Quantum federated learning (QFL) has emerged as a promising approach for collaboratively training compact quantum neural networks (QNNs) over distributed private data on resource-constrained devices. However, differences in device capabilities make a single shared QNN architecture unsuitable for all clients. While personalized quantum neural architecture search (QNAS) allows each client to select a device-specific QNN, averaging parameters across structurally different QNN architectures mixes semantically inconsistent circuit operations. To address this, prototype-guided personalized QNAS for virtual FL (vFedProtoQNAS) is proposed, where model parameters are never aggregated across clients and federated collaboration is achieved through class-wise prototype sharing. Each client independently searches and trains a client-specific QNN, computes class-wise local prototypes from latent representations, and refines them using global prototypes from the server as federated semantic anchors. Experiments demonstrate that vFedProtoQNAS improves accuracy by 3.70% over FedAvg and enhances class-consistent representation alignment.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: The concept of virtual federated learning.
Figure 2: The overall framework of vFedProtoQNAS.
Figure 3: Prototype margin improvement before and after prototype-guided refinement. A positive margin indicates that a latent representation is closer to the correct class prototype than to any incorrect prototype.
βproto
Accuracy
Precision
Recall
F1-score
0.05
91.25±0.53
91.30±0.52
91.25±0.53
91.23±0.54
0.10
91.25±0.74
91.29±0.71
91.25±0.74
91.24±0.74
0.20
91.19±0.66
91.23±0.66
91.19±0.66
91.18±0.68
0.50
90.94±0.38
90.98±0.35
90.94±0.38
90.93±0.37
Table 1: Sensitivity analysis of vFedProtoQNAS with respect to the prototype alignment weight βproto using MNIST(0-3). Results are reported as mean ± std over five seeds.
α
Accuracy
Precision
Recall
F1-score
0.5
84.32±11.77
82.67±16.72
84.32±11.77
82.64±15.48
1.0
91.15±0.76
91.26±0.67
91.15±0.76
91.15±0.75
10.0
91.16±0.93
91.24±0.89
91.16±0.93
91.17±0.92
Table 2: Sensitivity analysis of vFedProtoQNAS under different non-IID levels using MNIST(0-3). Results are reported as mean ± std over five seeds. A smaller Dirichlet concentration parameter α indicates stronger data heterogeneity.
Method
Accuracy
Precision
Recall
F1-score
FedAvg
87.55±2.38
87.96±2.26
87.55±2.38
87.46±2.39
FixedQNN LocalOnly
90.31±1.01
90.54±0.88
90.31±1.01
90.25±1.04
vFedProtoQNAS w/o QNAS
90.01±0.76
90.21±0.71
90.01±0.76
89.92±0.83
RandomQNAS + FedProto
90.17±0.92
90.32±0.87
90.17±0.92
90.15±0.90
PersonalQNAS
90.45±0.70
90.59±0.66
90.45±0.70
90.44±0.71
vFedProtoQNAS (Ours)
91.25±0.74
91.29±0.71
91.25±0.74
91.24±0.74
Table 3: Comparison with baselines under the default setting βproto=0.10 . Results are reported as mean ± std over five seeds.