Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41387996›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

A quantum machine learning-based predictive analysis of CERN collision events.

Sarvapriya Tripathi, Himanshu Upadhyay, Jayesh Soni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Sarvapriya TripathiDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA. strip011@fiu.edu.
Himanshu UpadhyayDepartment of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.
Jayesh SoniApplied Research Center, Florida International University, Miami, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With the advent of quantum computing, researchers have explored the applicability and any potential advantages of quantum algorithms. This study investigates the application of Quantum Machine Learning (QML) models for regression tasks. Utilizing two distinct CERN datasets (Dielectron events and Proton collision), we investigate prediction accuracy using two QML algorithms, namely Quantum Neural Network (QNN) and Quantum Long Short-Term Memory (QLSTM). We also discuss the comparative analysis and computational efficiency of QNN and QLSTM compared to classical regression methods. The results show that while the two QML models gave comparable accuracy scores to some of the classical models, the best scores were still achieved by some of the more advanced classical algorithms such as CatBoost. Further analysis of the QNN and QLSTM algorithms using multiple ansätz designs showed that increased circuit complexity did not yield substantial improvements in prediction accuracy. These findings suggest that QML models, especially QLSTM with simpler ansätz designs, offer a promising approach for modeling high-energy physics data, and highlight the importance of balancing circuit complexity with performance. The study also underscores the need for further evaluation of these algorithms on quantum hardware to better understand real-world applicability.

Indexed as

Dielectron eventsProton collisionQuantum long short-term memoryQuantum machine learningQuantum neural networkRegression

Identifiers

PMID41387996
PMCPMC12780270

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.