Quantum Long Short-term Memory with Differentiable Architecture Search

Prayag Tiwari; Samuel Yen-Chi Chen

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 43 references

Quantum Long Short-term Memory with Differentiable Architecture Search

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read DiffQAS-QLSTM claims lower loss by letting gradient descent design the quantum circuit along with its parameters.

desk verdict The submission cannot be reviewed: the supplied full text is a gr-qc black-hole thermodynamics paper, not the QLSTM architecture-search paper described in the abstract. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.14955 v1 pith:HDE6CKIV submitted 2025-08-20 cs.LG cs.AIcs.ETcs.NEquant-ph

Samuel Yen-Chi Chen , Prayag Tiwari This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.LGcs.AIcs.ETcs.NEquant-ph

keywords quantummachinelearninglongshort-termmemorydifferentiablearchitecturesearchvariationalcircuitssequencerecurrentmodels

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

DiffQAS-QLSTM is a quantum long short-term memory model whose variational quantum circuit is discovered by differentiable architecture search rather than designed by hand. The paper's central claim is that jointly optimizing the circuit's architecture and its parameters during training yields consistently lower loss than handcrafted QLSTM baselines on the tasks tested. This matters because designing effective variational quantum circuits has been a manual, task-specific bottleneck for quantum sequence learning, and an automatic search would make such models easier to deploy across time-series, NLP, and reinforcement learning. The supplied full text, however, is an unrelated manuscript, so the abstract's experimental assertions cannot be inspected here.

What carries the argument

The central object is DiffQAS-QLSTM, a differentiable architecture search framework for quantum recurrent models. Its key mechanism is a continuous relaxation of discrete circuit choices: instead of selecting a fixed set of gates, the model treats architecture decisions as soft, differentiable weights, allowing standard gradient descent to co-optimize the circuit's structure and its trainable parameters in a single training run. This continuous relaxation is what carries the claim that the search can find better circuits than handcrafted designs.

What would settle it

Run DiffQAS-QLSTM and a carefully tuned handcrafted QLSTM on the same sequential-prediction datasets under identical training budgets and hyperparameter searches; if the searched model's loss is not consistently lower across them, the central claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper proposes making the architecture of a variational quantum circuit inside a QLSTM differentiable, so backpropagation can update not only the numerical parameters but also which quantum operations appear. It reports that this joint search, DiffQAS-QLSTM, achieves lower loss than handcrafted baselines across diverse test settings. The authors frame this as evidence that end-to-end architecture selection is a viable route to scalable, adaptive quantum sequence models, relieving the need for task-specific manual circuit design.

Load-bearing premise

The abstract's claim that DiffQAS-QLSTM outperforms handcrafted baselines rests on its reported experiments, and the supplied full text is an unrelated physics paper, so those experimental results cannot be inspected.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the reported loss advantage is real, hand-engineering of variational circuits for QLSTM can be replaced by automatic search, cutting development effort for sequential quantum models.
The same differentiable-search approach could be extended to other quantum neural network families, not just recurrent ones, adapting circuit structure to the task at hand.
Because architecture and parameters are trained together, the model can adjust its circuit during training, potentially improving performance across heterogeneous sequential tasks.
Reported consistency across diverse test settings implies the search is finding a general advantage rather than overfitting a single benchmark.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The continuous relaxation of architecture choices likely introduces a discretization gap: after training, the soft choices must be mapped to discrete gates, and the paper does not discuss how much performance is lost in that conversion.
A direct ablation separating the contribution of architecture search from parameter optimization would clarify how much of the gain comes from the search itself.
Because the supplied full text is a different paper, the abstract's numbers should be treated as unverified; running DiffQAS-QLSTM against a well-tuned handcrafted QLSTM on the same benchmark with the same budget would provide a concrete check.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: the arXiv ID and abstract promise a quantum LSTM with differentiable architecture search (DiffQAS-QLSTM), but the body of the submission is an unrelated gr-qc paper by Sekhmani et al. on EUP-corrected Reissner-Nordström AdS black holes. There is no DiffQAS-QLSTM content to evaluate. So the only thing I can respond to is the three-sentence abstract.

What is new? On its face, the idea is a reasonable extension: use differentiable architecture search to select VQC circuit structure in a QLSTM. That's a plausible incremental contribution to quantum sequence learning, and the abstract's promise of 'consistent' improvement over handcrafted baselines is the kind of claim that would need a real comparison. But there is nothing here to check—no equations, no search space definition, no relaxation details, no training procedure, no baseline definitions, no tables or error bars. The claim is asserted in the abstract and not supported anywhere in the supplied text.

The soft spot is not a subtle methodological flaw; it's a complete absence of the paper. This is either a submission error or a serious misshelving, and that has to be resolved before any review. The mismatch is visible in the full text's arXiv number and title. I can't assess soundness, novelty, or citation practice because the object I'm being asked to review simply isn't present.

Who is this for? A reader interested in QLSTM architecture search would be the audience if the real paper exists. But this particular submission is not ready for review. My recommendation: desk-reject with a clear note asking the authors to upload the correct PDF and resubmit, or if this is a metadata glitch on the arXiv side, fix it before anyone spends referee time. I can't endorse sending this to reviewers in its current state.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The submitted manuscript consists of an abstract claiming a new method, DiffQAS-QLSTM, for differentiable architecture search over variational quantum circuits in quantum LSTM models, together with a reported result that it "consistently outperforms handcrafted baselines, achieving lower loss across diverse test settings." The full text supplied, however, is an entirely unrelated general-relativity paper titled "Infrared Extended Uncertainty Principle Corrections and Quintessence-Induced Topology of Reissner-Nordström AdS Black Holes" (arXiv:2508.14953v1 [gr-qc]). There is no overlap in content: no QLSTM, no architecture search, no variational quantum circuit, no experiments, no loss tables, and no baseline definitions. The central claim is therefore unsupported by the document as submitted.

Significance. If properly documented, the idea of jointly optimizing VQC architecture and parameters during training could interest the quantum machine learning community, especially for sequential data. However, this manuscript provides no such documentation. The only evidence for the claimed contribution is a one-paragraph abstract; the full text is a different paper. The significance of the claimed result cannot be assessed, and the submission in its current form contains no identifiable scientific content relevant to the claimed contribution.

major comments (3)

[Full Text (title/header)] The full text is arXiv:2508.14953v1 [gr-qc], "Infrared Extended Uncertainty Principle Corrections and Quintessence-Induced Topology of Reissner-Nordström AdS Black Holes." It contains no mention of QLSTM, VQC, differentiable architecture search, or any machine-learning experiment. The abstract's central claim ("consistently outperforms handcrafted baselines, achieving lower loss across diverse test settings") has zero in-document support. This mismatch is load-bearing and prevents any technical evaluation of the claimed method.
[Abstract] Even taken alone, the abstract asserts results without providing the necessary method: no definition of the search space, no description of the differentiable relaxation, no specification of the QLSTM cell or training procedure, no baseline definitions, and no datasets or error bars. A claim of consistent outperformance cannot be checked from the abstract. The full experimental protocol and results are absent.
[Manuscript identity] The header of the full text gives a different arXiv identifier (2508.14953) from the submission (2508.14955). If this is a submission error, the correct manuscript must be provided; if not, the document is internally inconsistent. Either way, the current version cannot be accepted.

minor comments (2)

[Abstract] The abstract lacks citations to prior QLSTM and differentiable architecture search work; such references would be expected for a methods paper.
[Full Text] The page headers, figures, and reference list in the full text all pertain to the black-hole physics paper; this reinforces that the body is not the paper described by the abstract.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity detectable: the supplied full text is an unrelated gr-qc paper (EUP-corrected Reissner-Nordström AdS black holes), so the claimed DiffQAS-QLSTM derivation chain is absent; an unsupported claim is not the same as a circular one.

full rationale

The abstract claims that DiffQAS-QLSTM 'consistently outperforms handcrafted baselines, achieving lower loss across diverse test settings.' In principle, a circularity evaluation would inspect the architecture-search objective, the differentiable relaxation, the QLSTM cell, training procedure, and baseline comparisons to see if any prediction is equivalent to its inputs by construction. However, the supplied full text does not contain any of these components. Its visible header reads 'arXiv:2508.14953v1 [gr-qc]' and its content is a paper on infrared extended uncertainty principle corrections and quintessence-induced topology of Reissner-Nordström AdS black holes—topics entirely disjoint from quantum LSTM. Consequently, there is no derivation chain, no equations, no fitted parameters, and no self-citation network for the QLSTM claim to analyze. The absence of support for the central claim is a serious evidential gap, but it is not circularity under the specified patterns: no step reduces to its own input, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing premise is justified only by a self-citation. To flag circularity, the instructions require quoting the paper and exhibiting a specific reduction; no such reduction exists in the supplied text. Therefore, the honest circularity finding is 0, with the caveat that the submitted full text does not correspond to the paper named in the abstract and the manuscript cannot be evaluated for circularity beyond the abstract alone.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 0 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters, axioms, or invented entities can be extracted from the abstract. The supplied full text is an unrelated black hole paper, so the QLSTM work's assumptions and fitted quantities are not available for audit.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Long Short-term Memory with Differentiable Architecture Search." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HDE6CKIV

@misc{pith2026250814955,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Long Short-term Memory with Differentiable Architecture Search},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HDE6CKIV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.14955}
}

read the original abstract

Recent advances in quantum computing and machine learning have given rise to quantum machine learning (QML), with growing interest in learning from sequential data. Quantum recurrent models like QLSTM are promising for time-series prediction, NLP, and reinforcement learning. However, designing effective variational quantum circuits (VQCs) remains challenging and often task-specific. To address this, we propose DiffQAS-QLSTM, an end-to-end differentiable framework that optimizes both VQC parameters and architecture selection during training. Our results show that DiffQAS-QLSTM consistently outperforms handcrafted baselines, achieving lower loss across diverse test settings. This approach opens the door to scalable and adaptive quantum sequence learning.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 40 canonical work pages

[30]

Breitenlohner and D

P. Breitenlohner and D. Z. Freedman, Annals Phys. 144, 249 (1982)

work page 1982
[31]

Kempf, G

A. Kempf, G. Mangano and R. B. Mann, Phys. Rev. D 52, 1108-1118 (1995)

work page 1995
[32]

Bosso, G

P. Bosso, G. G. Luciano, L. Petruzziello and F. Wagner, Class. Quant. Grav. 40, no.19, 195014 (2023)

work page 2023
[33]

Jizba, G

P. Jizba, G. Lambiase, G. G. Luciano and L. Petruzziello, Phys. Rev. D 105, no.12, L121501 (2022)

work page 2022
[34]

R. C. Pantig, A. Ovgun and G. Lambiase, Phys. Dark Univ. 49, 101997 (2025)

work page 2025
[35]

Tan, Phys

B. Tan, Phys. Lett. B 861, 139289 (2025)

work page 2025
[36]

Sadeghi, Mod

M. Sadeghi, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 36, no.28, 2150202 (2021)

work page 2021
[37]

S. G. Ghosh, S. D. Maharaj, D. Baboolal and T. H. Lee, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, no.2, 90 (2018)

work page 2018

Show all 43 references

[38]

C. G. Boehmer, N. Tamanini and M. Wright, Phys. Rev. D 91, no.12, 123002 (2015)

2015
[39]

Xiang and X

L. Xiang and X. Q. Wen, JHEP 10, 046 (2009)

2009
[40]

A. J. M. Medved and E. C. Vagenas, Phys. Rev. D 70, 124021 (2004)

2004
[41]

Buoninfante, G

L. Buoninfante, G. G. Luciano, L. Petruzziello and F. Scardigli, Phys. Lett. B 824, 136818 (2022)

2022
[42]

Buoninfante, G

L. Buoninfante, G. G. Luciano and L. Petruzziello, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, no.8, 663 (2019)

2019
[43]

Akiyama et al

K. Akiyama et al. [Event Horizon Telescope], Astrophys. J. Lett. 875, no.1, L6 (2019)

2019
[44]

Khodadi, G

M. Khodadi, G. Lambiase and D. F. Mota, JCAP 09, 028 (2021)

2021
[45]

Cunha, V.P., E

P. Cunha, V.P., E. Berti and C. A. R. Herdeiro, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, no.25, 251102 (2017)

2017
[46]

Sadeghi and M

J. Sadeghi and M. A. S. Afshar, Astropart. Phys. 162, 102994 (2024)

2024
[47]

M. A. S. Afshar and J. Sadeghi, Chin. Phys. C 49, no.3, 035107 (2025)

2025
[48]

J. Peng, M. Guo and X. H. Feng, Chin. Phys. C 45, no.8, 085103 (2021)

2021
[49]

P. V. P. Cunha and C. A. R. Herdeiro, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, no.18, 181101 (2020)

2020
[50]

N. C. Bai, L. Li and J. Tao, Phys. Rev. D 107, no.6, 064015 (2023)

2023
[51]

P. K. Yerra and C. Bhamidipati, Phys. Lett. B 835, 137591 (2022)

2022
[52]

Sadeghi, S

J. Sadeghi, S. Noori Gashti, M. R. Alipour and M. A. S. Af- shar, Annals Phys. 455, 169391 (2023)

2023
[53]

Wu and S

D. Wu and S. Q. Wu, Phys. Rev. D 107, no.8, 084002 (2023)

2023
[54]

D. Wu, S. Y. Gu, X. D. Zhu, Q. Q. Jiang and S. Z. Yang, JHEP 06, 213 (2024)

2024
[55]

Sekhmani, S

Y. Sekhmani, S. Noori Gashti, M. A. S. Afshar, M. R. Alipour, J. Sadeghi, B. Pourhassan and J. Rayimbaev, [arXiv:2409.04997 [gr-qc]]

arXiv
[56]

N. J. Gogoi and P. Phukon, Phys. Rev. D 108, no.6, 066016 (2023)

2023
[57]

Sadeghi, M

J. Sadeghi, M. A. S. Afshar, S. Noori Gashti and M. R. Alipour, Astropart. Phys. 156, 102920 (2024)

2024
[58]

Hazarika and P

B. Hazarika and P. Phukon, PTEP 2024, no.4, 043E01 (2024)

2024
[60]

Hazarika, B

B. Hazarika, B. Eslam Panah and P. Phukon, Eur. Phys. J. C 84, no.11, 1204 (2024)

2024
[61]

Noori Gashti, ˙I

S. Noori Gashti, ˙I. Sakallı and B. Pourhassan, [arXiv:2410.14492 [hep-th]]

arXiv
[62]

M. A. S. Afshar and J. Sadeghi, Phys. Dark Univ. 47, 101814 (2025)

2025
[63]

Eslam Panah, B

B. Eslam Panah, B. Hazarika and P. Phukon, PTEP 2024, no.8, 083E02 (2024)

2024
[64]

D. Wu, Eur. Phys. J. C 83, no.7, 589 (2023)

2023
[65]

Sadeghi, M

J. Sadeghi, M. R. Alipour, S. Noori Gashti and M. A. S. Af- shar, Chin. Phys. C 48, no.9, 095106 (2024)

2024
[66]

Bahroz Brzo, S

A. Bahroz Brzo, S. Noori Gashti, B. Pourhassan and S. Beikpour, Nucl. Phys. B 1012, 116840 (2025)

2025
[67]

Noori Gashti, B

S. Noori Gashti, B. Pourhassan, ˙I. Sakallı and A. B. Brzo, Phys. Dark Univ. 47, 101833 (2025)

2025
[68]

M. A. S. Afshar, M. R. Alipour, S. Noori Gashti and J. Sadeghi, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, no.4, 457 (2025)

2025
[69]

Noori Gashti, B

S. Noori Gashti, B. Pourhassan and I. Sakalli, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, no.3, 305 (2025)

2025
[70]

Noori Gashti, JHAP 4, no.4, 59-70 (2024)

S. Noori Gashti, JHAP 4, no.4, 59-70 (2024)

2024
[71]

M. R. Alipour, M. A. S. Afshar, S. Noori Gashti and J. Sadeghi, Phys. Dark Univ. 42, 101361 (2023)

2023
[72]

Anand and S

A. Anand and S. Noori Gashti, Phys. Dark Univ. 48, 101916 (2025)

2025
[73]

Noori Gashti and B

S. Noori Gashti and B. Pourhassan, Eur. Phys. J. C 85, no.4, 435 (2025)

2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [30]

Breitenlohner and D

P. Breitenlohner and D. Z. Freedman, Annals Phys. 144, 249 (1982)

work page 1982

[2] [31]

Kempf, G

A. Kempf, G. Mangano and R. B. Mann, Phys. Rev. D 52, 1108-1118 (1995)

work page 1995

[3] [32]

Bosso, G

P. Bosso, G. G. Luciano, L. Petruzziello and F. Wagner, Class. Quant. Grav. 40, no.19, 195014 (2023)

work page 2023

[4] [33]

Jizba, G

P. Jizba, G. Lambiase, G. G. Luciano and L. Petruzziello, Phys. Rev. D 105, no.12, L121501 (2022)

work page 2022

[5] [34]

R. C. Pantig, A. Ovgun and G. Lambiase, Phys. Dark Univ. 49, 101997 (2025)

work page 2025

[6] [35]

Tan, Phys

B. Tan, Phys. Lett. B 861, 139289 (2025)

work page 2025

[7] [36]

Sadeghi, Mod

M. Sadeghi, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 36, no.28, 2150202 (2021)

work page 2021

[8] [37]

S. G. Ghosh, S. D. Maharaj, D. Baboolal and T. H. Lee, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, no.2, 90 (2018)

work page 2018