Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper conducts an empirical comparison between quantum machine learning (QML) models and classical machine learning counterparts across seven model pairs in supervised and reinforcement learning contexts. The findings reveal that current QML models do not outperform classical models in terms of prediction performance, policy stability, or training time, highlighting significant challenges in hardware, training efficiency, and convergence stability. However, the study identifies QML's potential advantages in noise filtering and false positive control, laying groundwork for future research in robustness and parameter optimization.
Current quantum machine learning models fall short of classical counterparts in key performance metrics, but they show promise in noise reduction and false positive management.
Quantum computing has emerged as a promising computational paradigm for machine learning (ML), with the potential to offer computational advantages over classical approaches. At this stage, the evidence supporting the performance and advantages of quantum machine learning (QML) models relative to classical models is insufficient.To address this gap, this paper presents an empirical study on the performance of QML models and their classical counterparts. We compare seven model pairs spanning supervised learning and reinforcement learning. Our results indicate that the evaluated quantum machine learning models do not yet surpass the classical baselines in overall prediction performance, policy stability, or training time. Nevertheless, QML remains a promising approach for filtering noise and controlling false positives. Our research findings summarize the challenges facing quantum machine learning across hardware environments, training efficiency, and convergence stability, providing a foundation for research into the robustness and parameter optimization of QML. This work is publicly available at https://github.com/Z-537-437/QML.
