Spectral Geometry and Bosonic-Bloch Probes: Explorations in Quantum Learning
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper studies how spectral geometry emerges in quantum learning models and how it can be diagnosed with physically grounded probes. In graph-regularized quantum networks, training reorganizes the output similarity graph, increases the effective spectral dimension Delta S = +0.23, and reshapes the Laplacian spectrum. Edge-resolved two-boson interference directly probes this restructuring: the bosonic enhancement Delta P_uv correlates with the Fiedler edge split |Delta v_2| (r = -0.50), linking learned spectral partitions to interference signatures. A phase diagram shows a nonmonotonic dependence of performance on coupling strength gamma and noise delta, with graph regularization improving fidelity only in a restricted regime; hardware experiments confirm the predicted interference behavior within shot-noise uncertainty. We also analyze a hybrid quantum autoencoder and introduce Bloch-space drift as a geometric diagnostic of its latent representation. With an unsupervised benign-data threshold, the model achieves high ranking performance (ROC-AUC about 0.99) and negligible false-negative rates. Absolute Bloch drift strongly discriminates anomalies (ROC-AUC at least about 0.9), while consecutive drift is near random (ROC-AUC about 0.5), showing that detection arises from persistent state-space displacement rather than local fluctuations. Through the geometry of reduced single-qubit states and associated quantum Fisher information, these results show that learning-induced spectral organization appears as measurable quantum-state structure, establishing a unified spectral-geometric framework for diagnosing quantum learning systems with bosonic and Bloch probes.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 25 of its 123 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 30 Jun 2026.
Builds on
25 of 123 references.
References · 25
- 2016Semi-Supervised Classification with Graph Convolutional Networkscited by 11,361
- 2017Inductive Representation Learning on Large Graphscited by 6,320
- 2019A Comprehensive Survey on Graph Neural Networkscited by 2,919
- 2016Convolutional Neural Networks on Graphs with Fast Localized Spectral Filteringcited by 2,089
- 2018Relational inductive biases, deep learning, and graph networkscited by 1,360
- 2016Geometric deep learning: going beyond Euclidean datacited by 1,048
- 2020Variational Quantum Algorithmscited by 692
- 2018Supervised learning with quantum enhanced feature spacescited by 665
- 2018Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapescited by 630
- 2019Memorizing Normality to Detect Anomaly: Memory-augmented Deep Autoencoder for Unsupervised Anomaly Detectioncited by 564
- 2020The power of quantum neural networkscited by 379
- 2019Deep Learning for Anomaly Detection: A Surveycited by 358
13 more
- 2020Power of data in quantum machine learningcited by 338
- 2019Parameterized quantum circuits as machine learning modelscited by 332
- 2017Stochastic Gradient Descent as Approximate Bayesian Inferencecited by 300
- 2015Unitary Evolution Recurrent Neural Networkscited by 294
- 2019Quantum Natural Gradientcited by 106
- 2019A Survey of Network-based Intrusion Detection Data Setscited by 46
- 2024Deep Graph Anomaly Detection: A Survey and New Perspectivescited by 40
- 2019Quantum-inspired algorithms in practicecited by 18
- 2022SLISEMAP: Supervised dimensionality reduction through local explanationscited by 7
- 2024From Graphs to Qubits: A Critical Review of Quantum Graph Neural Networkscited by 6
- 2024Applying Quantum Autoencoders for Time Series Anomaly Detectioncited by 6
- 2024The role of data embedding in quantum autoencoders for improved anomaly detectioncited by 3
- 2025Quantum Autoencoder for Multivariate Time Series Anomaly Detectioncited by 2
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.