cs.AIOct 12, 2026

Benchmarking Quantum Kernel SVMs for Credit Card Fraud Detection: Performance Realities Under NISQ Constraints

Authors: Hitanshi Arora, Mohit Swarnkar, Aswani Kumar Cherukuri

Abstract

Detecting credit card fraud is notoriously difficult because fraudulent charges make up less than 0.2% of total transactions. Quantum Machine Learning (QML), particularly Quantum Kernel Support Vector Machines (QSVM), promises richer feature representations by embedding classical data into high-dimensional Hilbert spaces. However, whether this theoretical advantage holds up when managing real-world financial data bottlenecks remains unclear. We designed a controlled benchmark comparing three quantum encodings, Angle, ZZFeatureMap, and IQP against classical models while keeping sample sizes, feature counts, and scaling strictly matched. To handle class skew without corrupting quantum state overlaps, we embedded synthetic minority oversampling (SMOTE) directly into the quantum Gram matrix workflow, raising PR-AUC scores by roughly +0.04 across feature maps. When trained on the full European credit card dataset with 30 features, classical baselines reached a top PR-AUC of 0.983. However, restricting classical models to match QSVM hardware constraints (500 samples, 4 PCA features) dropped their PR-AUC to 0.750. This puts our best quantum result 0.730 PR-AUC using IQP encoding on 150 samples into realistic context. Testing on physical quantum hardware reduced performance further to 0.62 due to CNOT gate errors and thermal noise. Overall, our findings pinpoint two main operational bottlenecks for near-term quantum kernels: the scaling of Gram matrix evaluation and heavy information loss from squeezing features onto small qubit registers.

Explore similar work

Apr 20, 2026

Benchmarking Quantum Kernel Support Vector Machines Against Classical Baselines on Tabular Data: A Rigorous Empirical Study with Hardware Validation

Quantum kernel methods have been proposed as a promising approach for leveraging near-term quantum computers for supervised learning, yet rigorous benchmarks against strong classical baselines remain scarce. We present a comprehensive empirical study of quantum kernel support vector machines (QSVMs) across nine binary classification datasets, four quantum feature maps, three classical kernels, and multiple noise models, totalling 970 experiments with strict nested cross-validation. Our analysis spans four phases: (i) statistical significance testing, revealing that none of 29 pairwise quantum-classical comparisons reach significance at α=0.05α= 0.05; (ii) learning curve analysis over six training fractions, showing steeper quantum slopes on six of eight datasets that nonetheless fail to close the gap to the best classical baseline; (iii) hardware validation on IBM ibm_fez (Heron r2), demonstrating kernel fidelity r≥0.976r \geq 0.976 across six experiments; and (iv) seed sensitivity analysis confirming reproducibility (mean CV 1.4%). A Kruskal-Wallis factorial analysis reveals that dataset choice dominates performance variance (ε2=0.73\varepsilon^2 = 0.73), while kernel type accounts for only 9%. Spectral analysis offers a mechanistic explanation: current quantum feature maps produce eigenspectra that are either too flat or too concentrated, missing the intermediate profile of the best classical kernel, the radial basis function (RBF). Quantum kernel training (QKT) via kernel-target alignment yields the single competitive result -- balanced accuracy 0.968 on breast cancer -- but with ~2,000x computational overhead. Our findings provide actionable guidelines for quantum kernel research. The complete benchmark suite is publicly available to facilitate reproduction and extension.
May 27, 2026

Do We Really Need Quantum Machine Learning?: A Multidimensional Empirical Study

The rapid growth of computer vision and increasingly complex image recognition tasks has exposed fundamental computational limitations of classical machine learning models, motivating the exploration of quantum computing as an emerging new paradigm. This paper presents a comprehensive benchmarking study of classical and quantum machine learning models for image recognition on the MNIST handwritten digit dataset, evaluating both traditional models, a Classical Support Vector Machine (CSVM) and a Quantum Support Vector Machine (QSVM), and deep neural network models, a Classical Convolutional Neural Network (CCNN) and a Quantum Convolutional Neural Network (QCNN), across four performance dimensions: classification accuracy, computational runtime, parameter count, and memory requirements. Experiments are conducted as functions of both feature dimensionality and sample size, and across CPU and GPU execution environments, providing a controlled, multidimensional comparison to address gaps in prior work. For the SVM-based models, QSVM consistently outperforms CSVM in accuracy, reaching ∼\sim 0.90 versus ∼\sim 0.85 at 1,000 samples, with a higher computational cost. A feature count of 10 qubits and a sample size in the range of 200 -- 500 emerge as practical operating points that balance accuracy and runtime. For the neural network models, CCNN and QCNN achieve comparable classification accuracy, both exceeding 0.96 at 64 features and 60,000 samples, yet QCNN offers substantially superior parameter and memory efficiency, requiring ∼\sim 94% fewer parameters and ∼\sim 75% less memory than CCNN at higher feature counts, while incurring higher runtime. Across both model families, quantum models consistently outperform classical models by greater margins in accuracy as feature dimensionality or sample size increases.
Sep 20, 2026

Comparative Study of Quantum and Classical Machine Learning Models in Binary Classification

A potential path forward is Quantum Machine Learning (QML), which aims to leverage quantum computing in conjunction with classical machine learning to enhance computing efficiency and the expressiveness of models. In this paper, two different quantum classifiers - Variational Quantum Classifier (VQC) and Quantum Kernel Support Vector Machine (QSVM) - are compared with three classical classifiers as baseline classifiers - Logistic Regression, Support Vector Machine (SVM), and a Multi-Layer Perceptron (MLP) - on the Breast Cancer Wisconsin dataset. The quantum circuits were created in the PennyLane framework and simulated on a classical backend. However, in terms of accuracy, classical Logistic Regression performed better with an accuracy of 97.8%, classical SVM and QSVM with an accuracy of 95.6% each, although the Quantum VQC achieved a lower accuracy of 88.9% and had a recall of 100% for the benign class, though it correctly identified only 12 of the 17 malignant cases (a malignant-class recall of approximately 70.6%). The drawback of quantum models is the higher training time; however, since the quantum circuit needs to be classically simulated, the quantum SVM took 23.29 seconds compared to less than 0.01 seconds for the classical linear models. These results indicate that for small structured datasets, classifiers based on quantum computing have not yet surpassed well-tuned classical counterparts. In some respects (e.g., benign-class recall), they perform competitively, though not on malignant-class recall, where the VQC in particular performed worse than the classical baselines, which is worth further investigation on real quantum computers.