Untangling the Mysteries of Knots with Quantum Computers
One of the greatest privileges of working directly with the world’s most powerful quantum computer at Quantinuum is building meaningful experiments that convert theory into practice. The privilege becomes even more compelling when considering that our current quantum processor – our H2 system – will soon be enhanced by Helios, a quantum computer potentially a stunning trillion times more powerful, and due for launch in just a few months. The moment has now arrived when we can build a timeline for applications that quantum computing professionals have anticipated for decades and which are experimentally supported.
Quantinuum’s applied algorithms team has released an end-to-end implementation of a quantum algorithm to solve a central problem in knot theory. Along with an efficiently verifiable benchmark for quantum processors, it allows for concrete resource estimates for quantum advantage in the near-term. The research team, included Quantinuum researchers Enrico Rinaldi, Chris Self, Eli Chertkov, Matthew DeCross, David Hayes, Brian Neyenhuis, Marcello Benedetti, and Tuomas Laakkonen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In this article, Konstantinos Meichanetzidis, a team leader from Quantinuum’s AI group who led the project, writes about the problem being addressed and how the team, adopting an aggressively practical mindset, quantified the resources required for quantum advantage:
Knot theory is a field of mathematics called ‘low-dimensional topology’, with a rich history, stemming from a wild idea proposed by Lord Kelvin, who conjectured that chemical elements are different knots formed by vortices in the aether. Of course, we know today that the aether theory was falsified by the Michelson-Morley experiment, but mathematicians have been classifying, tabulating, and studying knots ever since. Regarding applications, the pure mathematics of knots can find their way into cryptography, but knot theory is also intrinsically related to many aspects of the natural sciences. For example, it naturally shows up in certain spin models in statistical mechanics, when one studies thermodynamic quantities, and the magnetohydrodynamical properties of knotted magnetic fields on the surface of the sun are an important indicator of solar activity, to name a few examples. Remarkably, physical properties of knots are important in understanding the stability of macromolecular structures. This is highlighted by work of Cozzarelli and Sumners in the 1980’s, on the topology of DNA, particularly how it forms knots and supercoils. Their interdisciplinary research helped explain how enzymes untangle and manage DNA topology, crucial for replication and transcription, laying the foundation for using mathematical models to predict and manipulate DNA behavior, with broad implications in drug development and synthetic biology. Serendipitously, this work was carried out during the same decade as Richard Feynman, David Deutsch, and Yuri Manin formed the first ideas for a quantum computer.
Most importantly for our context, knot theory has fundamental connections to quantum computation, originally outlined by Witten’s work in topological quantum field theory, concerning spacetimes without any notion of distance but only shape. In fact, this connection formed the very motivation for attempting to build topological quantum computers, where anyons – exotic quasiparticles that live in two-dimensional materials – are braided to perform quantum gates. The relation between knot theory and quantum physics is the most beautiful and bizarre facts you have never heard of.
The fundamental problem in knot theory is distinguishing knots, or more generally, links. To this end, mathematicians have defined link invariants, which serve as ‘fingerprints’ of a link. As there are many equivalent representations of the same link, an invariant, by definition, is the same for all of them. If the invariant is different for two links then they are not equivalent. The specific invariant our team focused on is the Jones polynomial.
They all have the same Jones polynomial, as it is an invariant.
The mind-blowing fact here is that any quantum computation corresponds to evaluating the Jones polynomial of some link, as shown by the works of Freedman, Larsen, Kitaev, Wang, Shor, Arad, and Aharonov. It reveals that this abstract mathematical problem is truly quantum native. In particular, the problem our team tackled was estimating the value of the Jones polynomial at the 5th root of unity. This is a well-studied case due to its relation to the infamous Fibonacci anyons, whose braiding is capable of universal quantum computation.
Building and improving on the work of Shor, Aharonov, Landau, Jones, and Kauffman, our team developed an efficient quantum algorithm that works end-to end. That is, given a link, it outputs a highly optimized quantum circuit that is readily executable on our processors and estimates the desired quantity. Furthermore, our team designed problem-tailored error detection and error mitigation strategies to achieve a higher accuracy.
In addition to providing a full pipeline for solving this problem, a major aspect of this work was to use the fact that the Jones polynomial is an invariant to introduce a benchmark for noisy quantum computers. Most importantly, this benchmark is efficiently verifiable, a rare property since for most applications, exponentially costly classical computations are necessary for verification. Given a link whose Jones polynomial is known, the benchmark constructs a large set of topologically equivalent links of varying sizes. In turn, these result in a set of circuits of varying numbers of qubits and gates, all of which should return the same answer. Thus, one can characterize the effect of noise present in a given quantum computer by quantifying the deviation of its output from the known result.
The benchmark introduced in this work allows one to identify the link sizes for which there is exponential quantum advantage in terms of time to solution against the state-of-the-art classical methods. These resource estimates indicate our next processor, Helios, with 96 qubits and at least 99.95% two-qubit gate-fidelity, is extremely close to meeting these requirements. Furthermore, Quantinuum’s hardware roadmap includes even more powerful machines that will come online by the end of the decade. Notably, an advantage in energy consumption emerges for even smaller link sizes. Meanwhile, our teams aim to continue reducing errors through improvements in both hardware and software, thereby moving deeper into quantum advantage territory.
The importance of this work, indeed the uniqueness of this work in the quantum computing sector, is its practical end-to-end approach. The advantage-hunting strategies introduced are transferable to other “quantum-easy classically-hard” problems. Our team’s efforts motivate shifting the focus toward specific problem instances rather than broad problem classes, promoting an engineering-oriented approach to identifying quantum advantage. This involves first carefully considering how quantum advantage should be defined and quantified, thereby setting a high standard for quantum advantage in scientific and mathematical domains. And thus, making sure we instill confidence in our customers and partners.
Edited
About Quantinuum
Quantinuum, the world’s largest integrated quantum company, pioneers powerful quantum computers and advanced software solutions. Quantinuum’s technology drives breakthroughs in materials discovery, cybersecurity, and next-gen quantum AI. With over 500 employees, including 370+ scientists and engineers, Quantinuum leads the quantum computing revolution across continents.
From September 16th – 18th, Quantum World Congress (QWC) will bring together visionaries, policymakers, researchers, investors, and students from across the globe to discuss the future of quantum computing in Tysons, Virginia.
Quantinuum is forging the path to universal, fully fault-tolerant quantum computing with our integrated full-stack. Join our quantum experts for the below sessions and at Booth #27 to discuss the latest on Quantinuum Systems, the world’s highest-performing, commercially available quantum computers, our new software stack featuring the key additions of Guppy and Selene, our path to error correction, and more.
Wednesday, September 17th
Keynote with Quantinuum's CEO, Dr. Rajeeb Hazra
9:00 – 9:20am ET | Main Stage
At QWC 2024, Quantinuum’s President & CEO, Dr. Rajeeb “Raj” Hazra, took the stage to showcase our commitment to advancing quantum technologies through the unveiling of our roadmap to universal, fully fault-tolerant quantum computing by the end of this decade. This year at QWC 2025, join Raj on the main stage to discover the progress we’ve made over the last year in advancing quantum computing on both commercial and technical fronts and be the first to hear exciting insights on what’s to come from Quantinuum.
Panel Session: Policy Priorities for Responsible Quantum and AI
1:00 – 1:30pm ET | Maplewood Hall
As part of the Track Sessions on Government & Security, Quantinuum’s Director of Government Relations, Ryan McKenney, will discuss “Policy Priorities for Responsible Quantum and AI” with Jim Cook from Actions to Impact Strategies and Paul Stimers from Quantum Industry Coalition.
Fireside Chat: Establishing a Pro-Innovation Regulatory Framework
4:00 – 4:30pm ET | Vault Theater
During the Track Session on Industry Advancement, Quantinuum’s Chief Legal Officer, Kaniah Konkoly-Thege, and Director of Government Relations, Ryan McKenney, will take the stage to discuss the importance of “Establishing a Pro-Innovation Regulatory Framework”.
In the world of physics, ideas can lie dormant for decades before revealing their true power. What begins as a quiet paper in an academic journal can eventually reshape our understanding of the universe itself.
In 1993, nestled deep in the halls of Yale University, physicist Subir Sachdev and his graduate student Jinwu Ye stumbled upon such an idea. Their work, originally aimed at unraveling the mysteries of “spin fluids”, would go on to ignite one of the most surprising and profound connections in modern physics—a bridge between the strange behavior of quantum materials and the warped spacetime of black holes.
Two decades after the paper was published, it would be pulled into the orbit of a radically different domain: quantum gravity. Thanks to work by renowned physicist Alexei Kitaev in 2015, the model found new life as a testing ground for the mind-bending theory of holography—the idea that the universe we live in might be a projection, from a lower-dimensional reality.
Holography is an exotic approach to understanding reality where scientists use holograms to describe higher dimensional systems in one less dimension. So, if our world is 3+1 dimensional (3 spatial directions plus time), there exists a 2+1, or 3-dimensional description of it. In the words of Leonard Susskind, a pioneer in quantum holography, "the three-dimensional world of ordinary experience—the universe filled with galaxies, stars, planets, houses, boulders, and people—is a hologram, an image of reality coded on a distant two-dimensional surface."
The “SYK” model, as it is known today, is now considered a quintessential framework for studying strongly correlated quantum phenomena, which occur in everything from superconductors to strange metals—and even in black holes. In fact, The SYK model has also been used to study one of physics’ true final frontiers, quantum gravity, with the authors of the paper calling it “a paradigmatic model for quantum gravity in the lab.”
The SYK model involves Majorana fermions, a type of particle that is its own antiparticle. A key feature of the model is that these fermions are all-to-all connected, leading to strong correlations. This connectivity makes the model particularly challenging to simulate on classical computers, where such correlations are difficult to capture. Our quantum computers, however, natively support all-to-all connectivity making them a natural fit for studying the SYK model.
Now, 10 years after Kitaev’s watershed lectures, we’ve made new progress in studying the SYK model. In a new paper, we’ve completed the largest ever SYK study on a quantum computer. By exploiting our system’s native high fidelity and all-to-all connectivity, as well as our scientific team’s deep expertise across many disciplines, we were able to study the SYK model at a scale three times larger than the previous best experimental attempt.
While this work does not exceed classical techniques, it is very close to the classical state-of-the-art. The biggest ever classical study was done on 64 fermions, while our recent result, run on our smallest processor (System Model H1), included 24 fermions. Modelling 24 fermions costs us only 12 qubits (plus one ancilla) making it clear that we can quickly scale these studies: our System Model H2 supports 56 qubits (or ~100 fermions), and Helios, which is coming online this year, will have over 90 qubits (or ~180 fermions).
However, working with the SYK model takes more than just qubits. The SYK model has a complex Hamiltonian that is difficult to work with when encoded on a computer—quantum or classical. Studying the real-time dynamics of the SYK model means first representing the initial state on the qubits, then evolving it properly in time according to an intricate set of rules that determine the outcome. This means deep circuits (many circuit operations), which demand very high fidelity, or else an error will occur before the computation finishes.
Our cross-disciplinary team worked to ensure that we could pull off such a large simulation on a relatively small quantum processor, laying the groundwork for quantum advantage in this field.
First, the team adopted a randomized quantum algorithm called TETRIS to run the simulation. By using random sampling, among other methods, the TETRIS algorithm allows one to compute the time evolution of a system without the pernicious discretization errors or sizable overheads that plague other approaches. TETRIS is particularly suited to simulating the SYK model because with a high level of disorder in the material, simulating the SYK Hamiltonian means averaging over many random Hamiltonians. With TETRIS, one generates random circuits to compute evolution (even with a deterministic Hamiltonian). Therefore, when applying TETRIS on SYK, for every shot one can just generate a random instance of the Hamiltonain, and generate a random circuit on TETRIS at the same time. This simple approach enables less gate counts required per shot, meaning users can run more shots, naturally mitigating noise.
In addition, the team “sparsified” the SYK model, which means “pruning” the fermion interactions to reduce the complexity while still maintaining its crucial features. By combining sparsification and the TETRIS algorithm, the team was able to significantly reduce the circuit complexity, allowing it to be run on our machine with high fidelity.
They didn’t stop there. The team also proposed two new noise mitigation techniques, ensuring that they could run circuits deep enough without devolving entirely into noise. The two techniques both worked quite well, and the team was able to show that their algorithm, combined with the noise mitigation, performed significantly better and delivered more accurate results. The perfect agreement between the circuit results and the true theoretical results is a remarkable feat coming from a co-design effort between algorithms and hardware.
As we scale to larger systems, we come closer than ever to realizing quantum gravity in the lab, and thus, answering some of science’s biggest questions.
At Quantinuum, we pay attention to every detail. From quantum gates to teleportation, we work hard every day to ensure our quantum computers operate as effectively as possible. This means not only building the most advanced hardware and software, but that we constantly innovate new ways to make the most of our systems.
A key step in any computation is preparing the initial state of the qubits. Like lining up dominoes, you first need a special setup to get meaningful results. This process, known as state preparation or “state prep,” is an open field of research that can mean the difference between realizing the next breakthrough or falling short. Done ineffectively, state prep can carry steep computational costs, scaling exponentially with the qubit number.
Recently, our algorithm teams have been tackling this challenge from all angles. We’ve published three new papers on state prep, covering state prep for chemistry, materials, and fault tolerance.
In the first paper, our team tackled the issue of preparing states for quantum chemistry. Representing chemical systems on gate-based quantum computers is a tricky task; partly because you often want to prepare multiconfigurational states, which are very complex. Preparing states like this can cost a lot of resources, so our team worked to ensure we can do it without breaking the (quantum) bank.
To do this, our team investigated two different state prep methods. The first method uses Givens rotations, implemented to save computational costs. The second method exploits the sparsity of the molecular wavefunction to maximize efficiency.
Once the team perfected the two methods, they implemented them in InQuanto to explore the benefits across a range of applications, including calculating the ground and excited states of a strongly correlated molecule (twisted C_2 H_4). The results showed that the “sparse state preparation” scheme performed especially well, requiring fewer gates and shorter runtimes than alternative methods.
In the second paper, our team focused on state prep for materials simulation. Generally, it’s much easier for computers to simulate materials that are at zero temperature, which is, obviously, unrealistic. Much more relevant to most scientists is what happens when a material is not at zero temperature. In this case, you have two options: when the material is steadily at a given temperature, which scientists call thermal equilibrium, or when the material is going through some change, also known as out of equilibrium. Both are much harder for classical computers to work with.
In this paper, our team looked to solve an outstanding problem: there is no standard protocol for preparing thermal states. In this work, our team only targeted equilibrium states but, interestingly, they used an out of equilibrium protocol to do the work. By slowly and gently evolving from a simple state that we know how to prepare, they were able to prepare the desired thermal states in a way that was remarkably insensitive to noise.
Ultimately, this work could prove crucial for studying materials like superconductors. After all, no practical superconductor will ever be used at zero temperature. In fact, we want to use them at room temperature – and approaches like this are what will allow us to perform the necessary studies to one day get us there.
Finally, as we advance toward the fault-tolerant era, we encounter a new set of challenges: making computations fault-tolerant at every step can be an expensive venture, eating up qubits and gates. In the third paper, our team made fault-tolerant state preparation—the critical first step in any fault-tolerant algorithm—roughly twice as efficient. With our new “flag at origin” technique, gate counts are significantly reduced, bringing fault-tolerant computation closer to an everyday reality.
The method our researchers developed is highly modular: in the past, to perform optimized state prep like this, developers needed to solve one big expensive optimization problem. In this new work, we’ve figured out how to break the problem up into smaller pieces, in the sense that one now needs to solve a set of much smaller problems. This means that now, for the first time, developers can prepare fault-tolerant states for much larger error correction codes, a crucial step forward in the early-fault-tolerant era.
On top of this, our new method is highly general: it applies to almost any QEC code one can imagine. Normally, fault-tolerant state prep techniques must be anchored to a single code (or a family of codes), making it so that when you want to use a different code, you need a new state prep method. Now, thanks to our team’s work, developers have a single, general-purpose, fault-tolerant state prep method that can be widely applied and ported between different error correction codes. Like the modularity, this is a huge advance for the whole ecosystem—and is quite timely given our recent advances into true fault-tolerance.
This generality isn’t just applicable to different codes, it’s also applicable to the states that you are preparing: while other methods are optimized for preparing only the |0> state, this method is useful for a wide variety of states that are needed to set up a fault tolerant computation. This “state diversity” is especially valuable when working with the best codes – codes that give you many logical qubits per physical qubit. This new approach to fault-tolerant state prep will likely be the method used for fault-tolerant computations across the industry, and if not, it will inform new approaches moving forward.
From the initial state preparation to the final readout, we are ensuring that not only is our hardware the best, but that every single operation is as close to perfect as we can get it.