You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.

Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Machine Learning Quantum Chemistry

Assessing the Practical Feasibility of the Clader-Jacobs-Sprouse Quantum Algorithm for Calculating Radar Cross Sections

arXiv
Authors: Edward Parker, Nicholas A. O'Donoughue, Alvin Moon, Nicolas M. Robles

Year

2026

Paper ID

15486

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

55

Citations

N/A

Abstract

In 2013, Clader, Jacobs, and Sprouse developed a quantum computing algorithm that solves electromagnetic scattering problems exponentially faster than the best known classical algorithm for that problem. We examine this quantum algorithm's potential practical feasibility for modeling a target's radar cross section. Doing so could be important for modeling and predicting radar behavior against emerging targets.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Machine Learning research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • In 2013, Clader, Jacobs, and Sprouse developed a quantum computing algorithm that solves electromagnetic scattering problems exponentially faster than the best known classical...

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #15486 #69042 Simultaneous Fragment Docking f... #69037 Spin dynamics and ortho-para co... #69034 Hardware-aware Low-latency Quan... #69025 Machine-Learning Optimization a...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.