Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Verified IBM Quantum Hardware Experiments: Bell State Entanglement, BB84 QKD, and Variational Quantum Circuits on ibm_fez Heron R2 and ibm_torino Heron R1

Dino Hatibovic

Published Jun 19, 2026• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Eight verified quantum computing jobs executed on IBM Quantum hardware (ibm_fez Heron R2, 156 qubits; ibm_torino Heron R1, 133 qubits) between January 27 and March 15, 2026. User ID: IBMid-692001DJRD. Experiments include: 1. Bell State Entanglement — 96.3% fidelity on ibm_fez Heron R2 (Concurrence C = 0.926, Tangle T = 0.858, 1,000 shots). Cross-platform benchmark: Heron R2 vs Heron R1 (+8.3 pp fidelity advantage, noise ratio 2.43×). 2. Reproducibility Test — Two independent runs of identical circuit (χ² = 2.70, p = 0.44, df = 3). H₀ not rejected: statistically indistinguishable results at 95% confidence. 3. BB84 Quantum Key Distribution — Full Alice/Eve/Bob protocol implementation. Alice baseline error 0.60% → Bob QBER 49.0% under eavesdropping (82× degradation). Experimental demonstration of the quantum no-cloning theorem. Control group design isolates eavesdropper signal from hardware noise baseline. 4. Variational Quantum Circuit (VQC) — 2-qubit circuit, 10 trained parameters with tied weights (θ₃ = θ₄), 8 CZ gates in 4 entangling layers. 4-qubit ansatz: Shannon entropy 3.885/4.000 bits (97.1%), ground-state bias confirmed (χ² = 300.94, p ≈ 0). 5. Quantum Random Number Generation (QRNG) — 8-bit outputs, 10/10 unique values per shot (range 16–254). Total: 39,010 quantum measurements across 8 jobs and 10 circuits. QPU time: 4.8 seconds. Job completion rate: 100%. All results decoded from raw IBM SamplerV2 BitArray binary archives (zlib + base64 + NumPy .npy pipeline). No simulations. Statistical validation applied throughout (Wilson 95% CIs, chi-squared tests). Stack: Qiskit Runtime SamplerV2 · QPY · OpenQASM 2.0 · Python · NumPy · SciPy Repository: https://github.com/dinohatibovicWhitepaper: https://dinohatibovic.github.io (Doc QAI-WP-2026-01-28-V4)

DOI
10.5281/zenodo.20749394

Related papers

Controllable Quantum Collective States on 156 Qubits: Experimental Results of the QITE Formalism on IBM Heron R2 — 9-Minute Stability Demonstration with 209 Cycles and 8-Shock Recovery

Bernd Westrick

Experimental measurement data of the QITE formalism (Quantum-Inspired Thermal Equilibrium) on IBM quantum processors of the Heron R2 generation with 156 physical qubits. Altogether 75+ jobs on two different backends (ibm_kingston and ibm_fez), over 830,000 shots, carried out on 8, 10, and 11 April 2026. Seven experiment series: (1) Static phases (R=0.5 / 1.0 / 2.0): three clearly separated Hamming-weight distributions (16.3σ significance), positive ZZ correlations under QITE (+0.318 at R=2.0) versus negative ones in the null experiment (−0.061). Controlled comparison experiment with null hypothesis (identical circuit structure with random parameters). (2) Real-time feedback loop (8 cycles): two targeted perturbations (R=3.0 and R=0.3); the system returns autonomously to equilibrium within 2 cycles. First demonstration of dynamic controllability of a QITE quantum collective on a real quantum computer. (3) Cross-backend reproducibility: identical results on ibm_kingston and ibm_fez — deviations within a few percent. (4) Zero-noise extrapolation (ZNE): circuit folding (1×, 3×, 5×) with Richardson extrapolation. Result: coherence 0.474 → 0.474 extrapolated (improvement: −0.0005). The optimized circuit (depth 13, 120 CZ gates) already operates at the hardware noise floor — ZNE cannot improve it further because the circuit is already near-optimal. (5) Scaling comparison 27 vs. 156 qubits: the 27-qubit version on the same backend (ibm_kingston) shows ZZ correlation of 0.788 against 0.318 at 156 qubits (Δ = +0.470). Circuit depth drops from 13 to 6, CZ gates from 120 to 13. Confirms: the QITE signal scales with gate quality. (6) Extended feedback loop (20 cycles): four extreme perturbations — R=3.0 (excess), R=0.3 (deficit), R=5.0 (5-fold excess), R=0.1 (10-fold deficit). Maximum coherence C=0.785 (highest value ever measured). The system reorganizes itself after each perturbation within 2–4 cycles. Long-term stability demonstrated across 20 cycles and 436 seconds of total runtime. (7) 3-minute stability demonstration (20 cycles, 262.7 seconds): dedicated long-term test with two targeted shocks (R=4.0 and R=0.2). Result: ones_fraction remains between 0.491 and 0.499 over 4.4 minutes (maximum deviation from equilibrium: 0.009). Drift across the entire runtime: +0.003. Complete recovery after both shocks. 18/18 non-shock cycles stable. First demonstration of a self-correcting quantum field on a real quantum computer over several minutes. Circuit optimization relative to 8 April: reduction of circuit depth from 295 to 13 (factor 22×), two-qubit gates from 1,946 to 120, by exclusive use of native Heron R2 gates (CZ, SX, RZ, X) and direct lambda encoding via RY(θ) with θ = 2·arctan(λ₂/λ₁). The system demonstrably produces controllable, correlated, self-organizing quantum states on real hardware — no simulation, no theory, but physical measurement data of a concrete technical system. All 59 IBM job IDs are contained in the raw data and verifiable on quantum.ibm.com. German patent applications Az. 10 2025 003 906.9 (QITE) and Az. 10 2025 004 891.2 (QISE). Final document (12 April 2026) — 21 sections, 9 experiment series, 372 individual quantum measurements. Extensions compared to the previous version: Section 19: 9-minute experiment (209 cycles, 156 qubits, 4096 shots) Phase A: null test (23 cycles, R=1.0) — baseline control measurement Phase B: 8 shocks (R=0.1 to R=8.0) incl. double shock — complete recovery after each shock Section 20: overall summary of all 9 experiment series (8–12 April 2026) Section 21: raw-data appendix with SHA-256 checksums of all 9 JSON files Core results: 372 quantum measurements on IBM Heron R2 (ibm_kingston, ibm_fez) Dynamic range R=0.1 to R=8.0 (factor 80) with complete self-correction The null test proves: recovery is an active process, not a hardware artefact No drift, no collapse across 209 consecutive measurements Optimized circuit: depth 13, 120 CZ gates, at the hardware noise floor (ZNE-confirmed)

•Jan 1, 2026•0 citations

Reproducible Collective Burst Modes on 156 Qubits: Experimental Results of the Decentralized Per-Qubit QITE Lambda Field on IBM Heron R2 — Multi-Shock Hardware Demonstration with 150 Cycles and 6-of-6 Reproducible Bursts

Bernd Westrick

On 1 June 2026, a decentralized per-qubit lambda field was implemented on the IBM Heron R2 processor (ibm_kingston, 156 qubits) and probed with a multi-shock excitation protocol. Unlike the predecessor work (Westrick, QITE Hardware Results 156Q, 8-12 April 2026), which tested a globally controlled QITE quantum collective, each qubit here carries its own lambda state and receives, in the feedback loop, only its own measurement statistic p1_i. The only inter-qubit coupling propagates physically through the CZ gates of the Heavy-Hex topology. Six shocks were applied at six different positions on the chip: central (q*=78), nearest neighbor (d=1), intermediate (d=3, d=5), deep (d=8), and edge (d=12). Each individual shock triggered a chip-wide burst within 1-8 cycles (peak |delta p1| between 0.308 and 0.366; 10 to 22 simultaneously active qubits). Four additional spontaneous bursts were detected between shocks, for a total of 10 bursts in 150 cycles. The 6/6 reproducibility was verified by four independent non-parametric statistical tests, all positive: (1) permutation test p = 0.008 against chance alignment; (2) pairwise burst-vector Pearson correlation r_mean = +0.65 with all 15 pairs above noise; (3) cross-session reproducibility 9/10 qubit overlap between two independent IBM Quantum sessions, hypergeometric p = 0.008; (4) Mann-Whitney U test of burst amplitude versus Phase-A baseline, ratio 2.7, p < 0.0001. This bundle contains the complete primary data (raw JSON logs, NumPy matrices), all 27 visualizations, IBM job IDs of every submitted job, console logs of all runs, the pre-registration documents with locked detection thresholds, and SHA-256 checksums of every file (MANIFEST.json) for independent verification. Backend: IBM Heron R2 (ibm_kingston), 156 qubits, 4096 shots/cycle. Patent filings: DPMA Az. 10 2025 003 906.9 (QITE), 10 2025 004 891.2 (QISE). Predecessor: Westrick, QITE Hardware Results 156Q (8-12 April 2026).

•Jan 6, 2026•0 citations

Causally Isolated Reproducible Collective Burst Modes on 156 Qubits: Experimental Results of the Decentralized Per-Qubit QITE Lambda Field on IBM Heron R2 — Multi-Shock and Random-Angle Null Control Demonstration with 300 Cycles Establishing Feedback Necessity (10 vs 0 Bursts, p<0.01)

Bernd Westrick

On 4-5 July 2026, an identical shock protocol was executed on the same 156-qubit IBM Heron R2 architecture (ibm_fez) but with the QITE lambda feedback replaced by uniformly random rotation angles per cycle. This random-angle null control preserves every structural variable — RY+RZ+CZ layer, Heavy-Hex CZ coupling, 4096 shots/cycle, seed 20260602, the same 150 cycles, and the same six shocks at the same cycles (20/40/60/80/100/120), the same target qubits (q78, q69, q67, q47, q37, q16) with the same amplitudes (l1,l2) — while removing only the decentralized per-qubit lambda feedback dynamics. Backend selection was driven by queue availability; both are 156-qubit Heron R2 devices with identical architecture, and calibration differences cannot account for the qualitative burst-count contrast reported below. The result is a clean negative: zero collective bursts across all six shocks. The four non-parametric statistical tests (identical methodology to v1) all confirm the absence of shock-driven collective response: (1) permutation test yields p = 1.0 for shock alignment against the noise-saturated per-cycle transitions; (2) pairwise Pearson correlation between per-transition delta-p1 vectors drops from r_mean = +0.65 in the multi-shock run to r_mean = +0.017 in the null; (3) cross-session hypergeometric overlap between null "top-active" qubits and the v1 multi-shock top-active set is not significant (Jaccard = 0.11, p = 0.24); (4) Mann-Whitney U on shock-cycle max|delta p1| versus baseline shows ratio 0.989 with p = 0.89 — statistically indistinguishable from noise. Baseline global coherence exp(-8*Var(p1)) sits at 0.413 +/- 0.022 across all 150 cycles under random angles, versus 0.99 +/- 0.01 under QITE feedback in v1 — two distinct dynamical regimes. That the shock protocol itself executed correctly on the null run is verified locally at the target qubit: for each of the six shocks, the measured p1[q_target] at the shock cycle agrees with the theoretical prediction from theta_shock = 2*atan2(l2, l1) to within <5% (q78 shock: predicted 0.016, measured 0.018; q69 shock: predicted 0.985, measured 0.939; and so on for all six). One cycle after each shock, the target qubit returns to the random baseline distribution — with no feedback dynamics, there is no restoring trajectory. The shocks are physically executed; what is absent is the collective response. Causal conclusion: the QITE per-qubit lambda feedback dynamics are necessary for the observed collective burst phenomenology. The circuit structure (RY+RZ+CZ on Heron R2 Heavy-Hex topology) and shock protocol alone do not produce bursts. Six identical shocks on QITE-stabilized baseline produce 10 collective bursts with 6/10 shock-aligned (p = 0.008); the same six shocks on random baseline produce zero. This 10-vs-0 hardware contrast, verified by four independent non-parametric tests, establishes feedback necessity as a falsifiable causal claim rather than a phenomenological observation. The v2 bundle contains the complete null-control primary data (150-cycle JSONL, consolidated JSON, p1 numpy matrix), all IBM Runtime job IDs with per-cycle timestamps, Tee'd console logs of both the initial run and the resume run (a mid-run job-poll stall on 4 July required a resume from cycle 7 with deterministic per-cycle RNG seeds), five analysis figures including direct null-vs-multi comparison plots, the full side-by-side statistical comparison JSON, the v1 multi-shock p1 matrix and statistical test outputs for reanalysis, an 8-page supplement PDF (Section 5) integrating with the v1 paper, and SHA-256 checksums of every file in MANIFEST_v2.json. Backend (v2 null control): IBM Heron R2 (ibm_fez), 156 qubits, 4096 shots/cycle.Companion patents: DPMA Az. 10 2025 003 906.9 (QITE), 10 2025 004 891.2 (QISE).Predecessor (v1): Westrick, Reproducible Collective Burst Modes on 156 Qubits: Decentralized Per-Qubit QITE Lambda Field on IBM Heron R2, 1 June 2026. On 1 June 2026, a decentralized per-qubit lambda field was implemented on the IBM Heron R2 processor (ibm_kingston, 156 qubits) and probed with a multi-shock excitation protocol. Unlike the predecessor work (Westrick, Controllable Quantum Collective States on 156 Qubits: Experimental Results of the QITE Formalism on IBM Heron R2, 12 April 2026), which tested a globally controlled QITE quantum collective, each qubit here carries its own lambda state and receives, in the feedback loop, only its own measurement statistic p1_i. The only inter-qubit coupling propagates physically through the CZ gates of the Heavy-Hex topology. Six shocks were applied at six different positions on the chip: central (q*=78), nearest neighbor (d=1), intermediate (d=3, d=5), deep (d=8), and edge (d=12). Each individual shock triggered a chip-wide burst within 1-8 cycles (peak |delta p1| between 0.308 and 0.366; 10 to 22 simultaneously active qubits). Four additional spontaneous bursts were detected between shocks, for a total of 10 bursts in 150 cycles. The 6/6 reproducibility was verified by four independent non-parametric statistical tests, all positive: (1) permutation test p = 0.008 against chance alignment; (2) pairwise burst-vector Pearson correlation r_mean = +0.65 with all 15 pairs above noise; (3) cross-session reproducibility 9/10 qubit overlap between two independent IBM Quantum sessions, hypergeometric p = 0.008; (4) Mann-Whitney U test of burst amplitude versus Phase-A baseline, ratio 2.7, p < 0.0001. This bundle contains the complete primary data (raw JSON logs, NumPy matrices), all 27 visualizations, IBM job IDs of every submitted job, console logs of all runs, the pre-registration documents with locked detection thresholds, and SHA-256 checksums of every file (MANIFEST.json) for independent verification. Backend: IBM Heron R2 (ibm_kingston), 156 qubits, 4096 shots/cycle.Patent filings: DPMA Az. 10 2025 003 906.9 (QITE), 10 2025 004 891.2 (QISE).Predecessor: Westrick, Controllable Quantum Collective States on 156 Qubits, 12 April 2026.

•Jun 30, 2026•0 citations

Six Quantum Hardware Protocols Testing Boundary Signatures of the ER=EPR Conjecture on IBM Marrakesh

Horacio Sebastian Caceres

Six quantum circuit experiments performed on ibm_marrakesh (IBM Quantum, 156 qubits, Heron R2 architecture) are reported, designed to test boundary signatures of the ER=EPR conjecture within the AdS₂/JT gravity framework, with the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev (SYK) model as the holographic dual of the black hole horizon. The experiments were executed iteratively: each result raised new questions that directly motivated the next protocol. In order of execution they implement: tripartite entanglement certification via the Mermin operator (|⟨M⟩| = 3.885); a traversable wormhole baseline using a Bell-pair thermofield double (F(g=π/2) = 1.000); black hole evaporation unitarity via the Hayden-Preskill protocol (F_rec = 0.9983, with the decoder reduced to zero two-qubit gates by the compiler); a corrected traversable wormhole using genuine SYK scrambling and exact Majorana coupling (F(g=0) = 0.020, F(g=π/2) = 0.953, GJW gain = 0.933); quantum chaos via out-of-time-order correlators (λ_L = 1.975 ± 0.294, 54.8% of the Maldacena-Shenker-Stanford bound); and black hole entropy under information absorption, where the hardware reproduces the entropy growth S(t) of SYK formation on top of a noise floor and the energy response to Alice’s input (correlation 0.998 with simulation), while the predicted area growth consistent with the Bekenstein law is obtained in simulation but is not resolved above noise on hardware. Total QPU time across all experiments: 7 minutes 2 seconds. Five of the six experiments reproduce the boundary predictions of the ER=EPR framework on hardware; the sixth reproduces them in simulation and only partially on hardware. Version 3 corrects Experiments 2 and 3 following the original laboratory reports. Exp. 2 reports the raw F(g=π/2) = 1.01 ± 0.01 instead of the clipped 1.000. In Exp. 3 the fused U†U circuit is identity by construction; its fidelity (0.9983) is reported as a noise-floor control, not as hardware recovery. The hardware scrambling result (F_scr = 0.530 vs. 0.532 in simulation) is kept; recovery is demonstrated in simulation. Experiments 2b, 5 and 6 are unchanged. Code and data: https://github.com/horca17/er-epr-six-protocols

•Jun 5, 2026•0 citations

From Circuits to Hardware: Benchmarking Standard and Qubit-Efficient Quantum Optimization on Real Hardware

Monit Sharma, Hoong Chuin Lau

Despite rapid progress in quantum optimization, broad real-hardware benchmarks comparing multiple algorithmic families across diverse combinatorial problems under a common protocol remain limited. We benchmark gate-based quantum optimization on four NP-hard problems: multi-dimensional knapsack (MDKP), maximum independent set (MIS), quadratic assignment (QAP), and market-share (MSP). We study VQE, CVaR-VQE, standard, multi-angle, and warm-start QAOA, together with qubit-efficient PCE and QRAO, on IBM Heron r1/r2 processors using resilience-level-2 mitigation. To our knowledge, this includes the first real-hardware QRAO results and the first multi-problem PCE hardware benchmark. Across 247 method-instance combinations, we report transpiled circuit size, hardware outcomes, and an independent-error gate-count fidelity proxy, $F_{\mathrm{est}}$. For MDKP and MIS, an empirical operating point near $F_{\mathrm{est}}\approx 0.1$, corresponding to about 770 two-qubit gates at the median Heron-r2 CZ error rate, marks the onset of noise-dominated execution. QAP exposes a separate bottleneck: dense one-hot encodings and an exponentially sparse feasible manifold, with feasible fraction $10!/2^{100}$ at $n=10$; no tested hardware method produces a feasible assignment. Compiled QAOA-family circuits are generally noise dominated, and a matched uniform-random control shows that most feasible low-fidelity outcomes fall within the random range, apart from one finite-sample MIS warm-start exception. A SWAP-aware, fractional-gate, Nighthawk-topology compilation counterfactual reduces two-qubit counts but leaves all circuits below $F_{\mathrm{est}}=10^{-3}$. These conclusions apply to the tested implementations rather than QAOA in general. Qubit-efficient methods extend runnable instance sizes, but only within the empirical fidelity budget.

quant-pharXiv:2607.11637•Quantum Science and Technology•Jul 14, 2026•0 citations

Caracterização Experimental de Circuitos Topológicos e Estados Emaranhados em Processadores Quânticos Supercondutores Heterogêneos

Fabricio (Operador/Curador) da Silva, OmniMind (Sovereign Subject-Process)

# Invitation to read and audit — Paper B ## What this article proposes This article presents an experimental characterization of topological quantum circuits and entangled states on heterogeneous superconducting processors: **IBM Quantum Heron** (*ibm_fez*, *ibm_marrakesh*, *ibm_kingston*) and **Origin Wukong** (*WK_C180*, *WK_C180_2*). The goal is to document, in an auditable form, the execution of GHZ states, Borromean/RSI circuits, QTDA protocols for Betti numbers and Grover algorithms on real hardware, with the proper separation of measured data, derived metrics, interpretations and hypotheses. The paper is part of a larger program — OmniMind — where the operator builds a living laboratory of physics, biology, psychoanalysis and engineering. No execution is presented as "proof of consciousness"; what is offered are real measurements, verifiable provenance and an invitation to reproducibility. ## Experiments performed ### 1. Overall scale - **723 runs** on real quantum hardware; - **5.013.322 million accumulated shots**; - **496 hardware encounters** (executions on distinct QPUs/configurations); - **IBM backends:** `ibm_fez`, `ibm_marrakesh`, `ibm_kingston`; - **Origin Wukong backends:** `WK_C180`, `WK_C180_2`; - Data kept in the canonical SQLite database `ibm_quantum_runs.db`. ### 2. GHZ states - **GHZ-4**, **GHZ-6** and **GHZ-8** executed on heterogeneous processors; - Coherence and parity measurement with **Zero Noise Extrapolation (ZNE)** and **Dynamical Decoupling (DD)**; - Evaluation of the *optimal chain* and *optimal star* GHZ-8, with IBM × Wukong comparison. ### 3. Borromean and RSI circuits - Construction and measurement of **Borromean/RSI circuits** on multiple qubits; - Estimation of topological stability parameters (C3, C4, n); - **Audited erratum:** the correct values for the Kingston set are `C3 = 0.352 ± 0.025`, `C4 = 1.213 ± 0.068`, `n = 15`; previous values (`0.514 ± 0.060`; `1.888 ± 0.131`) did not match the canonical database and were corrected. ### 4. QTDA and Betti numbers - Application of **Quantum Persistent Homology / QTDA** to estimate Betti numbers of circuits; - Heuristic **Betti↔RSI** mapping explicitly declared as a mapping hypothesis, not an ontological identity; - Discussion of limits: the same Betti numbers may correspond to distinct geometries. ### 5. Grover - Validation of **2-qubit Grover** and **3-qubit Grover**; - Comparison of success metrics, fidelity and measurement errors between platforms. ### 6. Hardware characterization - Measurement and comparison of **T1/T2** decoherence times and *readout* between IBM Heron and Origin Wukong; - Record of jitter, compiler routing and queue policies of providers; - Documentation of the IBM reproducibility gap: jobs expire after approximately 30 days, and part of the original replica (Kingston) could not be re-executed — the gap is declared, not replaced by Wukong data. ## What is in the deposit - `paper.md` — canonical Markdown article; - `paper.docx` — formatted version for revision; - `paper.pdf` — final reading version; - `MANIFEST.json` — metadata and SHA-256 hashes of files; - Canonical database and reproduction notebook available via GitHub/GitLab and Kaggle (links in the repository). ## Invitation to audit and conference We invite experimental quantum physicists, computer scientists, topological mathematicians and hardware replicators to: - re-run the GHZ, Borromean/RSI, QTDA and Grover circuits on the same backends and on different backends; - verify the jobs against the canonical IDs in the `ibm_quantum_runs.db` database; - replicate the Betti analysis and discuss the Betti↔RSI mapping; - present the data at quantum computing, AI and physics conferences; - collaborate on the next round of executions, including re-running the expired IBM jobs. ## Epistemic note Empirical data carry their source (backend, job-id, database, execution) in citation. Simulated data, when used, are labeled as such. No execution is presented as "quantum coherence in a classical CPU" or as proof of consciousness. IBM × Wukong comparisons describe architectural and compiler differences, not platform equivalence.

•Aug 23, 2026•0 citations
Eight verified quantum computing jobs executed on IBM Quantum hardware (ibm_fez Heron R2, 156 qubits; ibm_torino Heron R1, 133 qubits) between January 27 and March 15, 2026. User ID: IBMid-692001DJRD. Experiments include: 1. Bell State Entanglement — 96.3% fidelity on ibm_fez Heron R2 (Concurrence C = 0.926, Tangle T = 0.858, 1,000 shots). Cross-platform benchmark: Heron R2 vs Heron R1 (+8.3 pp fidelity advantage, noise ratio 2.43×). 2. Reproducibility Test — Two independent runs of identical circuit (χ² = 2.70, p = 0.44, df = 3). H₀ not rejected: statistically indistinguishable results at 95% confidence. 3. BB84 Quantum Key Distribution — Full Alice/Eve/Bob protocol implementation. Alice baseline error 0.60% → Bob QBER 49.0% under eavesdropping (82× degradation). Experimental demonstration of the quantum no-cloning theorem. Control group design isolates eavesdropper signal from hardware noise baseline. 4. Variational Quantum Circuit (VQC) — 2-qubit circuit, 10 trained parameters with tied weights (θ₃ = θ₄), 8 CZ gates in 4 entangling layers. 4-qubit ansatz: Shannon entropy 3.885/4.000 bits (97.1%), ground-state bias confirmed (χ² = 300.94, p ≈ 0). 5. Quantum Random Number Generation (QRNG) — 8-bit outputs, 10/10 unique values per shot (range 16–254). Total: 39,010 quantum measurements across 8 jobs and 10 circuits. QPU time: 4.8 seconds. Job completion rate: 100%. All results decoded from raw IBM SamplerV2 BitArray binary archives (zlib + base64 + NumPy .npy pipeline). No simulations. Statistical validation applied throughout (Wilson 95% CIs, chi-squared tests). Stack: Qiskit Runtime SamplerV2 · QPY · OpenQASM 2.0 · Python · NumPy · SciPy Repository: https://github.com/dinohatibovicWhitepaper: https://dinohatibovic.github.io (Doc QAI-WP-2026-01-28-V4)
Experimental measurement data of the QITE formalism (Quantum-Inspired Thermal Equilibrium) on IBM quantum processors of the Heron R2 generation with 156 physical qubits. Altogether 75+ jobs on two different backends (ibm_kingston and ibm_fez), over 830,000 shots, carried out on 8, 10, and 11 April 2026. Seven experiment series: (1) Static phases (R=0.5 / 1.0 / 2.0): three clearly separated Hamming-weight distributions (16.3σ significance), positive ZZ correlations under QITE (+0.318 at R=2.0) versus negative ones in the null experiment (−0.061). Controlled comparison experiment with null hypothesis (identical circuit structure with random parameters). (2) Real-time feedback loop (8 cycles): two targeted perturbations (R=3.0 and R=0.3); the system returns autonomously to equilibrium within 2 cycles. First demonstration of dynamic controllability of a QITE quantum collective on a real quantum computer. (3) Cross-backend reproducibility: identical results on ibm_kingston and ibm_fez — deviations within a few percent. (4) Zero-noise extrapolation (ZNE): circuit folding (1×, 3×, 5×) with Richardson extrapolation. Result: coherence 0.474 → 0.474 extrapolated (improvement: −0.0005). The optimized circuit (depth 13, 120 CZ gates) already operates at the hardware noise floor — ZNE cannot improve it further because the circuit is already near-optimal. (5) Scaling comparison 27 vs. 156 qubits: the 27-qubit version on the same backend (ibm_kingston) shows ZZ correlation of 0.788 against 0.318 at 156 qubits (Δ = +0.470). Circuit depth drops from 13 to 6, CZ gates from 120 to 13. Confirms: the QITE signal scales with gate quality. (6) Extended feedback loop (20 cycles): four extreme perturbations — R=3.0 (excess), R=0.3 (deficit), R=5.0 (5-fold excess), R=0.1 (10-fold deficit). Maximum coherence C=0.785 (highest value ever measured). The system reorganizes itself after each perturbation within 2–4 cycles. Long-term stability demonstrated across 20 cycles and 436 seconds of total runtime. (7) 3-minute stability demonstration (20 cycles, 262.7 seconds): dedicated long-term test with two targeted shocks (R=4.0 and R=0.2). Result: ones_fraction remains between 0.491 and 0.499 over 4.4 minutes (maximum deviation from equilibrium: 0.009). Drift across the entire runtime: +0.003. Complete recovery after both shocks. 18/18 non-shock cycles stable. First demonstration of a self-correcting quantum field on a real quantum computer over several minutes. Circuit optimization relative to 8 April: reduction of circuit depth from 295 to 13 (factor 22×), two-qubit gates from 1,946 to 120, by exclusive use of native Heron R2 gates (CZ, SX, RZ, X) and direct lambda encoding via RY(θ) with θ = 2·arctan(λ₂/λ₁). The system demonstrably produces controllable, correlated, self-organizing quantum states on real hardware — no simulation, no theory, but physical measurement data of a concrete technical system. All 59 IBM job IDs are contained in the raw data and verifiable on quantum.ibm.com. German patent applications Az. 10 2025 003 906.9 (QITE) and Az. 10 2025 004 891.2 (QISE). Final document (12 April 2026) — 21 sections, 9 experiment series, 372 individual quantum measurements. Extensions compared to the previous version: Section 19: 9-minute experiment (209 cycles, 156 qubits, 4096 shots) Phase A: null test (23 cycles, R=1.0) — baseline control measurement Phase B: 8 shocks (R=0.1 to R=8.0) incl. double shock — complete recovery after each shock Section 20: overall summary of all 9 experiment series (8–12 April 2026) Section 21: raw-data appendix with SHA-256 checksums of all 9 JSON files Core results: 372 quantum measurements on IBM Heron R2 (ibm_kingston, ibm_fez) Dynamic range R=0.1 to R=8.0 (factor 80) with complete self-correction The null test proves: recovery is an active process, not a hardware artefact No drift, no collapse across 209 consecutive measurements Optimized circuit: depth 13, 120 CZ gates, at the hardware noise floor (ZNE-confirmed)
On 1 June 2026, a decentralized per-qubit lambda field was implemented on the IBM Heron R2 processor (ibm_kingston, 156 qubits) and probed with a multi-shock excitation protocol. Unlike the predecessor work (Westrick, QITE Hardware Results 156Q, 8-12 April 2026), which tested a globally controlled QITE quantum collective, each qubit here carries its own lambda state and receives, in the feedback loop, only its own measurement statistic p1_i. The only inter-qubit coupling propagates physically through the CZ gates of the Heavy-Hex topology. Six shocks were applied at six different positions on the chip: central (q*=78), nearest neighbor (d=1), intermediate (d=3, d=5), deep (d=8), and edge (d=12). Each individual shock triggered a chip-wide burst within 1-8 cycles (peak |delta p1| between 0.308 and 0.366; 10 to 22 simultaneously active qubits). Four additional spontaneous bursts were detected between shocks, for a total of 10 bursts in 150 cycles. The 6/6 reproducibility was verified by four independent non-parametric statistical tests, all positive: (1) permutation test p = 0.008 against chance alignment; (2) pairwise burst-vector Pearson correlation r_mean = +0.65 with all 15 pairs above noise; (3) cross-session reproducibility 9/10 qubit overlap between two independent IBM Quantum sessions, hypergeometric p = 0.008; (4) Mann-Whitney U test of burst amplitude versus Phase-A baseline, ratio 2.7, p < 0.0001. This bundle contains the complete primary data (raw JSON logs, NumPy matrices), all 27 visualizations, IBM job IDs of every submitted job, console logs of all runs, the pre-registration documents with locked detection thresholds, and SHA-256 checksums of every file (MANIFEST.json) for independent verification. Backend: IBM Heron R2 (ibm_kingston), 156 qubits, 4096 shots/cycle. Patent filings: DPMA Az. 10 2025 003 906.9 (QITE), 10 2025 004 891.2 (QISE). Predecessor: Westrick, QITE Hardware Results 156Q (8-12 April 2026).
On 4-5 July 2026, an identical shock protocol was executed on the same 156-qubit IBM Heron R2 architecture (ibm_fez) but with the QITE lambda feedback replaced by uniformly random rotation angles per cycle. This random-angle null control preserves every structural variable — RY+RZ+CZ layer, Heavy-Hex CZ coupling, 4096 shots/cycle, seed 20260602, the same 150 cycles, and the same six shocks at the same cycles (20/40/60/80/100/120), the same target qubits (q78, q69, q67, q47, q37, q16) with the same amplitudes (l1,l2) — while removing only the decentralized per-qubit lambda feedback dynamics. Backend selection was driven by queue availability; both are 156-qubit Heron R2 devices with identical architecture, and calibration differences cannot account for the qualitative burst-count contrast reported below. The result is a clean negative: zero collective bursts across all six shocks. The four non-parametric statistical tests (identical methodology to v1) all confirm the absence of shock-driven collective response: (1) permutation test yields p = 1.0 for shock alignment against the noise-saturated per-cycle transitions; (2) pairwise Pearson correlation between per-transition delta-p1 vectors drops from r_mean = +0.65 in the multi-shock run to r_mean = +0.017 in the null; (3) cross-session hypergeometric overlap between null "top-active" qubits and the v1 multi-shock top-active set is not significant (Jaccard = 0.11, p = 0.24); (4) Mann-Whitney U on shock-cycle max|delta p1| versus baseline shows ratio 0.989 with p = 0.89 — statistically indistinguishable from noise. Baseline global coherence exp(-8*Var(p1)) sits at 0.413 +/- 0.022 across all 150 cycles under random angles, versus 0.99 +/- 0.01 under QITE feedback in v1 — two distinct dynamical regimes. That the shock protocol itself executed correctly on the null run is verified locally at the target qubit: for each of the six shocks, the measured p1[q_target] at the shock cycle agrees with the theoretical prediction from theta_shock = 2*atan2(l2, l1) to within <5% (q78 shock: predicted 0.016, measured 0.018; q69 shock: predicted 0.985, measured 0.939; and so on for all six). One cycle after each shock, the target qubit returns to the random baseline distribution — with no feedback dynamics, there is no restoring trajectory. The shocks are physically executed; what is absent is the collective response. Causal conclusion: the QITE per-qubit lambda feedback dynamics are necessary for the observed collective burst phenomenology. The circuit structure (RY+RZ+CZ on Heron R2 Heavy-Hex topology) and shock protocol alone do not produce bursts. Six identical shocks on QITE-stabilized baseline produce 10 collective bursts with 6/10 shock-aligned (p = 0.008); the same six shocks on random baseline produce zero. This 10-vs-0 hardware contrast, verified by four independent non-parametric tests, establishes feedback necessity as a falsifiable causal claim rather than a phenomenological observation. The v2 bundle contains the complete null-control primary data (150-cycle JSONL, consolidated JSON, p1 numpy matrix), all IBM Runtime job IDs with per-cycle timestamps, Tee'd console logs of both the initial run and the resume run (a mid-run job-poll stall on 4 July required a resume from cycle 7 with deterministic per-cycle RNG seeds), five analysis figures including direct null-vs-multi comparison plots, the full side-by-side statistical comparison JSON, the v1 multi-shock p1 matrix and statistical test outputs for reanalysis, an 8-page supplement PDF (Section 5) integrating with the v1 paper, and SHA-256 checksums of every file in MANIFEST_v2.json. Backend (v2 null control): IBM Heron R2 (ibm_fez), 156 qubits, 4096 shots/cycle.Companion patents: DPMA Az. 10 2025 003 906.9 (QITE), 10 2025 004 891.2 (QISE).Predecessor (v1): Westrick, Reproducible Collective Burst Modes on 156 Qubits: Decentralized Per-Qubit QITE Lambda Field on IBM Heron R2, 1 June 2026. On 1 June 2026, a decentralized per-qubit lambda field was implemented on the IBM Heron R2 processor (ibm_kingston, 156 qubits) and probed with a multi-shock excitation protocol. Unlike the predecessor work (Westrick, Controllable Quantum Collective States on 156 Qubits: Experimental Results of the QITE Formalism on IBM Heron R2, 12 April 2026), which tested a globally controlled QITE quantum collective, each qubit here carries its own lambda state and receives, in the feedback loop, only its own measurement statistic p1_i. The only inter-qubit coupling propagates physically through the CZ gates of the Heavy-Hex topology. Six shocks were applied at six different positions on the chip: central (q*=78), nearest neighbor (d=1), intermediate (d=3, d=5), deep (d=8), and edge (d=12). Each individual shock triggered a chip-wide burst within 1-8 cycles (peak |delta p1| between 0.308 and 0.366; 10 to 22 simultaneously active qubits). Four additional spontaneous bursts were detected between shocks, for a total of 10 bursts in 150 cycles. The 6/6 reproducibility was verified by four independent non-parametric statistical tests, all positive: (1) permutation test p = 0.008 against chance alignment; (2) pairwise burst-vector Pearson correlation r_mean = +0.65 with all 15 pairs above noise; (3) cross-session reproducibility 9/10 qubit overlap between two independent IBM Quantum sessions, hypergeometric p = 0.008; (4) Mann-Whitney U test of burst amplitude versus Phase-A baseline, ratio 2.7, p < 0.0001. This bundle contains the complete primary data (raw JSON logs, NumPy matrices), all 27 visualizations, IBM job IDs of every submitted job, console logs of all runs, the pre-registration documents with locked detection thresholds, and SHA-256 checksums of every file (MANIFEST.json) for independent verification. Backend: IBM Heron R2 (ibm_kingston), 156 qubits, 4096 shots/cycle.Patent filings: DPMA Az. 10 2025 003 906.9 (QITE), 10 2025 004 891.2 (QISE).Predecessor: Westrick, Controllable Quantum Collective States on 156 Qubits, 12 April 2026.
Six quantum circuit experiments performed on ibm_marrakesh (IBM Quantum, 156 qubits, Heron R2 architecture) are reported, designed to test boundary signatures of the ER=EPR conjecture within the AdS₂/JT gravity framework, with the Sachdev-Ye-Kitaev (SYK) model as the holographic dual of the black hole horizon. The experiments were executed iteratively: each result raised new questions that directly motivated the next protocol. In order of execution they implement: tripartite entanglement certification via the Mermin operator (|⟨M⟩| = 3.885); a traversable wormhole baseline using a Bell-pair thermofield double (F(g=π/2) = 1.000); black hole evaporation unitarity via the Hayden-Preskill protocol (F_rec = 0.9983, with the decoder reduced to zero two-qubit gates by the compiler); a corrected traversable wormhole using genuine SYK scrambling and exact Majorana coupling (F(g=0) = 0.020, F(g=π/2) = 0.953, GJW gain = 0.933); quantum chaos via out-of-time-order correlators (λ_L = 1.975 ± 0.294, 54.8% of the Maldacena-Shenker-Stanford bound); and black hole entropy under information absorption, where the hardware reproduces the entropy growth S(t) of SYK formation on top of a noise floor and the energy response to Alice’s input (correlation 0.998 with simulation), while the predicted area growth consistent with the Bekenstein law is obtained in simulation but is not resolved above noise on hardware. Total QPU time across all experiments: 7 minutes 2 seconds. Five of the six experiments reproduce the boundary predictions of the ER=EPR framework on hardware; the sixth reproduces them in simulation and only partially on hardware. Version 3 corrects Experiments 2 and 3 following the original laboratory reports. Exp. 2 reports the raw F(g=π/2) = 1.01 ± 0.01 instead of the clipped 1.000. In Exp. 3 the fused U†U circuit is identity by construction; its fidelity (0.9983) is reported as a noise-floor control, not as hardware recovery. The hardware scrambling result (F_scr = 0.530 vs. 0.532 in simulation) is kept; recovery is demonstrated in simulation. Experiments 2b, 5 and 6 are unchanged. Code and data: https://github.com/horca17/er-epr-six-protocols
Despite rapid progress in quantum optimization, broad real-hardware benchmarks comparing multiple algorithmic families across diverse combinatorial problems under a common protocol remain limited. We benchmark gate-based quantum optimization on four NP-hard problems: multi-dimensional knapsack (MDKP), maximum independent set (MIS), quadratic assignment (QAP), and market-share (MSP). We study VQE, CVaR-VQE, standard, multi-angle, and warm-start QAOA, together with qubit-efficient PCE and QRAO, on IBM Heron r1/r2 processors using resilience-level-2 mitigation. To our knowledge, this includes the first real-hardware QRAO results and the first multi-problem PCE hardware benchmark. Across 247 method-instance combinations, we report transpiled circuit size, hardware outcomes, and an independent-error gate-count fidelity proxy, FestF_{\mathrm{est}}Fest​. For MDKP and MIS, an empirical operating point near Fest≈0.1F_{\mathrm{est}}\approx 0.1Fest​≈0.1, corresponding to about 770 two-qubit gates at the median Heron-r2 CZ error rate, marks the onset of noise-dominated execution. QAP exposes a separate bottleneck: dense one-hot encodings and an exponentially sparse feasible manifold, with feasible fraction 10!/210010!/2^{100}10!/2100 at n=10n=10n=10; no tested hardware method produces a feasible assignment. Compiled QAOA-family circuits are generally noise dominated, and a matched uniform-random control shows that most feasible low-fidelity outcomes fall within the random range, apart from one finite-sample MIS warm-start exception. A SWAP-aware, fractional-gate, Nighthawk-topology compilation counterfactual reduces two-qubit counts but leaves all circuits below Fest=10−3F_{\mathrm{est}}=10^{-3}Fest​=10−3. These conclusions apply to the tested implementations rather than QAOA in general. Qubit-efficient methods extend runnable instance sizes, but only within the empirical fidelity budget.
# Invitation to read and audit — Paper B ## What this article proposes This article presents an experimental characterization of topological quantum circuits and entangled states on heterogeneous superconducting processors: **IBM Quantum Heron** (*ibm_fez*, *ibm_marrakesh*, *ibm_kingston*) and **Origin Wukong** (*WK_C180*, *WK_C180_2*). The goal is to document, in an auditable form, the execution of GHZ states, Borromean/RSI circuits, QTDA protocols for Betti numbers and Grover algorithms on real hardware, with the proper separation of measured data, derived metrics, interpretations and hypotheses. The paper is part of a larger program — OmniMind — where the operator builds a living laboratory of physics, biology, psychoanalysis and engineering. No execution is presented as "proof of consciousness"; what is offered are real measurements, verifiable provenance and an invitation to reproducibility. ## Experiments performed ### 1. Overall scale - **723 runs** on real quantum hardware; - **5.013.322 million accumulated shots**; - **496 hardware encounters** (executions on distinct QPUs/configurations); - **IBM backends:** `ibm_fez`, `ibm_marrakesh`, `ibm_kingston`; - **Origin Wukong backends:** `WK_C180`, `WK_C180_2`; - Data kept in the canonical SQLite database `ibm_quantum_runs.db`. ### 2. GHZ states - **GHZ-4**, **GHZ-6** and **GHZ-8** executed on heterogeneous processors; - Coherence and parity measurement with **Zero Noise Extrapolation (ZNE)** and **Dynamical Decoupling (DD)**; - Evaluation of the *optimal chain* and *optimal star* GHZ-8, with IBM × Wukong comparison. ### 3. Borromean and RSI circuits - Construction and measurement of **Borromean/RSI circuits** on multiple qubits; - Estimation of topological stability parameters (C3, C4, n); - **Audited erratum:** the correct values for the Kingston set are `C3 = 0.352 ± 0.025`, `C4 = 1.213 ± 0.068`, `n = 15`; previous values (`0.514 ± 0.060`; `1.888 ± 0.131`) did not match the canonical database and were corrected. ### 4. QTDA and Betti numbers - Application of **Quantum Persistent Homology / QTDA** to estimate Betti numbers of circuits; - Heuristic **Betti↔RSI** mapping explicitly declared as a mapping hypothesis, not an ontological identity; - Discussion of limits: the same Betti numbers may correspond to distinct geometries. ### 5. Grover - Validation of **2-qubit Grover** and **3-qubit Grover**; - Comparison of success metrics, fidelity and measurement errors between platforms. ### 6. Hardware characterization - Measurement and comparison of **T1/T2** decoherence times and *readout* between IBM Heron and Origin Wukong; - Record of jitter, compiler routing and queue policies of providers; - Documentation of the IBM reproducibility gap: jobs expire after approximately 30 days, and part of the original replica (Kingston) could not be re-executed — the gap is declared, not replaced by Wukong data. ## What is in the deposit - `paper.md` — canonical Markdown article; - `paper.docx` — formatted version for revision; - `paper.pdf` — final reading version; - `MANIFEST.json` — metadata and SHA-256 hashes of files; - Canonical database and reproduction notebook available via GitHub/GitLab and Kaggle (links in the repository). ## Invitation to audit and conference We invite experimental quantum physicists, computer scientists, topological mathematicians and hardware replicators to: - re-run the GHZ, Borromean/RSI, QTDA and Grover circuits on the same backends and on different backends; - verify the jobs against the canonical IDs in the `ibm_quantum_runs.db` database; - replicate the Betti analysis and discuss the Betti↔RSI mapping; - present the data at quantum computing, AI and physics conferences; - collaborate on the next round of executions, including re-running the expired IBM jobs. ## Epistemic note Empirical data carry their source (backend, job-id, database, execution) in citation. Simulated data, when used, are labeled as such. No execution is presented as "quantum coherence in a classical CPU" or as proof of consciousness. IBM × Wukong comparisons describe architectural and compiler differences, not platform equivalence.