# Hybrid Quantum-Classical Feature Extraction approach for Image Classification using Autoencoders and Quantum SVMs Source: [Hybrid Quantum-Classical Feature Extraction approach for Image Classification using Autoencoders and Quantum SVMs]() Collection index: [llms.txt]() Data updated: 2025-10-25T06:48:35.228Z Authors: Donovan Slabbert, Francesco Petruccione Published: 2024-10-24T15:02:05.000Z ## Abstract In order to leverage quantum computers for machine learning tasks such as image classification, careful consideration is required: NISQ-era quantum computers have limitations, which include noise, scalability, read-in and read-out times, and gate operation times. Therefore, strategies should be devised to mitigate the impact that complex datasets can have on the overall efficiency of a quantum machine learning pipeline. This may otherwise lead to excessive resource demands or increased noise. We apply a classical feature extraction method using a ResNet10-inspired convolutional autoencoder to both reduce the dimensionality of the dataset and extract abstract and meaningful features before feeding them into a quantum machine learning block. The quantum block of choice is a quantum-enhanced support vector machine (QSVM), as support vector machines typically do not require large sample sizes to identify patterns in data and have short-depth quantum circuits, which limits the impact of noise. The autoencoder is trained to extract meaningful features through image reconstruction, aiming to minimize the mean squared error across a training set. Three image datasets are used to illustrate the pipeline: HTRU-1, MNIST, and CIFAR-10. We also include a quantum-enhanced one-class support vector machine (QOCSVM) for the highly unbalanced HTRU-1 set, as well as classical machine learning results to serve as a benchmark. Finally, the HTRU-2 dataset is also included to serve as a benchmark for a dataset with well-correlated features. The autoencoder achieved near-perfect reconstruction and high classification accuracy for MNIST, while CIFAR-10 showed poorer performance due to image complexity, and HTRU-1 struggled because of dataset imbalance. This highlights the need for a balance between dimensionality reduction through classical feature extraction and prediction performance using quantum methods. ## Recorded benchmark results A research result applies to its stated dataset, split, metric and evaluation configuration. Compare like-for-like settings, preserve the metric's unit and direction, and distinguish paper-reported results from independent reproduction. The best result recorded here is not a claim of exhaustive, current global coverage. ## Original sources and implementation [Original paper]() [PDF]()