Dimensionality Reduction for Data Analysis With Quantum Feature Learning

To improve data analysis and feature learning, this study compares the effectiveness of quantum dimensionality reduction (qDR) techniques to classical ones. In this study, we investigate several qDR techniques on a variety of datasets such as quantum Gaussian distribution adaptation (qGDA), quantum principal component analysis (qPCA), quantum linear discriminant analysis (qLDA), and quantum t‐SNE (qt‐SNE). The Olivetti Faces, Wine, Breast Cancer, Digits, and Iris are among the datasets used in this investigation. Through comparison evaluations against well‐established classical approaches, such as classical PCA (cPCA), classical LDA (cLDA), and classical GDA (cGDA), and using well‐established metrics like loss, fidelity, and processing time, the effectiveness of these techniques is assessed. The findings show that cPCA produced positive results with the lowest loss and highest fidelity when used on the Iris dataset. On the other hand, quantum uniform manifold approximation and projection (qUMAP) performs well and shows strong fidelity when tested against the Wine dataset, but ct‐SNE shows mediocre performance against the Digits dataset. Isomap and locally linear embedding (LLE) function differently depending on the dataset. Notably, LLE showed the largest loss and lowest fidelity on the Olivetti Faces dataset. The hypothesis testing findings showed that the qDR strategies did not significantly outperform the classical techniques in terms of maintaining pertinent information from quantum datasets. More specifically, the outcomes of paired t‐tests show that when it comes to the ability to capture complex patterns, there are no statistically significant differences between the cPCA and qPCA, the cLDA and qLDA, and the cGDA and qGDA. According to the findings of the assessments of mutual information (MI) and clustering accuracy, qPCA may be able to recognize patterns more clearly than standardized cPCA. Nevertheless, there is no discernible improvement between the qLDA and qGDA approaches and their classical counterparts.