Do quantum kernels improve cross-sectional stock return prediction? We run a controlled horse race on the Chinese A-share market in which a quantum fidelity kernel, a projected quantum kernel, and a classical RBF control share identical training subsamples, solver, and tuning budgets, so that only the kernel is exchanged. On the main evaluation -- a point-in-time universe and 170 walk-forward windows (2012-2025) -- no quantum advantage exists: the fidelity kernel is indistinguishable from its RBF control ($\Delta$IC $=+0.005$, $p=0.42$), and a $2\times2$ design crossing kernel type with training budget (a Nystrom extension to the full ~38,000-observation windows) shows quantum kernels matching, but never beating, equal-budget linear models; after family-wise correction no pairwise difference among eleven models is significant, with point estimates favoring penalized linear regressions throughout. We then document how the opposite conclusion arises: a 60-window evaluation on a universe screened with full-sample information makes the same quantum kernel appear dominant on stability criteria and significantly better than neural baselines. Interaction characteristics from the anomalies literature help nothing, quantum or classical; a widened bandwidth grid reveals an interior optimum rather than the near-classical endpoint a coarse grid suggests; and the geometric difference, while large throughout ($g \gg 1$), does not predict out-of-sample gains ($\rho=-0.20$). We propose protocol standards -- kernel-swap controls, budget-equalized comparisons, point-in-time universes, and multiplicity-robust inference -- for empirical claims of quantum advantage in finance.
This work operationalizes the conditions as SPECTRA, a two-tier certificate: a simulator-free structural screen followed by a decisive comparison between a matched quantum model and five tuned classical twins using paired-bootstrap confidence bounds, providing a practical recipe for identifying, engineering, and deploying quantum-advantage candidates in tabular data.
Similarity in many decision systems is governed not by distance alone but by interactions among variables. In fraud and anomaly detection, small local perturbations can cross interaction-sensitive decision boundaries while leaving ambient distance almost unchanged. Motivated by this setting, we introduce a thin-slab interaction model and an interaction-driven quantum kernel constructed from entangled Pauli-string feature maps. The feature map explicitly encodes sparse high-order block interactions. We show that the resulting fidelity kernel is positive semidefinite, admits an exact block-factorized formulation, and induces a geometry sensitive to changes in interaction regime. Across balanced and imbalanced synthetic experiments spanning third-, fourth-, sixth-, and eighth-order interactions, the proposed kernel consistently outperforms linear, radial basis function, Laplacian, and polynomial kernels, as well as an engineered-interaction linear baseline supplied with the planted block products. On real fraud-detection benchmarks, it achieves the highest mean accuracy and F1 on Credit Card Fraud Detection and ranks second on IEEE-CIS Fraud Detection. These findings show that quantum-kernel performance depends on alignment between feature-map geometry and the underlying predictive structure, rather than on Hilbert-space dimension alone. Because the prescribed block-factorized kernel can also be evaluated exactly on a classical computer, the results establish predictive and representational value rather than computational quantum speedup.
In this study, we developed and evaluated four conditional energy-based forecasting architectures: a classical Gaussian-Bernoulli CRBM, a hybrid quantum-classical QCRBM, a full-register QQRBM, and a lag-feature QFeatureQRBM with complete derivations of their conditional distributions, Contrastive-Divergence gradients, and hybrid training, bridging the energy-based formulation and the implementation-level quantum computation. Unlike prior comparisons, our evaluation enforces symmetric hyperparameter optimisation: classical and quantum-specific hyperparameters receive an equally thorough grid search across thirteen structured experiments. We test on two data classes, a Gaussian-process dataset (GP) generated with real financial data and the input-driven NARMA-10 nonlinear benchmark. Across both regimes we find no systematic evidence of a quantum advantage at the available sample size: no quantum architecture improves on the best classical baseline. The fully quantum QQRBM and QFeatureQRBM are significantly worse, whereas the hybrid QCRBM is statistically indistinguishable from the strongest classical CRBM on both datasets. A power analysis bounds this null result: at n = 12 only medium-to-large effects are detectable, so small advantages cannot be excluded. An iso-parameter (matched-budget) comparison reaches the same conclusion: the classical CRBM is lowest at three of the four budgets and no CRBM-vs-QCRBM difference is significant at any budget.
Gerhard Hellstern, Danyal Maheshwari, Martin Zaefferer et al.· 0 citations
It is shown that ordinary hyperparameter choices move performance by considerably more than the quantum kernel does, that additional qubits degrade rather than improve performance through kernel concentration, and that the clustering framing itself fails at realistic class imbalance though kernel-based anomaly scoring does not.
Preliminary empirical characterisation on synthetic financial-transaction data confirms FT-FM's predicted expressibility advantage over generic feature maps (Kullback– Leibler divergence to the Haar distribution of 4.01 ± 1.16 versus 21.24 ± 0.79 for a ZZ-like baseline and 19.53 ± 0.43 for an amplitude-like baseline at matched qubit count), and exposes a kernel-concentration phenomenon (Meyer–Wallach Q = 0.948 ± 0.004) that motivates a refined construction (FT-FM-lite) with a tunable entanglement-strength hyperparameter; full empirical benchmarking on Kaggle CCF, CICIDS-2017, and UNSW-NB15 is the subject of a forthcoming paper in this series.
Jean Marie Vianney Sindayigaya· International Journal of Ele...· 0 citations
Activation patching and weight-space ablation both claim a component is causally responsible for a behavior, yet they act on different objects: one forward pass versus the parameters behind every forward pass. We ask when they agree. We study an idealized model where a conditional computation is carried additively through a residual stream, $F(x)=F_0(x)+\sum_i\alpha_i(x)v_i$, read out by a linear functional, and prove three exact results. First, deleting a subset of carriers collapses a matched input pair onto the same unconditional output \emph{if and only if} the removal is symmetric on the pair and leaves no outside contrast; the error is deterministic, and we give its exact form even when the two conditions hold only approximately. Second, patching a carrier moves the readout by its donor-receiver \emph{contrast}, while ablating it moves the readout by its \emph{absolute level}; neither bounds the other, and we construct pairs where every single-carrier patch flips the decision while no single-carrier ablation does. Third, for an attention head composed with its own layer's normalization and MLP, we derive an exact first-order interaction formula with a provably second-order remainder, vanishing identically when only the MLP is ablated but not, in general, when a head is. Small transformers trained on a synthetic conditional task illustrate all three predictions: across thirty-nine ablation configurations the measured interaction is strongly rank-correlated with the idealized model's predictive accuracy (Spearman $-0.83$), and a second task and architecture reproduces the same pattern, including a further polarity reversal. The single-block interaction result extends past one residual block, and the synthetic validation is tested against a real pretrained model, in a companion paper that takes this theory further along both axes.
