Can the Quantum Fisher Effective Dimension Judge a Hybrid Quantum Neural Network?
Abstract
Hybrid quantum neural networks (QNNs) pair a classical feature extractor with a variational quantum circuit, and the effective dimension of the circuit's quantum Fisher information matrix (QFIM) is widely used to assess such models. This scalar is often interpreted as an indicator of trainability or accuracy, although these readings are rarely tested under controlled conditions. We therefore investigate what it actually measures. We define the effective dimension as the participation ratio of the QFIM diagonal, which lies between one and the parameter count, and we evaluate it across two image datasets, four frozen backbones including a random-projection control, four circuit depths on eight qubits, and three seeds. During training, the effective dimension remains well below the parameter count, and its correlation with test accuracy ranges from -0.72 to +0.87, changing sign across seeds in half of the configurations. Increasing depth activates a larger share of the circuit directions, from 0.38 to 0.91 of the parameter count, while the initialization gradient variance remains between 1e-5 and 1e-4, so no barren plateau (BP) appears at eight qubits. At a fixed circuit, the four backbones share an initial effective dimension of 6 to 9, even though CIFAR-10 accuracy ranges from 23.14% to 86.44%. These results show that the effective dimension characterizes circuit geometry rather than model quality. We conclude with a practical protocol that assigns each diagnostic to the question it can answer.
Related
- Robust and cost-effective quantum network using Kramers-Kronig receiver
- Quantum Secret Sharing from CSS qLDPC Codes: Computable Access Structures, Accessible Logical Dimension, and Topology-Aware Network Cost
- Scalable Hybrid Device Architecture on Thin-Film Lithium Tantalate for Long Distance Quantum Network Nodes with Atomic Frequency Comb Quantum Memories
- Photometric Redshift Estimation with Hybrid Quantum Neural Network
- A hybrid quantum-classical neural network for learning to route
BibTeX
@misc{mia2026quantum,
title = {{Can the Quantum Fisher Effective Dimension Judge a Hybrid Quantum Neural Network?}},
author = {Md Masum Mia and Amith Khandakar and Mohamed Arselene Ayari},
howpublished = {arXiv},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2610.14070},
eprint = {2610.14070},
archivePrefix = {arXiv},
url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.14070},
note = {CC BY-NC-ND 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - UNPB
TI - Can the Quantum Fisher Effective Dimension Judge a Hybrid Quantum Neural Network?
AU - Md Masum Mia
AU - Amith Khandakar
AU - Mohamed Arselene Ayari
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/07
PB - arXiv
DO - 10.48550/arxiv.2610.14070
UR - https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.14070
AB - Hybrid quantum neural networks (QNNs) pair a classical feature extractor with a variational quantum circuit, and the effective dimension of the circuit's quantum Fisher information matrix (QFIM) is widely used to assess such models. This scalar is often interpreted as an indicator of trainability or accuracy, although these readings are rarely tested under controlled conditions. We therefore investigate what it actually measures. We define the effective dimension as the participation ratio of the QFIM diagonal, which lies between one and the parameter count, and we evaluate it across two image datasets, four frozen backbones including a random-projection control, four circuit depths on eight qubits, and three seeds. During training, the effective dimension remains well below the parameter count, and its correlation with test accuracy ranges from -0.72 to +0.87, changing sign across seeds in half of the configurations. Increasing depth activates a larger share of the circuit directions, from 0.38 to 0.91 of the parameter count, while the initialization gradient variance remains between 1e-5 and 1e-4, so no barren plateau (BP) appears at eight qubits. At a fixed circuit, the four backbones share an initial effective dimension of 6 to 9, even though CIFAR-10 accuracy ranges from 23.14% to 86.44%. These results show that the effective dimension characterizes circuit geometry rather than model quality. We conclude with a practical protocol that assigns each diagnostic to the question it can answer.
ER -