ArticleScientific reports2026
Bayesian convolutional front-end based uncertainty-aware hybrid quantum-classical image classification.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Quantum machine learning on noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices often suffers from noise sensitivity, small-data overfitting, and miscalibrated predictive confidence. We propose an uncertainty-aware hybrid Bayesian quantum neural network (BQNN) that couples a Bayesian convolutional front-end with a parameterized quantum circuit (PQC), forming a three-stage pipeline: Bayesian feature extraction, quantum state evolution, and classical decision making. For 28 ×28 grayscale inputs, the front-end uses an 8-filter 3 ×3 Bayesian convolution followed by 2 ×2 max-pooling and a fully connected layer to produce a 10-dimensional embedding, which is mapped to four rotation angles and encoded on 4 qubits. Two parameterized quantum circuit designs are considered for the quantum classification layer. On MNIST and Fashion-MNIST, repeated experiments over five independent random seeds show that the proposed BQNN variants consistently outperform the corresponding QCNN baselines. On MNIST, BQNN-2 achieves a mean best test accuracy of 95.46 ± 0.36%, a mean final test accuracy of 95.44 ± 0.38%, and a mean final test loss of 0.169 ± 0.012. On Fashion-MNIST, BQNN-1 attains the best mean overall performance, with a mean best test accuracy of 87.59 ± 0.62%, a mean final test accuracy of 87.49 ± 0.73%, and a mean final test loss of 0.385 ± 0.017, while BQNN-2 exhibits slightly smaller run-to-run variation. Additional representative comparisons with QNN baselines under the same training configuration further suggest faster convergence and higher peak accuracy for BQNN. Using 30 Monte-Carlo forward passes, BQNN achieves better calibration (ECE 0.007-0.009) than QCNN (ECE 0.016-0.020), thereby reducing overconfident predictions. Additional robustness experiments under noisy mixed-state simulation further show that, under depolarizing noise, BQNN consistently preserves higher peak test accuracy than QCNN across both circuit variants on MNIST, demonstrating improved robustness in NISQ-like noisy settings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.