A potential path forward is Quantum Machine Learning (QML), which aims to leverage quantum computing in conjunction with classical machine learning to enhance computing efficiency and the expressiveness of models. In this paper, two different quantum classifiers - Variational Quantum Classifier (VQC) and Quantum Kernel Support Vector Machine (QSVM) - are compared with three classical classifiers as baseline classifiers - Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machine (SVM), and a Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) - on the Breast Cancer Wisconsin dataset. The quantum circuits were created in the PennyLane framework and simulated on a classical backend. However, in terms of accuracy, classical Logistic Regression performed better with an accuracy of 97.8%, classical SVM and QSVM with an accuracy of 95.6% each, although the Quantum VQC achieved a lower accuracy of 88.9% and had a recall of 100% for the benign class, though it correctly identified only 12 of the 17 malignant cases (a malignant-class recall of approximately 70.6%). The drawback of quantum models is the higher training time; however, since the quantum circuit needs to be classically simulated, the quantum SVM took 23.29 seconds compared to less than 0.01 seconds for the classical linear models. These results indicate that for small structured datasets, classifiers based on quantum computing have not yet surpassed well-tuned classical counterparts. In some respects (e.g., benign-class recall), they perform competitively, though not on malignant-class recall, where the VQC in particular performed worse than the classical baselines, which is worth further investigation on real quantum computers.
A potential path forward is Quantum Machine Learning (QML), which aims to leverage quantum computing in conjunction with classical machine learning to enhance computing efficiency and the expressiveness of models. In this paper, two different quantum classifiers - Variational Quantum Classifier (VQC) and Quantum Kernel Support Vector Machine (QSVM) - are compared with three classical classifiers as baseline classifiers - Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machine (SVM), and a Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) - on the Breast Cancer Wisconsin dataset. The quantum circuits were created in the PennyLane framework and simulated on a classical backend. However, in terms of accuracy, classical Logistic Regression performed better with an accuracy of 97.8%, classical SVM and QSVM with an accuracy of 95.6% each, although the Quantum VQC achieved a lower accuracy of 88.9% and had a recall of 100% for the benign class, though it correctly identified only 12 of the 17 malignant cases (a malignant-class recall of approximately 70.6%). The drawback of quantum models is the higher training time; however, since the quantum circuit needs to be classically simulated, the quantum SVM took 23.29 seconds compared to less than 0.01 seconds for the classical linear models. These results indicate that for small structured datasets, classifiers based on quantum computing have not yet surpassed well-tuned classical counterparts. In some respects (e.g., benign-class recall), they perform competitively, though not on malignant-class recall, where the VQC in particular performed worse than the classical baselines, which is worth further investigation on real quantum computers.
Quantum machine learning has emerged as a promising paradigm that leverages quantum computational principles to potentially outperform classical approaches on specific learning tasks. This paper presents a comprehensive empirical investigation comparing Quantum Machine Learning (QML), specifically Quantum Support Vector Machines (QSVM) against Classical Machine Learning (CML) baselines including Logistic Regression, K Nearest Neighbors and classical SVMs. We implement quantum kernel methods using variational quantum circuits with angle embedding, IQP and ZZ feature maps on datasets exhibiting varying structural complexity. Our experiments on synthetic quantum generated datasets (Quantum Parity, Quantum Entanglement, Quantum Interference) demonstrate that QSVM achieves superior classification accuracy with improvements ranging from 2.9 % to 60 % over the best classical baselines achieving a 55.6 % overall win rate. Notably, on the Quantum Parity dataset, QSVM consistently outperformed all classical models across multiple configurations. On real-world benchmark datasets (Breast Cancer, Iris, Wine), QSVM Angle achieved 88% accuracy on Breast Cancer compared to 76% for classical SVM Linear a 15.8 % relative improvement while matching the best classical performance on Iris(100%)and Wine(92%). All experiments were conducted using quantum circuit simulation on classical hardware. These results provide empirical evidence that quantum kernel methods offer meaningful advantages over classical approaches on datasets with complex feature interactions. We discuss the theoretical foundations of these improvements including quantum feature space expressivity and kernel alignment.
Early and accurate diagnosis of breast cancer plays a critical role in improving patient survival rates and reducing treatment costs. Classical machine learning algorithms such as Logistic Regression and Support Vector Machines (SVM) have demonstrated strong performance in medical diagnosis tasks; however, their scalability and representational limits motivate the exploration of emerging paradigms. Quantum Machine Learning (QML), particularly Variational Quantum Classifiers (VQC), has recently gained attention due to its potential to model complex decision boundaries using quantum circuits. This paper presents a comparative analysis between a Variational Quantum Classifier and classical machine learning models for binary breast cancer classification. The study employs dimensionality-reduced clinical data and evaluates model performance using accuracy, confusion matrices, decision boundary visualization, Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves. Experimental results indicate that the VQC achieves competitive performance with classical approaches, demonstrating its feasibility for small-scale medical datasets and highlighting the promise of quantum-enhanced learning in healthcare applications.
Breast cancer is rated as one of the top leading diagnosed and deadliest cancers affecting women worldwide and causing high mortality rate among cancers. With the data-driven applications, hybrid quantum-classical machine learning models have evolved as significant alternatives for handling complex feature spaces with the growing interest in quantum computing. This paper presents a systematic comparative study of classical and quantum machine learning approaches for breast cancer classification using the Wisconsin Breast Cancer Dataset. In this architecture we have preprocessed classical feature vectors using standard normalized techniques and parallelly quantum states are mapped through data embedding techniques which relies on parameterized rotational gates. In this work we have implemented all quantum models using the Pennylane library, resulting in hybrid quantum–classical optimization on near-term quantum simulators. The comparison results in multiple classical and quantum models. In classical we have Support Vector Machine (SVM), K-Nearest Neighbors (KNN) and Convolutional Neural Networks (CNN), which are compared with the quantum-based models such as the Variational Quantum Classifier (VQC), Quantum Support Vector Machine (QSVM) and Quantum Convolutional Neural Network (QCNN). In QSVM, we have performed dimensionality reduction using Principal Component Analysis (PCA) before to quantum embedding, and quantum-generated features are used to train a classical linear SVM. The evaluation metrics results in accuracy, precision, recall, F1-score, ROC curves and confusion matrices. The classical models achieves the accuracy in the range of 94%-96%, whereas competitive performance of quantum models demonstrate depending on the embedding strategy and circuit configuration. In the implemented quantum models, the variational quantum classifier achieved the highest classification accuracy of 96.06%, surpassing other evaluated models. These results demonstrate quantum embedding combined with variational quantum circuits can effectively capture discriminative patterns in medical datasets, indicating the implementation of quantum machine learning models for breast cancer diagnosis with the present quantum simulating platforms.
Abstract This study presents a comparison between classical machine learning (ML) algorithms and their quantum-enhanced counterparts in classifying scikit’s breast cancer dataset. Specifically, the research focused on evaluating the accuracy and time computational efficiency of quantum-enhanced machine learning (QEML) algorithms against traditional or classical machine learning algorithms. The quantum algorithms employed include the quantum support vector machine (qSVM), variational quantum classifier (VQC) and quantum k-nearest neighbor (qkNN). The qSVM and qkNN algorithms discussed here are really kernel-based hybrid classical-quantum algorithms as opposed to fully quantum algorithms and the VQC is a hybrid classical-quantum algorithm. These algorithms were tested against their classical equivalents: support vector machine (SVM), k-nearest neighbor (kNN), and artificial neural network (ANN). The qSVM algorithm demonstrated an 90% accuracy in distinguishing malignant from benign cancer cases (the classical support vector machine algorithm had a 99% accuracy), while qkNN achieved 90% accuracy (the classical kNN algorithm had an accuracy of 97%), and VQC reported 88.77± 0.26% (averaged over 5 runs) (this was compared with an ANN which had an accuracy of 96%). The accuracies of the classical SVM, kNN, and ANN algorithms were recorded, to provide a basis for comparison. The results indicated that while QEML algorithms perform reasonably well in classification tasks, however they do not consistently outperform classical algorithms. Additionally, the study measured the time efficiency of each algorithm. The ANN required 33.8 seconds, kNN required 0.21 seconds, and SVM required 1.98 seconds to perform the classification tasks. In contrast, the quantum algorithms were significantly slower, with the VQC taking 632.53 seconds, qkNN requiring 495.34 seconds, and qSVM requiring 538.05 seconds (This is not fixed per run but give an impression of the time scales to run the algorithms). We emphasize that this simulation runtime does not reflect actual quantum hardware performance, where gate execution and circuit depth constraints differ significantly. To mitigate this ambiguity, we distinguish between simulation runtime and estimated quantum runtime where relevant. This work potentially highlights the cases where it may not offer any advantage to use quantum machine learning algorithms. The Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve and the Area Under the Curve (AUC) analysis are also considered in this work where the values measured for the SVM, kNN and ANN were 99%, 99% and 99% respectively and for the qSVM, qkNN and VQC were 87%, 86% and 86± 0.2% (averaged over 5 runs) respectively. Overall, this research contributes valuable insights into the comparative performance of classical and quantum ML algorithms in a specific application, underscoring the potential and current limitations of quantum approaches in machine learning tasks. Hyperparameter optimization was done for all the algorithms, both quantum and classical, with Optuna. This was primarily because the QEML algorithms had more parameters and required considerable computational resources to optimize. This could have influenced the performance outcomes and is the basis for future work. The development of key comparison criteria is critical in the development of quantum machine learning, and this work offers some building blocks for this.
Quantum Machine Learning (QML) has emerged as an interdisciplinary field that harnesses the potential of quantum computing to revolutionize classical machine learning paradigms. This paper presents a benchmarking study focused on four quantum classifier algorithms: Quantum Support Vector Classifier (QSVC), Variational Quantum Circuit (VQC), Quantum Neural Network Classifier (QNNC) and Pegasos Quantum Support Vector Classifier (PegasosQSVC). These quantum classifiers hold promise for unlocking quantum advantages in classification tasks. However, a systematic assessment of their performance across diverse datasets is yet to be fully explored. In this research study, we evaluate and compare the classification performance of quantum machine learning classifiers on various datasets (Breast Cancer, Diabetes, and Titanic) and compare them to a classical model. Our findings revealed that PegasosQSVC consistently maintained high performance across all datasets with the highest average accuracy, recall, and F1-score values of 0.81, 0.72, and 0.71, respectively, followed by VQC, followed by VQC, while QSVC and QNNC perform variably. Nevertheless, QSVC was found to balance performance and training time, achieving an average accuracy of 0.81 and a training time of 177 seconds. Overall, the classical model surpassed QML models as it was up to 10% higher in average accuracy.
Current research paper presents a comparative analysis of classical and quantum machine learning algorithms for breast cancer diagnosis. The study focuses on two classical machine learning algorithms, XGBoost and SVM, along with two quantum models, Variational Quantum Classifier (VQC) and Quantum Support Vector Classifier (QSVC). The performance of the models is evaluated based on F1 score and recall. Results indicated that classic SVM and QSVC showed competitive results considering the other two algorithms regarding F1 score. This work contributes to the growing research on the application of classical and quantum ML algorithms in breast cancer classification.