Quantum Computing

Computation with superposition, entanglement, and interference

Quantum computing processes information stored in quantum states. A register of $n$ qubits is described by $2^n$ complex amplitudes. Gates manipulate the amplitudes, and quantum algorithms arrange for interference to concentrate probability on correct answers before measurement. For certain problems this gives provable speedups: exponential for factoring and for simulating quantum systems, and quadratic for unstructured search. For most everyday workloads it offers nothing. This hub summarizes the field as of late 2026 and points to the detailed pages on this site.

Table of contents

  1. Pages in This Section
  2. Core Concepts
  3. Algorithm Landscape
  4. Hardware Platforms
  5. Error Correction and the Road to Fault Tolerance
    1. Milestones
  6. Cryptographic Impact and Post-Quantum Cryptography
  7. Applications
  8. Programming and Tools
    1. Quick Start
    2. Cloud Access
  9. Further Reading
  10. See Also

Pages in This Section

Page Covers Level
Introduction to Quantum Computing Qubits, gates, circuits, the standard algorithms, error correction, hardware, and programming Introductory to intermediate
Quantum Mechanics: Quantum Computing The physics of qubits and gates from the quantum-mechanics side Intermediate
Bell’s Theorem & Experimental Tests Entanglement, nonlocality, and the experiments behind them Intermediate
Quantum Algorithms Research Rigorous algorithm design and analysis, query and circuit complexity Graduate
Computational Complexity Theory BQP and its relationship to P, NP, and PH Graduate
Information & Coding Theory Classical and quantum channels and codes Graduate
Cryptography: Foundations & Post-Quantum Shor’s threat to RSA/ECC and the lattice- and hash-based replacements Graduate
Quantum Computational Methods Classical simulation of quantum systems, the benchmark quantum hardware must beat Graduate

How the topics depend on one another:

flowchart TD
    LA[Linear algebra] --> QI[Qubits, gates, measurement]
    QM[Quantum mechanics] --> QI
    QI --> Circ[Circuits and programming]
    QI --> Alg[Algorithms]
    Circ --> HW[Hardware platforms]
    HW --> QEC[Error correction and<br/>fault tolerance]
    QEC --> FT[Fault-tolerant algorithms:<br/>Shor, phase estimation, simulation]
    Alg --> FT
    Alg --> NISQ[Near-term heuristics:<br/>VQE, QAOA, sampling]
    Circ --> NISQ
    FT --> PQC[Cryptographic impact<br/>and post-quantum crypto]
    Alg --> Cx[Complexity: BQP]

Core Concepts

A qubit is a unit vector in $\mathbb{C}^2$:

\[\lvert\psi\rangle = \alpha\lvert 0\rangle + \beta\lvert 1\rangle, \qquad \lvert\alpha\rvert^2 + \lvert\beta\rvert^2 = 1.\]

An $n$-qubit state lives in the tensor product $(\mathbb{C}^2)^{\otimes n}$, which has dimension $2^n$. A computation applies a unitary $U$, built from a small set of one- and two-qubit gates, and then measures. Measuring in the computational basis returns bitstring $x$ with probability $\lvert\langle x\rvert U\lvert\psi_0\rangle\rvert^2$ (the Born rule).

Concept Meaning Why it matters
Superposition A state is a linear combination of basis states The state space grows as $2^n$. Measurement returns only $n$ bits, so a superposition is not free parallelism.
Entanglement A joint state that cannot be factored, e.g. $\tfrac{1}{\sqrt2}(\lvert00\rangle+\lvert11\rangle)$ Needed for any exponential speedup, since weakly entangled circuits can be simulated efficiently
Interference Amplitudes add with phases and can cancel The mechanism every quantum algorithm relies on
Unitary gates Reversible operations: $H$, $S$, $T$, $X$, CNOT, … ${H, T, \text{CNOT}}$ is universal. The Clifford gates alone ($H$, $S$, CNOT) are classically simulable (Gottesman-Knill theorem).
Measurement Projects onto a basis and destroys superposition Algorithms must end in a state where the answer has high probability
Decoherence Uncontrolled coupling to the environment Limits circuit depth, which is why error correction is needed
No-cloning Unknown states cannot be copied Rules out classical-style redundancy; QEC has to work differently

Gates are unitary matrices. The two workhorses are

\[H = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix} 1 & 1 \\ 1 & -1 \end{pmatrix}, \qquad \text{CNOT} = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}.\]

Applying $H$ to the first qubit of $\lvert00\rangle$ and then CNOT produces the Bell state

\[\lvert\Phi^+\rangle = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\lvert 00\rangle + \lvert 11\rangle\right).\]

Algorithm Landscape

Quantum speedups are problem-specific. Speedups also differ in how firmly they are established: some are proven in the query model, some depend on unproven complexity assumptions, and some are heuristic.

Algorithm Problem Best classical Quantum Notes
Shor (1994) Factoring, discrete log $\exp!\left(O(n^{1/3}\log^{2/3} n)\right)$ (number field sieve) Polynomial, roughly $O(n^2\log n)$ to $O(n^3)$ gates Breaks RSA, Diffie-Hellman, and ECC; needs fault tolerance
Grover (1996) Unstructured search over $N$ items $O(N)$ $O(\sqrt N)$ Provably optimal. The quadratic gain is often eaten by error-correction overhead.
Quantum phase estimation Eigenvalues of a unitary Varies $O(1/\epsilon)$ uses of $U$ (Heisenberg limit) Core subroutine of Shor, chemistry, and HHL
Hamiltonian simulation Time evolution $e^{-iHt}$ Exponential in general Polynomial (Trotter, qubitization, QSP) Feynman’s original motivation; the likeliest first useful application
HHL (2009) Sample from solution of $Ax=b$ $\text{poly}(N)$ $\text{poly}(\log N,\kappa)$ Needs efficient state preparation and readout; many proposed uses were “dequantized” (Tang, 2018 onward)
Quantum walks Graph search, element distinctness Varies Polynomial speedups, e.g. $O(N^{2/3})$ for element distinctness Also give an exponential separation for the glued-trees problem
VQE, QAOA Ground states, combinatorial optimization Heuristics Heuristic, no proven speedup Hybrid quantum-classical; limited by barren plateaus and noise
Random-circuit sampling Sample a random circuit’s output distribution Believed exponential Polynomial Used for “beyond-classical” demonstrations; no practical use

Quantum singular value transformation (QSVT), introduced in 2019, gives one framework that covers amplitude amplification, Hamiltonian simulation, and linear-systems solvers. Most modern fault-tolerant algorithms are expressed in it. For derivations, see Quantum Algorithms Research.

Hardware Platforms

Several physical platforms compete, and none has won. They differ in speed, connectivity, coherence, and how they scale.

Platform Qubit Strengths Weaknesses Notable players
Superconducting Transmon (Josephson-junction circuit) at ~10 mK Fast gates (tens of ns), mature fabrication Short coherence, nearest-neighbor wiring, cryogenic I/O Google (Willow), IBM (Heron, Nighthawk), Rigetti
Trapped ion Hyperfine levels of Yb$^+$, Ba$^+$, Ca$^+$ Highest two-qubit fidelities (>99.9%), all-to-all connectivity Slow gates (tens to hundreds of µs); scaling needs ion shuttling or photonic links Quantinuum (H2, Helios), IonQ
Neutral atom Rydberg-excited atoms (Rb, Cs, Sr, Yb) in optical tweezers Thousands of qubits, reconfigurable connectivity, native multi-qubit gates Slow cycle time, atom loss and reloading QuEra, Atom Computing, Pasqal, Infleqtion
Photonic Photon modes (dual-rail or GKP) Room-temperature components, natural networking Probabilistic gates, photon loss PsiQuantum, Xanadu
Spin qubits Electron or nuclear spins in Si/SiGe quantum dots Small qubits, compatible with CMOS fabrication Device variability, early scale Intel, Diraq, Quantum Motion
Topological Majorana zero modes in superconductor-semiconductor nanowires Intrinsic protection from errors, in principle Existence of a working topological qubit is still disputed Microsoft (Majorana 1, 2025)

Headline qubit counts say little about capability on their own. The more useful measures are two-qubit gate error, coherence relative to gate time, connectivity, measurement and reset speed, and, increasingly, the number and error rate of logical qubits.

Error Correction and the Road to Fault Tolerance

Physical error rates of around $10^{-3}$ limit uncorrected circuits to a few thousand gates. Useful fault-tolerant algorithms need $10^{9}$ or more gates at logical error rates of $10^{-10}$ or lower. Quantum error correction (QEC) closes this gap by encoding each logical qubit in many physical qubits and repeatedly measuring stabilizers, which reveal errors without disturbing the encoded information.

flowchart LR
    subgraph Cycle["One QEC cycle (repeated about every microsecond)"]
        direction LR
        D[Data qubits<br/>hold logical state] --> S[Measure stabilizers<br/>via ancilla qubits]
        S --> Syn[Syndrome bits]
        Syn --> Dec[Real-time classical<br/>decoder]
        Dec --> Fix[Track or apply<br/>Pauli correction]
        Fix --> D
    end

The threshold theorem says that when physical error rates are below a threshold $p_{\text{th}}$, logical errors can be made arbitrarily small at polylogarithmic overhead. For the surface code of distance $d$,

\[p_L \approx A\left(\frac{p}{p_{\text{th}}}\right)^{\lfloor (d+1)/2 \rfloor},\]

with $p_{\text{th}} \approx 1\%$ under circuit-level noise. The ratio $\Lambda = p_L(d)/p_L(d+2)$ measures how much each increase in distance helps. Below threshold, $\Lambda > 1$.

Code family Encoding rate Connectivity needed Status
Surface code 1 logical per $\sim 2d^2$ physical 2D nearest-neighbor Below-threshold operation demonstrated (Google, 2024)
Color codes Similar to surface code 2D, higher-weight checks Transversal Clifford gates; demonstrated on superconducting and neutral-atom hardware
qLDPC codes (e.g. IBM’s bivariate bicycle “gross” code) Much higher; the $[[144,12,12]]$ code stores 12 logical qubits in 144 data qubits Long-range couplers Basis of IBM’s fault-tolerance roadmap
Bosonic codes (cat, GKP) Encoded in an oscillator Cavities or photonics Cat qubits give biased noise (AWS, Alice & Bob)

Magic-state distillation or cultivation supplies the non-Clifford $T$ gates needed for universality. These factories often dominate resource estimates.

Milestones

timeline
    title Selected milestones
    1982 : Feynman proposes quantum simulation
    1994 : Shor's factoring algorithm
    1995 : Shor's 9-qubit code, first QEC scheme
    1996 : Grover search
    1997 : Kitaev surface and toric codes
    2019 : Google Sycamore random-circuit sampling
    2023 : Harvard and QuEra run circuits on 48 logical qubits
    2024 : Google Willow surface code below threshold, d = 7
    2025 : Gidney estimates RSA-2048 needs under 1M noisy qubits
         : Google Quantum Echoes verifiable-advantage experiment
         : Quantinuum Helios trapped-ion system
    2029 : IBM Starling target, 200 logical qubits
  • Google Willow (Nature, Dec 2024): a 105-qubit superconducting chip ran surface-code memories at distances 3, 5, and 7. The logical error rate fell by a factor of about 2.14 with each step in distance, reaching roughly 0.14% per cycle at $d=7$. This was the first clear demonstration of below-threshold scaling.
  • Resource estimates for breaking RSA: Gidney (2025) estimated that 2048-bit RSA could be factored in under a week with fewer than one million noisy qubits, down from the roughly 20 million estimated in 2019. The machines that exist today are still orders of magnitude short of this.
  • Verifiable advantage: in 2025 Google reported its “Quantum Echoes” out-of-time-order-correlator experiment on Willow (Nature). Its output can be checked, unlike random-circuit sampling. The practical relevance of such demonstrations is still debated.
  • Roadmaps: IBM’s published roadmap targets a fault-tolerant machine, Starling, for 2029, running about $10^8$ gates on 200 logical qubits with qLDPC codes. Other vendors, including Quantinuum, QuEra, and PsiQuantum, have announced fault-tolerance targets for the late 2020s. Treat all such dates as goals, not guarantees.

The industry usually divides progress into three eras:

Era Characteristics Typical workloads
NISQ (roughly 2018-2024) 50 to 1,000 noisy physical qubits, no error correction Error-mitigated variational algorithms, sampling experiments
Early fault tolerance (mid-2020s onward) Tens to hundreds of logical qubits, limited $T$-gate budget Small-scale simulation, QEC research, logical-level benchmarks
Fault-tolerant (FTQC) Thousands of logical qubits, $10^{9}$ or more gates Chemistry, materials, cryptanalysis

Error mitigation techniques such as zero-noise extrapolation, probabilistic error cancellation, and readout correction reduce bias in expectation values without encoding. Their sampling cost grows exponentially with circuit size, so they serve as a bridge to error correction, not a replacement for it.

Cryptographic Impact and Post-Quantum Cryptography

A large enough fault-tolerant machine running Shor’s algorithm would break RSA, finite-field Diffie-Hellman, and elliptic-curve cryptography. Grover’s algorithm only halves the effective key length of symmetric ciphers and hashes, so AES-256 and SHA-384 remain adequate. The immediate concern is “harvest now, decrypt later”: adversaries can record encrypted traffic today and decrypt it once quantum computers become capable enough.

In August 2024, NIST published the first post-quantum standards:

Standard Algorithm Based on Use
FIPS 203 ML-KEM (Kyber) Module lattices Key encapsulation
FIPS 204 ML-DSA (Dilithium) Module lattices Signatures
FIPS 205 SLH-DSA (SPHINCS+) Hash functions Conservative stateless signatures
FIPS 206 (draft) FN-DSA (Falcon) NTRU lattices Compact signatures
Selected 2025 HQC Codes Backup KEM with a non-lattice assumption

NIST’s transition guidance (IR 8547) proposes deprecating quantum-vulnerable public-key algorithms after 2030 and disallowing them after 2035. Hybrid key exchange (X25519 combined with ML-KEM-768) is already the default in current major browsers and in OpenSSH. Quantum key distribution (QKD) takes a different approach, deriving security from physics rather than computational hardness, but it requires dedicated hardware and authenticated channels. National security agencies generally recommend PQC over QKD for most uses. For details, see Cryptography: Foundations & Post-Quantum.

Applications

Realistic expectations, ordered from most to least established:

Area Why quantum could help Current assessment
Quantum simulation (chemistry, materials, high-energy physics) Nature is quantum, and phase estimation gives exponential speedups for suitable Hamiltonians Strongest case. Needs fault tolerance for industrially relevant molecules such as FeMoco and P450.
Cryptanalysis Shor’s algorithm Certain in principle; drives PQC migration now
Certified randomness, verifiable sampling Outputs that are classically hard to spoof Demonstrated; niche applications
Optimization (logistics, finance) Grover-type and heuristic speedups At most quadratic speedups, largely consumed by overhead; no demonstrated practical advantage
Quantum machine learning High-dimensional feature spaces Many claimed speedups were dequantized or require quantum data; still at the research stage
Sensing and networking Entanglement-enhanced metrology, distributed entanglement Separate from computing; some sensing is already deployed

Programming and Tools

Most quantum software is Python-based. It is usually written at the circuit level and compiled (“transpiled”) to each device’s native gates and qubit connectivity.

flowchart TD
    App[Application / algorithm] --> SDK[SDK: Qiskit, Cirq, QDK, PennyLane, CUDA-Q]
    SDK --> IR[Circuit IR: OpenQASM 3, QIR]
    IR --> Comp[Transpiler: layout, routing,<br/>gate synthesis, optimization]
    Comp --> Run{Target}
    Run --> Sim[Simulator<br/>statevector, MPS, stabilizer]
    Run --> Cloud[Cloud QPU service]
    Cloud --> Ctrl[Control electronics<br/>pulses, readout, QEC decoding]
    Ctrl --> QPU[Physical qubits]
Framework Maintainer Current line (Sept 2026) Notes
Qiskit IBM 2.x (2.5) Primitives-based API (Sampler, Estimator). The Rust core also has a C API. execute() and BackendV1 have been removed.
Cirq Google 1.x (1.7) Low-level control, noise modeling, Google hardware access; requires Python 3.11 or later
Microsoft QDK Microsoft qdk Python package (1.32) Q# and OpenQASM, resource estimator, Azure Quantum; replaces the retired .NET-based IQ# kernel
PennyLane Xanadu 0.x Differentiable programming and variational algorithms
CUDA-Q NVIDIA — GPU-accelerated simulation and hybrid CPU-GPU-QPU workflows
Amazon Braket SDK AWS — Single API for IonQ, Rigetti, QuEra, IQM, and other devices

Quick Start

Install Qiskit into a virtual environment. Qiskit 2.x requires Python 3.10 or later and a 64-bit platform.

python3 -m venv .venv && source .venv/bin/activate
pip install qiskit qiskit-ibm-runtime   # IBM SDK + cloud runtime client
pip install cirq                        # Google Cirq (optional)
pip install qdk                         # Microsoft QDK: Q#, OpenQASM, resource estimation (optional)

A Bell state, simulated locally with Qiskit’s reference StatevectorSampler:

from qiskit import QuantumCircuit
from qiskit.primitives import StatevectorSampler

qc = QuantumCircuit(2)
qc.h(0)          # superposition on qubit 0
qc.cx(0, 1)      # entangle qubit 1 with qubit 0
qc.measure_all() # adds a classical register named "meas"

result = StatevectorSampler().run([qc], shots=1000).result()
print(result[0].data.meas.get_counts())   # about 500 '00' and 500 '11', never '01' or '10'

The same circuit in Cirq:

import cirq

q0, q1 = cirq.LineQubit.range(2)
circuit = cirq.Circuit(cirq.H(q0), cirq.CNOT(q0, q1), cirq.measure(q0, q1, key="m"))
result = cirq.Simulator().run(circuit, repetitions=1000)
print(result.histogram(key="m"))   # Counter({0: ~500, 3: ~500})

To run on IBM hardware, create an account on the IBM Quantum Platform, which includes a free Open Plan with a monthly allocation of QPU time. Save the API key once with QiskitRuntimeService.save_account(...), then transpile the circuit to the device’s native instruction set architecture (ISA) and submit it:

from qiskit.transpiler import generate_preset_pass_manager
from qiskit_ibm_runtime import QiskitRuntimeService, SamplerV2 as Sampler

service = QiskitRuntimeService()
backend = service.least_busy(operational=True, simulator=False)

isa_circuit = generate_preset_pass_manager(backend=backend, optimization_level=1).run(qc)
job = Sampler(mode=backend).run([isa_circuit], shots=1000)
print(job.result()[0].data.meas.get_counts())   # mostly '00' and '11', plus some hardware noise

On real hardware, a few percent of shots will land on 01 and 10 because of gate and readout errors. Measuring that noise is a useful first exercise.

Cloud Access

Service Hardware available Entry point
IBM Quantum Platform IBM superconducting (Heron, Nighthawk) Free Open Plan; paid plans
Amazon Braket IonQ, Rigetti, IQM, QuEra, and others Pay per task and shot; simulators included
Azure Quantum Quantinuum, IonQ, Pasqal, Rigetti, and others Credits programs; QDK integration
Google Quantum AI Willow-class devices Research access by proposal

Further Reading

Textbooks

  • Nielsen & Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (10th anniversary ed., 2010). This is the standard reference.
  • Aaronson, Quantum Computing Since Democritus (2013), on complexity-theoretic perspectives.
  • Preskill, Lecture Notes for Physics 219 (Caltech), free online, especially the chapters on error correction and fault tolerance.
  • Preskill, “Quantum Computing in the NISQ era and beyond,” Quantum 2, 79 (2018), the paper that named the NISQ era.

Online

See Also