Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

Problem-informed Graphical Quantum Generative Learning

Published 23 May 2024 in quant-ph | (2405.14072v2)

Abstract: Leveraging the intrinsic probabilistic nature of quantum systems, generative quantum machine learning (QML) offers the potential to outperform classical learning models. Current generative QML algorithms mostly rely on general-purpose models that, while being very expressive, face several training challenges. One potential way to address these setbacks is by constructing problem-informed models that are capable of more efficient training on structured problems. In particular, probabilistic graphical models provide a flexible framework for representing structure in generative learning problems and can thus be exploited to incorporate inductive bias into QML algorithms. In this work, we propose a problem-informed quantum circuit Born machine Ansatz for learning the joint probability distribution of random variables, with independence relations efficiently represented by a Markov network (MN). We further demonstrate the applicability of the MN framework in constructing generative learning benchmarks and compare our model's performance to previous designs, showing that it outperforms problem-agnostic circuits. Based on a preliminary analysis of trainability, we narrow down the class of MNs to those exhibiting favourable trainability properties. Finally, we discuss the potential of our model to offer quantum advantage in the context of generative learning.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (61)
  1. I. H. Sarker, “Machine learning: Algorithms, real-world applications and research directions,” SN Computer Science, vol. 2, no. 3, p. 160, 2021.
  2. S. Bond-Taylor, A. Leach, Y. Long, and C. G. Willcocks, “Deep generative modelling: A comparative review of VAEs, GANs, normalizing flows, energy-based and autoregressive models,” IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 2021.
  3. J. Biamonte, P. Wittek, N. Pancotti, P. Rebentrost, N. Wiebe, and S. Lloyd, “Quantum machine learning,” Nature, vol. 549, no. 7671, pp. 195–202, 2017.
  4. M. Schuld, I. Sinayskiy, and F. Petruccione, “The quest for a quantum neural network,” Quantum Information Processing, vol. 13, pp. 2567–2586, 2014.
  5. B. M. Terhal and D. P. DiVincenzo, “Adaptive quantum computation, constant depth quantum circuits and arthur-merlin games,” Quantum Info. Comput., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 134–145, 2004.
  6. S. Aaronson and A. Arkhipov, “The computational complexity of linear optics,” in Proceedings of the forty-third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pp. 333–342, 2011.
  7. E. Farhi and A. W. Harrow, “Quantum supremacy through the quantum approximate optimization algorithm,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.07674, 2016.
  8. F. Arute, K. Arya, R. Babbush, D. Bacon, J. C. Bardin, R. Barends, R. Biswas, S. Boixo, F. G. Brandao, D. A. Buell, et al., “Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor,” Nature, vol. 574, no. 7779, pp. 505–510, 2019.
  9. L. S. Madsen, F. Laudenbach, M. F. Askarani, F. Rortais, T. Vincent, J. F. Bulmer, F. M. Miatto, L. Neuhaus, L. G. Helt, M. J. Collins, et al., “Quantum computational advantage with a programmable photonic processor,” Nature, vol. 606, no. 7912, pp. 75–81, 2022.
  10. J. Tian, X. Sun, Y. Du, S. Zhao, Q. Liu, K. Zhang, W. Yi, W. Huang, C. Wang, X. Wu, et al., “Recent advances for quantum neural networks in generative learning,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 2023.
  11. M. Benedetti, D. Garcia-Pintos, O. Perdomo, V. Leyton-Ortega, Y. Nam, and A. Perdomo-Ortiz, “A generative modeling approach for benchmarking and training shallow quantum circuits,” npj Quantum Information, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 45, 2019.
  12. J.-G. Liu and L. Wang, “Differentiable learning of quantum circuit Born machines,” Physical Review A, vol. 98, no. 6, p. 062324, 2018.
  13. B. Coyle, D. Mills, V. Danos, and E. Kashefi, “The Born supremacy: quantum advantage and training of an Ising Born machine,” npj Quantum Information, vol. 6, no. 1, p. 60, 2020.
  14. S. Lloyd and C. Weedbrook, “Quantum generative adversarial learning,” Physical review letters, vol. 121, no. 4, p. 040502, 2018.
  15. P.-L. Dallaire-Demers and N. Killoran, “Quantum generative adversarial networks,” Physical Review A, vol. 98, no. 1, p. 012324, 2018.
  16. M. H. Amin, E. Andriyash, J. Rolfe, B. Kulchytskyy, and R. Melko, “Quantum Boltzmann machine,” Physical Review X, vol. 8, no. 2, p. 021050, 2018.
  17. C. Zoufal, A. Lucchi, and S. Woerner, “Variational quantum Boltzmann machines,” Quantum Machine Intelligence, vol. 3, pp. 1–15, 2021.
  18. J. R. McClean, S. Boixo, V. N. Smelyanskiy, R. Babbush, and H. Neven, “Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes,” Nature communications, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 4812, 2018.
  19. Z. Holmes, K. Sharma, M. Cerezo, and P. J. Coles, “Connecting Ansatz expressibility to gradient magnitudes and barren plateaus,” PRX Quantum, vol. 3, no. 1, p. 010313, 2022.
  20. M. Ragone, B. N. Bakalov, F. Sauvage, A. F. Kemper, C. O. Marrero, M. Larocca, and M. Cerezo, “A unified theory of barren plateaus for deep parametrized quantum circuits,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.09342, 2023.
  21. E. Fontana, D. Herman, S. Chakrabarti, N. Kumar, R. Yalovetzky, J. Heredge, S. H. Sureshbabu, and M. Pistoia, “The adjoint is all you need: Characterizing barren plateaus in quantum Ansätze,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.07902, 2023.
  22. E. R. Anschuetz and B. T. Kiani, “Quantum variational algorithms are swamped with traps,” Nature Communications, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 7760, 2022.
  23. Y.-C. Ho and D. L. Pepyne, “Simple explanation of the no-free-lunch theorem and its implications,” Journal of optimization theory and applications, vol. 115, pp. 549–570, 2002.
  24. K. Poland, K. Beer, and T. J. Osborne, “No free lunch for quantum machine learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2003.14103, 2020.
  25. K. Sharma, M. Cerezo, Z. Holmes, L. Cincio, A. Sornborger, and P. J. Coles, “Reformulation of the no-free-lunch theorem for entangled datasets,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 128, no. 7, p. 070501, 2022.
  26. M. Larocca, F. Sauvage, F. M. Sbahi, G. Verdon, P. J. Coles, and M. Cerezo, “Group-invariant quantum machine learning,” PRX Quantum, vol. 3, no. 3, p. 030341, 2022.
  27. J. J. Meyer, M. Mularski, E. Gil-Fuster, A. A. Mele, F. Arzani, A. Wilms, and J. Eisert, “Exploiting symmetry in variational quantum machine learning,” PRX Quantum, vol. 4, no. 1, p. 010328, 2023.
  28. H. Zheng, Z. Li, J. Liu, S. Strelchuk, and R. Kondor, “Speeding up learning quantum states through group equivariant convolutional quantum ansätze,” PRX Quantum, vol. 4, no. 2, p. 020327, 2023.
  29. J. Bowles, V. J. Wright, M. Farkas, N. Killoran, and M. Schuld, “Contextuality and inductive bias in quantum machine learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.01365, 2023.
  30. D. Koller and N. Friedman, Probabilistic graphical models: principles and techniques. MIT press, 2009.
  31. D. Heckerman, A. Mamdani, and M. P. Wellman, “Real-world applications of Bayesian networks,” Communications of the ACM, vol. 38, no. 3, pp. 24–26, 1995.
  32. K. P. Murphy, Machine learning: a probabilistic perspective. MIT press, 2012.
  33. G. H. Low, T. J. Yoder, and I. L. Chuang, “Quantum inference on Bayesian networks,” Physical Review A, vol. 89, no. 6, p. 062315, 2014.
  34. S. E. Borujeni, S. Nannapaneni, N. H. Nguyen, E. C. Behrman, and J. E. Steck, “Quantum circuit representation of Bayesian networks,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 176, p. 114768, 2021.
  35. X. Gao, E. R. Anschuetz, S.-T. Wang, J. I. Cirac, and M. D. Lukin, “Enhancing generative models via quantum correlations,” Physical Review X, vol. 12, no. 2, p. 021037, 2022.
  36. E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, “A quantum approximate optimization algorithm,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.4028, 2014.
  37. H. Krovi, “Average-case hardness of estimating probabilities of random quantum circuits with a linear scaling in the error exponent,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.05642, 2022.
  38. L. Von Rueden, S. Mayer, K. Beckh, B. Georgiev, S. Giesselbach, R. Heese, B. Kirsch, J. Pfrommer, A. Pick, R. Ramamurthy, et al., “Informed machine learning–a taxonomy and survey of integrating prior knowledge into learning systems,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 614–633, 2021.
  39. Y. Song and D. P. Kingma, “How to train your energy-based models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.03288, 2021.
  40. V. Gogate, W. Webb, and P. Domingos, “Learning efficient Markov networks,” Advances in neural information processing systems, vol. 23, 2010.
  41. D. Roth, “On the hardness of approximate reasoning,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 82, no. 1-2, pp. 273–302, 1996.
  42. M. S. Rudolph, S. Lerch, S. Thanasilp, O. Kiss, S. Vallecorsa, M. Grossi, and Z. Holmes, “Trainability barriers and opportunities in quantum generative modeling,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.02881, 2023.
  43. B. Coyle, M. Henderson, J. C. J. Le, N. Kumar, M. Paini, and E. Kashefi, “Quantum versus classical generative modelling in finance,” Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 6, no. 2, p. 024013, 2021.
  44. C. Chow and C. Liu, “Approximating discrete probability distributions with dependence trees,” IEEE transactions on Information Theory, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 462–467, 1968.
  45. M. Benedetti, B. Coyle, M. Fiorentini, M. Lubasch, and M. Rosenkranz, “Variational inference with a quantum computer,” Physical Review Applied, vol. 16, no. 4, p. 044057, 2021.
  46. V. Bergholm, J. J. Vartiainen, M. Möttönen, and M. M. Salomaa, “Quantum circuits with uniformly controlled one-qubit gates,” Phys. Rev. A, vol. 71, p. 052330, May 2005.
  47. N. Piatkowski and C. Zoufal, “On quantum circuits for discrete graphical models,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.00398, 2022.
  48. A. Gilyén, Y. Su, G. H. Low, and N. Wiebe, “Quantum singular value transformation and beyond: exponential improvements for quantum matrix arithmetics,” in Proceedings of the 51st Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 193–204, 2019.
  49. F. J. Kiwit, M. Marso, P. Ross, C. A. Riofrío, J. Klepsch, and A. Luckow, “Application-oriented benchmarking of quantum generative learning using QUARK,” in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE), vol. 1, pp. 475–484, IEEE, 2023.
  50. V. Bergholm, J. Izaac, M. Schuld, C. Gogolin, S. Ahmed, V. Ajith, M. S. Alam, G. Alonso-Linaje, B. AkashNarayanan, A. Asadi, et al., “Pennylane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1811.04968, 2018.
  51. D. P. Kingma and J. Ba, “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1412.6980, 2014.
  52. A. Arrasmith, Z. Holmes, M. Cerezo, and P. J. Coles, “Equivalence of quantum barren plateaus to cost concentration and narrow gorges,” Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 7, no. 4, p. 045015, 2022.
  53. E. Y. Zhu, S. Johri, D. Bacon, M. Esencan, J. Kim, M. Muir, N. Murgai, J. Nguyen, N. Pisenti, A. Schouela, et al., “Generative quantum learning of joint probability distribution functions,” Physical Review Research, vol. 4, no. 4, p. 043092, 2022.
  54. M. J. Bremner, R. Jozsa, and D. J. Shepherd, “Classical simulation of commuting quantum computations implies collapse of the polynomial hierarchy,” Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, vol. 467, no. 2126, pp. 459–472, 2011.
  55. A. M. Dalzell, A. W. Harrow, D. E. Koh, and R. L. La Placa, “How many qubits are needed for quantum computational supremacy?,” Quantum, vol. 4, p. 264, 2020.
  56. K. Gili, M. Hibat-Allah, M. Mauri, C. Ballance, and A. Perdomo-Ortiz, “Do quantum circuit Born machines generalize?,” Quantum Science and Technology, vol. 8, no. 3, p. 035021, 2023.
  57. A. Glos, A. Krawiec, and Z. Zimborás, “Space-efficient binary optimization for variational quantum computing,” npj Quantum Information, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 39, 2022.
  58. B. Bakó, A. Glos, Ö. Salehi, and Z. Zimborás, “Prog-qaoa: Framework for resource-efficient quantum optimization through classical programs,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.03386, 2022.
  59. A. J. Da Silva and D. K. Park, “Linear-depth quantum circuits for multiqubit controlled gates,” Physical Review A, vol. 106, no. 4, p. 042602, 2022.
  60. Qiskit contributors, “Qiskit: An open-source framework for quantum computing,” 2023.
  61. C. Manning and H. Schutze, Foundations of statistical natural language processing. MIT press, 1999.

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 2 tweets with 60 likes about this paper.