MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408100138 · doi:10.1109/access.2025.3546956

NR-QNN: Noise-Resilient Quantum Neural Network

2025· article· en· W4408100138 on OpenAlexafffund
Sohrab Sajadimanesh, Hanieh Aghaee Rad, Jean Paul Latyr Faye, Ehsan Atoofian

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Access · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsCMC Microsystems (Canada)Lakehead University
FundersMitacs
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial neural networkNoise (video)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum Neural Networks (QNNs) based on parameterized quantum circuits (PQCs) are gaining significant research attention due to their potential to achieve quantum advantages on Near-Term Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) computers. However, executing QNNs on NISQ devices is challenging due to quantum noise. To address this, we propose a noise-resilient QNN (NR-QNN) that leverages the unique characteristics of PQCs to perform noise-aware optimizations during the inference stage of QNNs. Specifically, NR-QNN employs two optimization techniques to mitigate the impact of noise on QNNs: quantum pruning and sensitivity-aware qubit mapping. The first technique is quantum pruning which identifies gates with small angle of rotations and removes them to simplify circuit of QNNs. The second optimization technique is sensitivity-aware qubit mapping which maps more important logical qubits to more reliable physical qubits. This technique is based on the observation that there can be variation in the sensitivity of an output to input qubits in a QNN. NR-QNN exploits this variability and guides qubit allocation to use reliable physical qubits for sensitive logical qubits. Our evaluation on a real quantum computer demonstrates that NR-QNN enhances the robustness of QNNs, enabling them to operate effectively on NISQ devices.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score0.754

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.271 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE AccessSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207