Talk:Quantum machine learning
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Wadams3, Dbaror (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Moonunit42, Jfailla1.
![]() | This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
![]() | Text and/or other creative content from this version of Quantum machine learning was copied or moved into Machine learning in physics with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
"Connected contributor" tag
@Headbomb: I'm not sure if I understand this cleanup tag here. Do any of this article's authors have an apparent conflict of interest? Jarble (talk) 01:16, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics/Archive September 2018#COI/POV check at Quantum machine learning?. Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 02:20, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
- The cleanup tag says that "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject." - but in this case, the subject is "Quantum machine learning", and there is nothing wrong with that. It is perhaps not OK to use one's own work as a source, but if it's wrong, it's wrong regardless of whether one has a close connection with the subject or not. That's why I don't like the use of the COI template in cases like these: its wording is misleading. GregorB (talk) 16:37, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
Proposing Split
As far as I can see, there are two different things being talked about in this article at the moment. There's machine learning on quantum computers (section 1), and classical machine learning for quantum mechanics problems (section 2). I'd suggest that the former stay as Quantum machine learning (since it's the more common use for the phrase), and the latter move to Quantum machine learning (physics). Thoughts? ArguMentor (talk) 11:34, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
- I agree with the split, but Quantum machine learning (physics) seems more ambiguous than, say, Machine learning in quantum physics or a similar analog. 205.175.118.118 (talk) 21:42, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
- I agree with the split, and that Machine learning in quantum physics is a good choice for the new article. Maybe Machine learning of quantum physics, alternatively. Fawly (talk) 19:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
- Did a bold split; please let me know if I made any errors. Fawly (talk) 05:47, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- B-Class AfC articles
- AfC submissions by date/26 November 2014
- Accepted AfC submissions
- B-Class Computer science articles
- Unknown-importance Computer science articles
- WikiProject Computer science articles
- B-Class physics articles
- Low-importance physics articles
- B-Class physics articles of Low-importance