“Talking quantum circuits”

Interpretable and scalable quantum natural language processing

September 18, 2024

‍The central question that pre-occupies our team has been:

“How can quantum structures and quantum computers contribute to the effectiveness of AI?”

In previous work we have made notable advances in answering this question, and this article is based on our most recent work in the new papers [, ], and most notably the experiment in [].

This article is one of a series that we will be publishing alongside further advances – advances that are accelerated by access to the most powerful quantum computers available.

Large language Models (LLMs) such as ChatGPT are having an impact on society across many walks of life. However, as users have become more familiar with this new technology, they have also become increasingly aware of deep-seated and systemic problems that come with AI systems built around LLM’s.

The primary problem with LLMs is that nobody knows how they work - as inscrutable “black boxes” they aren’t “interpretable”, meaning we can’t reliably or efficiently control or predict their behavior. This is unacceptable in many situations. In addition, Modern LLMs are incredibly expensive to build and run, costing serious – and potentially unsustainable –amounts of power to train and use. This is why more and more organizations, governments, and regulators are insisting on solutions.

But how can we find these solutions, when we don’t fully understand what we are dealing with now?¹

At ҹɫֱ��, we have been working on natural language processing (NLP) using quantum computers for some time now. We are excited to have recently carried out experiments [] which demonstrate not only how it is possible to train a model for a quantum computer in a scalable manner, but also how to do this in a way that is interpretable for us. Moreover, we have promising theoretical indications of the usefulness of quantum computers for interpretable NLP [].

In order to better understand why this could be the case, one needs to understand the ways in which meanings compose together throughout a story or narrative. Our work towards capturing them in a new model of language, which we call DisCoCirc, is reported on extensively in this .

In new work referred to in this article, we embrace “compositional interpretability” as proposed in [] as a solution to the problems that plague current AI. In brief, compositional interpretability boils down to being able to assign a human friendly meaning, such as natural language, to the components of a model, and then being able to understand how they fit together².

A problem currently inherent to quantum machine learning is that of being able to train at scale. We avoid this by making use of “compositional generalization”. This means we train small, on classical computers, and then at test time evaluate much larger examples on a quantum computer. There now exist quantum computers which are impossible to simulate classically. To train models for such computers, it seems that compositional generalization currently provides the only credible path.

1. Text as circuits

DisCoCirc is a circuit-based model for natural language that turns arbitrary text into “text circuits” [, , ]. When we say that arbitrary text becomes ‘text-circuits’ we are converting the lines of text, which live in one dimension, into text-circuits which live in two-dimensions. These dimensions are the entities of the text versus the events in time.

To see how that works, consider the following story. In the beginning there is Alex and Beau. Alex meets Beau. Later, Chris shows up, and Beau marries Chris. Alex then kicks Beau.

The content of this story can be represented as the following circuit:

Figure 1. A text circuit for a simple story, involving three actors Alex, Beau andChris, who have a number of interactions with one another, making up a story –the circuit is to be read from top to bottom.

2. From text circuits to quantum circuits

Such a text circuit represents how the ‘actors’ in it interact with each other, and how their states evolve by doing so. Initially, we know nothing about Alex and Beau. Once Alex meets Beau, we know something about Alex and Beau’s interaction, then Beau marries Chris, and then Alex kicks Beau, so we know quite a bit more about all three, and in particular, how they relate to each other.

Let’s now take those circuits to be quantum circuits.

In the last section we will elaborate more why this could be a very good choice. For now it’s ok to understand that we simply follow the current paradigm of using vectors for meanings, in exactly the same way that this works in LLMs. Moreover, if we then also want to faithfully represent the compositional structure in language³, we can rely on theorem 5.49 from our book Picturing Quantum Processes, which informally can be stated as follows:

If the manner in which meanings of words (represented by vectors) compose obeys linguistic structure, then those vectors compose in exactly the same way as quantum systems compose.⁴

In short, a quantum implementation enables us to embrace compositional interpretability, as defined in our recent paper [].

3. Text circuits on our quantum computer

So, what have we done? And what does it mean?

We implemented a “question-answering” experiment on our ҹɫֱ�� quantum computers, for text circuits as described above. We know from our new paper [] that this is very hard to do on a classical computer due to the fact that as the size of the texts get bigger they very quickly become unrealistic to even try to do this on a classical computer, however powerful it might be. This is worth emphasizing. The experiment we have completed would scale exponentially using classical computers – to the point where the approach becomes intractable.

The experiment consisted of teaching (or training) the quantum computer to answer a question about a story, where both the story and question are presented as text-circuits. To test our model, we created longer stories in the same style as those used in training and questioned these. In our experiment, our stories were about people moving around, and we questioned the quantum computer about who was moving in the same direction at the end of the stories. A harder alternative one could imagine, would be having a murder mystery story and then asking the computer who was the murderer.

And remember - the training in our experiment constitutes the assigning of quantum states and gates to words that occur in the text.

Figure 2. The question-answering task for the language of text circuits as implementable on a quantum computer from []. Above the dotted line is the text we consider. Below are upside-down text circuits which constitute the question we ask. The boxes with words are parameterized as quantum gates. The diagram on the left constitutes one possible answer to the question, and the one on the right the other. Can you figure out what the text is and what the questions are?

4. Compositional generalization

The major reason for our excitement is that the training of our circuits enjoys compositional generalization. That is, we can do the training on small-scale ordinary computers, and do the testing, or asking the important questions, on quantum computers that can operate in ways not possible classically. Figure 4 shows how, despite only being trained on stories with up to 8 actors, the test accuracy remains high, even for much longer stories involving up to 30 actors.

Training large circuits directly in quantum machine learning, leads to difficulties which in many cases undo the potential advantage. Critically - compositional generalization allows us to bypass these issues.

Figure 3. A simplified plot from [] showing that increasing the sizes of circuits when testing doesn’t affect the accuracy, after training small-scale on ordinary computers. The number of actors correlates with the text size. H1-1 is the name of the ҹɫֱ�� quantum computer that was used.

5. Real-world comparison: ChatGPT

We can compare the results of our experiment on a quantum computer, to the success of a classical LLM ChatGPT (GPT-4) when asked the same questions.

What we are considering here is a story about a collection of characters that walk in a number of different directions, and sometimes follow each other. These are just some initial test examples, but it does show that this kind of reasoning is not particularly easy for LLMs.

The input to ChatGPT was:

What we got from ChatGPT:

Can you see where ChatGPT went wrong?

ChatGPT’s score (in terms of accuracy) oscillated around 50% (equivalent to random guessing). Our text circuits consistently outperformed ChatGPT on these tasks. Future work in this area would involve looking at prompt engineering – for example how the phrasing of the instructions can affect the output, and therefore the overall score.

Of course, we note that ChatGPT and other LLM’s will issue new versions that may or may not be marginally better with ‘question-answering’ tasks, and we also note that our own work may become far more effective as quantum computers rapidly become more powerful.

6. What’s next?

We have now turned our attention to work that will show that using vectors to represent meaning and requiring compositional interpretability for natural language takes us mathematically natively into the quantum formalism. This does not mean that there doesn't exist an efficient classical method for solving specific tasks, and it may be hard to prove traditional hardness results whenever there is some machine learning involved. This could be something we might have to come to terms with, just as in classical machine learning.

At ҹɫֱ�� we possess the most powerful quantum computers currently available. Our recently published roadmap is going to deliver more computationally powerful quantum computers in the short and medium term, as we extend our lead and push towards universal, fault tolerant quantum computers by the end of the decade. We expect to show even better (and larger scale) results when implementing our work on those machines. In short, we foresee a period of rapid innovation as powerful quantum computers that cannot be classically simulated become more readily available. This will likely be disruptive, as more and more use cases, including ones that we might not be currently thinking about, come into play.

Interestingly and intriguingly, we are also pioneering the use of powerful quantum computers in a hybrid system that has been described as a ‘quantum supercomputer’ where quantum computers, HPC and AI work together in an integrated fashion and look forward to using these systems to advance our work in language processing that can help solve the problem with LLM’s that we highlighted at the start of this article.

¹ And where do we go next, when we don’t even understand what we are dealing with now? On previous occasions in the history of science and technology, when efficient models without a clear interpretation have been developed, such as the Babylonian lunar theory or Ptolemy’s model of epicycles, these initially highly successful technologies vanished, making way for something else.

² Note that our conception of compositionality is more general than the usual one adopted in linguistics, which is due to Frege. A discussion can be found in [].

³ For example, using pregroups here as linguistic structure, which are the cups and caps of PQP.

⁴ That is, using the tensor product of the corresponding vector spaces.

About ҹɫֱ��

ҹɫֱ��, the world’s largest integrated quantum company, pioneers powerful quantum computers and advanced software solutions. ҹɫֱ��’s technology drives breakthroughs in materials discovery, cybersecurity, and next-gen quantum AI. With over 500 employees, including 370+ scientists and engineers, ҹɫֱ�� leads the quantum computing revolution across continents.

Blog

June 26, 2025

ҹɫֱ�� Overcomes Last Major Hurdle to Deliver Scalable Universal Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computers by 2029

Quantum computing companies are poised to exceed $1 billion in revenues by the close of 2025, to McKinsey & Company, underscoring how today’s quantum computers are already delivering customer value in their current phase of development.

This figure is projected to reach upwards of $37 billion by 2030, rising in parallel with escalating demand, as well as with the scale of the machines and the complexity of problem sets of which they will be able to address.

Several systems on the market today are fault-tolerant by design, meaning they are capable of suppressing error-causing noise to yield reliable calculations. However, the full potential of quantum computing to tackle problems of true industrial relevance, in areas like medicine, energy, and finance, remains contingent on an architecture that supports a fully fault-tolerant universal gate set with repeatable error correction—a capability that, until now, has eluded the industry.

ҹɫֱ�� is the first—and only—company to achieve this critical technical breakthrough, universally recognized as the essential precursor to scalable, industrial-scale quantum computing. This milestone provides us with the most de-risked development roadmap in the industry and positions us to fulfill our promise to deliver our universal, fully fault-tolerant quantum computer, Apollo, by 2029.

In this regard, ҹɫֱ�� is the first company to step from the so-called “NISQ” (noisy intermediate-scale quantum) era towards utility-scale quantum computers.

Unpacking our achievement: first, a ‘full’ primer

A quantum computer uses operations called gates to process information in ways that even today’s fastest supercomputers cannot. The industry typically refers to two types of gates for quantum computers:

Clifford gates, which can be easily simulated by classical computers, and are relatively easy to implement; and
Non-Clifford gates, which are usually harder to implement, but are required to enable true quantum computation (when combined with their siblings).

A system that can run both gates is classified as and has the machinery to tackle the widest range of problems. Without non-Clifford gates, a quantum computer is non-universal and restricted to smaller, easier sets of tasks - and it can always be simulated by classical computers. This is like painting with a full palette of primary colors, versus only having one or two to work with. Simply put, a quantum computer that cannot implement ‘non-Clifford’ gates is not really a quantum computer.

A fault-tolerant, or error-corrected, quantum computer detects and corrects its own errors (or faults) to produce reliable results. ҹɫֱ�� has the best and brightest scientists dedicated to keeping our systems’ error rates the lowest in the world.

For a quantum computer to be fully fault-tolerant, every operation must be error-resilient, across Clifford gates and non-Clifford gates, and thus, performing “a full gate set” with error correction. While some groups have performed fully fault-tolerant gate sets in academic settings, these demonstrations were done with only a few qubits and —too high for any practical use.

Today, we have published that establishes ҹɫֱ�� as the first company to develop a complete solution for a universal fully fault-tolerant quantum computer with repeatable error correction, and error rates low enough for real-world applications.

This is where the magic happens

The describes how scientists at ҹɫֱ�� used our System Model H1-1 to perfect magic state production, a crucial technique for achieving a fully fault-tolerant universal gate set. In doing so, they set a record magic state infidelity (7x10^-5), 10x better than any .

Our simulations show that our system could reach a magic state infidelity of 10^-10, or about one error per 10 billion operations, on a larger-scale computer with our current physical error rate. We anticipate reaching 10^-14, or about one error per 100 trillion operations, as we continue to advance our hardware. This means that our roadmap is now derisked.

Setting a record magic state infidelity was just the beginning. The paper also presents the first break-even two-qubit non-Clifford gate, demonstrating a logical error rate below the physical one. In doing so, the team set another record for two-qubit non-Clifford gate infidelity (2x10^-4, almost 10x better than our physical error rate). Putting everything together, the team ran the first circuit that used a fully fault-tolerant universal gate set, a critical moment for our industry.

Flipping the switch

In the , co-authored with researchers at the University of California at Davis, we demonstrated an important technique for universal fault-tolerance called “code switching”.

Code switching describes switching between different error correcting codes. The team then used the technique to demonstrate the key ingredients for universal computation, this time using a code where we’ve previously demonstrated full error correction and the other ingredients for universality.

In the process, the team set a new record for magic states in a distance-3 error correcting code, over 10x better than with error correction. Notably, this process only cost 28 qubits . This completes, for the first time, the ingredient list for a universal gate setin a system that also has real-time and repeatable QEC.

To perform "code switching", one can implement a logical gate between a 2D code and a 3D code, as pictured above. This type of advanced error correcting process requires ҹɫֱ��'s reconfigurable connectivity.

Fully equipped for fault-tolerance

Innovations like those described in these two papers can reduce estimates for qubit requirements by an order of magnitude, or more, bringing powerful quantum applications within reach far sooner.

With all of the required pieces now, finally, in place, we are ‘fully’ equipped to become the first company to perform universal fully fault-tolerant computing—just in time for the arrival of Helios, our next generation system launching this year, and what is very likely to remain as the most powerful quantum computer on the market until the launch of its successor, Sol, arriving in 2027.

technical

All

Blog

June 10, 2025

Our Hardware is Now Running Quantum Transformers!

If we are to create ‘next-gen’ AI that takes full advantage of the power of quantum computers, we need to start with quantum native transformers. Today we announce yet again that ҹɫֱ�� continues to lead by demonstrating concrete progress — advancing from theoretical models to real quantum deployment.

The future of AI won't be built on yesterday’s tech. If we're serious about creating next-generation AI that unlocks the full promise of quantum computing, then we must build quantum-native models—designed for quantum, from the ground up.

Around this time last year, we introduced Quixer, a state-of-the-art quantum-native transformer. Today, we’re thrilled to announce a major milestone: one year on, Quixer is now running natively on quantum hardware.

Why this matters: Quantum AI, born native

This marks a turning point for the industry: realizing quantum-native AI opens a world of possibilities.

Classical transformers revolutionized AI. They power everything from ChatGPT to real-time translation, computer vision, drug discovery, and algorithmic trading. Now, Quixer sets the stage for a similar leap — but for quantum-native computation. Because quantum computers differ fundamentally from classical computers, we expect a whole new host of valuable applications to emerge.

Achieving that future requires models that are efficient, scalable, and actually run on today’s quantum hardware.

That’s what we’ve built.

What makes Quixer different?

Until Quixer, quantum transformers were the result of a brute force “copy-paste” approach: taking the math from a classical model and putting it onto a quantum circuit. However, this approach does not account for the considerable differences between quantum and classical architectures, leading to substantial resource requirements.

Quixer is different: it’s not a translation – it's an innovation.

With Quixer, our team introduced an explicitly quantum transformer, built from the ground up using quantum algorithmic primitives. Because Quixer is tailored for quantum circuits, it's more resource efficient than most competing approaches.

As quantum computing advances toward fault tolerance, Quixer is built to scale with it.

What’s next for Quixer?

We’ve already deployed Quixer on real-world data: genomic sequence analysis, a high-impact classification task in biotech. We're happy to report that its performance is already approaching that of classical models, even in this first implementation.

This is just the beginning.

Looking ahead, we’ll explore using Quixer anywhere classical transformers have proven to be useful; such as language modeling, image classification, quantum chemistry, and beyond. More excitingly, we expect use cases to emerge that are quantum-specific, impossible on classical hardware.

This milestone isn’t just about one model. It’s a signal that the quantum AI era has begun, and that ҹɫֱ�� is leading the charge with real results, not empty hype.

Stay tuned. The revolution is only getting started.

technical

All

Blog

June 9, 2025

Join us at ISC25

Our team is participating in (ISC 2025) from June 10-13 in Hamburg, Germany!

As quantum computing accelerates, so does the urgency to integrate its capabilities into today’s high-performance computing (HPC) and AI environments. At ISC 2025, meet the ҹɫֱ�� team to learn how the highest performing quantum systems on the market, combined with advanced software and powerful collaborations, are helping organizations take the next step in their compute strategy.

ҹɫֱ�� is leading the industry across every major vector: performance, hybrid integration, scientific innovation, global collaboration and ease of access.

Our industry-leading quantum computer holds the record for performance with a Quantum Volume of 2²³ = 8,388,608 and the highest fidelity on a commercially available QPU available to our users every time they access our systems.
Our systems have been validated by a #1 ranking against competitors in a recent benchmarking study by Jülich Research Centre.
We’ve laid out a clear roadmap to reach universal, fully fault-tolerant quantum computing by the end of the decade and will launch our next-generation system, Helios, later this year.
We are advancing real-world hybrid compute with partners such as RIKEN, NVIDIA, SoftBank, STFC Hartree Center and are pioneering applications such as our own GenQAI framework.

Exhibit Hall

From June 10–13, in Hamburg, Germany, visit us at Booth B40 in the Exhibition Hall or attend one of our technical talks to explore how our quantum technologies are pushing the boundaries of what’s possible across HPC.

Presentations & Demos

Throughout ISC, our team will present on the most important topics in HPC and quantum computing integration—from near-term hybrid use cases to hardware innovations and future roadmaps.

Multicore World Networking Event

‍Monday, June 9 | 7:00pm – 9:00 PM at Hofbräu Wirtshaus Esplanade
‍In partnership with Multicore World, join us for a ҹɫֱ��-sponsored Happy Hour to explore the present and future of quantum computing with ҹɫֱ�� CCO, Dr. Nash Palaniswamy, and network with our team.

H1 x CUDA-Q Demonstration

‍All Week at Booth B40
‍We’re showcasing a live demonstration of NVIDIA’s CUDA-Q platform running on ҹɫֱ��’s industry-leading quantum hardware. This new integration paves the way for hybrid compute solutions in optimization, AI, and chemistry.
‍Register for a demo

HPC Solutions Forum

‍Wednesday, June 11 | 2:20 – 2:40 PM
‍“Enabling Scientific Discovery with Generative Quantum AI” – Presented by Maud Einhorn, Technical Account Executive at ҹɫֱ��, discover how hybrid quantum-classical workflows are powering novel use cases in scientific discovery.

See You There!

Whether you're exploring hybrid solutions today or planning for large-scale quantum deployment tomorrow, ISC 2025 is the place to begin the conversation.

We look forward to seeing you in Hamburg!

events

All

ҹɫֱ��