Splitting and Parallelizing of Quantum Convolutional Neural Networks for Learning Translationally Symmetric Data (2306.07331v3)
Abstract: The quantum convolutional neural network (QCNN) is a promising quantum machine learning (QML) model that is expected to achieve quantum advantages in classically intractable problems. However, the QCNN requires a large number of measurements for data learning, limiting its practical applications in large-scale problems. To alleviate this requirement, we propose a novel architecture called split-parallelizing QCNN (sp-QCNN), which exploits the prior knowledge of quantum data to design an efficient model. This architecture draws inspiration from geometric quantum machine learning and targets translationally symmetric quantum data commonly encountered in physics and quantum computing science. By splitting the quantum circuit based on translational symmetry, the sp-QCNN can substantially parallelize the conventional QCNN without increasing the number of qubits and improve the measurement efficiency by an order of the number of qubits. To demonstrate its effectiveness, we apply the sp-QCNN to a quantum phase recognition task and show that it can achieve comparable classification accuracy to the conventional QCNN while considerably reducing the measurement resources required. Due to its high measurement efficiency, the sp-QCNN can mitigate statistical errors in estimating the gradient of the loss function, thereby accelerating the learning process. These results open up new possibilities for incorporating the prior data knowledge into the efficient design of QML models, leading to practical quantum advantages.
- M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Infomation (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
- N. Wiebe, A. Kapoor, and K. M. Svore, Quantum Deep Learning, (2014), arXiv:1412.3489 [quant-ph] .
- M. Schuld, I. Sinayskiy, and F. Petruccione, An introduction to quantum machine learning, Contemporary Physics 56, 172 (2015).
- V. Dunjko and H. J. Briegel, Machine learning & artificial intelligence in the quantum domain: a review of recent progress, Rep. Prog. Phys. 81, 074001 (2018).
- Y. Liu, S. Arunachalam, and K. Temme, A rigorous and robust quantum speed-up in supervised machine learning, Nat. Phys. 17, 1013 (2021).
- M. Schuld and N. Killoran, Is Quantum Advantage the Right Goal for Quantum Machine Learning?, PRX Quantum 3, 030101 (2022).
- E. Farhi and H. Neven, Classification with Quantum Neural Networks on Near Term Processors 10.48550/arXiv.1802.06002 (2018), arXiv:1802.06002 [quant-ph] .
- J.-G. Liu and L. Wang, Differentiable learning of quantum circuit Born machines, Phys. Rev. A 98, 062324 (2018).
- I. Cong, S. Choi, and M. D. Lukin, Quantum convolutional neural networks, Nat. Phys. 15, 1273 (2019).
- J. Preskill, Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018).
- J. M. Kübler, S. Buchholz, and B. Schölkopf, The Inductive Bias of Quantum Kernels, (2021), arXiv:2106.03747 [quant-ph] .
- C. Ortiz Marrero, M. Kieferová, and N. Wiebe, Entanglement-Induced Barren Plateaus, PRX Quantum 2, 040316 (2021).
- L. Liu and X. Dou, QuCloud: A New Qubit Mapping Mechanism for Multi-programming Quantum Computing in Cloud Environment, in 2021 IEEE International Symposium on High-Performance Computer Architecture (HPCA) (2021) pp. 167–178.
- S. Niu and A. Todri-Sanial, How Parallel Circuit Execution Can Be Useful for NISQ Computing?, (2021), arXiv:2112.00387 [cs.AR] .
- S. Niu and A. Todri-Sanial, Enabling multi-programming mechanism for quantum computing in the NISQ era, Quantum 7, 925 (2023).
- Z.-C. Gu and X.-G. Wen, Tensor-entanglement-filtering renormalization approach and symmetry-protected topological order, Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter 80, 155131 (2009).
- X. Chen, Z.-C. Gu, and X.-G. Wen, Classification of gapped symmetric phases in one-dimensional spin systems, Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter 83, 035107 (2011).
- F. Pollmann and A. M. Turner, Detection of symmetry-protected topological phases in one dimension, Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter 86, 125441 (2012).
- Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton, Deep learning, Nature 521, 436 (2015).
- S. Yan, D. A. Huse, and S. R. White, Spin-liquid ground state of the S = 1/2 kagome Heisenberg antiferromagnet, Science 332, 1173 (2011).
- I. Marvian, Restrictions on realizable unitary operations imposed by symmetry and locality, Nat. Phys. 18, 283 (2022).
- I. Kerenidis, J. Landman, and N. Mathur, Classical and Quantum Algorithms for Orthogonal Neural Networks, (2021), arXiv:2106.07198 [quant-ph] .
- P. Jordan and E. Wigner, Über das Paulische Äquivalenzverbot, Zeitschrift für Physik 47, 631 (1928).
- S. R. White, Density matrix formulation for quantum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2863 (1992).
- S. R. White, Density-matrix algorithms for quantum renormalization groups, Phys. Rev. B Condens. Matter 48, 10345 (1993).
- U. Schollwöck, The density-matrix renormalization group in the age of matrix product states, Ann. Phys. 326, 96 (2011).
- M. Fishman, S. White, and E. Stoudenmire, The ITensor software library for tensor network calculations, SciPost Phys. Codebases 10.21468/scipostphyscodeb.4 (2022).
- H. Robbins and S. Monro, A Stochastic Approximation Method, aoms 22, 400 (1951).
- E. R. Anschuetz and B. T. Kiani, Quantum variational algorithms are swamped with traps, Nat. Commun. 13, 7760 (2022).
- J. J. Rotman, An Introduction to the Theory of Groups (Springer New York, 1994).