let’s talk.

insights.

Where quantum technology is expected to create value.

quantum technology insights.

quantum technology·error correction

7,000 → 900

C. Gidney, M. Newman and M. McEwen, “Benchmarking the Planar Honeycomb Code”, Quantum 6, 813 (2022); arXiv:2202.11845 (opens in a new tab)

physical qubits projected for one logical qubit at one-in-a-trillion error rates in the planar honeycomb code at a 0.1% gate error rate: about 7,000 with standard two-qubit gates, about 50,000 in a superconducting-inspired model where 0.1% sits near threshold, and about 900 where two-qubit parity measurements are native; these are projections from simulated noise, not a demonstration.

quantum technology·error correction

≈ 0.2% → ≈ 0.4%

C. Gidney, “A Pair Measurement Surface Code on Pentagons”, Quantum 7, 1156 (2023); arXiv:2206.12780 (opens in a new tab)

simulated threshold of the surface code when its checks are compiled into two-qubit parity measurements, raised by a new circuit laid out on a pentagonal tiling; the qubits needed for one trillion operations at a 0.1% error rate fall from about 6,000 to about 3,000, while the honeycomb code in the same simulation needs about 1,000.

sustainability insights.

investment insights.

finance and insurance insights.

investment insights·finance and insurance

Insurance

H.-Y. Liu, X.-N. Zhuang, C. Wang et al., “Quantum computational insurance and actuarial science”, Science China Information Sciences 68, 202501 (2025) (opens in a new tab)

Mortality forecasting and reinsurance allocation, shown at small scale on a quantum processor: a 4 × 4 mortality-model fit on four qubits and an allocation on six qubits, with no forecast made and no speed-up measured. Risk assessment and pricing, proposed. Claims and fraud analysis, only named.

industries insights.