Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42553234›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in artificial intelligence2026

Quantum-enhanced generative artificial intelligence: a critical review of classical limitations, complexity barriers, and hybrid quantum-classical architectures.

Diljot Singh, Omana J, Smrithy G S

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2026. 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.

Diljot SinghSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, India.
Omana JSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, India.
Smrithy G SSchool of Computer Science and Engineering, Vellore Institute of Technology, Chennai, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The rapid commercialization of generative artificial intelligence (AI), along with the maturation of quantum technologies has raised a question: can quantum-powered neural networks become the next major shift in large language model (LLM) technology? This naturally leads to another misconception that quantum systems will replace classical LLMs. In this study, both architectures are compared in a contrastive manner in terms of mathematics. The data reveals that identical dynamics that help classical systems learn natural language distributions constrain its ability to use efficient sampling of quantum-mechanical spaces. Performing complexity-theoretic separations (i.e., the widely believed but unproven conjecture that BPP ⊆ BQP) and a 2025 preprint reporting experimental demonstrations of quantum advantage for generative tasks we conclude that quantum utility is unlikely to lie in tasks involving natural language processing under current architectures, but rather in certain computational subroutines. We then suggest a hybrid quantum-classical architecture as the best direction to take in the future, as it has the advantages of both paradigms. This is done by studying a case study that optimizes retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) pipelines with Grover's search algorithm.

Indexed as

generative AIGrover's search algorithmhybrid quantum-classical architecturelarge language modelquantum probabilistic modelretrieval-augmented generationvariational quantum eigensolver

Identifiers

PMID42553234
PMCPMC13433594

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.