Quantum scheduling optimization visualization
    Quantum Support Vector Machine + HHL Quantum Linear Solver

    Quantum Binary Classification with LS-QSVM & HHLTransparent, Reproducible Results

    Diagnose breast cancer with LS-QSVM and HHL.

    What you get: the combination of Least-Squares QSVM and HHL linear solver solution for healthcare diagnostics

    How it's delivered: downloadable research-style report and run-ready Python code

    Why trust it: seed-controlled reproducibility, classical baselines, and hardware notes

    Get the Right Diagnosis from Your Data

    Binary Classification Solution

    We use a classical SVM pipeline to solve binary classification problem. The model seeks a set of separating hyperplanes in feature space, \mathbf{w}^\top \phi(\mathbf{x}) + b = 0 , maximizing the geometric margin between classes. When linear separation is difficult, we map data to a higher-dimensional space and apply the kernel trick: instead of building \phi(\cdot) explicitly, we compute inner products k(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}')=\langle \phi(\mathbf{x}), \phi(\mathbf{x}')\rangle , which lets the SVM operate implicitly in a Hilbert space \mathcal{H}.

    What you get on the platform
    • • End-to-end combination of Least-Squares QSVM and HHL linear solver executed on Simulator
    • • Results: the combination of LS-QSVM and HHL achieved 90% accuracy with ROC-AUC 0.96 on a tiny training set
    • • Downloadable, citable report (method, experiments, results)
    • • Executable Python code with deterministic, reproducible outputs
    • • Hardware details: encoding, circuit depth/qubits, backend/cost guidance
    • • Baseline comparisons with metrics and plots

    Configuration of Least-Squares QSVM and HHL linear solver

    Quantum SVM is implemented using a quantum kernel, where input \mathbf{x} is encoded into a quantum state |\phi(\mathbf{x})\rangle=U(\mathbf{x})|0\rangle^{\otimes n} and using the state overlap (inner product or fidelity) as k(\mathbf{x},\mathbf{x}'). The circuit induces a (potentially very high-dimensional) nonlinear embedding through data-dependent single-qubit rotations and entangling gates; the choice of encoding and entanglement pattern governs which higher-order interactions are represented. These overlaps are estimated by running U(\mathbf{x}')^\dagger U(\mathbf{x}) on quantum hardware; the resulting Gram matrix feeds directly into the standard SVM pipeline.

    For this task, the solution used requires linear-system solve, which can be computed via HHL (Harrow–Hassidim–Lloyd), a quantum algorithm for solving A\mathbf{x}=\mathbf{b}. In the LS-SVM/QSVM setting, this corresponds to systems such as (K+\lambda I)\boldsymbol{\alpha}=\mathbf{y}, where K is the kernel Gram matrix; HHL returns a quantum state proportional to the solution vector (from which the needed coefficients are obtained).

    Strengths

    • Quantum kernels embed data into high-dimensional Hilbert spaces, increasing the chance of linear separability and improving classification quality.
    • Implementation of HHL algorithm provides prospects of exponential speed-up as a task scales up for computations on more advanced quantum devices.
    • Shallow, hardware-efficient circuits keep depth, noise, and runtime low enough for practical kernel evaluation on NISQ devices.
    • On fault-tolerant quantum hardware, kernel entries over exponentially large state spaces can be estimated in polynomial quantum time for specific problem families.

    Weaknesses

    • Contemporary quantum devices exhibit non-negligible noise and gate/measurement error rates, which can degrade model or task-level accuracy.
    • Given present hardware constraints, it is prudent to employ HHL-based approaches on smaller datasets, despite the fact that HHL’s asymptotic benefits arise for large-scale problems.
    • Performance improvements over classical baselines are not guaranteed and typically depend on the dataset, problem structure, and parameter regime.
    • Classical simulation of quantum circuits can avoid hardware noise but incurs additional computational cost compared to purely classical approaches.

    Proof-of-Concept Simulation Results

    Task: A supervised binary-classification benchmark with continuous features derived from digitized fine-needle aspirate images of breast masses on a small subset of 25 samples with 35 features each. The labels are benign or malignant, and Min-Max scaling to [0, π] is used.

    Execution

    Simulator

    Number of qubits

    6

    Number of layers

    1

    Key Outcomes (Trainable QSVM)

    90%

    Accuracy

    88%

    Balanced Accuracy

    0.89

    Macro F1

    0.96

    Macro ROC-AUC

    Business Impact

    The combination of LS-QSVM and HHL potentially achieves clinic-ready diagnosis accuracy (90%), cutting average review time per FNA case and expanding throughput without adding more employees to the task.

    Cost Savings

    $32,160

    Annual projected savings from reduced reviews/scrap and faster throughput.

    ROI

    114%

    Return on investment based on value add vs. TCO.

    Time Saved

    67%

    Efficiency gains vs. baseline review/inspection workflows.

    How it works

    Simple and transparent: from your brief to quantum results, code, and a paper

    01

    Describe

    Map your problem to the right quantum use case

    02

    Confirm

    Confirm the quantum-classical hybrid approach and key assumptions

    03

    Run

    Download ready-to-run code; execute on simulator

    04

    Review

    Review reproducible results — iterate as needed

    05

    Benchmark

    Compare against classical baseline; prepare for quantum hardware

    Run QSVM with HHL Now

    Run your first diagnostic task with QSVM and HHL and get transparent results within a clear report.

    Try Your First Use Case for Free