Investigation of quantum machine learning algorithms in noisy environment for cybersecurity applications
Source abstract
Abstract
In cybersecurity, protecting sensitive data from malicious attacks is of paramount importance. Classical machine learning algorithms have shown limitations in this domain due to their inability to handle complex, highly dynamic, and adversarial attack scenarios. Quantum machine learning (QML) algorithms, with their enhanced processing capacity and robustness against such attacks, offer a promising alternative to address these shortcomings. Consequently, QML can significantly improve the detection and mitigation of sophisticated and evolving threats. This study explores the application of QML algorithms, specifically the quantum support vector machine (QSVM) and a hybrid quantum neural network (QNN) and QSVM architecture (QSVM-QNN), on two real-world cybersecurity datasets: APA-DDoS and CIC-IoT2022. Initially, different qubit counts and encoding techniques are investigated to assess the effectiveness of the swap test and UU† methods for inner product calculation, which is later employed in the QSVM algorithm. Subsequently, the performance of the proposed QSVM and QSVM-QNN models is evaluated and compared against classical counterparts across varying numbers of qubits and encoding schemes. The results show that the proposed QSVM model achieved accuracies of 1.000 and 0.985, while the QSVM-QNN model reached accuracies of 0.970 and 1.000, respectively, on the two datasets, demonstrating strong performance and surpassing several classical models. Furthermore, to assess robustness, the proposed algorithms were tested under various noise models, highlighting their capability to provide effective solutions for cybersecurity challenges in realistic quantum noisy environments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Quantum Information and Cryptography · Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture · Quantum Mechanics and Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Birla Institute of Technology 1 , Mesra, Ranchi 835215, Jharkhand,
Bikash’s Quantum (OPC) Private Limited 2 , Balindi, Mohanpur 741246, West Bengal,
Department of Physics, Hampton University 3 , Hampton, Virginia 23668,
References (53)
Show source-provided references
1. Digital Threats · 2022 · 4 · 110.1145/3545574 ↗
2. 2020
3. IEEE Access · 2019 · 7 · 15812610.1109/ACCESS.2019.2948912 ↗
4. Int. J. Mach. Learn. Cybern. · 2019 · 10 · 282310.1007/S13042-018-00906-1 ↗
5. WIREs Data Min. Knowl. Discovery · 2019 · 9 · e130610.1002/WIDM.1306 ↗
6. IEEE Access · 2018 · 6 · 3536510.1109/ACCESS.2018.2836950 ↗
7. Quantum · 2018 · 2 · 7910.22331/q-2018-08-06-79 ↗
8. Contemp. Phys. · 2014 · 56 · 17210.1080/00107514.2014.964942 ↗
9. F. Phillipson , “QANSWER” (2020), https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:211574012.
10. Nature · 2017 · 549 · 19510.1038/nature23474 ↗
11. 2023 · 1057
12. Int. J. Saf. Secur. Eng. · 2024 · 14 · 87510.18280/ijsse.140319 ↗
13. T. Quertier and G.Barrué, arXiv:2312.12161 (2023).
14. Int. Res. J. Innovations Eng. Technol. · 2024 · 08 · 31910.47001/irjiet/2024.805042 ↗
15. Kaggle, “APA-DDoS Dataset” (2022). https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/yashwanthkumbam/apaddos-dataset
16. S. Dadkhah , H.Mahdikani, P. K.Danso, A.Zohourian, K. A.Truong, and A. A.Ghorbani, “CIC-IoT-dataset2022” (2024). https://www.kaggle.com/datasets/dhoogla/ciciotdataset2022
17. J. Supercomput. · 2024 · 80 · 110.1007/s11227-024-05919-y ↗
18. IEEE Trans. Emerging Top. Comput. Intell. · 2022 · 6 · 41710.1109/TETCI.2021.3074916 ↗
19. IEEE Internet Things J. · 2024 · 11 · 384010.1109/JIOT.2023.3300577 ↗
20. IEEE Trans. Artif. Intell. · 2024 · 5 · 97710.1109/TAI.2022.3187676 ↗
21. EPJ Quantum Technology · 2021 · 8 · 1810.1140/epjqt/s40507-021-00107-w ↗
22. J. Appl. Phys. · 2025 · 137 · 10490110.1063/5.0241680 ↗
23. Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. · 2011 · 62 · 18510.1146/annurev-physchem-032210-103512 ↗
24. D. Gottesman and I. L.Chuang, arXiv Preprint quant-ph/0105032 (2001).
25. Phys. Rev. Lett. · 2012 · 109 · 02040810.1103/PhysRevLett.109.020408 ↗
26. Phys. Rev. Lett. · 2001 · 87 · 16790210.1103/physrevlett.87.167902 ↗
27. Phys. Rev. Lett. · 2005 · 95 · 15050210.1103/physrevlett.95.150502 ↗
28. Phys. Rev. Lett. · 1998 · 81 · 215210.1103/PhysRevLett.81.2152 ↗
29. Phys. Rev. Lett. · 1996 · 76 · 428110.1103/PhysRevLett.76.4281 ↗
30. Quantum Inf. Process. · 2017 · 16 · 31210.1007/s11128-017-1762-0 ↗
31. A. Kariya and B. K.Behera, “Investigation of quantum support vector machine for classification in NISQ era,” arXiv.2112.06912 (2021).
32. Knowl.-Based Syst. · 2023 · 267 · 11041310.1016/j.knosys.2023.110413 ↗
33. 2010
34. Quantum Inf. Comput. · 2005 · 5 · 46710.26421/qic5.6-5 ↗
35. IET Quantum Commun. · 2020 · 1 · 5510.1049/iet-qtc.2020.0013 ↗
36. Quantum Mach. Intell. · 2024 · 6 · 3410.1007/s42484-024-00161-4 ↗
37. J. Yang , A. J.Awan, and G.Vall-Llosera, “Support vector machines on noisy intermediate scale quantum computers,” arXiv.1909.11988 (2019).
38. 2019
39. Nature · 2019 · 567 · 20910.1038/s41586-019-0980-2 ↗
40. Quantum · 2024 · 8 · 122510.22331/q-2024-01-11-1225 ↗
41. Eur. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. · 2007 · 1912 · 104610.1097/MEG.0b013e3282f198a0 ↗
42. 1992 · 683
43. Quantum Inf. Process. · 2014 · 13 · 256710.1007/s11128-014-0809-8 ↗
44. Nat. Comput. Sci. · 2021 · 1 · 40310.1038/s43588-021-00084-1 ↗
45. Nat. Commun. · 2020 · 11 · 80810.1038/s41467-020-14454-2 ↗
46. A. Javadi-Abhari , M.Treinish, K.Krsulich, C. J.Wood, J.Lishman, J.Gacon, S.Martiel, P. D.Nation, L. S.Bishop, A. W.Cross, B. R.Johnson, and J. M.Gambetta, “Quantum computing with Qiskit,” arXiv.2405.08810 (2024).
47. ACM SIGKDD Explor. Newsl. · 2000 · 1 · 6710.1145/846183.846201 ↗
48. IEEE Access · 2018 · 6 · 4869710.1109/ACCESS.2018.2867564 ↗
49. 2018 · 355
50. Sun · 2018 · 326
51. 2020 · 610
52. 2018 · 204
53. AIP Adv. · 2023 · 13 · 11530910.1063/5.0172384 ↗