Comparative Analysis of Classical and Quantum K-Means Clustering: SWAP Test and Fidelity-Based Approaches on Benchmark Datasets
Fuente:
Zenodo
Enregistré dans:
| Auteur principal: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Recurso digital |
| Publié: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Sujets: | |
| Accès en ligne: | |
| Tags: |
Ajouter un tag
Pas de tags, Soyez le premier à ajouter un tag!
|
| _version_ | 1866901965841104896 |
|---|---|
| author | Sricharan Suresh |
| author_facet | Sricharan Suresh |
| contents | <p>Quantum machine learning promises computational advantages for certain tasks, yet rigorous empirical evaluation of quantum clustering algorithms against classical baselines remains limited. This paper presents a comprehensive implementation and comparative analysis of two quantum K-means clustering algorithms—SWAP Test-based and Quantum Fidelity-based—against classical K-means on benchmark datasets. Both quantum approaches employ amplitude encoding to map classical data into quantum state amplitudes and use quantum-native distance metrics derived from inner products in Hilbert space. All three methods are evaluated on the ENB2012 energy efficiency dataset (768 samples, 8 features) and a synthetically expanded high-dimensional dataset (4,998 samples, 16 features), measuring silhouette score, inertia, and wall-clock execution time across cluster counts k ∈ {2, . . . , 7}. The experiments, conducted on Qiskit’s AerSimulator and Statevector backends, show that classical K-means achieves substantially higher silhouette scores (0.391 vs. 0.031 on the original dataset) and orders-of-magnitude faster execution. A rigorous analysis attributes these results to three factors: (i) the information loss inherent in amplitude encoding normalization, (ii) the geometric mismatch between Euclidean and Hilbert-space distance metrics, and (iii) the absence of quantum parallelism in classical simulation. The implications for quantum advantage in unsupervised learning are discussed and concrete requirements for near-term quantum hardware to achieve competitive clustering performance are outlined.</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_19134120 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | |
| publishDate | 2026 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Comparative Analysis of Classical and Quantum K-Means Clustering: SWAP Test and Fidelity-Based Approaches on Benchmark Datasets Sricharan Suresh Quantum Algorithms K-Means Clustering Machine Learning Unsupervised Learning Clustering Quantum Computing <p>Quantum machine learning promises computational advantages for certain tasks, yet rigorous empirical evaluation of quantum clustering algorithms against classical baselines remains limited. This paper presents a comprehensive implementation and comparative analysis of two quantum K-means clustering algorithms—SWAP Test-based and Quantum Fidelity-based—against classical K-means on benchmark datasets. Both quantum approaches employ amplitude encoding to map classical data into quantum state amplitudes and use quantum-native distance metrics derived from inner products in Hilbert space. All three methods are evaluated on the ENB2012 energy efficiency dataset (768 samples, 8 features) and a synthetically expanded high-dimensional dataset (4,998 samples, 16 features), measuring silhouette score, inertia, and wall-clock execution time across cluster counts k ∈ {2, . . . , 7}. The experiments, conducted on Qiskit’s AerSimulator and Statevector backends, show that classical K-means achieves substantially higher silhouette scores (0.391 vs. 0.031 on the original dataset) and orders-of-magnitude faster execution. A rigorous analysis attributes these results to three factors: (i) the information loss inherent in amplitude encoding normalization, (ii) the geometric mismatch between Euclidean and Hilbert-space distance metrics, and (iii) the absence of quantum parallelism in classical simulation. The implications for quantum advantage in unsupervised learning are discussed and concrete requirements for near-term quantum hardware to achieve competitive clustering performance are outlined.</p> |
| title | Comparative Analysis of Classical and Quantum K-Means Clustering: SWAP Test and Fidelity-Based Approaches on Benchmark Datasets |
| topic | Quantum Algorithms K-Means Clustering Machine Learning Unsupervised Learning Clustering Quantum Computing |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19134120 |