Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
186,625 studies31 sourcesUpdated 46 min ago
PreprintarXiv licencearXiv

Physics-anchored residual quantum neural networks for cloud-cover parameterization

Abstract

Compact quantum neural networks have been explored for cloud-cover parameterization, but their predictive value depends on how physical knowledge is incorporated and which classical models provide the reference. We investigate an offline residual formulation that retains a fitted \XR\ cloud-cover estimate and learns a correction to its logit in transformed target space. Using released ICON/DYAMOND-derived data, we compare ten model variants in six- and eight-input settings, with three matched replicates and 10,000 training samples per replicate. All quantum circuits use local Z readout and noiseless exact expectation values. Under a common 30-epoch protocol, residual prediction reduced physical-space test mean squared error relative to direct QNN prediction by 54.3\% and 38.8\% for six-input XYZ and ZZXY circuits, and by 49.2\% and 38.9\% for their eight-input versions. Residual QNNs also outperformed the selected compact residual multilayer perceptron in every paired replicate. A larger, longer-trained Grundner-Q1 adaptation nevertheless achieved lower error: residual Q1 reached mean MSEs of 0.00778 and 0.00791, compared with 0.01124 and 0.01082 for residual XYZ. The results support residual prediction for compact simulated QNNs within the tested budget and establish a clear boundary set by stronger classical references. They do not establish computational quantum advantage or online climate-model skill.

Related

  1. Fourier-Feature-Embedded Complex-Valued Physics-Informed Convolutional Residual Networks for Sparse and Gappy Noisy Flow-Field Reconstruction
    Biswanath Barman, Rajendra K. Ray
    arXivPreprintCC BY-NC-SA 4.0Full textFluid dynamicsarXiv
  2. Accelerating noisy variational quantum algorithms with physics-informed denoising networks
    Jie Liu, Xin Wang
    Physical Review ResearchPeer-reviewedPublisher termsAtomic, molecular & optical physicsCrossref
  3. Data-driven point spread function parameterization with generative neural networks. Application to high-contrast VLT/SPHERE observations
    T. Santos, F. Soulez, T. Bodin +2
    Astronomy & AstrophysicsPeer-reviewedPublisher termsOptics & photonicsCrossref
  4. Lazy training of quantum physics informed neural networks
    Anderson Melchor Hernandez, Giacomo De Palma
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textMathematical physicsProbabilityarXiv
  5. Physics-Informed Classical and Quantum Neural Networks for One-Dimensional Schrodinger Eigenvalue Problems
    Tariq Mahmood, Waqas Arshad, Bilal Naseer +1
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textHigh-energy & particle physicsQuantum physics & quantum informationarXiv
BibTeX
@misc{wang2026physicsanchored,
  title = {{Physics-anchored residual quantum neural networks for cloud-cover parameterization}},
  author = {Zhuo Wang and Ce Yu and Bin Yang},
  howpublished = {arXiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = oct,
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2610.26279},
  eprint = {2610.26279},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.26279},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - Physics-anchored residual quantum neural networks for cloud-cover parameterization
AU  - Zhuo Wang
AU  - Ce Yu
AU  - Bin Yang
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/19
PB  - arXiv
DO  - 10.48550/arxiv.2610.26279
UR  - https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.26279
AB  - Compact quantum neural networks have been explored for cloud-cover parameterization, but their predictive value depends on how physical knowledge is incorporated and which classical models provide the reference. We investigate an offline residual formulation that retains a fitted \XR\ cloud-cover estimate and learns a correction to its logit in transformed target space. Using released ICON/DYAMOND-derived data, we compare ten model variants in six- and eight-input settings, with three matched replicates and 10,000 training samples per replicate. All quantum circuits use local Z readout and noiseless exact expectation values. Under a common 30-epoch protocol, residual prediction reduced physical-space test mean squared error relative to direct QNN prediction by 54.3\% and 38.8\% for six-input XYZ and ZZXY circuits, and by 49.2\% and 38.9\% for their eight-input versions. Residual QNNs also outperformed the selected compact residual multilayer perceptron in every paired replicate. A larger, longer-trained Grundner-Q1 adaptation nevertheless achieved lower error: residual Q1 reached mean MSEs of 0.00778 and 0.00791, compared with 0.01124 and 0.01082 for residual XYZ. The results support residual prediction for compact simulated QNNs within the tested budget and establish a clear boundary set by stronger classical references. They do not establish computational quantum advantage or online climate-model skill.
ER  -