thermalizer Algorithm, arXiv:1910.02071. · arXiv
  31. K. Beer, D. Bondarenko, T. Farrelly, T. J. Osborne, R. Salzmann, D. Scheiermann, and R. Wolf, Training Deep Quantum Neural Networks, Nat. Commun. 11, 808 (2020). · DOI · Paper page
  32. F. Tacchino, P. Barkoutsos, C. Macchiavello, I. Tavernelli, D. Gerace, and D. Bajoni, Quantum Implementation of an Artificial Feed-Forward Neural Network, Quantum Sci. Technol. 5, 044010 (2020). · DOI
  33. I. Cong, S. Choi, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum Convolutional Neural Networks, Nat. Phys. 15, 1273 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  34. J. R. McClean, S. Boixo, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Babbush, and H. Neven, Barren Plateaus in Quantum Neural Network Training Landscapes, Nat. Commun. 9, 4812 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  35. M. Cerezo, A. Sone, T. Volkoff, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Cost-Function-Dependent Barren Plateaus in Shallow Quantum Neural Networks, Nat. Commun. 12, 1791 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  36. K. Sharma, M. Cerezo, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Train- ability of Dissipative Perceptron-Based Quantum Neural Networks, arXiv:2005.12458. · arXiv
  37. M. Cerezo and P. J. Coles, Impact of Barren Plateaus on the Hessian and Higher Order Derivatives, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 035006 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  38. S. Wang, E. Fontana, M. Cerezo, K. Sharma, A. Sone, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Noise-Induced Barren Plateaus in Variational Quantum Algorithms, arXiv:2007.14384. · arXiv
  39. Z. Holmes, A. Arrasmith, B. Yan, P. J. Coles, A. Albrecht, and A. T. Sornborger, Barren Plateaus Preclude Learning Scramblers, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 190501 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  40. T. J. Volkoff, Efficient Trainability of Linear Optical Modules in Quantum Optical Neural Networks, arXiv:2008.09173. · arXiv
  41. E. Campos, A. Nasrallah, and J. Biamonte, Abrupt Tran- sitions in Variational Quantum Circuit Training, Phys. Rev. A 103, 032607 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  42. C. O. Marrero, M. Kieferová, and N. Wiebe, Entanglement Induced Barren Plateaus, arXiv:2010.15968. · arXiv
  43. A. Abbas, D. Sutter, C. Zoufal, A. Lucchi, A. Figalli, and S. Woerner, The Power of Quantum Neural Networks, NATOASI series Series F, Computer and system sciences 1, 403 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  44. R. LaRose, A. Tikku, É. O'Neel-Judy, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Variational Quantum State Diagonalization, npj Quantum Inf. 5, 1 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  45. E. Grant, L. Wossnig, M. Ostaszewski, and M. Benedetti, An Initialization Strategy for Addressing Barren Plateaus in Parametrized Quantum Circuits, Quantum 3, 214 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  46. T. Volkoff and P. J. Coles, Large Gradients via Correlation in Random Parameterized Quantum Circuits, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6, 025008 (2021). · DOI · Paper page
  47. G. Verdon, M. Broughton, J. R. McClean, K. J. Sung, R. Babbush, Z. Jiang, H. Neven, and M. Mohseni, Learning to Learn with Quantum Neural Networks via Classical Neural Networks, arXiv:1907.05415. · arXiv
  48. A. Skolik, J. R. McClean, M. Mohseni, P. van der Smagt, and M. Leib, Layerwise Learning for Quantum Neural Networks, arXiv:2006.14904. · arXiv
  49. M. Cerezo, K. Sharma, A. Arrasmith, and P. J. Coles, Variational Quantum State Eigensolver, arXiv:2004.01372. · arXiv
  50. B. Commeau, M. Cerezo, Z. Holmes, L. Cincio, P. J. Coles, and A. Sornborger, Variational Hamiltonian Diagonalization for Dynamical Quantum Simulation, arXiv:2009.02559. · arXiv
  51. K. Bharti and T. Haug, Iterative Quantum Assisted Ei- gensolver, arXiv:2010.05638. · arXiv
  52. A. Cervera-Lierta, J. S. Kottmann, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, The Meta-Variational Quantum Eigensolver (META-VQE): Learning Energy Profiles of Parameterized Hamiltonians for Quantum Simulation, PRX Quantum 2, 020329 (2021). · DOI
  53. T. L. Patti, K. Najafi, X. Gao, and S. F. Yelin, Entanglement Devised Barren Plateau Mitigation, Phys. Rev. Research 3, 033090 (2021). · DOI
  54. E. Grant, M. Benedetti, S. Cao, A. Hallam, J. Lockhart, V. Stojevic, A. G. Green, and S. Severini, Hierarchical Quan- tum Classifiers, npj Quantum Inf. 4, 65 (2018). · DOI
  55. I. MacCormack, C. Delaney, A. Galda, N. Aggarwal, and P. Narang, Branching Quantum Convolutional Neural Net- works, arXiv:2012.14439. · arXiv
  56. L. Franken and B. Georgiev, in Proceedings of ESANN (2020), http://publica.fraunhofer.de/documents/N-615541.html.
  57. K. Mitarai, M. Negoro, M. Kitagawa, and K. Fujii, Quantum Circuit Learning, Phys. Rev. A 98, 032309 (2018). · DOI · Paper page
  58. M. Schuld, V. Bergholm, C. Gogolin, J. Izaac, and N. Killoran, Evaluating Analytic Gradients on Quantum Hard- ware, Phys. Rev. A 99, 032331 (2019). · DOI · Paper page
  59. Z. Holmes, K. Sharma, M. Cerezo, and P. J. Coles, Con- necting Ansatz Expressibility to Gradient Magnitudes and Barren Olateaus, arXiv:2101.02138. · arXiv
  60. B. Collins and P. Śniady, Integration with Respect to the Haar Measure on Unitary, Orthogonal and Symplectic Group, Commun. Math. Phys. 264, 773 (2006). · DOI
  61. Z. Puchała and J. Adam Miszczak, Symbolic Integration with Respect to the Haar Measure on the Unitary Groups, Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Technical Sciences 65, 21 (2017). · DOI
  62. F. Vatan and C. Williams, Optimal Quantum Circuits for General Two-Qubit Gates, Phys. Rev. A 69, 032315 (2004). · DOI · Paper page
  63. M. Broughton et al., TENSORFLOW QUANTUM: A Software Framework for Quantum Machine Learning, arXiv:2003 .02989.
  64. K. Zhang, M.-H. Hsieh, L. Liu, and D. Tao, Toward Trainability of Quantum Neural Networks, arXiv:2011 .06258.
  65. M. Fukuda, R. König, and I. Nechita, RTNI-A Symbolic Integrator for Haar-Random Tensor Networks, J. Phys. A 52, 425303 (2019). · DOI
  66. R. A. Horn and C. R. Johnson, Matrix Analysis (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2012).
  67. P. J. Coles, M. Cerezo, and L.Cincio, Strong Bound between Trace Distance and Hilbert-Schmidt Distance for Low-Rank States, Phys. Rev. A 100, 022103 (2019). · DOI
  68. M. Raıssouli and I. H. Jebril, Various Proofs for the Decrease Monotonicity of the Schatten's Power Norm, Various Families of R n -Norms and Some Open Problems, Int. J. Open Probl. Compt. Math. 3, 164 (2010), http:// eprints.umi.ac.ma/id/eprint/623.
  69. A. W. Harrow and R. A. Low, Random Quantum Circuits Are Approximate 2-Designs, Commun. Math. Phys. 291, 257 (2009). · DOI · Paper page
  70. F. G. S. L. Brandao, A. W. Harrow, and M. Horodecki, Local Random Quantum Circuits Are Approximate Polynomial-Designs, Commun. Math. Phys. 346, 397 (2016). · DOI · Paper page
  71. A. Harrow and S. Mehraban, Approximate Unitary t-Designs by Short Random Quantum Circuits Using Near- est-Neighbor and Long-Range Gates, arXiv:1809.06957. · arXiv
  72. F. Mezzadri, How to Generate Random Matrices from the Classical Compact Groups, Not. Am. Math. Soc. 54, 592 (2007), http://www.ams.org/notices/200705/fea-mezzadri- web.pdf.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Pesah, A., Cerezo, M., Wang, S., Volkoff, T., Sornborger, A. T., & Coles, P. J.
Affiliations
Los Alamos National Laboratory (US)
ORCID
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2020
Volume
11
Issue
4
ISSN
2160-3308 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.48550/arxiv.2011.02966
arXiv
2011.02966
OpenAlex
W3096560863
Cited by
343
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 52 · 2025: 71 · 2024: 89 · 2023: 56 · 2022: 49 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 2
FWCI
19.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Physical Review X (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • OSTI OAI (U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
  • Bulletin of the American Physical Society
Funders
  • U.S. Department of Energy (20190065DR)
  • Samsung
  • Office of Science
  • Advanced Scientific Computing Research
  • Laboratory Directed Research and Development (20190065DR, 20200677PRD1)
  • Los Alamos National Laboratory (20190065DR)
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 › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Information and Cryptography
Keywords
barren plateaus, quantum convolutional neural networks, gradient scaling, trainability, graph analysis, quantum neural networks, quantum machine learning, random initialization

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