Quantum Read-Throughs from D-Wave Investor Day

Research evidence excerpt

Quantum Read-Throughs from D-Wave Investor Day

ed on a paper referencing simulation and rests on a numerical simulation

built on measured component error rates (sub-1% erasure and 0.1% dephasing per gate) rather than demonstrated logical error-

suppression results. In an industry where experts encourage employing analysis based on demonstrated logical qubits, we would

like to see more demonstrated progress before putting too much faith in the numbers. After all, Google had measured its 2.14

lambda from a demonstration, Quantinuum (HON, Not Rated) has run dozens of logical qubits on trapped ions, and Infleqtion

has demonstrated a logical qubit on its neutral atom platform.

■ Annealing Could Host a Defensible Claim to Optimization Problems. D-Wave frames Optimization problems ($100-$220

billion TAM per BCG) as annealing home turf, citing a >1,000x differential over IBM's (IBM, Not Rated) gate system in multi-

objective work, and leaning on Google's "beyond quadratic speedups" argument to imply gate-model optimization advantages

get fully absorbed by QEC overhead. This underscores another emerging narrative: quantum advantage can be workload-

specific, and not universal. This suggests the gate-based modalities (IONQ, Rigetti (RGTI, Not Rated), Quantinuum, INFQ, IBM)

are best valued on near-term opportunities for chemistry, simulation and cryptography, rather than optimization.

■ Quantum Simulation Emerging as Consensus First Frontier. Between the spin-glass supremacy result and the analog-

digital materials-simulation capabilities, D-Wave points at quantum simulation as the near-term value driver. We find the

convergence in conclusions interesting; an annealing company is landing on the same answer as the gate-model leaders