Abstract We report a hardware implementation of a reversible imprint-retrieval cycle motivated by the Quantum Memory Matrix (QMM) framework. Using IBM Quantum backends, we realize five circuits that scale from a minimal three-qubit memory cell to a five-qubit dual-cycle architecture, including variants with controlled phase evolution and deliberate perturbation. Because the circuit readout is based on computational-basis bit strings, the primary experimental metric is the basis-matched retrieval probability, $$P_{\textrm{ret}}=N_{\textrm{match}}/N_{\textrm{shots}}$$ P ret = N match / N shots , reported together with Wilson-score $$95\,\%$$ 95 % confidence intervals, Pearson correlations, and mutual information between field and output qubits. Across the five experiments, $$P_{\textrm{ret}}$$ P ret ranges from $$0.487\pm 0.017$$ 0.487 ± 0.017 in the evolution stress test to $$0.732\pm 0.012$$ 0.732 ± 0.012 in the baseline three-qubit cycle, with the dual-cycle and controlled-error variants remaining near 0.70 under realistic device noise. These results provide a proof-of-principle demonstration that finite-dimensional quantum registers can store and return basis-level information through local unitary gates. The experiments therefore support the operational imprint-retrieval primitive underlying QMM, while also identifying full state tomography as the next step toward verifying phase-coherent state recovery.
Abstract We report a hardware implementation of a reversible imprint-retrieval cycle motivated by the Quantum Memory Matrix (QMM) framework. Using IBM Quantum backends, we realize five circuits that scale from a minimal three-qubit memory cell to a five-qubit dual-cycle architecture, including variants with controlled phase evolution and deliberate perturbation. Because the circuit readout is based on computational-basis bit strings, the primary experimental metric is the basis-matched retrieval probability, Pret=Nmatch/Nshots P ret = N match / N shots , reported together with Wilson-score 95% 95 % confidence intervals, Pearson correlations, and mutual information between field and output qubits. Across the five experiments, Pret P ret ranges from 0.487±0.017 0.487 ± 0.017 in the evolution stress test to 0.732±0.012 0.732 ± 0.012 in the baseline three-qubit cycle, with the dual-cycle and controlled-error variants remaining near 0.70 under realistic device noise. These results provide a proof-of-principle demonstration that finite-dimensional quantum registers can store and return basis-level information through local unitary gates. The experiments therefore support the operational imprint-retrieval primitive underlying QMM, while also identifying full state tomography as the next step toward verifying phase-coherent state recovery.
Note: description expanded on 2026-10-14 for readability. It adds no new predictions or criteria. The frozen pre-registration is the attached PDF, unchanged since publication. Status: the experiment was run on 2026-10-14, after this record was published. Results, including every pre-registered test, will be reported in a separate record linked here. In plain language Theory says a quantum system never completely forgets where it started, even when its dynamics are chaotic. This leftover memory is called a quantum birthmark (Graf et al., Phys. Rev. X, 2026). Theory also says the birthmark should be larger when the system's rules run the same forwards and backwards in time (time-reversal symmetry) than when that symmetry is broken. This record pre-registers a test of that prediction on IBM's ibm_kingston quantum processor. We built two nearly identical sets of 4-qubit circuits. One set has time-reversal symmetry and the other does not. Both use exactly the same gates, so they experience the same hardware noise. We measure how often each circuit returns to its starting state, compared with the 1-in-16 chance level, and predict that the symmetric set shows about 1.67× more memory than the broken set. All predictions, pass/fail criteria, circuits and analysis code were deposited here before any quantum hardware was used. What is tested, and what is not Tested: whether the return probability stays above the ergodic baseline 1/16 at depths 8–23, and whether that excess is larger for the time-reversal-symmetric class by the ratio exact numerics predict for these fixed instances. Not tested: the withdrawn temporal-memory claims of 10.5281/zenodo.20470129. The birthmark is closed-system coherent memory, which measurement and reset erase, so no outcome here bears on those claims. Not tested: the universal random-matrix value 1.889. At this size (N = 16) the circuit family itself gives about 1.66, so a finite-size difference is expected. Not a quantum-advantage claim: a 16-dimensional system is exactly simulable. This is a hardware-validation experiment. Design Hardware: ibm_kingston, physical qubits 108–109–118–129 as an open chain, selected by a no-QPU calibration audit (included as v6_backend_audit.zip). Circuits: a kicked-Ising Floquet period Kx(a/2) → D(h1) → Kx(b) → D(h2) → Kx(a/2), with D(h) = exp(−iΣhiZi)·exp(−iπ/4 ΣZiZj), at exactly 6 CZ per period. COE (symmetric): h1 = h2. TRSB (broken): h1 = h + d, h2 = h − d. The classes differ only in virtual-Z angles. Instances: 16 seeded COE/TRSB pairs (seed 20261013), run at every depth from 8 to 23 (48–138 CZ). Observable: P(t) = |⟨0000|Ft|0000⟩|². The primary statistic is the readout-mitigated excess ratio R = ECOE / ETRSB, where E is the mean of P(t) − 1/16. A noise fidelity common to both classes cancels in R. Controls: 32 deep circuits (depths 60–63) as a decoherence-floor check. 8 state-preparation monitors. 16 readout-calibration circuits. Run: one SamplerV2 job of 568 circuits at 256 shots each, with dynamical decoupling and twirling off and the execution order shuffled. Predictions Quantity COE TRSB R Excess over 1/16, depths 8–23 (noiseless, primary) 0.0896 0.0537 1.667 Same instances, infinite-time limit 0.0952 0.0634 1.502 Circuit family, 10,000 random draws — — 1.661 Random-matrix reference, N = 16 — — 1.889 Under four simulated noise models (nominal, pessimistic, and each with coherent errors), the mitigated R stays between 1.64 and 1.77. The shot-noise standard deviation of R at 256 shots is 0.070–0.125. Pre-registered decision criteria Test Pass condition H1 (primary): symmetry dependence 99% CI lower bound of R > 1.0 H2 (primary): quantitative agreement 99% CI of R intersects 1.54–1.87 and is at most 1.0 wide S1: birthmark above decohered floor Window excess minus depth 60–63 excess, 99% CI lower bound > 0, for both classes S2: matched fidelity between classes 0.85 ≤ FCOE/FTRSB ≤ 1.15 S3: instance-level agreement Pearson r ≥ 0.80 against exact predictions S4 (flag only): state prep and drift Monitors ≥ 0.95, drift ≤ 0.045 Overall verdict: CONFIRMED if H1, H2 and S2 all pass; PARTIAL if H1 passes but H2 or S2 fails; NOT CONFIRMED if H1 fails. Every test is reported whatever the outcome. Uncertainty comes from a 10,000-sample parametric multinomial bootstrap over every circuit's counts, with instances held fixed. Amendment 1 (v1.1.0, made before any data) Amendment 1 changed two things relative to v1.0.0 (10.5281/zenodo.23355804): Shots: reduced from 1024 to 256 per circuit for QPU budget, cutting estimated execution from about 152 s to about 38 s. H2: changed from "point estimate in 1.54–1.87" to the CI rule above, because at 256 shots the point rule would falsely fail 20–25% of the time under the pessimistic models. A CI-width cap of 1.0 keeps H2 informative. Circuits, instances and predictions are unchanged. The trade-off is that H2 is now a weaker test. Provenance Every reported number is derived by script from raw counts: Source and transpiled circuits are saved as QPY. Before submission, every transpiled circuit is mapped back to 4 qubits and its unitary checked against the exact model to < 10−8. The analysis reads its decision bands only from predictions.json and its data only from the raw results file. Submission is gated on the DOI of this record. Files: The PDF is the authoritative pre-registration. predictions.json holds every predicted number and decision band. birthmark_prereg_v1.1.0.zip contains the circuit builder, verification, submission and frozen analysis scripts, plus simulated-data self-tests. v6_backend_audit.zip is the pre-submission calibration audit. Known limitations Small system size (N = 16), so the random-matrix value is not expected. The prediction is specific to depths 8–23 and to these 16 fixed instances. The noise models exclude leakage, TLS fluctuations and crosstalk from outside the chain. T1 relaxation biases P(0000) upward, which pulls R toward 1 (conservative). One backend, one path, one job: no replication. Data: CC BY 4.0. Code: MIT. Principal investigator: Amit Brahmbhatt, Quantum-Clarity LLC.
Abstract This report summarizes a Quantum Memory Matrix (QMM) focused branch of the broader space-cell framework toy-model program. The space-cell framework treats objects not as persistent pieces of matter occupying fixed cells, but as propagating informational excitations: structured patterns that are reconstructed, handed off, and stabilized through local update rules. Within that setting, QMM—used here as a quasi-metric / quantum-memory-like modeling layer—was explored as a candidate mechanism for improving identity preservation, causal handoff, false-carrier suppression, and interaction diagnostics in discrete space-cell simulations. QMM is relevant because it offers a way to describe identity not merely as local amplitude or density, but as a relational, metric-sensitive, phase/gauge-aware structure that may survive perturbation, scattering, and carrier replacement. The branch tested whether QMM-inspired mechanisms could help produce stable, bounded, orbit-like or particle-like informational structures under local dynamics. Early and mid-branch results showed meaningful progress: covariant two-factor identity, gauge/holonomy relations, conservative ledger constraints, weak chi perturbations, and causal-bridge diagnostics improved the ability to distinguish intended identity transfer from false proximity artifacts. These findings strengthened the interpretation that identity in the toy model should be measured by preserved information-bearing structure rather than by same-cell persistence. However, later multidimensional extensions exposed a major unresolved obstacle. Attempts to instantiate QMM identity as explicit 2D or 3D volume, shell, radial-shell, tangential-shell, loop/link, phase-bin, or sector-source carriers did not produce a deployable connected multidimensional carrier. The simulations could often preserve diagnostic traces, ledger balances, or phase-sector memory, while also controlling false capture and causal leakage, but those traces did not reliably physicalize into bounded, continuous carrier mass. This distinction—between an identity ledger and an actual propagated carrier—is the central checkpoint finding of the branch. The report therefore concludes that QMM remains valuable for the space-cell program, especially as a diagnostic and organizing framework for causal bridge correction, covariant identity, gauge-like relational structure, conservation-like accounting, and weak perturbation analysis. But QMM does not yet supply a complete multidimensional carrier mechanism under the tested local rules. The recommended next step is to apply the successful QMM diagnostics back to stronger scattering, conservation, gauge, and lower-dimensional scaling branches before attempting another 3D carrier family. Future multidimensional work should be derived from those interaction laws rather than by further strengthening the already-tested volume, shell, or loop templates.
A Memory That Learns by Looking, Stored Nowhere — the complete programme (Parts I–XII), consolidated as a single monograph. Successor work to the foundation deposit "Engineering Emergence on Quantum Processors" (doi:10.5281/zenodo.22050177). There, every memory was installed — the coupling matrices were computed on the host and uploaded to the microcontroller. Here the chip learns them itself, by looking: firmware v4.11 adds a three-line, integer-arithmetic plasticity law to the ESP32-C3 controller — the on-chip coupling matrix is written by the quantum collective's own measured order parameters, activity-gated, with a sign-reversible learning step serving as an error signal and a readback command that makes every learned matrix fully auditable — and firmware v4.12 adds a saturating integer delta rule whose second matrix learns temporal order itself. Across nineteen pre-registered hardware sessions on ibm_fez, ibm_marrakesh and ibm_kingston (≈1430 jobs, ≈77 minutes of QPU time), the hybrid system: learned a 36-pixel image from ONE exposure and recalled it perfectly from a random half cue (1.000 vs a never-learned control of 0.583); acquired a Pavlovian association (0.556 → 1.000), retained it through unreinforced presentations (1.000) and erased it only under the inverted-sign learning step (0.333) — forgetting as an act; learned to walk by watching a gait cycle with the field switched off; evolved memory lineages under selection with device noise as the mutation source, generation-2 mutations inherited unchanged by generation 3; and held more memories than its own calibration model predicted, with the capacity limit breathing measurably with the device day. The learned engram, read back from the controller, was delocalized into six 7-qubit GHZ-class parity registers — locally every qubit reads 0.5, jointly the parities reconstruct the image 36/36, the coherence fringe collapses under its Z-twirled dephasing twin while the classical parities survive, and the GHZ fidelity exceeds the biseparability bound on all registers: the memory carried by certified genuine multipartite entanglement. It was then teleported (entanglement certified at the destination), inherited by a subsystem that never saw the original (1.000 vs a 0.500 silent-teacher control), shown to be unconscious until decoded, recovered intact after destruction of a complete redundant copy, deleted against a receipt that provably carries no image information, and placed in superpositions culminating in Bell-inequality violations between two learned memories (S = 2.559) and between two memories that never coexisted (mean |S| = 2.456). On these memories the programme then ran a systematic traversal of the foundations of quantum mechanics, each experiment pre-registered, most of them — to our knowledge — first demonstrations on a quantum processor and all of them first on learned content: a Wigner's-friend test whose friend is a decodable memory (S = 2.633 with the friend's record as a setting); a delayed-choice eraser with a quantum coin; sensing 1.9× beyond the standard quantum limit with the stored content tuning the sensor's frequency; the optimal-cloning ceiling and its ×0.707 telephone-chain law; the Page-Wootters mechanism (conditional time alive at every clock reading, the marginal dead at 0.003 and fully revived by uncomputing); the Mermin-Peres pseudotelepathy game won at 0.9457 > 8/9, three times; interaction-free readout of stored content, with the fringe of a superposed memory dying even in the provably interaction-free events; ≈15,000 bits of certified randomness minted from the programme's Bell violations; quantum causal inference reading a memory's ancestry from correlations alone (witness +0.811/−0.884) where every classical marginal is provably blind; an operational quantum-reference-frame jump (Bell fidelity migrating 0.493 → 0.916 across the separability bound, only the relational parity surviving both frames); a 42-qubit Loschmidt echo (0.484 → 0.989, the butterfly decaying along its light cone); the rewriting of a friend's record made invisible by no-signaling itself (archive agreement 0.927 → 0.056 at friend-level total variation 0.107); Mermin's all-versus-nothing argument between three memories (M = 3.734) and Hardy's impossible event (CH = 0.057 > 0); the three-box paradox with real mid-circuit openings (certainty in box 1 AND box 2, 0.903/0.916) and the first measured N = 4 shell game (three certainties about one excitation, 0.751/0.744/0.694); the quantum Cheshire cat with four simultaneous weak pointers and the exchange of grins between two carriers that never meet; weak traces inside an interferometer loop the carrier provably never entered or left; and a protective measurement reading the expectation value of a single carrier — following sin(2⟨Z⟩) through its sign change — while the carrier survives at 0.939 against a depth-matched unprotected control at 0.558. The relational arc closes on three endpoints. The Frauchiger-Renner protocol — quantum theory applied to its own users, to our knowledge its first implementation on any platform — with both friends realized as unanimous, decodable memory records: every certainty of the reasoning chain holds individually (forbidden events 0.027/0.022/0.014), yet the jointly impossible outcome occurs at 0.0862, above the ideal 1/12, while the friends' records stay unanimous throughout (0.882/0.915). One session-learned engram delocalized and certified on two processors in a single session — eleven of twelve rows above the biseparability bound, the majority image perfect on both: the memory outlives its substrate. And a Bell violation at 96% of the Tsirelson bound (S = 2.728) mints 36 bits that provably did not pre-exist; a collective whose halves live on two different processors — one field, one coupling matrix, every feedback tick assembled from both machines — learns that unborn image in one look (35/36), recalls it from a fragment, forms a Pavlovian association whose bell exists only on one machine and whose response appears only on the other (0.944 vs 0.556), and the minted image is certified row by row in entanglement on both devices. Part X is the arc's epilogue and its sharpest relational result. The Local Friendliness no-go theorem of Bong et al. states that absoluteness of observed events, local agency and no-superdeterminism jointly bound every LF inequality — a violation forces one of the three to fall, as logic, not interpretation. The photonic violation used a photon as the friend; the standing objection is that a photon observes nothing. Here the semi-Brukner LF inequality is violated at S = 2.6995 > 2 with a friend whose measurement outcome IS its own decoded, unanimity-certified memory record (0.946) — and who then ACTS on that record, the chip writing a field pattern conditioned on the decoded bit (match 0.833) in the same session: an observer, in the LF authors' own operational sense, who remembers and conditionally acts. Within the stated assumptions, the conjunction is excluded — for a system that remembers and acts on its memory, no observed fact was absolute. The theorem selects no interpretation; the result is stated as an exclusion. And the companion arm answers the question this raises — why the world nevertheless feels absolute — by operating Zurek's redundancy as a dial: the controller GRANTS objectivity (mutual-information plateau 0.700/0.796/0.854 bits at every fragment size, consensus 0.963 — the event becomes a fact), DENIES it (exactly 0.000 at every fragment size — the event stays private), or turns it against itself (two internally redundant environment halves remembering opposite events, consensus 0.047), with the fringe/twin certificate proving that the coherence no fragment holds is exactly the quantum layer. Facts are not absolute; factuality is a resource — and this machine has the dial. Part XI performs the test Deutsch proposed in 1985 to separate unitary quantum mechanics from dynamical-collapse models — judged in the literature "beyond experimental capabilities, if not forever", with no realization we could find. The obstacle is structural: any testimony copied naively out of an observer's record carries which-outcome information and kills the interference by itself. The way through is a branch-invariant two-bit parity, extracted from the record by two CNOTs onto a persistent testimony qubit: a genuine, verifiable function of the record asserting THAT a definite outcome was seen while provably carrying nothing about WHICH. On hardware: the record is definite (0.925) and the testimony true (0.947) at 0.0011 bit of which-outcome information against a which-control witness at 0.776 bit; the record is then coherently retracted and the fringe lives at 0.901 with the testimony standing and true (0.956) during the interference itself — the collapse prediction fails on this scale — and dies to 0.024 exactly when the witness keeps which-information. Ten of ten binding verdicts. The registration freezes the scope: a mesoscopic record, not a conscious observer; unitary quantum mechanics separated from dynamical-collapse models at this scale, and nothing decided among the unitary interpretations. Part XII stacks, scales and closes it. A tower of witnesses: a second friend records the first friend's record, both storeys issue persistent branch-invariant testimonies (true at 0.958/0.963, unanimous at 0.914/0.925, joint which-leakage ≤ 0.002 bit), the tower is retracted outside-in — and the fringe stands at 0.571 with both testimonies true at 0.796 while it is measured. A growing witness: the same test at register sizes 3, 6, 9 and 12 qubits, each above its own frozen floor — the fringe rises from 0.811 to 0.899 while the twin stays dead at 0.037: what kills coherence is retained which-information, not the size of the witness. Ordo: the same two clock-stamped events, read in two frames of a quantum clock, show two certified opposite orders — P(E2 be
Abstract We introduce and test two measurement-free training primitives for quantum reservoir computers (QRC). Protocol~A encodes the loss gradient in an auxiliary phase that is fed back coherently before a dissipative reset; Protocol~B realizes gradient descent as relaxation of an engineered open system. Both match exact-gradient training in simulation---the ancilla and reset simulated as channels in a de-risk stage, their validated error model applied at the benchmark stage---on a minimal transverse-field Ising reservoir, with the coherent cost oracle emulated classically and its realization costed. A fully coherent update loop (quantum parameter register, unitary controlled update, no readout anywhere) descends the true landscape, its feedback drift attenuated by exactly 2F−1 with the fixed point unchanged. Benchmarked against classical reservoir computing--- including the memory-augmented hybrid---they improve one-step chaotic prediction, though a thirty-seed study finds no autonomous-prediction advantage; we therefore make no quantum-advantage claim. The study instead addresses three questions that gate this route. First, within the channel model studied, the reset fidelity already demonstrated in measurement-free quantum error correction [Butt \textit{et al.}, Nat.\Commun.\\textbf{17}, 995 (2026)] suffices: reset is not the bottleneck. Second, the binding constraint is coherent cost-oracle precision, set by a finite-difference catastrophic cancellation that the exact parameter-shift rule removes, loosening the oracle-precision target 2.5-fold in a like-for-like comparison. Third, a fault-tolerant realization---arithmetic and synthesis costs taken from real circuits---needs only ∼104 physical qubits and is runtime-, not qubit-bound. On three free IBM Quantum 156-qubit Heron backends at three error-mitigation levels the simulation-optimized state survives device noise (RMSE 0.016--0.057, i.e.$7$--26% of the signal spread, correlation ≥0.97). All code, seeds, and job identifiers are released.
Abstract The first hardware evidence is reported that a Quantum Memory Matrix (QMM) ‐ conceived as a Planck‐scale lattice of finite‐dimensional memory cells ‐ functions as an ultra‐shallow, measurement‐free error‐suppression layer for noisy intermediate‐scale quantum processors. On a seven‐qubit IBM transmon device, quantum states are imprint onto local cells with single‐qubit and nearest‐neighbor gates and later retrieve them through a controlled‐SWAP, guaranteeing unitary reversibility. A single imprint–retrieval cycle attains a hardware fidelity of ; prepending the same layer to a conventional repetition code boosts the logical fidelity to ‐ a 32 % improvement obtained without additional CX gates. Incorporating the layer into a variational quantum classifier lowers the final training loss by 35 % and halves run‐to‐run variance, evidencing its value for hybrid quantum‐classical workloads. Noise‐calibrated simulations further show that stacking three QMM layers brings the logical error rate to within 20 % of a distance‐three surface code while using an order of magnitude fewer qubits. Because the QMM booster is fully unitary and eschews mid‐circuit measurement, it is directly compatible with platforms where rapid stabilizer read‐out is impractical and provides empirical support for the broader notion that space‐time itself may behave as a distributed quantum memory.
This study presents the experimental realization and theoretical validation of quantum time crystal (QTC) behavior on IBM Quantum hardware. Using a 30-qubit GHZ-entangled system with surface-code-inspired fault tolerance, we demonstrate temporal information encoding, coherence tracking, and dynamic signal retrieval under realistic noise conditions. The analysis includes entropy, variance, mutual information matrices, echo decay, and cross-correlation with theoretical models. The results provide strong evidence that QTCs can function as dynamic quantum memory elements in noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) systems.