Hybrid Quantum Algorithms for Trade Surveillance Analytics
Bimal Mehta, Daniel musgrove, Devanshu Shekhar, Shiplu Sarkar, Vanshaj Kerni, Varun Puram, Nitesh Kansara, Abinash Pati, Sarthak Chakraborty, Parth Gaglani, Bhaskar Roy Bardhan
Abstract
Anti-money laundering (AML) and trade surveillance remain largely manual: rule-based monitoring raises alerts of which, by estimate, over 95% are false positives, each reviewed by a human analyst. We benchmark four quantum and hybrid classifiers against classical baselines on a synthetic pump-and-dump detection task: a fidelity-based quantum k-nearest-neighbours classifier (QKNN) with clustering-based routing; a quantum support vector machine (QSVM) on a one-body projected quantum kernel; a 20-qubit quantum neural network (QNN) with a Pauli-ZZ feature map and RealAmplitudes ansatz; and a hybrid quantum neural network (HQNN) in which a small classical network generates every rotation angle of a five-qubit circuit. Baselines are logistic regression, XGBoost, one- and three-hidden-layer neural networks, and classical k-nearest neighbours. All models share one stratified split of 1000 accounts (800 train, 200 test, 20% suspicious) and two 20-feature representations (ANOVA and PCA); QKNN and QSVM are also tested under simulated noise, and the HQNN is run on the ibmfez processor. The best model is classical XGBoost on ANOVA features, at a suspicious-class F1 of 61.4%. The HQNN is the strongest quantum-hybrid model, at 54.5-57.9% F1 on an ideal simulator and 55.4-59.8% on ibmfez, ahead of six of eight classical configurations; at a 15% false-positive rate, half its alerts are genuinely suspicious. Versus the QNN (42.0% F1), it raises under half the false alarms at similar recall with a quarter of the qubits. The QKNN reaches 43.5% F1 (44.4% under noise), above classical KNN (35.6%); the QSVM does not exceed 41%. We observe no quantum advantage, but a five-qubit hybrid on today's noisy hardware already matches well-tuned classical models, with room to grow via richer circuits and larger devices. We contribute a like-for-like comparison with classical models on shared data, splits and features.
Create a lesson
Related papers
Using topology to reveal all mutually unbiased bases in dimension six
Mateo Cárdenes Wuttig, Joseph Tindall
Arithmetic Depth, Minimal Gate Alphabets, and Exact Program-State Resources for Single-Qubit Dyadic Programs
Tony Newton, Dan-Adrian German
Probing gravity at megahertz frequencies with levitated rotors
Matteo Fadel, Andrea Vinante
Optimal Holding Times for Entanglement Swapping
Van Sy Mai, Richard J. La, Abdella Battou
Quantum Algorithms for Molecular Response Functions: Resolvent Kernels, Time-Domain Sampling, Query Lower Bounds with Matched Single-Point Calibers, and a Six-Route Comparison
Yunlong Liu, Yujin Tang, Miao Xu et al.
GFlowQEC: Generative Flow Networks that Learn to Sample Quantum LDPC Codes
Nuno Batista, Gabriel Falcao, Penousal Machado