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.
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.
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 (QML) has emerged as a promising paradigm for addressing increasing computational and representational demands in materials informatics. While classical models such as Support Vector Machines (SVM) achieve strong predictive performance, they often struggle to capture complex, highly correlated interactions in high-dimensional materials data. QML addresses this challenge by leveraging quantum-mechanical principles to construct expressive feature embeddings, where prospective quantum advantage lies in generating feature spaces that are difficult to approximate classically. In this study, 1,000 crystalline compounds from the Open Quantum Materials Database (OQMD) are evaluated in a binary classification task based on formation-energy stability. The dataset is normalized, reduced to four dimensions via Principal Component Analysis (PCA), and encoded into quantum circuits. Three QML models—QSVM, VQC, and QNN—are benchmarked against a classical SVM using repeated stratified evaluation. Results show that the classical SVM achieves the highest accuracy (91.8% ± 0.012), followed by QSVM (60.8% ± 0.035), while VQC and QNN perform significantly worse. This gap is driven by limited qubit capacity, encoding inefficiencies, restricted circuit expressivity, and optimization challenges. Nevertheless, QSVM demonstrates stable performance, suggesting that potential quantum advantage may emerge from improved feature encoding and kernel design rather than deeper variational circuits.
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.
Quantum Machine Learning (QML) has emerged as a paradigm that combines the computational advantages of quantum computing with the predictive capabilities of machine learning to address complex data classification problems. As data dimensionality increases rapidly and classical learning algorithms face scalability constraints, QML leverages quantum parallelism, entanglement, and high-dimensional Hilbert space representations to enhance learning performance. This paper reviews and analyses advanced QML algorithms, including Quantum Support Vector Machines (QSVM), Variational Quantum Circuits (VQC), Quantum Neural Networks (QNN), and Quantum Kernel Estimation, for optimizing both binary and multi-class classification tasks under high-complexity conditions. The proposed QML framework is evaluated on benchmark datasets like MNIST, the Breast Cancer Wisconsin (BCW) dataset, and synthetic nonlinear datasets, and is compared against classical machine learning baselines, including Support Vector Machines (SVM), Random Forests (RF), and Deep Neural Networks (DNN). The results demonstrate notable improvements in classification accuracy (up to 96.8%), decision margins, and computational efficiency in quantum-suitable data regimes, while also highlighting current limitations related to noise, circuit depth, and hardware constraints. Overall, the study presents a unified QML framework, theoretical formulations, and experimental evaluations that illustrate the potential of quantum algorithms for next-generation classification tasks.
Quantum kernel methods have been proposed as a promising approach for leveraging near-term quantum computers for supervised learning, yet rigorous benchmarks against strong classical baselines remain scarce. We present a comprehensive empirical study of quantum kernel support vector machines (QSVMs) across nine binary classification datasets, four quantum feature maps, three classical kernels, and multiple noise models, totalling 970 experiments with strict nested cross-validation.
Our analysis spans four phases: (i) statistical significance testing, revealing that none of 29 pairwise quantum-classical comparisons reach significance at α=0.05; (ii) learning curve analysis over six training fractions, showing steeper quantum slopes on six of eight datasets that nonetheless fail to close the gap to the best classical baseline; (iii) hardware validation on IBM ibm_fez (Heron r2), demonstrating kernel fidelity r≥0.976 across six experiments; and (iv) seed sensitivity analysis confirming reproducibility (mean CV 1.4%).
A Kruskal-Wallis factorial analysis reveals that dataset choice dominates performance variance (ε2=0.73), while kernel type accounts for only 9%. Spectral analysis offers a mechanistic explanation: current quantum feature maps produce eigenspectra that are either too flat or too concentrated, missing the intermediate profile of the best classical kernel, the radial basis function (RBF). Quantum kernel training (QKT) via kernel-target alignment yields the single competitive result -- balanced accuracy 0.968 on breast cancer -- but with ~2,000x computational overhead.
Our findings provide actionable guidelines for quantum kernel research. The complete benchmark suite is publicly available to facilitate reproduction and extension.
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.