【冠道汽车图片】广汽本田

In the contemporary era, information technology has become ubiquitous with profound implications for society. The advent of new electronic devices and connected services has enabled the collection of significant amounts of data, which can be further leveraged to improve the quality of our daily lives. However, interpreting data from various sources is a complex task, and the extraction of useful information requires sophisticated algorithms and technologies. Artificial Intelligence (AI), specifically within the branch of [1], offers a promising solution to automate this elaboration process.
Over the past three decades, many algorithms have been developed to accomplish precise tasks, with widespread applications in technology and science domains, including autonomous vehicle control, robotics, natural language processing, and computer vision[2]. However, these solutions are computationally expensive, and there is a need to find new efficient strategies to perform the related tasks.

In parallel with AI research, [3, 4] has gained significant attention from the scientific community due to its potential to solve complex problems with algorithms that theoretically prove superior to classical known approaches (e.g., Shor’s factorization algorithm[5] and Grover’s quantum search algorithm [6]). This potential, coupled with recent technological advancements that have led to the development of the first quantum computers, has prompted research to investigate opportunities for developing new solutions to address real-world complex problems.
The objective is to expand the computational capabilities of modern processing systems beyond limits previously considered unimaginable. Today, researchers are seeking to initiate another revolution based on this new paradigm, similar to the introduction of the first computers in the 1970s, to find applications with a quantum advantage.

Given the computational requirements of current algorithms and the prospect of a quantum advantage in the field, [7, 8, 9, 10, 11] was born. Several models have been proposed in the last few years to address a variety of tasks, ranging from solving high-energy physics problems [12]helping with the detection of drowsiness through EEG signals [13], to improving applications in chemical engineering such as reaction kinetics and optimization [14], to discovering new drugs [15], defining new convolutional neural networks [16], and even UAV path planning using a quantum?inspired experience replay in a Deep Reinforcement Learning framework [17]. The research in this new field is still in its infancy with models demonstrating limited capabilities; thus, comparisons with well-established classical ML techniques are not yet entirely fair, highlighting potential topics for further investigation [18, 19]. Among these, when considering input classical data, it is necessary to express them through quantum formalism in a process known as embedding. Strategies such as quantum feature maps [20] and data re?uploading [21] have been adopted; these approaches directly influence both the computational resource requirements (e.g., number of qubits and circuit depth) and the the expressive power of the final model [22].

This work presents an in-depth analysis of how the available embedding techniques influence the results achievable in performing the classification task using a [23] of reference. The study addresses the embedding of input classical data through quantum formalism, and how it influcences the classification performance of the model .

In this work, two main categories of embedding strategies are analyzed, Angle and Amplitude (described also in [24]). The Amplitude encoding strategy consist of embedding the input data vector as the probability amplitude of the state vector. On the other hand, for the Angle encoding strategy the data are passed as the angle parameters for the rotation gates. Further details related to these encoding strategies are described in subsubsection?2.3.1. The Angle encoding mechanism has been subjected to several algorithmic approaches to understand the possibility of a better strategy for performing the embedding task.

The study has been conducted on two established real datasets, i.e., Wine[25] and Diabetes [26], while keeping a constant number of qubits to implement the data classification model. This latter choice has posed a constraint on the definition of the subsequent model of , thereby ensuring that the results are independent of it and focus solely on the efficacy of the embedding. The analysis seeks to identify the best embedding strategy for a given input dataset. To this end, a set of multiple random input transformations is considered to understand if one best performs independently from the input data. The experiments have been executed on a local computer using a simulator provided within the Pennylane Library [27], which can be considered representative of any kind of quantum computer’s ideal behavior.

The results obtained in this work demonstrate that the embedding circuit has a significant impact on the classification performance of the model. Consequently, it can be regarded as a hyper-parameter and optimized through a benchmarking process specific to the dataset of interest. Indeed, when evaluating performance on both datasets, the differences in various metrics (accuracy, balanced accuracy, recall, precision and F1-score) between the best and worst models varies from 10% to 30% on average, considering the same kind of architecture (the employing of the re-uploading technique, which is also described in subsubsection?2.3.3, and the number of layers of the circuits).

In the literature, a few other works have explored the topic of quantum embedding in classification problems and how it influences the models’ performance. In particular, they generally focus on a limited set of analyses, which do not provide a comprehensive understanding of the effects on real-world case applications. Fauzi R. et al. [28] have conducted tests on the effects of four different encoding techniques, namely Angle, Amplitude, Instantaneous Quantum Polynomial (IQP), and Complex Entangled, on the Iris dataset. In this case, the author suggest that the encoding strategy influences the results, but differently on our work, they do not consider all the possible combinations of the Angle encoding strategy, limiting the analysis to a single example of Angle encoding and not taking into account the impact of the choice of the rotational gates on classification performance.

On the other hand, Sierra-Sosa et al., in two different works[29, 30], performed similar analyses but on a synthetic dataset. In the former case, the Authors compared the effects of applying Amplitude and Angle encoding strategies, while in the latter, Amplitude, IQP, and Second-order Pauli-Z evolution have been studied. In these cases, the Amplitude encoding strategies have obtained better results with respect the Angle encoding counterpart. A. Matic et al. [31] propose and analyze Quantum Convolutional Neural Networks (QCNNs) by varying both the encoding methods—focusing on high-order encoding and threshold encoding (embedding strategies that are also described in their article)—and the ansatz, including Basic and Strongly Entangling layers [11]. Their study compares the performance of quantum models against classical counterparts, showing that the QCNN using high-order encoding and Basic Entangling layers achieved performance comparable to classical models.

Similarly, in [32], an exploration of Angle encoding models using RY and RX gates, Amplitude encoding models, and High-order models is presented. The study tested these models on two datasets, concluding that the encoding circuit influences the classification performance of quantum models. This work focuses exclusively on RX and RY Angle encoding models, excluding other combinations that are discussed and implemented in this article.

In all these works, the different encoding strategies have been applied without considering limitations on the number of qubits, which can significantly impact the resources required by the . The outcome depends not only on the type of embedding technique used but also on the details of the related models, which vary in size and number of parameters. It is important to note that comparing results obtained from synthetic datasets with those already present in the state-of-the-art can be challenging. Additionally, when implementing the embedding, the default versions provided by two of the foremost open-source libraries (i.e., Qiskit and Pennylane) are adopted. This approach excludes the possibility of customizing the transformations applied to identify the most suitable ones for the classification task, especially in the case of the Angle encoding.

In summary, this paper proposes the following contributions:

• ?

  Propose the evaluation of different Angle encoding strategies by tuning the rotational gates applied.

• ?

  Evaluate these Angle encoding strategies based on their trajectories on the Bloch sphere.

• ?

  Compare Angle encoding models with Amplitude encoding models using the same number of qubits (and thus the same number of parameters).

• ?

  Introduce a methodology for selecting the optimal VQC model.

In the following sections, the background topics of and will be presented, together with their intersection, . Then, the methodology behind the test conducted will be discussed in detail before providing the analysis results.

is an emerging research field based on developing models for by exploiting quantum technology to accelerate the training process and be capable of obtaining better results. The following sections will provide a detailed description of the two main topics, and , to ensure an accessible discussion to people with different backgrounds. Further elements can be deepened respectively in [33] and [34].

The proposed work focuses on the and its main parameters, described in details in the subsection?2.3. Specifically, an analysis is conducted on the encoding mechanism, the number of layers of the variational part, and the application of the re-uploading strategy. The study measures the accuracy achieved by modifying these parameters to identify the optimal model for the classification task under consideration.
An example of an implemented model is shown in Figure?9, where the most significant blocks that compound the quantum circuit, such as the encoding and the variational circuit, are highlighted.

This section discusses the actual implementation and the methodology used to test the models’ performance, providing the necessary details for the reader to replicate the experiments.

The models were tested on two distinct datasets: the Wine [25] dataset and the Diabetes [26] dataset. The Wine dataset consists of 13 features and 178 samples, each classified into one of three classes. It’s important to note that this dataset is unbalanced, with 59 samples in the first category, 71 in the second, and 48 in the third. On the other hand, the Diabetes dataset represents a binary classification problem with 168 items. Each one is characterized by eight features, including Pregnancy, Glucose, Blood Pressure, Skin Thickness, Insulin, BMI, Diabetes Pedigree Function, and Age. Each sample is classified as either class 0 (non-diabetic) or class 1 (diabetic). Also this dataset is unbalanced, with 65% of the data belonging to class 0 and the remaining 35% to class 1.

For the Wine dataset, model performance is evaluated using accuracy as the primary metric. However, given the stronger imbalance in the Diabetes dataset, additional metrics are needed to evaluate the model’s effectiveness.

Regarding the Wine dataset, models using Amplitude encoding methods have, on average, obtained better accuracy compared to those using Angle encoding, as illustrated in Figure 14. Despite this, the highest-performing model in this task employed Angle encoding with an RY gate for embedding, with 10 Strongly Entangling layers and no re-uploading. The encoding circuit was found to have a substantial impact on accuracy. In fact, the difference in accuracy between the best and worst model, holding the number of layers constant and using re-uploading, averaged 33%, with a maximum difference of 41.1%. The results are shown in Table?3, reporting the accuracy percentage for both the best and the worst model, as well as the associated standard deviation. In the same table, the accuracy difference between the best and worst models and the associated standard deviation ($\sqrt{STD_{best}^{2}+STD_{worst}^{2}}$) are also calculated.

For the Diabetes classification task, similar observations were made regarding the influence of the encoding strategy on model performance. When comparing various performance metrics, a significant disparity emerged between the best and worst models. These results were analyzed using accuracy (reported in Table?4), balanced accuracy (Table?5), recall (Table?6), precision (Table?7), and F1-score (Table?8). For each of the tables considered, not only the results of the metrics are provided, but also their associated standard deviation values. In addition, the difference between the best and worst model for each of the metrics considered and the associated standard deviation are calculated as well.

In terms of accuracy, the average difference between the best and worst models with identical architectures (same re-uploading process and number of layers) was approximately 8%, with the maximum difference reaching 10.3%. This gap became even more pronounced when considering balanced accuracy, where the average difference increased to 12%, with a maximum of 19%. Additionally, differences in precision, recall, and F1-score between the best and worst models remained significant, emphasizing the importance of encoding method optimization. However, these metrics exhibited greater uncertainties, which can depend on the intrinsic characteristics of the dataset or of the model. Further investigation on these results can be done to understand on what depends this uncertainty.

Another analysis addressed, models were compared based on the encoding strategy they employed—grouped by Angle and Amplitude encoding—and the use of the re-uploading technique across all considered metrics (Accuracy, Balanced Accuracy, Recall, Precision, and F1-score). The models that exploit Angle encoding consistently outperformed their counterparts with Amplitude encoding on all metrics. Additionally, models that employed the re-uploading strategy showed an average improvement in classification performance, particularly on Balanced Accuracy, Recall, and F1-score, compared to models that did not use it. The selection of the best model depends on the specific classification goal. If balanced accuracy and F1-score are prioritized, the best model is the RX-RZ-RY with 10 layers and no re-uploading. If precision is the primary focus, the RX-RY-RZ with 10 layers and no re-uploading is the optimal choice. For maximizing recall, the RX-RZ-RY with 6 layers and no re-uploading performs best.

All the collected results highlight the critical impact of encoding methods on model classification performance, reinforcing the idea that encoding should be treated as a key hyper-parameter that must be carefully optimized to enhance both model accuracy and efficiency. Refining the encoding process can lead to significant improvements in the model’s overall predictive capabilities.

Moreover, the study examines the effect of encoding strategies on model simulation times for both the Wine and Diabetes datasets, as shown in Figure?16 and LABEL:fig:TimeDiabetes. The results were obtained through simulation in [48], with the number of threads constrained to 24. These results depend on system parameters, such as the number of CPU cores, CPU frequency, and the number of threads, among others. Additionally, since the simulations were not conducted on a real device, it is not possible to guarantee that the measured times directly correlate with the times required on actual hardware. Training and inference times for both the training and test sets are reported. On average, models employing Amplitude encoding (using the Mottonen circuit) took significantly longer to train and infer than those using Angle encoding. As expected, models utilizing the re-uploading strategy also required more time for both training and inference.

Given the trajectory analysis and the results obtained, we propose a structured methodology for designing and optimizing Variational Quantum Circuit models. The procedure initiates with a simple implementation and progressively incorporates more sophisticated techniques to improve performance. The first stage involves the application of a single rotational gate Angle encoding strategy. By this, continuous variable features are encoded into the quantum circuit using a single rotational gate (e.g., $RX$, $RY$, or $RZ$) for each feature. This strategy serves as a baseline implementation whose primary goal is to evaluate the model’s performance using this simple embedding technique and establish a starting point to enhance the classification performance.

In cases where the single rotational gate strategy yields suboptimal results, more sophisticated Angle encoding approaches are exploited. The idea is to increase progressively the number of rotational gates to encode features along different axes of the qubit state to enhance the model’s ability to capture complex patterns in the data, thereby improving classification performance.

This methodology provides a systematic and scalable approach to designing Variational Quantum Circuits models. It guarantees that the complexity of the model does not increase too much, leading to overfit.

is an innovative and rapidly developing field with significant potential for advancement. At this moment in history, due to the limited number of qubits in actual quantum devices and the non-idealities affecting them, it is necessary to consider hybrid solutions in which quantum and classical computing work together. In this regard, new models, such as s are being explored, where the quantum computer implements the application and the classical computer reveals useful during the training procedure to update its parameters.

This work aims to highlight the impact of quantum embedding on the accuracy of quantum models, with a particular focus on Angle and Amplitude encoding strategies. Specifically, for Angle encoding, a broad and systematic analysis of possible encoding mechanisms is benchmarked. Special attention has been given to the comparability of results, to keep the topology of the variational part constant in every comparison between the adopted encoding strategies. To do so, the number of qubits made available to the models has been kept constant, and PCA has been applied to the considered datasets to reduce the number of features to be processed. This choice has intrinsically disadvantaged the performance of the overall models but guarantees fairness in comparisons.

As observed from the results, the accuracy differences between the best and the worst models, considering the same number of layers for the ansatz and the application or non-application of the re-uploading technique, can have an impact of tens of percentage points. Therefore, the encoding strategy should be considered as a hyper-parameter for defining the models, influencing their accuracy performance. Moreover, it is worth noting that no single encoding technique guarantees the best classification, as it depends on the dataset considered. This adds another complexity element in the definition of applications, as its development is not strictly related to the formulation of an effective ansatz but opens up the need to investigate the best encoding strategy for a given dataset.

In the future, further exploration will be addressed to investigate possible correlations between the encoding techniques and generic input data to identify a strategy to find the best encoding through a-priori analysis on the input dataset, avoiding a time-consuming benchmark procedure today’s required. To achieve this, larger datasets should be explored and tested, which has not been possible at the moment due to limited computational resources. Indeed, training and inference of models on larger datasets would take significantly longer. This is also evident from the graphs (Figure?16), where models tested on the Wine dataset (with circuits on 4 qubits) take four times as long as those tested on the Diabetes dataset (3 qubits).
In addition, given the low results in terms of the model’s classifications performance, it is considered appropriate to do further investigation on finding the ideal model that is best able to classify by varying all possible hyper-parameters that constitute it. For instance, one could evaluate alternative ansatz topologies constituted by also different entangling gates and the optimal number of layers for each dataset (considering also the application of the reuploading strategy). Once found the optimal hyper-parameters of the model, it could be possible to compare the QML models with the classical ones.
Finally, to account for the impact of noise, one could evaluate the classification performance on a noisy simulator by training models in both ideal and noisy simulation environments.