MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115177649 · doi:10.1109/comst.2025.3644750

Quantum Federated Learning: A Comprehensive Survey

2025· article· W7115177649 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsKey (lock)QuantumQuantum computerSocietal impact of nanotechnologyQuantum information science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quantum federated learning (QFL) is a combination of distributed quantum computing and federated machine learning, integrating the strengths of both to enable privacy-preserving decentralized learning with quantum-enhanced capabilities. It appears as a promising approach for addressing challenges in efficient and secure model training across distributed quantum systems. This paper presents a comprehensive survey on QFL, exploring its key concepts, fundamentals, applications, and emerging challenges in this rapidly developing field. Specifically, we begin with an introduction to the recent advancements of QFL, followed by discussion on its market opportunity and background knowledge. We then discuss the motivation behind the integration of quantum computing and federated learning, highlighting its working principle. Moreover, we review the fundamentals of QFL and its taxonomy. Particularly, we explore federation architecture, networking topology, communication schemes, optimization techniques, and security mechanisms within QFL frameworks. Furthermore, we investigate applications of QFL across several domains which include vehicular networks, healthcare networks, satellite networks, metaverse, and network security. Additionally, we analyze frameworks and platforms related to QFL, delving into its prototype implementations, and provide a detailed case study. Key insights and lessons learned from this review of QFL are also highlighted. We complete the survey by identifying current challenges and outlining potential avenues for future research in this rapidly advancing field.

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.

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)0.015
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Open science, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.848
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0150.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0090.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.268 · 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