On the expressivity of embedding quantum kernels
Abstract: One of the most natural connections between quantum and classical machine learning has been established in the context of kernel methods. Kernel methods rely on kernels, which are inner products of feature vectors living in large feature spaces. Quantum kernels are typically evaluated by explicitly constructing quantum feature states and then taking their inner product, here called embedding quantum kernels. Since classical kernels are usually evaluated without using the feature vectors explicitly, we wonder how expressive embedding quantum kernels are. In this work, we raise the fundamental question: can all quantum kernels be expressed as the inner product of quantum feature states? Our first result is positive: Invoking computational universality, we find that for any kernel function there always exists a corresponding quantum feature map and an embedding quantum kernel. The more operational reading of the question is concerned with efficient constructions, however. In a second part, we formalize the question of universality of efficient embedding quantum kernels. For shift-invariant kernels, we use the technique of random Fourier features to show that they are universal within the broad class of all kernels which allow a variant of efficient Fourier sampling. We then extend this result to a new class of so-called composition kernels, which we show also contains projected quantum kernels introduced in recent works. After proving the universality of embedding quantum kernels for both shift-invariant and composition kernels, we identify the directions towards new, more exotic, and unexplored quantum kernel families, for which it still remains open whether they correspond to efficient embedding quantum kernels.
- P. W. Shor, Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring, in Proceedings 35th Ann. Symp. Found. Compu. Sc. (IEEE, 1994) pp. 124–134.
- M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum information and quantum computation (Cambridge university press Cambridge, 2000).
- A. Montanaro, Quantum algorithms: an overview, npj Quant. Inf. 2, 15023 (2016).
- F. Arute et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature 574, 505 (2019).
- Y. Wu et al., Strong quantum computational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 180501 (2021).
- D. Hangleiter and J. Eisert, Computational advantage of quantum random sampling, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 035001 (2023).
- 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).
- M. Schuld and F. Petruccione, Machine Learning with Quantum Computers (Springer International Publishing, 2021).
- M. Cerezo et al., Variational quantum algorithms, Nature Rev. Phys. 3, 625 (2021).
- K. Bharti et al., Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms, Rev. Mod. Phys. 94, 015004 (2022).
- M. Schuld, M. Fingerhuth, and F. Petruccione, Implementing a distance-based classifier with a quantum interference circuit, Europhys. Lett. 119, 60002 (2017).
- V. Havlíček et al., Supervised learning with quantum-enhanced feature spaces, Nature 567, 209 (2019).
- M. Schuld and N. Killoran, Quantum machine learning in feature Hilbert spaces, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 4, 040504 (2019).
- A. Pérez-Salinas et al., Data re-uploading for a universal quantum classifier, Quantum 4, 226 (2020).
- M. Schuld, Quantum machine learning models are kernel methods, arXiv:2101.11020 (2021).
- C. Gyurik and V. Dunjko, Structural risk minimization for quantum linear classifiers, Quantum 7, 893 (2023).
- S. Shin, Y. S. Teo, and H. Jeong, Analyzing quantum machine learning using tensor network, arXiv:2307.06937 (2023).
- Y. Suzuki, H. Kawaguchi, and N. Yamamoto, Quantum Fisher kernel for mitigating the vanishing similarity issue, arXiv:2210.16581 (2022).
- R. Mengoni and A. D. Pierro, Kernel methods in quantum machine learning, Quant. Mach. Int. 1, 65 (2019).
- M. Schuld, R. Sweke, and J. J. Meyer, Effect of data encoding on the expressive power of variational quantum-machine-learning models, Phys. Rev. A 103, 032430 (2021).
- Y. Liu, S. Arunachalam, and K. Temme, A rigorous and robust quantum speed-up in supervised machine learning, Nature Phys. 17, 1013 (2021).
- C. A. Micchelli, Y. Xu, and H. Zhang, Universal kernels, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 7, 2651 (2006).
- A. W. Harrow, A. Hassidim, and S. Lloyd, Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 150502 (2009).
- P. Rebentrost, M. Mohseni, and S. Lloyd, Quantum support vector machine for big data classification, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 130503 (2014).
- F. J. Schreiber, J. Eisert, and J. J. Meyer, Classical surrogates for quantum learning models, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 100803 (2023).
- F. Bach, On the equivalence between kernel quadrature rules and random feature expansions, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 18, 1 (2017).
- A. Rahimi and B. Recht, Random features for large-scale kernel machines, in Adv. Neur. Inf. Proc. Sys., Vol. 20 (2007).
- W. Rudin, Fourier Analysis on Groups (Wiley, 1990).
- M. Troyer and U.-J. Wiese, Computational complexity and fundamental limitations to fermionic quantum monte carlo simulations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 170201 (2005).
- G. Kalai, The complexity of sampling (approximately) the fourier transform of a boolean function, StackExchange, Theoretical Computer Science (2013).
- M. Schwarz and M. Van den Nest, Simulating quantum circuits with sparse output distributions, arXiv:1310.6749 (2013).
- S. Karlin, Total positivity, absorption probabilities and applications, Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 111, 33 (1964).
- P. C. Hansen, Discrete Inverse Problems (Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics, 2010).
- C.-W. Ha, Eigenvalues of differentiable positive definite kernels, SIAM J. Math. Ana. 17, 415 (1986).
- A. M. Yaglom, Correlation Theory of Stationary and Related Random Functions, Volume I: Basic Results, Vol. 131 (Springer, 1987).
- J. Kübler, S. Buchholz, and B. Schölkopf, The inductive bias of quantum kernels, Adv. Neur. Inf. Proc. Sys. 34, 12661 (2021).
- E. Peters and M. Schuld, Generalization despite overfitting in quantum machine learning models, arXiv:2209.05523 (2022).
- E. Gil-Fuster, How to approximate a classical kernel with a quantum computer, PennyLane demo (2022).
Paper Prompts
Sign up for free to create and run prompts on this paper using GPT-5.
Top Community Prompts
Collections
Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.