• Van Damme, J. et al. Advanced CMOS manufacturing of superconducting qubits on 300 mm wafers. Nature 634, 74–79 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Shaw, A. L. et al. Benchmarking highly entangled states on a 60-atom analogue quantum simulator. Nature 628, 71–77 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Manetsch, H. J. et al. tweezer array with 6100 highly coherent atomic qubits. Nature 647, 60 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • King, A. D. et al. Beyond-classical computation in quantum simulation. Science 388, 199–204 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bourgund, D. et al. Formation of individual stripes in a mixed-dimensional cold-atom Fermi–Hubbard system. Nature 637, 57–62 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Xu, S. et al. Non-Abelian braiding of Fibonacci anyons with a superconducting processor. Nat. Phys. 20, 1469–1475 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Manovitz, T. et al. Quantum coarsening and collective dynamics on a programmable simulator. Nature 638, 86–92 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Andersen, T. I. et al. Thermalization and criticality on an analogue–digital quantum simulator. Nature 638, 79–85 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • DeCross, M. et al. Computational power of random quantum circuits in arbitrary geometries. Phys. Rev. X 15, 021052 (2025).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Bluvstein, D. et al. Logical quantum processor based on reconfigurable atom arrays. Nature 626, 58–65 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Google Quantum AI and Collaborators. Quantum error correction below the surface code threshold. Nature 638, 920–926 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gao, D. et al. Establishing a new benchmark in quantum computational advantage with 105-qubit Zuchongzhi 3.0 processor. Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 090601 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Preskill, J. Beyond NISQ: the megaquop machine. ACM Trans. Quantum Comput. 6, 18 (2025).

    Article 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Eisert, J. & Preskill, J. Mind the gaps: the fraught road to quantum advantage. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2510.19928 (2025).

  • Orús, R. Tensor networks for complex quantum systems. Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 538–550 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Aaronson, S. & Gottesman, D. Improved simulation of stabilizer circuits. Phys. Rev. A 70, 052328 (2004).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bravyi, S. & Gosset, D. Improved classical simulation of quantum circuits dominated by Clifford gates. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 250501 (2016).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Aharonov, D., Gao, X., Landau, Z., Liu, Y. & Vazirani, U. A polynomial-time classical algorithm for noisy random circuit sampling. In Proc. 55th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing 945–957 (ACM, 2023).

  • Gebhart, V. et al. Learning quantum systems. Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 141–156 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Radford, A. et al. Improving language understanding by generative pre-training. Preprint at https://paperswithcode.com/paper/improving-language-understanding-by (2018).

  • Anshu, A. & Arunachalam, S. A survey on the complexity of learning quantum states. Nat. Rev. Phys. 6, 59–69 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Huang, H.-Y., Kueng, R., Torlai, G., Albert, V. V. & Preskill, J. Provably efficient machine learning for quantum many-body problems. Science 377, eabk3333 (2022). First to prove that a classical algorithm can predict ground-state properties of a gapped phase with polynomial sample and time complexity.

    Article 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cho, G. & Kim, D. Machine learning on quantum experimental data toward solving quantum many-body problems. Nat. Commun. 15, 7552 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wu, Y.-D., Zhu, Y., Wang, Y. & Chiribella, G. Learning quantum properties from short-range correlations using multi-task networks. Nat. Commun. 15, 8796 (2024). A multi-task learning model for predicting quantum properties, which can be further used for transfer learning and out-of-distribution test. 

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Qian, Y., Du, Y., He, Z., Hsieh, M.-H. & Tao, D. Multimodal deep representation learning for quantum cross-platform verification. Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 130601 (2024).A multimodal deep network for cross-platform quantum verification that jointly processes heterogeneous measurement data from different quantum hardware.

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Du, Y., Hsieh, M.-H. & Tao, D. Efficient learning for linear properties of bounded-gate quantum circuits. Nat. Commun. 16, 3790 (2025). The first machine-learning algorithm with provable sample-complexity guarantees for predicting linear properties of bounded-gate quantum circuits.

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Eisert, J. et al. Quantum certification and benchmarking. Nat. Rev. Phys. 2, 382–390 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Alexeev, Y. et al. Artificial intelligence for quantum computing. Nat. Commun. 16, 10829 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cerezo, M. et al. Variational quantum algorithms. Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 625–644 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Dawid, A. et al. Machine learning in quantum sciences (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2025).

  • Arunachalam, S. & de Wolf, R. Guest Column: A survey of quantum learning theory. ACM SIGACT News 48, 41–67 (2017).

    Article 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Carleo, G. et al. Machine learning and the physical sciences. Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 045002 (2019).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Das Sarma, S., Deng, D.-L. & Duan, L.-M. Machine learning meets quantum physics. Phys. Today 72, 48–54 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wetzel, S. J., Ha, S., Iten, R., Klopotek, M. & Liu, Z. Interpretable machine learning in physics: a review. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.23616 (2025).

  • Acampora, G. et al. Quantum computing and artificial intelligence: status and perspectives. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2505.23860 (2025).

  • Krenn, M., Landgraf, J., Foesel, T. & Marquardt, F. Artificial intelligence and machine learning for quantum technologies. Phys. Rev. A 107, 010101 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Varela, J. M., de Palhares Jr, A. B. & Duarte, D. H. Entanglement detection and quantification through machine learning: a comprehensive review. Braz. J. Phys. 56, 25 (2026).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Melko, R. G. & Carrasquilla, J. Language models for quantum simulation. Nat. Comput. Sci. 4, 11–18 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Carrasquilla, J. & Torlai, G. How to use neural networks to investigate quantum many-body physics. PRX Quantum 2, 040201 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lange, H., Van de Walle, A., Abedinnia, A. & Bohrdt, A. From architectures to applications: a review of neural quantum states. Quantum Sci. Tech. 9, 040501 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bharti, K. et al. Noisy intermediate-scale quantum algorithms. Rev. Mod. Phys. 94, 015004 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Du, Y. et al. A Gentle Introduction to Quantum Machine Learning (Springer, 2025).

  • Dunjko, V. & Briegel, H. J. Machine learning & artificial intelligence in the quantum domain: a review of recent progress. Rep. Prog. Phys. 81, 074001 (2018).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Krenn, M., Malik, M., Fickler, R., Lapkiewicz, R. & Zeilinger, A. Automated search for new quantum experiments. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 090405 (2016).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Melnikov, A. A. et al. Active learning machine learns to create new quantum experiments. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115, 1221–1226 (2018).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sachdev, S. Quantum phase transitions. Phys. World 12, 33 (1999).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Nielsen, M. A. & Chuang, I. L. Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2010).

  • Elben, A. et al. The randomized measurement toolbox. Nat. Rev. Phys. 5, 9–24 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Zhu, Y. et al. Flexible learning of quantum states with generative query neural networks. Nat. Commun. 13, 6222 (2022). Uses generative query networks to build implicit, query-driven representations of quantum states for downstream property prediction.

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kim, H. et al. Attention to quantum complexity. Sci. Adv. 11, eadu0059 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mohri, M., Rostamizadeh, A. & Talwalkar, A. Foundations of Machine Learning (MIT Press, 2018).

  • Bishop, C. M. & Nasrabadi, N. M. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning Vol. 4 (Springer, 2006).

  • Zou, H. & Hastie, T. Regularization and variable selection via the elastic net. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 67, 301–320 (2005).

    Article 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Huang, H.-Y., Kueng, R. & Preskill, J. Predicting many properties of a quantum system from very few measurements. Nat. Phys. 16, 1050–1057 (2020). Enables prediction of quantum properties from a number of measurements logarithmic in the number of target properties.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Grafakos, L. Classical Fourier Analysis (Springer, 2008).

  • Lewis, L. et al. Improved machine learning algorithm for predicting ground state properties. Nat. Commun. 15, 895 (2024). Reduces the sample complexity for predicting ground state properties of gapped local Hamiltonians from polynomial in system size to logarithmic.

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wanner, M., Lewis, L., Bhattacharyya, C., Dubhashi, D. & Gheorghiu, A. Predicting ground state properties: constant sample complexity and deep learning algorithms. In Proc. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33962–34024 (Curran Associates, 2024).

  • Che, Y., Gneiting, C. & Nori, F. Exponentially improved efficient machine learning for quantum many-body states with provable guarantees. Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 033035 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Šmíd, Š & Bondesan, R. Efficient learning of long-range and equivariant quantum systems. Quantum 9, 1597 (2025).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Šmíd, Š. & Bondesan, R. Accurate learning of equivariant quantum systems from a single ground state. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2405.12309 (2024).

  • Schuld, M., Sweke, R. & Meyer, J. J. Effect of data encoding on the expressive power of variational quantum-machine-learning models. Phys. Rev. A 103, 032430 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Vidal, J. G. & Theis, D. O. Input redundancy for parameterized quantum circuits. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1901.11434 (2020).

  • Schreiber, F. J., Eisert, J. & Meyer, J. J. Classical surrogates for quantum learning models. Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 100803 (2023). Shows that broad families of parameterized quantum learning models admit classical surrogates with provable approximation guarantees.

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Landman, J., Thabet, S., Dalyac, C., Mhiri, H. & Kashefi, E. Classically approximating variational quantum machine learning with random Fourier features. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2210.13200 (2022).

  • Sweke, R. et al. Potential and limitations of random Fourier features for dequantizing quantum machine learning. Quantum 9, 1640 (2025).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gan, B. Y., Huang, P.-W., Gil-Fuster, E. & Rebentrost, P. Concept learning of parameterized quantum models from limited measurements. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2408.05116 (2024).

  • Liao, W.-Y. et al. Demonstration of efficient predictive surrogates for large-scale quantum processors. Nat. Commun. 17, 4731 (2026).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Servedio, R. A. & Gortler, S. J. Equivalences and separations between quantum and classical learnability. SIAM J. Comput. 33, 1067–1092 (2004).

    Article 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gyurik, C. & Dunjko, V. On establishing learning separations between classical and quantum machine learning with classical data. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2208.06339 (2022).

  • Gyurik, C. & Dunjko, V. Exponential separations between classical and quantum learners. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2306.16028 (2023).

  • Molteni, R., Gyurik, C. & Dunjko, V. Exponential quantum advantages in learning quantum observables from classical data. npj Quantum Inf. 12, 19 (2026).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bouland, A. et al. Public-key pseudoentanglement and the hardness of learning ground state entanglement structure. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.12017 (2023).

  • Bouland, A., Zhang, C. & Zhou, Z. On the hardness of learning ground state entanglement of geometrically local Hamiltonians. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2411.04353 (2024).

  • Thabet, S., Monbroussou, L., Mamon, E. Z. & Landman, J. When quantum and classical models disagree: learning beyond minimum norm least square. npj Quantum Inf. 12, 81 (2026).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gil-Fuster, E., Gyurik, C., Perez-Salinas, A. & Dunjko, V. On the relation between trainability and dequantization of variational quantum learning models. In Proc. The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR ’25) (Curran Associates, 2025).

  • Sadoune, N., Giudici, G., Liu, K. & Pollet, L. Unsupervised interpretable learning of phases from many-qubit systems. Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 013082 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Che, Y., Gneiting, C., Wang, X. & Nori, F. Quantum circuit complexity and unsupervised machine learning of topological order. Nat. Commun. 17, 5179 (2026).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Dawid, A. Machine Learning in Quantum Sciences (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2025).

  • Rocchetto, A. Stabiliser states are efficiently PAC-learnable. Quantum Inf. Comput. 18, 541–552 (2018).

    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Grewal, S., Iyer, V., Kretschmer, W. & Liang, D. Efficient learning of quantum states prepared with few non-Clifford gates. Quantum 9, 1907 (2025).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Leone, L., Oliviero, S. F. & Hamma, A. Learning t-doped stabilizer states. Quantum 8, 1361 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Landau, Z. & Liu, Y. Learning quantum states prepared by shallow circuits in polynomial time. In Proc. 57th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC ’25) 1828–1838 (ACM, 2025).

  • Huang, H.-Y. et al. Learning shallow quantum circuits. In Proc. 56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC ’24) 1343–1351 (ACM, 2024).

  • Huang, H.-Y., Chen, S. & Preskill, J. Learning to predict arbitrary quantum processes. PRX Quantum 4, 040337 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chen, S. et al. Predicting quantum channels over general product distributions. In Proc. 38th Conference on Learning Theory (COLT ’25) 986–1007 (PMLR, 2025).

  • Pouyanfar, S. et al. A survey on deep learning: Algorithms, techniques, and applications. ACM Comput. Surv. 51, 1–36 (2018).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y. & Courville, A. Deep Learning (MIT Press, 2016).

  • Wang, H. et al. TorchQuantum case study for robust quantum circuits. In Proc. 41st IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design (ICCAD ’22) https://doi.org/10.1145/3508352.3561118 (ACM, 2022).

  • Carrasquilla, J., Torlai, G., Melko, R. G. & Aolita, L. Reconstructing quantum states with generative models. Nat. Mach. Intell. 1, 155–161 (2019). Reduces quantum state tomography to the unsupervised learning of outcome statistics of an informationally complete measurement.

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Smith, A. W. R., Gray, J. & Kim, M. S. Efficient quantum state sample tomography with basis-dependent neural networks. PRX Quantum 2, 020348 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mohseni, N., Fösel, T., Guo, L., Navarrete-Benlloch, C. & Marquardt, F. Deep learning of quantum many-body dynamics via random driving. Quantum 6, 714 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mohseni, N., Shi, J., Byrnes, T. & Hartmann, M. J. Deep learning of many-body observables and quantum information scrambling. Quantum 8, 1417 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Torlai, G. et al. Neural-network quantum state tomography. Nat. Phys. 14, 447–450 (2018).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cha, P. et al. Attention-based quantum tomography. Mach. Learn. Sci. Technol. 3, 01LT01 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Schmale, T., Reh, M. & Gärttner, M. Efficient quantum state tomography with convolutional neural networks. npj Quantum Inf. 8, 115 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ahmed, S., Muñoz, C. S., Nori, F. & Kockum, A. F. Quantum state tomography with conditional generative adversarial networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 140502 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ahmed, S., Sánchez Muñoz, C., Nori, F. & Kockum, A. F. Classification and reconstruction of optical quantum states with deep neural networks. Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 033278 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Du, Y. et al. ShadowNet for data-centric quantum system learning. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.11290 (2023).

  • Vaswani, A. et al. Attention is all you need. In Proc. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 6000–6010 (Curran Associates, 2017).

  • Zhang, X. et al. Direct fidelity estimation of quantum states using machine learning. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 130503 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Qin, H. et al. Experimental direct quantum fidelity learning via a data-driven approach. Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 190801 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Elben, A. et al. Cross-platform verification of intermediate scale quantum devices. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 010504 (2020).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wu, Y.-D., Zhu, Y., Bai, G., Wang, Y. & Chiribella, G. Quantum similarity testing with convolutional neural networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 210601 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Vadali, A., Kshirsagar, R., Shyamsundar, P. & Perdue, G. N. Quantum circuit fidelity estimation using machine learning. Quantum Mach. Intell. 6, 1 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ma, Y.-C. & Yung, M.-H. Transforming Bell’s inequalities into state classifiers with machine learning. npj Quantum Inf. 4, 34 (2018).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gao, J. et al. Experimental machine learning of quantum states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 240501 (2018).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Horodecki, R., Horodecki, P., Horodecki, M. & Horodecki, K. Quantum entanglement. Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865–942 (2009).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Harney, C., Pirandola, S., Ferraro, A. & Paternostro, M. Entanglement classification via neural network quantum states. New J. Phys. 22, 045001 (2020).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chen, Y., Pan, Y., Zhang, G. & Cheng, S. Detecting quantum entanglement with unsupervised learning. Quantum Sci. Tech. 7, 015005 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chen, C., Ren, C., Lin, H. & Lu, H. Entanglement structure detection via machine learning. Quantum Sci. Tech. 6, 035017 (2021).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Chen, Z., Lin, X. & Wei, Z. Certifying unknown genuine multipartite entanglement by neural networks. Quantum Sci. Tech. 8, 035029 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Huang, Y. et al. Direct entanglement detection of quantum systems using machine learning. npj Quantum Inf. 11, 29 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Gao, X. et al. Correlation-pattern-based continuous variable entanglement detection through neural networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 220202 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Koutny`, D. et al. Deep learning of quantum entanglement from incomplete measurements. Sci. Adv. 9, eadd7131 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lin, X., Chen, Z. & Wei, Z. Quantifying quantum entanglement via a hybrid quantum-classical machine learning framework. Phys. Rev. A 107, 062409 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rieger, M., Reh, M. & Gärttner, M. Sample-efficient estimation of entanglement entropy through supervised learning. Phys. Rev. A 109, 012403 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Taghadomi, N., Mani, A., Fahim, A., Bakoui, A. & Salami, M. S. Quantum Mach. Intell. 7, 40 (2025).

  • Krawczyk, M., Pawłowski, J., Maśka, M. M. & Roszak, K. Data-driven criteria for quantum correlations. Phys. Rev. A 109, 022405 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cimini, V., Barbieri, M., Treps, N., Walschaers, M. & Parigi, V. Neural networks for detecting multimode Wigner negativity. Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 160504 (2020).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mello, A. F., Lami, G. & Collura, M. Retrieving nonstabilizerness with neural networks. Phys. Rev. A 111, 012440 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Carrasquilla, J. & Melko, R. G. Machine learning phases of matter. Nat. Phys. 13, 431 (2017).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Van Nieuwenburg, E. P., Liu, Y.-H. & Huber, S. D. Learning phase transitions by confusion. Nat. Phys. 13, 435 (2017).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bohrdt, A. et al. Analyzing nonequilibrium quantum states through snapshots with artificial neural networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 150504 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Miles, C. et al. Machine learning discovery of new phases in programmable quantum simulator snapshots. Phys. Rev. Res. 5, 013026 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Zhang, H. et al. Experimental demonstration of adversarial examples in learning topological phases. Nat. Commun. 13, 4993 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jiang, S., Lu, S. & Deng, D.-L. Adversarial machine learning phases of matter. Quantum Front. 2, 15 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Skinner, B., Ruhman, J. & Nahum, A. Measurement-induced phase transitions in the dynamics of entanglement. Phys. Rev. X 9, 031009 (2019).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Li, Y., Chen, X. & Fisher, M. P. A. Measurement-driven entanglement transition in hybrid quantum circuits. Phys. Rev. B 100, 134306 (2019).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Barratt, F., Agrawal, U., Potter, A. C., Gopalakrishnan, S. & Vasseur, R. Transitions in the learnability of global charges from local measurements. Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 200602 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ippoliti, M. & Khemani, V. Learnability transitions in monitored quantum dynamics via eavesdropper’s classical shadows. PRX Quantum 5, 020304 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Akhtar, A. A., Hu, H.-Y. & You, Y.-Z. Measurement-induced criticality is tomographically optimal. Phys. Rev. B 109, 094209 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Agrawal, U., Lopez-Piqueres, J., Vasseur, R., Gopalakrishnan, S. & Potter, A. C. Observing quantum measurement collapse as a learnability phase transition. Phys. Rev. X 14, 041012 (2024).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Dehghani, H., Lavasani, A., Hafezi, M. & Gullans, M. J. Neural-network decoders for measurement induced phase transitions. Nat. Commun. 14, 2918 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kim, H. et al. Learning measurement-induced phase transitions using attention. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2508.15895 (2025).

  • Hou, W. et al. Machine learning the effects of many quantum measurements. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2509.08890 (2025).

  • Garratt, S. J. & Altman, E. Probing postmeasurement entanglement without postselection. PRX Quantum 5, 030311 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Aaronson, S. Shadow tomography of quantum states. In Proc. 50th Annual ACM SIGACT Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC ’18) 325–338 (ACM, 2018).

  • Bengio, Y., Courville, A. & Vincent, P. Representation learning: a review and new perspectives. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 35, 1798–1828 (2013).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Xiao, T., Huang, J., Li, H., Fan, J. & Zeng, G. Intelligent certification for quantum simulators via machine learning. npj Quantum Inf. 8, 138 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Mohseni, N., Marquardt, F. & Schmidt, P. Transfer learning in predicting quantum many-body dynamics: from physical observables to entanglement entropy. Quantum Sci. Tech. 10, 025038 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Van Engelen, J. E. & Hoos, H. H. A survey on semi-supervised learning. Mach. Learn. 109, 373–440 (2020).

    Article 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Tang, Y., Yang, N., Long, M. & Yan, J. Ssl4q: semi-supervised learning of quantum data with application to quantum state classification. In Proc. Forty-First International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML ’24) (PMLR, 2024).

  • Wu, D., Wang, L. & Zhang, P. Solving statistical mechanics using variational autoregressive networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 080602 (2019).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sharir, O., Levine, Y., Wies, N., Carleo, G. & Shashua, A. Deep autoregressive models for the efficient variational simulation of many-body quantum systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 020503 (2020).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Zhong, L., Guo, C. & Wang, X. Quantum state tomography inspired by language modeling. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2212.04940 (2022).

  • Zhang, Z. & You, Y.-Z. Observing Schrödinger’s cat with artificial intelligence: emergent classicality from information bottleneck. Mach. Learn. Sci. Technol. 5, 015051 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Carleo, G. & Troyer, M. Solving the quantum many-body problem with artificial neural networks. Science 355, 602–606 (2017).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Czischek, S., Moss, M. S., Radzihovsky, M., Merali, E. & Melko, R. G. Data-enhanced variational Monte Carlo simulations for Rydberg atom arrays. Phys. Rev. B 105, 205108 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Moss, M. S. et al. Enhancing variational Monte Carlo simulations using a programmable quantum simulator. Phys. Rev. A 109, 032410 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Lange, H. et al. Transformer neural networks and quantum simulators: a hybrid approach for simulating strongly correlated systems. Quantum 9, 1675 (2025).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Torlai, G. et al. Quantum process tomography with unsupervised learning and tensor networks. Nat. Commun. 14, 2858 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ahmed, S., Quijandría, F. & Kockum, A. F. Gradient-descent quantum process tomography by learning Kraus operators. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 150402 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Zhu, Y., Wu, Y.-D., Liu, Q., Wang, Y. & Chiribella, G. Predictive modelling of quantum process with neural networks. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2308.08815 (2023).

  • Hartmann, M. J. & Carleo, G. Neural-network approach to dissipative quantum many-body dynamics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 250502 (2019).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Carrasquilla, J. Machine learning for quantum matter. Adv. Phys. X 5, 1797528 (2020).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Harrington, P. M., Mueller, E. J. & Murch, K. W. Engineered dissipation for quantum information science. Nat. Rev. Phys. 4, 660–671 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Dugan, O. M., Lu, P. Y., Dangovski, R., Luo, D. & Soljacic, M. Q-Flow: generative modeling for differential equations of open quantum dynamics with normalizing flows. In Proc. 40th International Conference on Machine Learning 8879–8901 (PMLR, 2023).

  • Campaioli, F., Cole, J. H. & Hapuarachchi, H. Quantum master equations: tips and tricks for quantum optics, quantum computing, and beyond. PRX Quantum 5, 020202 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Valenti, A., van Nieuwenburg, E., Huber, S. & Greplova, E. Hamiltonian learning for quantum error correction. Phys. Rev. Res. 1, 033092 (2019).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Valenti, A., Jin, G., Léonard, J., Huber, S. D. & Greplova, E. Scalable Hamiltonian learning for large-scale out-of-equilibrium quantum dynamics. Phys. Rev. A 105, 023302 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Nandy, S., Schmitt, M., Bukov, M. & Lenarčič, Z. Reconstructing effective Hamiltonians from nonequilibrium thermal and prethermal steady states. Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 023160 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Che, L. et al. Learning quantum Hamiltonians from single-qubit measurements. Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 023246 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Proctor, T., Young, K., Baczewski, A. D. & Blume-Kohout, R. Benchmarking quantum computers. Nat. Rev. Phys. 7, 1–14 (2025).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hothem, D., Miller, A. & Proctor, T. What is my quantum computer good for? Quantum capability learning with physics-aware neural networks. In Proc. The Thirty-Eighth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (Curran Associates, 2024).

  • Hartnett, G. S. et al. Learning to rank quantum circuits for hardware-optimized performance enhancement. Quantum 8, 1542 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cai, Z. et al. Quantum error mitigation. Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 045005 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Kim, C., Park, K. D. & Rhee, J.-K. Quantum error mitigation with artificial neural network. IEEE Access 8, 188853–188860 (2020).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sack, S. H. & Egger, D. J. Large-scale quantum approximate optimization on nonplanar graphs with machine learning noise mitigation. Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013223 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Bao, T. et al. Beyond circuit connections: a non-message passing graph transformer approach for quantum error mitigation. In Proc. The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR ’25) (OpenReview, 2025).

  • Liao, H. et al. Machine learning for practical quantum error mitigation. Nat. Mach. Intell. 6, 1478–1486 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Liao, M., Zhu, Y., Chiribella, G. & Yang, Y. Noise-agnostic quantum error mitigation with data augmented neural models. npj Quantum Inf. 11, 8 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sweke, R., Kesselring, M. S., van Nieuwenburg, E. P. L. & Eisert, J. Reinforcement learning decoders for fault-tolerant quantum computation. Mach. Learn. Sci. Technol. 2, 025005 (2018).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Zhou, Y. et al. Learning to decode logical circuits. Nat. Comput. Sci. 5, 1158–1167 (2025).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Wang, H. et al. Transformer-QEC: quantum error correction code decoding with transferable transformers. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.16082 (2023).

  • Bausch, J. et al. Learning high-accuracy error decoding for quantum processors. Nature 635, 834–840 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cao, H., Pan, F., Feng, D., Wang, Y. & Zhang, P. Generative decoding for quantum error-correcting codes. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2503.21374 (2025).

  • Olle, J., Zen, R., Puviani, M. & Marquardt, F. Simultaneous discovery of quantum error correction codes and encoders with a noise-aware reinforcement learning agent. npj Quantum Inf. 10, 126 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Zeng, Y., Qin, W., Chen, Y.-H., Gneiting, C. & Nori, F. Neural-network-based design of approximate Gottesman–Kitaev–Preskill code. Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 060601 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cervera-Lierta, A., Kottmann, J. S. & Aspuru-Guzik, A. Meta-variational quantum eigensolver: learning energy profiles of parameterized Hamiltonians for quantum simulation. PRX Quantum 2, 020329 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Jain, N., Coyle, B., Kashefi, E. & Kumar, N. Graph neural network initialisation of quantum approximate optimisation. Quantum 6, 861 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Luo, D., Shen, J., Dangovski, R. & Soljacic, M. Quack: accelerating gradient-based quantum optimization with Koopman operator learning. In Proc. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 25662–25692 (Curran Associates, 2023).

  • Lee, J., Cho, J. & Kim, S. Q-MAML: quantum model-agnostic meta-learning for variational quantum algorithms. In Proc. AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence Vol. 39, 18137–18144 (AAAI, 2025).

  • Zhang, S.-X., Hsieh, C.-Y., Zhang, S. & Yao, H. Neural predictor based quantum architecture search. Mach. Learn. Sci. Technol. 2, 045027 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • He, Z. et al. A GNN-based predictor for quantum architecture search. Quantum Inf. Process. 22, 128 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Qian, Y., Wang, X., Du, Y., Luo, Y. & Tao, D. MG-Net: learn to customize QAOA with circuit depth awareness. In Proc. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 33691–33725 (Curran Associates, 2024).

  • Fösel, T., Niu, M. Y., Marquardt, F. & Li, L. Quantum circuit optimization with deep reinforcement learning. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2103.07585 (2021).

  • Fürrutter, F., Muñoz-Gil, G. & Briegel, H. J. Quantum circuit synthesis with diffusion models. Nat. Mach. Intell. 6, 515–524 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ruiz, F. J. et al. Quantum circuit optimization with AlphaTensor. Nat. Mach. Intell. 7, 374–385 (2025).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Arnold, J. & Schäfer, F. Replacing neural networks by optimal analytical predictors for the detection of phase transitions. Phys. Rev. X 12, 031044 (2022).


    Google Scholar
     

  • Gao, X. & Duan, L.-M. Efficient representation of quantum many-body states with deep neural networks. Nat. Commun. 8, 662 (2017).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Sharir, O., Shashua, A. & Carleo, G. Neural tensor contractions and the expressive power of deep neural quantum states. Phys. Rev. B 106, 205136 (2022).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Zhao, L., Guo, N., Luo, M.-X. & Rebentrost, P. Provable learning of quantum states with graphical models. Phys. Rev. Res. 8, 013109 (2026).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Yang, T.-H., Soleimanifar, M., Bergamaschi, T. & Preskill, J. When can classical neural networks represent quantum states? Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2410.23152 (2024).

  • Iten, R., Metger, T., Wilming, H., del Rio, L. & Renner, R. Discovering physical concepts with neural networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 010508 (2020).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Miles, C. et al. Correlator convolutional neural networks as an interpretable architecture for image-like quantum matter data. Nat. Commun. 12, 3905 (2021).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Flam-Shepherd, D. et al. Learning interpretable representations of entanglement in quantum optics experiments using deep generative models. Nat. Mach. Intell. 4, 544–554 (2022).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Frohnert, F. & van Nieuwenburg, E. Explainable representation learning of small quantum states. Mach. Learn. Sci. Technol. 5, 015001 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Cybiński, K. et al. Characterizing out-of-distribution generalization of neural networks: application to the disordered Su–Schrieffer–Heeger model. Mach. Learn. Sci. Technol. 6, 015014 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • de Schoulepnikoff, P., Muñoz-Gil, G., Nautrup, H. P. & Briegel, H. J. Interpretable representation learning of quantum data enabled by probabilistic variational autoencoders. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2506.11982 (2025).

  • Cao, Y. et al. A comprehensive survey of AI-generated content (AIGC): a history of generative AI from GAN to ChatGPT. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2303.04226 (2023).

  • Chang, Y. et al. A survey on evaluation of large language models. ACM Trans. Intell. Syst. Technol. 15, 1–45 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Brown, T. et al. Language models are few-shot learners. In Proc. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 1877–1901 (Curran Associates, 2020).

  • Kaplan, J. et al. Scaling laws for neural language models. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2001.08361 (2020).

  • Wang, H., Weber, M., Izaac, J. & Lin, C. Y.-Y. Predicting properties of quantum systems with conditional generative models. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2211.16943 (2022). Trains a conditional generative transformer on data from a family of quantum states, enabling property prediction for both unseen states and new observables without retraining.

  • Zhang, Y.-H. & Di Ventra, M. Transformer quantum state: a multipurpose model for quantum many-body problems. Phys. Rev. B 107, 075147 (2023). A single transformer-based neural quantum state that covers entire phase diagrams within one model and transfers to new Hamiltonians via fine-tuning.

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • An, Z., Wu, J., Yang, M., Zhou, D. L. & Zeng, B. Unified quantum state tomography and Hamiltonian learning: a language-translation-like approach for quantum systems. Phys. Rev. Appl. 21, 014037 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Yao, J. & You, Y.-Z. ShadowGPT: learning to solve quantum many-body problems from randomized measurements. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2411.03285 (2024).

  • Fitzek, D. et al. RydbergGPT. Mach. Learn. Sci. Technol. 6, 045057 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Tang, Y., Xiong, H., Yang, N., Xiao, T. & Yan, J. Towards LLM4QPE: unsupervised pretraining of quantum property estimation and a benchmark. In Proc. The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR ’24) (OpenReview, 2024).

  • Chen, A. & Heyl, M. Empowering deep neural quantum states through efficient optimization. Nat. Phys. 20, 1476–1481 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Rende, R. et al. Foundation neural-networks quantum states as a unified ansatz for multiple Hamiltonians. Nat. Commun. 16, 7213 (2025). The first foundation neural-network quantum state: taking spin configurations and Hamiltonian couplings as multimodal inputs, and generalizing to Hamiltonians beyond training.

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ho, J., Jain, A. & Abbeel, P. Denoising diffusion probabilistic models. In Proc. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 6840–6851 (Curran Associates, 2020).

  • Song, Y. et al. Score-based generative modeling through stochastic differential equations. In Proc. 9th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR ’21) (OpenReview, 2021).

  • Yang, L. et al. Diffusion models: a comprehensive survey of methods and applications. ACM Comput. Surv. 56, 1–39 (2023).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Tang, Y., Long, M. & Yan, J. QuaDiM: a conditional diffusion model for quantum state property estimation. In Proc. The Thirteenth International Conference on Learning Representations (OpenReview, 2025).

  • Dupuis, N. et al. Qiskit code assistant: training LLMs for generating quantum computing code. In Proc. 2024 IEEE LLM Aided Design Workshop (LAD) 1–4 (IEEE, 2024).

  • Yang, R., Wang, Z., Gu, Y., Liang, Y. & Li, T. QCircuitBench: a large-scale dataset for benchmarking quantum algorithm design. In Proc. The Thirty-Ninth Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems Datasets and Benchmarks Track (OpenReview, 2026).

  • Campbell, C., Chen, H. M., Luk, W. & Fan, H. Enhancing LLM-based quantum code generation with multi-agent optimization and quantum error correction. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2504.14557 (2025).

  • Liang, Z. et al. Unleashing the potential of LLMs for quantum computing: a study in quantum architecture design. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2307.08191 (2023).

  • Nakaji, K. et al. The generative quantum eigensolver (GQE) and its application for ground state search. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.09253 (2024).

  • Minami, S., Nakaji, K., Suzuki, Y., Aspuru-Guzik, A. & Kadowaki, T. Generative quantum combinatorial optimization by means of a novel conditional generative quantum eigensolver. Digit. Discov. 4, 2229–2243 (2026).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Zhao, Y., Zhang, C. & Du, Y. Rethink the role of deep learning towards large-scale quantum systems. In Proc. Forty-Second International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML ’25) (OpenReview, 2025).

  • Wang, H. et al. Scientific discovery in the age of artificial intelligence. Nature 620, 47–60 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Romera-Paredes, B. et al. Mathematical discoveries from program search with large language models. Nature 625, 468–475 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Boiko, D. A., MacKnight, R., Kline, B. & Gomes, G. Autonomous chemical research with large language models. Nature 624, 570–578 (2023).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Ataides, J., Gu, A., Yelin, S. F. & Lukin, M. D. Neural decoders for universal quantum algorithms. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2509.11370 (2025).

  • Ge, Y. et al. Quantum circuit synthesis and compilation optimization: overview and prospects. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2407.00736 (2024).

  • Wang, L. et al. A survey on large language model based autonomous agents. Front. Comput. Sci. 18, 186345 (2024).

    Article 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hafner, D., Pasukonis, J., Ba, J. & Lillicrap, T. Mastering diverse control tasks through world models. Nature 640, 647–653 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Baltrušaitis, T., Ahuja, C. & Morency, L.-P. Multimodal machine learning: a survey and taxonomy. IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell. 41, 423–443 (2018).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Han, Z., Gao, C., Liu, J., Zhang, J. & Zhang, S. Q. Parameter-efficient fine-tuning for large models: a comprehensive survey. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.14608 (2024).

  • Bertoni, C. et al. Shallow shadows: expectation estimation using low-depth random Clifford circuits. Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 020602 (2024).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Schuster, T., Haferkamp, J. & Huang, H.-Y. Random unitaries in extremely low depth. Science 389, 92–96 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 
    MathSciNet 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Hu, H.-Y. et al. Demonstration of robust and efficient quantum property learning with shallow shadows. Nat. Commun. 16, 2943 (2025).

    Article 
    ADS 

    Google Scholar
     

  • Schölkopf, B. & Smola, A. J. Learning with Kernels: Support Vector Machines, Regularization,Optimization, and Beyond (MIT Press, 2001).