# Configurable Packaged Quantum Solutions Are the Greatest Opportunity for Widespread Adoption of Quantum Computing

Designing and developing a sophisticated and complex computer application is a challenging, expensive, and risky proposition. A quantum application with quantum algorithms even more so. The availability of *configurable packaged quantum solutions* can make the process of exploiting quantum computing significantly less challenging, less expensive, and less risky. In short, configurable packaged quantum solutions are the greatest opportunity for widespread adoption of quantum computing. This informal paper explores the potential for such an approach to quantum applications.

**Caveat:**This paper*proposes*and*envisions*a*potential future*for quantum applications which would greatly facilitate the adoption of quantum computing by the widest possible audience and market. There is no guarantee that this envisioned future will come to fruition, nor is there any certainty or confidence as to when it might come to fruition. The only confidence is that it won’t happen in the very near future (next year or two), and is likely to take at least a few years to develop — and require significant progress in the advancement of quantum computing hardware.**Counter-caveat:**The proposal of this paper may not be a certainty but it certainly is a golden*opportunity*.

Designing and developing custom quantum algorithms and quantum applications is a very challenging process at present and will be for quite some time to come. Packaged quantum solutions remove the need for the user to know anything about the details of the underlying quantum computing and quantum mechanics. A configurable packaged quantum solution adds flexibility to control the behavior of the packaged quantum solution, again without any need to know anything about the details of the underlying quantum computing and quantum mechanics.

Briefly, a *configurable packaged quantum solution* is a pre-written, complete, ready to run (*turnkey*) quantum application needing only input data to run. Input data can range from simple input data, to parameters and options, to more sophisticated configuration data which allows the user to describe at a higher level the problem to be solved.

Without all of that sophisticated configuration data, it would simply be a *packaged quantum solution* or *application*, which is fine, but nowhere near as flexible, powerful, and *generalized* once the configurability capability is added.

**Topics covered by this paper:**

- In a nutshell
- My original description of the topic
- The essence of the problem
- The bigger picture
- Generative coding
- Presumption of production-scale and substantial quantum advantage
- No need to be Quantum Ready for configurable packaged quantum solutions since the arcana of quantum computing, quantum mechanics, linear algebra, etc. are not needed
- Welcome to Quantum Done
- Algorithms, applications, and solutions
- Some basic observations about applications
- Some basic observations about algorithms
- Solution vs. application
- An application is just the code
- A solution is much more than just the code
- Is it an application or a solution?
- Three levels of algorithms and applications: Custom, generalized, and configurable
- Make vs. buy decision
- Creation and marketing of configurable packaged quantum solutions
- Two distinct application use case categories — minor use of quantum and quantum-focused
- How quantum applications can use quantum algorithms
- Turnkey solutions — requirements and expectations
- Black boxes
- A configurable packaged quantum solution is a turnkey solution
- Anybody can develop an application, but a solution requires a dramatically higher level of skill
- Key features and benefits of configurable packaged quantum solutions
- The single greatest benefit of configurable packaged quantum solutions is to enable any organization of any size to exploit quantum computing without an onerous investment in quantum expertise
- Resilience
- Personal versus product use
- Single-purpose, specialized, and niche applications versus general-purpose and generalized applications
- Generalized applications
- Reusable applications
- Amortized costs for generalized and reusable applications
- Packaged applications
- Configurable packaged quantum solution
- Configurable packaged quantum solutions could be single-purpose or general-purpose
- Single-purpose configurable packaged quantum solutions can have high value for multiple customers
- Horizontal vs. vertical applications
- Configurable packaged quantum solutions can apply in many situations
- Many organizations will have similar specialized needs
- Many organizations will have a variety of situations with similar if not identical needs
- Configurable packaged quantum solutions could be horizontal or vertical applications
- Structure and form of applications and solutions can vary
- Packaging quantum solutions as network services
- Cloud-based applications and services
- Cloud-based configurable packaged quantum solutions
- Quantum-as-a-Service (QaaS) for quantum-focused solutions
- Pure quantum vs. hybrid quantum/classical web services
- Little Data With a Big Solution Space — the Sweet Spot for Quantum Computing
- Architecture and design details of generalized solutions is beyond the scope of this paper
- Configurable packaged quantum solutions vs. toolkits and frameworks
- Some examples of complex configuration data
- Fielder’s choice whether input data should be self-configuring, configured by input parameters, or a separate configuration description
- Specification of configuration
- All input data and parameters and configuration data should be in application-oriented terms, not the terms of quantum computing or quantum mechanics
- Data formats
- Configuring or controlling output
- Some examples of configurable classical solutions
- Examples of packaged quantum solutions
- Industry-specific solutions
- Unlikely that there will be a single configurable packaged quantum solution per application category, but maybe a dozen or more per application category
- Only a relative few configurable packaged quantum solutions are likely to cover the majority of use cases for real users in the real world
- The seven main quantum application categories
- Expect 70–80% of users (customers) to get by with configurable packaged quantum solutions alone
- Aim for 90% of users (customers) to get by with configurable packaged quantum solutions alone
- Critical mass of configurable packaged quantum solutions
- No need for full quantum error correction (QEC) — near-perfect qubits should be sufficient
- Debugging and logging
- The ENIAC Moment won’t necessarily depend on or result in a configurable packaged quantum solution
- The ENIAC Moment might provide the basis or impetus to kick start configurable packaged quantum solutions
- When can we expect the birth of the era of configurable packaged quantum solutions?
- Configurable packaged quantum solutions may actually be easier to design and build than full-custom applications
- Vendors and sources of configurable packaged quantum solutions
- Encourage open source software projects
- Ecosystem for configurable packaged quantum solutions
- Need for sample configurable packaged quantum solutions
- Quantum expertise
- Training for quantum
- Talent pool for quantum
- Broader is better, but it can be too expensive
- Significant hardware advances are needed
- Significant research is required
- Quantum-inspired solutions are great, but they don’t advance quantum computing itself
- Intellectual property (IP) — is a proprietary interest helpful or harmful?
- Provisioning a configurable packaged quantum solution
- Three stages of adoption for quantum computing: The ENIAC Moment, configurable packaged quantum solutions, and The FORTRAN Moment
- The FORTRAN Moment will herald widespread full-custom quantum algorithms and applications
- Summary and conclusions

# In a nutshell

Conceptualization, design, and development of a quantum algorithm or quantum application can be very tedious, challenging, and require a deep background in quantum computing, presenting an effective barrier to entry for many organizations, teams, and individuals.

*Packaged quantum solutions* eliminate that barrier. But they are not necessarily flexible.

*Configurable packaged quantum solutions* add the needed flexibility to enable a wider range of skill levels and background expertise to access quantum computing.

A *configurable packaged quantum solution* is ready to go, everything is there, it’s a *turnkey solution*, no coding required, no knowledge of quantum computing required. Ready to solve your pressing application problem.

Key points:

**Generalized applications can be applied in a wider range of situations for a wider range of users at a wider range of organizations.****Turnkey solution.**Everything is in place. No coding required. All of the necessary code has already been written and thoroughly tested. Just supply input data, some parameter settings, and possibly an application configuration description.**No specialized knowledge needed.**No quantum computing. No quantum mechanics. No linear algebra. It’s all encapsulated inside the application.**Insulate users, customers, and classical application code from any knowledge or dependence on any of the concepts of quantum computing.****No need to be Quantum Ready.**Or even Quantum Aware. Welcome to Quantum*Done*. Everything to do with quantum computing is complete, ready to go, and hidden deep under the hood.**No need for an elite technical team.**No reliance on availability of a quantum technical talent pool. No need to attract or retain elite quantum technical staff. No need for the cost. No need for the uncertainty. No need for the risk.**No need for quantum experts.**It’s all there, hidden under the hood.**No need for quantum expertise.**It’s all there, hidden under the hood.**No need for quantum error correction or perfect logical qubits.**Near-perfect qubits are sufficient.**No need for any specialized workflows.**Looks just like a normal, traditional, classical application. No quantum choreography required. Anything quantum is complete and hidden under the hood.**Presumption of production-scale.**No prototypes or experimental software here.**Presumption of production-ready.**Ready for full operation, to solve production-scale practical real-world problems.**Fully validated.**All functions and features have been fully tested.**Full explainability.**The decisions leading to application results are fully reported and fully explained. Reports exactly what it did and why. Leaves little to the imagination. Not the raw quantum computing per se or the physics, but the overall process and the math but in application terms.**Resilient.**Little need to worry about failure scenarios. Either the solution completely handles all failure scenarios or provides detailed but easy to comprehend diagnostics for any unhandled failures.**Presumption of substantial quantum advantage.**If not true dramatic quantum advantage. Far superior to any classical solution.**Generative coding.**Quantum circuits will not be handcrafted and hardwired into the application as might be the case for simple or toy or experimental applications, but automatically generated dynamically by classical code based on the input data, input parameters, and configuration data.**Automatic scaling of algorithms.**No manual intervention or technical expertise required. The joys of generative coding.**Significant hardware advances are needed.**Current quantum hardware is woefully inadequate. Qubit fidelity and qubit connectivity need dramatic improvement. Near-perfect qubits are required.**Significant research is required.**Hardware, qubit technology, architecture, control software, algorithms, programming models, applications, application frameworks, etc. You name it, it needs research.**Quantum-inspired solutions.**Benefit from the same overall approach, but don’t require hardware advances. But they don’t advance quantum computing itself per se — they’re still only classical computing and don’t offer an exponential speedup or any dramatic quantum advantage.**When?**Unfortunately, not real soon. Maybe three to five years. Maybe seven years. Four to five years may be a good bet. But with quantum, nothing is a truly safe bet.**Caveat.**This paper*proposes*and*envisions*a*potential future*for quantum applications which would greatly facilitate the adoption of quantum computing by the widest possible audience and market. There is no guarantee that this envisioned future will come to fruition, nor is there any certainty or confidence as to when it might come to fruition.

# My original description of the topic

Here is my original description of this topic, which is summarized in the preceding section, but this description is more succinct, and may be more appropriate for some readers for some situations:

**Configurable packaged quantum solutions are the greatest opportunity for widespread adoption of quantum computing.**Prewritten code — complete applications — addressing particular niches of quantum computing applications. User supplies the input data and a variety of application-oriented configuration parameters. Prewritten classical code will generate the necessary quantum circuits needed to implement the underlying algorithms using the user’s input data and configuration parameters. Algorithms and code for such solutions must be designed and developed by very elite professional teams, well beyond the ability of even most Fortune 500 companies, who will be the target customers of such packaged solutions. No knowledge needed of the physics or math of quantum computing. No knowledge needed of the internals of the underlying algorithms of the packaged solutions. Examples — none exist, yet. D-Wave is a step in this direction, but falls short.

# The essence of the problem

Developing production-scale practical real-world quantum applications will remain an elusive challenge for the vast majority of organizations for many years to come, but deployment of configurable packaged quantum solutions will become the widespread alternative, enabling the vast majority of larger organizations, and many medium-sized organizations as well, to deploy and utilize quantum computing without any of the need to develop quantum expertise in-house.

# The bigger picture

Development of a full-custom quantum application with full-custom quantum algorithms requires an extremely elite technical team. Such teams are difficult and expensive to assemble, and difficult and expensive to retain as well.

If every organization requiring custom quantum applications required such an elite technical team, well, there simply wouldn’t be enough talent of that caliber to go around. And it’s difficult to assemble and retain such teams even for the largest, most sophisticated, and well-funded technical organizations.

The solution is to seek to develop a much smaller number of more-generalized applications, each of which can be reused across many organizations. In short, the limited quantum technical talent pool can be *amortized* across organizations and even across applications.

A *packaged solution* provides the customer with a complete solution to a particular application problem or even category of application problems, with no need to design or develop additional code, classical or quantum. This dramatically reduces the technical challenges, cost, and risk for each customer.

Some packaged solutions may be very specific to a particular application problem niche, while others can be more-generalized to apply to more niches, more applications, and even more application categories.

Generalization of packaged solutions is itself a great challenge, expensive, and risky, but all of that can be amortized across a wide range of application areas and customers.

Some forms of generalization can simply be handled by careful automatic analysis of the application input data. And possibly with the addition of a relatively modest collection of input parameters to allow the user to hint at the specialization which is needed.

The true essence of generalization of a packaged solution is *generative coding*, where the quantum algorithm is parameterized so that the actual quantum circuit is dynamically generated by classical code based on the input data and any optional parameters. This permits a single application solution to handle a very wide range of situations.

Applications of greater sophistication and complexity may require *configurability*, which allows the user to *describe* the nature and details of the problem to be solved. Such a description, coupled with input parameters and application input data, enable the packaged solution to be *configured*, producing a *configurable packaged quantum solution*.

Configurability adds another layer of opportunity for generative coding to be even more flexible, so that a phenomenally large range of quantum circuits can be generated from a single quantum application.

Of course, even configurability has its limits. There is no suggestion that a single configurable packaged quantum solution could handle *all* application needs, or even all of the needs within a single application category. Rather, it is likely that there will be dozens of configurable packaged quantum solutions for each quantum application category.

It can be expected that a small handful of those solutions would account for the lion share of instances of application problems which require a quantum solution.

In fact, it could be that merely one or two dozen configurable packaged quantum solutions might cover a good 80% — or more — of the demand for quantum applications. Again, limited quantum technical talent can be focused on each of the configurable packaged quantum solutions, but amortized across the full range (or 80% of the range) of application problems demanding a quantum solution.

Assembling dozens or a few hundred top quantum technical talent teams is a much more credible proposition than expecting that thousands or even tens of thousands of organizations could assemble many, many thousands of top quantum technical talent teams.

# Generative coding

Just to highlight a key capability mentioned in the preceding section, *generative coding* is the essence of how an application is *generalized*. Quantum circuits will not be *handcrafted* and *hardwired* into the application as might be the case for simple or *toy* or experimental applications, but *automatically generated dynamically* by classical code based on the input data, input parameters, and configuration data.

A small amount of input data might generate a small quantum circuit, while a larger amount of input data generates a larger quantum circuit.

Various portions of the quantum circuit might be present or absent or modified based on input parameters, configuration data, and possibly even the input data itself.

# Automatic scaling of algorithms

Scaling of quantum algorithms is automatic in a configurable packaged quantum solution. No manual intervention or technical expertise is required. It’s all there deep under the hood. All courtesy of generative coding.

# Presumption of production-scale and substantial quantum advantage

The approach espoused by this paper *presumes* that quantum applications and solutions must be capable of *production-scale* usage and that they will be capable of achieving *substantial quantum advantage*. Anything less on either front is, well, uninteresting and not worthy of the effort. The intent is to *deliver on the promise* of *production-scale practical real-world quantum applications*.

A few key points:

**Presumption of production-scale.**No prototypes or experimental software here.**Presumption of production-ready.**Ready for full operation, to solve production-scale practical real-world problems. Not a tool for developers.**Presumption of substantial quantum advantage.**If not true dramatic quantum advantage, but that may be too much to ask for, initially. There’s no point if the solution does not deliver a clear and very compelling (substantial) improvement over classical solutions.**No intention here to cater to research, experimentation, prototyping, and toy-scale applications.**Although a configurable packaged quantum solution can certainly be used for experiments and prototyping, and research as well, the focus is on production-scale and production-ready.

For more on quantum advantage, see my papers:

*What Is Dramatic Quantum Advantage?*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/what-is-dramatic-quantum-advantage-e21b5ffce48c
*Fractional Quantum Advantage — Stepping Stones to Dramatic Quantum Advantage*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/fractional-quantum-advantage-stepping-stones-to-dramatic-quantum-advantage-6c8014700c61

# No need to be Quantum Ready for configurable packaged quantum solutions since the arcana of quantum computing, quantum mechanics, linear algebra, etc. are not needed

Everything to do with the details of quantum computing are *completely hidden deep under the hood* of a configurable packaged quantum solution, so there is not any need for users, teams, or organizations to be *Quantum Ready* — or even *Quantum Aware*. All that customers, teams, and users will need to be aware of is just the minimal application-specific jargon of the application itself.

Of course the customer will need to be aware of how to provision the application — what hardware, software, and cloud services will be required, since one or more quantum computers or remote access to quantum computers will be required. But even that can be outsourced or implicitly provided by the *solution provider* from whom the configurable packaged quantum solution is acquired, licensed, or accessed (remotely in the cloud.)

# Welcome to Quantum Done

Acquire and deploy a configurable packaged quantum solution and you are automatically a member of an elite club — you are now… *Quantum Done* — using quantum computing and realizing all of its promised benefits but without any of the need to be Quantum Ready or even Quantum Aware. All without the need for a super-elite quantum technical team.

# Algorithms, applications, and solutions

*Quantum algorithms* are where all of the action is, where the quantum *magic* happens, where the quantum rubber hits the quantum road. Where the promised *exponential quantum speedup* occurs. The *core logic* is in the quantum algorithms.

But the quantum algorithms alone aren’t terribly useful. Input data must be prepared by classical code and submitted to the quantum algorithms. The results of the quantum computation, the quantum result data must be *post-processed* by classical code and used by *classical application code*.

A *quantum application* accepts or acquires classical input data and classical input parameters, invokes the quantum algorithm, classically post-processes the quantum result, and performs some classical application function based on the post-processed quantum result. Rinse and repeat until the classical application code completes its intended purpose, producing a classical result, classical output data.

While a *quantum application* is simply a collection of classical code, invoking quantum algorithms, a *solution* is a *complete package* that does it all, everything. No additional effort is needed on the part of the user, other than to prepare the classical input data and parameters and use the classical output of the quantum application.

An application alone typically places significant burden on the user of the application, such as:

**An application tends to be very specialized, solving one, single, specific, particular problem.**The user will have to do another application if any of the details differ. No generality.**All input data must be carefully validated.**Sometimes by hand.**Input data may need to be formatted and presented in some cryptic form.****Behavior of the application is unpredictable if the input data is invalid.****Output data may be in some cryptic format.****Significant effort may be required to make use of the output data.****The user may have to hand-tune or otherwise modify either the classical code or the quantum algorithm to customize behavior.****Many***nuances of behavior*to be aware of and to work around.**And more.**Plenty of*gotchas*are common with applications in general.

Whereas a *solution* is conceptualized, designed, and implemented to eliminate *all* of these difficulties, onerous tasks, nuances, and gotchas.

In general, a *quantum solution* is designed to:

**Be more general than simply a specific, particular problem.**Designed to be able to handle variations in the details for the problem.**Discover as much as possible from the input data itself.****Be fully prepared for invalid input data.****Provide intelligent and convenient input options to allow easy control of the application without any need to modify or even read the code or quantum algorithms.****Accept a high-level***description*or*configuration*to guide the interpretation of the input data and input parameters.**Present a model of application behavior that is free from nuances and gotchas.**

# Some basic observations about applications

Let’s start with some basic observations, some truths that we can hold to be self-evident:

**Coding any application from scratch can be a very tedious and error-prone task.****Coding a quantum application from scratch will generally be a far more complex task.****Designing and coding any algorithm from scratch can be a very tedious and error-prone task.****Designing and coding a quantum algorithm from scratch will generally be a far more complex task.****Acquiring a complete application can be expensive, but avoids the need to know anything about what happens under the hood inside of the application.****Acquiring a complete quantum application can be expensive, but avoids the need to know anything about what happens under the hood inside of the application.****Customizing the code of any application can also be a very tedious and error-prone task.****Customizing the code of a quantum application will generally be a far more complex task.****Customizing any algorithm can be a very tedious and error-prone task.****Customizing any quantum algorithm will generally be a far more complex task.**

# Some basic observations about algorithms

Some additional, more subtle observations about algorithms:

**A hand-coded algorithm tends to be rather inflexible.****An algorithm generated by a computer program can be more flexible.****Code which generates algorithms tends to be significantly more difficult to design, understand, and maintain.**

# Solution vs. application

Just to briefly summarize some of the previous discussion related to solutions vs. applications:

**An application tends to focus on solving one, specific, particular problem.****While a solution tends to be generalized to solve a**It may be a relatively narrow or niche class, but is still more general than solving a particular problem.*class*of problems.**An application is mostly just the code with informal processes to guide its usage.**And the user must be responsible for the code, all of it.**While a solution has everything in place, all of the code, leaving little for the user to guess about or screw up — and if they do screw up it will be clearly diagnosed.**No need to write any code, modify any code, or even view or understand any code to use the solution.

# An application is just the code

Oversimplifying a bit, an application is really *just the code* for the application — classical as well as the quantum algorithms. That is the totality of the *value* delivered by the application.

Applications tend to either be completely hardwired with all data and parameters self-contained within the application, or accept a limited amount of input data and possibly some parameters. This limits their utility between users.

# A solution is much more than just the code

It’s not an exaggeration to suggest that compared to an application, a solution is much more than just the code. A solution delivers far more *value* than what is delivered by application code alone.

Sure, there’s the same *core code* (roughly, functionally equivalent) as the application, but there is much more code to deliver *added value* beyond the function of the core code itself.

And even the core code of the solution is much more sophisticated, in large part because it is more general — a *generalized application*, and also because it is more resilient.

For more on what added value a solution offers over an application see these two sections:

*Turnkey solutions — requirements and expectations.**Key features and benefits of configurable packaged quantum solutions.*

In short, with an application, all of the burden is on the user, while with a solution, all of the burden is on the solution itself. The user can rely on the solution rather than worry about how to use the application properly to achieve the desired effect.

# Is it an application or a solution?

Being a solution implies that very little is left for the user to use the application (solution) — simply prepare the input data, possibly tune the input parameters and configuration, execute the solution, and retrieve and use the application (solution) results.

A solution would also be extensively tested and resilient to improper usage, giving comprehensible error diagnostics in response to any improper usage. A solution leaves little to the imagination — no creativity required.

An application merely has to do what its author or intended user expects it to do. And if anything goes wrong, well… that’s the user’s problem.

# Three levels of algorithms and applications: Custom, generalized, and configurable

As conceptualized by this paper, there are really three levels of algorithms and applications:

**Custom algorithms and applications.**Focused on a singular, particular purpose, situation, user, and organization.**Generalized algorithms and applications.**For more than one purpose, situation, user, or organization. May still require enhancing, supplementing, or otherwise modifying the code.**Configurable algorithms and applications.**Especially*configurable packaged quantum solutions*as espoused by this paper. Generalized at their core, but configurable as well. Special attention to resilience. Generalized through configurability rather than any need to enhance, supplement, or modify the code by hand.

# Make vs. buy decision

Traditionally, each application begins with the same key decision:

**Should we**From scratch, or adapting an existing application.*make*the application ourselves?**Or should we***buy*an existing off-the-shelf application?

And a variation on this decision:

**Should we**Possibly directing the consultant which way we are biased, or deferring to their advice on make vs. buy.*hire a consultant*to make or buy the application?**Or should we decide to**Not feeling any need for the expertise of the consultant.*make or buy by ourselves*?

This decision is hard enough for a traditional, classical computer software application, but quantum computing makes the decision much more complex.

The complexity of quantum computing may make the consultant path more appealing.

Although, for larger organizations with deeper pockets the consultant path may at least appear less appealing even if it in fact is technically more advisable, unless inhouse technical talent is *not* particularly well-suited for the task or stretched too thin by multiple projects all competing for limited resources.

In any case, the availability of configurable packaged quantum solutions can make making a quantum application from scratch particularly *unappealing*.

And a configurable packaged quantum solution can be particularly appealing regardless of whether a hired-consultant or inhouse IT staff acquire the solution.

If the primary technical criteria are availability of quantum talent, level of effort, and resources required, the *make* option will tend to appear much less appealing than the *buy* option when it comes to a configurable packaged quantum solution.

So, in short, if a configurable packaged quantum solution is available the bias should be towards *buy* rather than *make*.

# Creation and marketing of configurable packaged quantum solutions

Some more sophisticated organizations may in fact see a business opportunity to *create and market* configurable packaged quantum solutions. That’s a tall order, not to be taken lightly, but I expect that major software firms, tech powerhouses, and major consulting firms will pursue that route, to at least some degree. Clearly that’s a bias towards a *make* decision.

Although, some such firms may in fact go the *buy* route as well, acquiring small startups or niche firms who have managed to create one or more configurable packaged quantum solutions, but may not be ideally positioned to fully and properly *market* them to exploit their full potential.

So, in short, there’s plenty of room for both *make* and *buy* decisions even for firms wishing to be in the business of marketing configurable packaged quantum solutions.

# Two distinct application use case categories — minor use of quantum and quantum-focused

There are two distinct overall categories of use cases for configurable packaged quantum solutions:

**Minor use of quantum.**The overall application has nothing to do with quantum computing per se, but one or more niche narrow, very-contained computations are quantum-based. This may in fact be a classical application which has been adapted to quantum computing for those narrow, niche portions of the overall application computation.**Quantum-focused.**A newer type of application where the overall application is focused on quantum computing, possibly with some amount of classical glue code, but everything is in service to the quantum logic. Not usually comparable to any existing classical application.

The approach espoused by this paper works for both.

The first category will be typical for applications where a significant performance improvement is expected, a *substantial quantum advantage*, compared to a classical computing solution.

The latter category will be typical for applications which simply cannot be currently implemented at all using classical computing technology. Use cases where *quantum supremacy* is expected.

# How quantum applications can use quantum algorithms

There is no single one-size-fits-all approach to how a quantum application can use a quantum algorithm. Here are the primary approaches, not intending to be an exhaustive list:

**Full-custom quantum algorithm design required.**Each quantum application does its own quantum algorithms from scratch. Either custom research is required, or an implementation based on published papers.**Radically adapt or redesign an existing quantum algorithm.**Significant redesign, but key elements remain unchanged. Might be unrecognizable to someone familiar with the original algorithm.**Moderately adapt an existing quantum algorithm.**Moderate redesign, but many or most elements remain unchanged. Tends to be somewhat recognizable, but not necessarily.**Modestly adapt an existing quantum algorithm.**Modest redesign, but many or most elements remain unchanged. Tends to be very recognizable.**Trivially adapt an existing quantum algorithm.**Modest or even trivial changes, such as changing some parameters or data values. No significant changes to the overall design — will look unchanged unless you know what to look for. Very recognizable, and even can be confused with the original quantum algorithm.**Use an existing, fully-developed off the shelf algorithm as-is.**No changes.**Use a classical black-box module.**Invoke a classical module which has a quantum algorithm embedded under the hood. The module takes classical input and parameters, and produces a classical result. The application never sees or can even sense that a quantum algorithm is used, but the internal application structure might be different from a pure-classical structure to accommodate the quantum algorithm. The quantum algorithm might even execute on a classical quantum simulator, or may be a quantum-inspired classical algorithm. Or, by default, the quantum algorithm is executed on a quantum computer, either locally, over a local area network, or accessed as an external Internet (cloud) service.**Fully-classical application structure that 100% replaces an existing classical module with the quantum-enabled module.**100% functionally compatible with the original classical application, but just faster and/or more accurate or otherwise more functional due to invoking the quantum algorithm from within the quantum-enabled module. Although this might simply result in a significant performance improvement, the ultimate goal is to be able to produce a result when a pure-classical module could not, otherwise known as*quantum supremacy*.**Classical application invokes a quantum web service over the Internet (cloud).**Could be a new service that is explicitly quantum which could require deep quantum knowledge or it could require some relatively light quantum awareness. Or it could appear to be a purely classical service that just happens to use a quantum algorithm deep under the hood, either locally or remotely as a service (cloud) — two levels of web service.

The concept of a configurable packaged quantum solution as espoused by this paper could use any of these approaches — all under the hood, where the user and customer have no sense of what quantum technology might be involved.

# Turnkey solutions — requirements and expectations

The term *turnkey solution* is somewhat redundant since turnkey means ready to go and a solution is ready to go. But, it’s a popular term from classical computing that many people may be familiar with.

To summarize the qualities or characteristics — the *requirements* and *expectations* — of a turnkey solution:

**Ready to go.**Ready to run, as-is.*Nothing*else is needed — other than the input data.**No additional software required.****No additional software components or modules needed.****No adaptation of the code required.**Classical or quantum.**No modification of the code required.**Classical or quantum.**Everything is flexible.**Nothing is hardcoded. All quantum algorithms are automatically adapted to the input data, input parameters, and application-oriented configuration data.**Fully validated.**All features have been fully tested.**Scaling is automatic.**No manual intervention or technical expertise required.**No need for an elite technical team.**No reliance on availability of a quantum technical talent pool. No need to attract or retain elite quantum technical staff. No need for the cost. No need for the uncertainty. No need for the risk.**No need to be Quantum Ready.**Welcome to Quantum*Done*. Everything to do with quantum computing is complete, ready to go, and hidden under the hood.**Fully documented.****No need to examine any of the code.**Classical or quantum.**No specialized knowledge needed.**No quantum computing. No quantum mechanics. No linear algebra. Not even software development.**Everything is in application terms.**No specialized vocabulary or knowledge required. Everything is expressed in terms of the specific application domain. No quantum computing jargon required.

Only seven steps needed:

**Acquire access to the solution.****Install, enable, or otherwise deploy the software.****Supply the input data.****Supply any optional parameters.****Optionally supply configuration data.**Application-oriented description of the problem to be solved. Or this may be automatically inferred directly from the input data.**Run the solution.**Push the button,*turn the key*. Invoke the application.**Access and use the results.**

# Black boxes

Another term for a *turnkey solution* is a *black box* — all details of how the solution works are fully hidden inside of the solution, so that the customer and user can treat the solution as a completely opaque block box. No knowledge of what happens inside the box is needed. No knowledge of how the contents of the box works is needed.

A configurable packaged quantum solution is in fact a *black box*. And a turnkey solution.

# A configurable packaged quantum solution is a turnkey solution

Just to be super-clear, the concept of a *configurable packaged quantum solution* is completely compatible with this older conception of a *turnkey solution*.

But more than that, the concept of a configurable packaged quantum solution emphasizes that everything is all there in one *package* and that it is *flexible* by virtue of both its input parameters and its *configurability*.

# Anybody can develop an application, but a solution requires a dramatically higher level of skill

Literally, *anybody* can develop an application, even a *quantum application*, but to meet the requirements and expectations of a solution, a turnkey solution, a configurable packaged quantum solution, a literally quantum leap of dramatically higher level of skill is needed. It takes a very different mindset.

A *domain expert* or *subject matter expert* can muster the skill to develop a *mere* application, but it takes the additional skills and attention to detail of a *software engineer* to even conceptualize, let alone design and develop and test a solution.

# Key features and benefits of configurable packaged quantum solutions

Some of these features and benefits overlap with general turnkey solutions:

**100% solution.**No additional code to write or adapt.**Full explainability.**The decisions leading to algorithm and application results are fully reported and explained. Not the raw quantum computing per se or the physics, but the overall process and the math but in application terms.**Extensive, foolproof validation of all input data and parameters with readable diagnostics.**All detectable errors. Highlight possible inconsistencies. Highlight possible undesirable consequences. Highlight potential optimizations or opportunities for simplification. Eliminate all surprises. Leave nothing to chance.**Extensive tools for processing and examining and diagnosing quantum results.**Automated whenever possible. And very configurable.**Full validation of quantum results.**When possible all results should be fully validated, but for some applications (e.g., optimization) that may not be possible. But at least validate that the results are plausible, such as that optimization is better than a Monte Carlo simulation.**Each solution focuses on a specific and clearly documented application niche.**Either vertical or horizontal.**Excellent customer service support.****Resilient.**Little need to worry about failure scenarios. Either the solution completely handles all failure scenarios or provides detailed but easy to comprehend diagnostics for any unhandled failures.**Outstanding online community providing great support.****Extensive online documentation.****Extensive online tutorials****Extensive training.**Readily available.**Extensive consulting services available.****Service-level agreement (SLA).**Guarantee 24/7 availability and uptime.**Frequent updates.**Generally fully compatible, with no customer changes needed.**Prototyping and proof of concept use cases fully supported by simulation.****100 to 1,000 times more complex than a typical prototype or experimental application.****No need for a super-elite quantum team.****No need for an elite quantum team of any sort.**Everything quantum is encapsulated and hidden within the solution.**Each configurable packaged quantum solution does require an elite team.**The team*developing*a configurable packaged quantum solution*does*require an elite team with broad and deep quantum expertise, but they are not part of the organization*deploying*or*using*the solution.**But each instance doesn’t require an elite team to deploy each instance of the application (solution.)****No development time.****Rapid deployment.****No maintenance staff.****No need for Quantum Ready.**It’s all hidden inside the box, under the hood of the solution.**No specialized knowledge needed.**Other than for the application domain itself. No quantum computing knowledge needed. No quantum mechanics knowledge needed. No physics knowledge needed. No quantum linear algebra needed.**All outsourced.**Everything. Algorithm knowledge. Application knowledge. Potentially infrastructure as well — with cloud access to a vendor system.**Eliminate the open-ended budget, planning, organizational, and business risk of an expensive and complex application.****Minimize talent cost and risk.****Minimize training cost.****Minimize IT operational costs.**

# The single greatest benefit of configurable packaged quantum solutions is to enable any organization of any size to exploit quantum computing without an onerous investment in quantum expertise

Configurable packaged quantum solutions enable an organization of any size to exploit quantum computing without *any* need to develop or acquire or invest in *quantum expertise*. Any needed quantum expertise is fully contained without the packaged solution, completely hidden deep under the hood.

**No need to hire expensive quantum talent.****No need to train expensive quantum talent.****No need to retain expensive quantum talent.****No need to be Quantum Ready.****No need to be Quantum Aware.**

Additionally, a configurable packaged quantum solution eliminates all of the *technical risk* associated with developing custom quantum applications. All of that risk was taken by the organization which underwrote the development and testing of the packaged solution.

# Resilience

*Resilience* is a key quality of a configurable packaged quantum solution.

If anything can go wrong, the solution will be prepared to handle it. That’s a key part of what makes the solution a solution rather than simply a program or application.

Some aspects of being resilient:

**There is little need to worry about failure scenarios.**Either the solution completely handles all failure scenarios or provides detailed but easy to comprehend diagnostics for any unhandled failures.**All failure scenarios have been identified and tested.****Everything that can be tested has been tested.****Extensive, foolproof validation of all input data and parameters with readable diagnostics.**All detectable errors. Highlight possible inconsistencies. Highlight possible undesirable consequences. Highlight potential optimizations or opportunities for simplification. Eliminate all surprises.**Full validation of quantum results.**When possible all results should be fully validated, but for some applications (e.g., optimization) that may not be possible. But at least validate that the results are plausible, such as that optimization is better than a Monte Carlo simulation.**All failure scenarios have been fully identified and fully documented.****Even if automatically handled, all failures will be reported.**And reported in an easy to understand manner.

# Personal versus product use

Anyone can develop an application for their own personal use or for use within a project or by a closely-knit team, but it takes a whole quantum leap of skill to develop an application as a *product*, a *solution*, which can be readily and easily be used by others who may not even be known to the developers.

Worst case, the developers can go in and examine or even modify the source code if the application doesn’t perform as expected.

But the users of a *product* won’t have that luxury. Even if it is an *open-source product* with readily available source code (in a GitHub repository), examining and modifying (and validating) source code may be far beyond the skill level of users of a product.

That places a dramatic burden on the developers of an application as a product.

# Single-purpose, specialized, and niche applications versus general-purpose and generalized applications

Most applications have a specific, well-defined purpose. They are either:

**Single-purpose applications.****Specialized applications.****Niche applications.**

Other applications have a broader, less-narrowly defined purpose. They are either:

**General-purpose applications.****Generalized applications.**

# Generalized applications

The core essence of a *configurable packaged quantum solution* is that it is a *generalized application*.

An application alone is *specialized*, to suit the needs of a particular situation for a particular user at a particular organization.

In contrast, a *solution* — or *generalized application* — applies to multiple situations for multiple users at multiple organizations.

I wouldn’t go so far as to say that the terms generalized application and configurable packaged quantum solution are exact synonyms. As noted in the earlier section *A solution is much more than just the code*, an application is really just the code while a solution is much more than just the code.

A key feature of a solution is its *resilience*. Also, a generalized application is indeed more… *generalized*, but the burden for using the application properly remains resting fully on the shoulders of the user, while a solution itself takes on the full burden, eliminating any need for the user to feel burdened in any way.

For more on what a configurable packaged quantum solution brings to the table see these sections of this paper:

*Turnkey solutions — requirements and expectations.**Key features and benefits of configurable packaged quantum solutions.*

# Reusable applications

Another name for a generalized application is a *reusable application* — it can be used in more than one situation, by more than one user, and by more than one organization.

Technically, reusability and generalization are distinct, but they share this quality of applying to more than one situation, user, and organization. A reusable application is by definition more general — if it wasn’t more general, it wouldn’t be reusable.

# Amortized costs for generalized and reusable applications

Generalized and reusable algorithms and applications overcome many of the challenges of conceptualizing, designing, developing, testing, and maintaining complex quantum algorithms and quantum applications, primarily by amortizing all of those extra costs over a much wider range of situations, users, and organizations.

# Packaged applications

*Packaged applications* are somewhat more generalized applications which can be used by multiple users with no change to the code, but simply supplying alternative input data and parameters.

And they are generally easier to deploy and manage by the IT guys.

And hopefully with significant documentation for proper usage.

And hopefully rigorously tested.

# Configurable packaged quantum solution

A *configurable packaged quantum solution* would be a more generalized version of an application for which a more complete description of the problem can be supplied rather than being completely hardwired within the application.

The description of the problem, the *configuration*, would be in terms that the user of the solution would understand (such as a subject matter expert for the application area or problem domain), not the terms of quantum computing, quantum mechanics, linear algebra, or physics in general — unless the actual problem domain is based on such concepts, such as simulating physics or chemistry.

Overall, a configurable packaged quantum solution is:

**A solution.**Rather than merely an application. Fully solves an application problem, not simply a*tool*in a*toolkit*, not simply a*framework*which is only a starting point.**Quantum-based.**Utilizes a quantum computer for some key portion of its computations.**Generalized.**Not focused on a single, particular problem, user, or organization.**Is packaged**. Somewhat more generalized application which can be used by multiple users with no change to the code, but simply by supplying alternative input data and parameters. Significant documentation for proper usage. Rigorously tested.**Configurable.**Accepts a high-level description of the problem to be solved.**Resilient.**Handles all failure scenarios, both expected and unexpected.**Turnkey solution.**Everything is in place. No coding required. All of the necessary code has already been written and thoroughly tested. Just supply input data, some parameter settings, and possibly an application configuration description.**Full explainability.**The decisions leading to application results are fully reported and explained. Reports exactly what it did and why. Leaves little to the imagination. Not the raw quantum computing per se or the physics, but the overall process and the math but in application terms.

# Configurable packaged quantum solutions could be single-purpose or general-purpose

Granted, general-purpose applications have a lot of appeal, but there can also be high-value applications where even a solution for a fairly narrow application niche can be very interesting from a business perspective.

There is nothing in the concept of a configurable packaged quantum solution which presupposes any bias towards or against either single-purpose or general-purpose applications.

Sure, general-purpose configurable packaged quantum solutions will have great value since they apply across many more situations, but specialized, niche, single-purpose applications can have real value in their intended even if narrow niches.

# Single-purpose configurable packaged quantum solutions can have high value for multiple customers

A single-purpose quantum application might seem of rather limited value, but there may be multiple organizations (customers) who have that same (or approximately the same) need, and that need may have relatively high value to each of them. So, single-purpose applications can indeed be great candidates for configurable packaged quantum solutions.

Just because an application is single-purpose doesn’t mean that every user is computing exactly the same value. Things that can differ:

- Differing input data.
- Differing input parameters.
- Differing configuration data. Solving fairly similar but not absolutely identical application problems.

In short, single-purpose quantum applications can be a great fit for configurable packaged quantum solutions.

# Horizontal vs. vertical applications

General-purpose or generalized applications are either:

**Horizontal applications.**Apply across a wide range of subject domains or industries.**Vertical applications.**Apply across the range of functional areas of a single subject domain or industry.

# Configurable packaged quantum solutions can apply in many situations

The main point of a configurable packaged quantum solution is that it applies in *many situations*, regardless of whether those situations are narrow or general purpose, or horizontal or vertical application domains.

# Many organizations will have similar specialized needs

Many organizations will have similar needs. Not exactly all of the same needs, but there will be a significant degree of overlap. This is a key part of the opportunity for configurable packaged quantum solutions.

# Many organizations will have a variety of situations with similar if not identical needs

Different parts of a single organization can have similar if not identical needs. This is an example of where a horizontal application comes into play. This is another key part of the opportunity for configurable packaged quantum solutions.

# Configurable packaged quantum solutions could be horizontal or vertical applications

There is nothing in the concept of a configurable packaged quantum solution which presupposes any bias towards or against either horizontal or vertical applications.

Each has its respective appeal.

# Structure and form of applications and solutions can vary

The proposal of this paper is agnostic with respect to the structure and form of quantum applications and solutions — it applies to all structures and forms that currently exist or might be proposed. The only important thing is that the solution be fully packaged so that the user or customer doesn’t need to write or modify any code or application logic or quantum algorithms. All the customer or user needs to be concerned with is formatting the input data, selecting some input options, and possibly describing the application problem using application-oriented configuration data.

Some possible application or solution structures and forms:

**Interactive GUI application.****Command-line program.**UNIX or DOS style. Standard input. Command line options. Standard output. Access to files and network services. Scripting.**HTTP REST API network service.**For more-sophisticated solutions.

And others. Those three should cover most common cases.

# Packaging quantum solutions as network services

Packaged quantum solutions and configurable packaged quantum solutions can be packaged and delivered as Internet services with an API, such as an HTTP REST API as just mentioned in the preceding section.

All technical details, quantum and classical, are hidden within the service — or at least they should be. The user merely supplies input data and parameters, and possibly configuration data to describe the problem to be solved, with results returned to the application which invokes the network service.

It’s also possible that the network-based configurable packaged quantum solution might invoke other network services, files, databases, and other network or local resources to satisfy application requests.

And it goes without saying that a network-based configurable packaged quantum solution will at some point invoke a *quantum computer* — locally or as a network-based resource — to perform quantum computations.

In any case, all technical details are hidden from the user. Or at least they should be if the configurable packaged quantum solution is properly designed and implemented as espoused by this paper.

# Cloud-based applications and services

Even before the advent of quantum computing, applications began migrating to *the cloud*. Just about everything in classical computing is now becoming *cloud-based*.

Application *services* are an ideal match for the cloud since they seem to provide a service to a wide range of applications without the need for the customer to install, deploy, operate, and maintain the service locally on their own premises.

More recently, entire *applications* are *moving to the cloud*.

# Cloud-based configurable packaged quantum solutions

The model of configurable packaged quantum solutions espoused by this paper is a natural fit for both quantum cloud-based services and quantum cloud-based applications and solutions.

The main point from the perspective of this paper is not that these services, applications, and solutions are cloud-based, but that they are packaged, turnkey, and configurable — configurable packaged quantum solutions, that may (or may not) just happen to be deployed in the cloud.

# Quantum-as-a-Service (QaaS) for quantum-focused solutions

*Cloud-based configurable packaged quantum solutions* which are designed to operate as *network services* are certainly great candidates for *Quantum-as-a-Service (QaaS)*, but it’s a little more nuanced. As I noted earlier in this paper, there are two distinct application use case categories: *minor use* of quantum and *quantum-focused*, so whether a network service which involves quantum computing is a Quantum-as-a-Service (QaaS) depends:

**Minor use of quantum.**It would be a stretch to consider this a true Quantum-as-a-Service (QaaS). The overall application has nothing to do with quantum computing per se, but one or more niche narrow, very-contained computations are quantum-based. This may in fact be a classical application which has been adapted to quantum computing for those narrow, niche portions of the overall application computation.**Quantum-focused.**This*definitely*would be considered a Quantum-as-a-Service (QaaS). A newer type of application where the overall application is focused on quantum computing, possibly with some amount of classical glue code, but everything is in service to the quantum logic. Not usually comparable to any existing classical application.

In short, *quantum-focused solutions* would be the primary use case category associated with *Quantum-as-a-Service (QaaS)*.

Of course, it’s all subjective and relative, and when it comes to products, it could simply be a matter of *marketing*.

# Pure quantum vs. hybrid quantum/classical web services

A purely quantum web service will be restricted, by definition, to the *little data with a big solution space* computing model (see the next section) since a quantum algorithm alone cannot do any I/O, file or database access, or access web services, or even complex control flow with rich datatypes. But, it can still be packaged as a web service and constitute a configurable packaged quantum solution as espoused by this paper.

In contrast, a *hybrid* quantum/classical web service has no such restrictions and can access any amount of data of any type from anywhere.

# Little Data With a Big Solution Space — the Sweet Spot for Quantum Computing

The essence of the *little data with a large solution space* quantum computing model is:

**Only a very small amount of input data.**All input data must be encoded in the gate structure of the quantum algorithm (circuit.)**Only a very small computation.**Limited by coherence time and total quantum circuit size. Relatively shallow maximum circuit depth. Limited total circuit size.**A very large solution space.**n qubits provide 2^n quantum states. 50 qubits offer a*quadrillion*quantum states. So, a small computation can be evaluated over a very large solution space.**Only a very small amount of output data.**Whatever qubits can be*measured*.

The whole point of a quantum algorithm is its ability to evaluate a relatively small computation with a very small amount of input data over a vast solution space.

For more on the little data with a large solution space quantum computing model, see my paper:

*Little Data With a Big Solution Space — the Sweet Spot for Quantum Computing*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/little-data-with-a-big-solution-space-the-sweet-spot-for-quantum-computing-b6c6d76ada6d

In contrast, a *hybrid* quantum/classical web service has no such restrictions, and can:

**Read, write, and update data of any type from any source and destination.****Perform classical I/O.****Access classical files.****Access classical databases.**Or network-based databases.**Access classical web services.**Locally or over the Internet.**Access pure quantum web services.**Locally or over the Internet.**Access other hybrid quantum/classical web services.****Access Big Data.**Process very large amounts of data.**Generate and store large results.**Large amounts of output data.**Perform large and complex computations.**

But, it must use the little data, small computation in a large solution space, and little data result computing model for only modest portions of input data in very small chunks on any single invocation of a quantum algorithm (circuit.) So, this does increase the amount of data which can be processed, but at the expense of trading off for much more limited *quantum advantage* since quantum advantage is based on how large a solution space is evaluated on a single invocation of a quantum algorithm.

If processing Big Data results in a large number of quantum algorithm invocations, the overall quantum advantage will be dramatically reduced to simply the amount of input data processed on each quantum algorithm invocation. A quantum solution won’t process the Big Data itself any faster, just the computation on each small chunk of data.

For more on evaluating quantum advantage, see my paper:

*What Is the Quantum Advantage of Your Quantum Algorithm?*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/what-is-the-quantum-advantage-of-your-quantum-algorithm-8f481aefe8d0

# Architecture and design details of generalized solutions is beyond the scope of this paper

The focus of this paper is the general concept of a configurable packaged quantum solution, but not the specific *architecture* or *design details* related to the design or implementation of such generalized solutions.

There may or may not be significant details in common between the many quantum solutions. When practical and sensible, it’s good to have commonality, but various applications may have their own special or even unique needs which preclude commonality. That’s fine too, when practical and sensible.

I fully expect that there will be toolkits and frameworks to specifically facilitate design and implementation of configurable packaged quantum solutions, but the point of this section is that that is all beyond the scope of this informal paper.

# Configurable packaged quantum solutions vs. toolkits and frameworks

Toolkits and application frameworks are very useful, but still require great skill and knowledge of quantum computing, and still leave too much of the work to the application developer.

Toolkits and application frameworks essentially provide the *foundation* for creating an application.

Some examples…

**From Google:**

**From IBM:**

**Qiskit****.****Qiskit application modules****.****Qiskit Nature****.**Covers physics, chemistry, drugs, materials.**Qiskit Finance****.****Qiskit Optimization****.****Qiskit Machine Learning****.**Can be applied to any application domain.

In contrast, the whole point of a packaged solution is that it *fully* solves an application problem. It’s the full, completed house, not just the foundation or some of the pieces.

A configurable packaged quantum solution requires only that the user supply the data and any application-oriented parameters which make sense in the application domain, and don’t require knowledge of quantum computing, quantum algorithms, quantum circuits, quantum gates, or even quantum mechanics or linear algebra, unless the application area is in fact quantum physics or quantum chemistry, but even then a packaged solution would only require knowledge of the application science, not quantum computing.

# Some examples of complex configuration data

Some examples of complex configuration data:

**Description of an atom, particle, molecule, or physical system to be simulated.****Description of chemicals whose reaction is to be simulated.****Description of a drug molecule to be simulated or analyzed.****Description of a protein molecule to be simulated or analyzed.****Description of the molecular structure of a material to be simulated.****Description of the elements of a business process to be optimized.****Description of a financial portfolio to be optimized.****Description of data for a machine learning algorithm.**

Granted, significant complexity may be required in the classical code which analyzes this configuration data and then determines how to transform it into one or more quantum circuits.

# Fielder’s choice whether input data should be self-configuring, configured by input parameters, or a separate configuration description

How to represent configuration data is an open-ended matter. There are really three choices:

**A separate configuration description.**Clean separation between input data, input parameters, and configuration data. Allows a configuration of arbitrary complexity. This is the most general and offers the maximal flexibility, but can be cumbersome if the configuration is relatively simple or would be more easily specified as simple input parameters or embedded in the input data.**Specify configuration data using input parameters.**If the configuration data is simple enough, a relatively small number of input parameters might be sufficient to describe the configuration. This makes sense if the configuration data is very simple and doesn’t make more sense being embedded in the input data.**Input data is self-configuring.**Given that the input data can have a semantically-rich description (such as XML or JSON), the configuration description could be included directly in the input data. Either explicitly, using separate data elements, or implicitly as part of the input data itself. This makes sense if the configuration can trivially be specified in the input data and directly parallels the input data. Or if an automated analysis of the raw input data can discern patterns and structure.

It’s a fielder’s choice which approach makes the most sense for a given application.

Generally, the simpler, the more obvious, and the more natural, the better.

# Specification of configuration

A simpler restatement of the gist of the previous section is that the configuration for a configurable packaged quantum solution could be either:

**A detailed problem description.**Separate configuration data.**Hints or instructions specified as simple input parameters.****Automatic detection of configuration from raw input data.**Based on automated examination and analysis of the raw input data. No explicit configuration needed. Input data is self-configuring.

# All input data and parameters and configuration data should be in application-oriented terms, not the terms of quantum computing or quantum mechanics

A core goal of a configurable packaged quantum solution is that all input data and input parameters and configuration data are couched in terms that are familiar for those working in the particular application domain, and not the language of physics, advanced mathematics, quantum mechanics, or even quantum computing in general. *All* of those levels of technical detail must be hidden within the packaged quantum solution, not visible to the user or customer.

With one big exception — for those applications which *are* focused on physics, quantum chemistry, quantum mechanics, or quantum computing itself, such as *simulation*, where such terms are very relevant. But even then, most of the jargon of quantum computing and quantum mechanics should be hidden from view unless it makes sense in the context of the application from the perspective of the user or customer.

Some of the areas of terminology which are expected to be hidden include:

**Qubits.****Quantum logic gates.****Quantum state.****Basis states.****Wavefunctions.****Hamiltonians.****Product states.****Bell states.****Bloch sphere and Bloch sphere rotations.****Phase and phase angles.****Superposition.****Entanglement.****Interference.****Teleportation.****Probability amplitudes.****Density matrix.****Kets and bra-ket notation.****Hilbert space.****Vector space.****Measurements.****Gate pulses.****Shot counts.****Circuit repetitions.****Quantum circuit.****Quantum algorithm.****Quantum results.****Unitary transform matrix.****Hermitian operators.****Eigenvalues, eigenvectors, eigenstates.**

# Data formats

A wide variety of data formats can be used to specify application input data, input parameters, and configuration data, such as:

**Simple text.**Simple strings, keywords, numbers, or lines of text.**Comma-separated values (CSV).**Single row of data or rows of data.**Tab-delimited.**Single row of data or rows of data.**XML.**Ranging from simple to very complex.**JSON.**JavaScript Object Notation. Ranging from simple to very complex.**Semantic Web RDF.**Graphs of subject, predicate, and object triples. Ranging from simple to very complex.**Read from a database.**Specify a database, table name, primary key, column name(s), etc.

The proposal of this paper is agnostic with regard to such data formats.

# Configuring or controlling output

A configurable packaged quantum solution might produce a single output in a standard format, or it might update or generate a database of some sort. The default behavior should of course be very reasonable and very useful, but like all other aspects of a configurable packaged quantum solution, the output behavior should be… *configurable*.

The exact configuration parameters would of course differ from solution to solution, although I expect that many solutions will have similar output needs. Some of the potential output configuration options might include:

**Data format.****Filtering.**How much of the computational results to include or exclude.**Identify a service to invoke with results.****Identify a database in which to store results.**Including a database, table name, primary key, column name(s), etc. Might be relative to the input data source, such as to read and then update a database.**Distinguish results of a full application or solution vs. simply a module producing intermediate results to be sent on to a larger component of a complex application.****Support workflow processing models.**

# Some examples of configurable classical solutions

**Database servers.**Schema to describe the structure of data. And storage schema to describe how the data should be stored. Various formats for import and export of rows of data or complex data structures, including graphs.**Search engines.**Configuration of data sources and data formats, including fields that can be searched by various data formats or text keywords. Configurations of complex data formats. For example*Apache Solr*and*Elasticsearch*.**Web service REST API.**Applications can use the web service without any knowledge of its internals or any need to modify or even examine the code. All you need are a URL and input data, and possibly credentials and a license.**Web sites.**Users and applications can use HTTP-based web servers without any knowledge of their internals or any need to modify or even examine the code. Tim Berners-Lee was working with a research team at LHC to solve a general problem in a narrow niche area (high-energy subatomic physics), but saw opportunities for a much broader range, and pursued it. His*solution*was not just for physics, not just for science, not just for technology, and not just business.**MATLAB****.**Numeric computing environment. Complete with a programming language.**Wolfram Mathematica****and****Wolfram Alpha****.**Symbolic computing environment. Computable data sets.

# Examples of packaged quantum solutions

Quantum computing is too new to have much in the way of commercial solutions. But some rudimentary solutions are starting to take root.

**Quantum Origin.**A*platform*service developed by Cambridge Quantum Computing Limited (now part of Quantinuum, an offshoot of Honeywell) to provide certifiably random encryption keys using a quantum algorithm running on a quantum computer. As per their website: “*Quantum Origin is a cloud-hosted platform that uses the unpredictable nature of quantum mechanics to generate cryptographic keys seeded with verifiable quantum randomness from quantum computers. The platform supports and helps protect traditional algorithms, such as RSA or AES, as well as post-quantum cryptography algorithms currently being standardised by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST).*”

It’s not clear to me how configurable this solution is, but it is *packaged* and a *turnkey solution* in the spirit of the model of configurable packaged quantum solutions espoused by this informal paper.

But I don’t see it as meeting two of the main criteria for a configurable packaged quantum solution:

**Production-scale.**Using a network service just to generate a random number is rather inefficient for generating a large number of random numbers.**Substantial quantum advantage.**No obvious dramatic performance advantage over classical computing. There are some specialized hardware devices which can be used with a classical computer, so there is no dramatic quantum advantage here.

That said, I myself have noted previously that quantum computers do have an inherent advantage when it comes to generating true random numbers. Yes, there’s an advantage, but not a particularly notable and compelling advantage. See my paper:

*Quantum Advantage Now: Generation of True Random Numbers*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/quantum-advantage-now-generation-of-true-random-numbers-237d89f8a7f2

But, all of that said, at least *Origin* is headed in the direction espoused by this paper.

# Industry-specific solutions

Although it is highly desirable to develop solutions that can be applied across multiple industries — horizontal applications, it will be quite common for many solutions to be *industry-specific*.

Each industry will typically have its own application needs, even if there are needs which are common across industries.

But some solutions will be horizontal, applicable to multiple industries, such as:

**Machine learning.****Optimization.**

Each industry is generally an *application domain*, with:

**Concepts and vocabulary.****Theory.****Practice.****A domain defined by concepts, vocabulary, theory, and practice.**

Some industries already have quantum application categories:

**Physics.****Chemistry.****Drugs.****Materials.****Finance.**

# Unlikely that there will be a single configurable packaged quantum solution per application category, but maybe a dozen or more per application category

Configurable packaged quantum solutions should of course be generalized, but even generalization has its limits. Rather than expecting a single configurable packaged quantum solution for each quantum application category — or even one solution to rule all application categories, we should expect at least a handful or even a dozen or more distinct solutions for each quantum application category.

There will also likely be niche applications or solutions which don’t fit into any of those seven general quantum application categories.

# Only a relative few configurable packaged quantum solutions are likely to cover the majority of use cases for real users in the real world

But even if there are *dozens* or even *hundreds* of configurable packaged quantum solutions, it is likely that only a relative few will be most widely used for the most common use cases.

This will be especially true when it comes to horizontal solutions.

Sure, there will be many smaller niches but the most common use cases will dominate demand for quantum computing. In terms of number of customers, number of teams, number of users, and number of situations.

Or at least that’s my theory, at this stage.

How it will all unfold over the next decade is anybody’s guess.

# The seven main quantum application categories

For reference, the seven main quantum application categories are:

**Simulating physics.****Simulating chemistry.****Material design.****Drug design.****Business process optimization.****Finance.**Including portfolio optimization.**Machine learning.**

And there will also be niche applications which don’t fit into any of those seven general quantum application categories.

For more on quantum applications and categories, see my paper:

*What Applications Are Suitable for a Quantum Computer?*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/what-applications-are-suitable-for-a-quantum-computer-5584ef62c38a

# Expect 70–80% of users (customers) to get by with configurable packaged quantum solutions alone

It is the expectation of this paper that most users and customers will not need to design or develop their own quantum algorithms or quantum applications — that configurable packaged quantum solutions will be sufficient to meet the quantum computing needs of most users and organizations. Maybe something on the order of 70% to 80% — or more — of organizations and users.

It is the expectation of this paper that only 20% to 30% — or less — of organizations and users will need to design or develop their own quantum algorithms or quantum applications.

# Aim for 90% of users (customers) to get by with configurable packaged quantum solutions alone

In fact, the goal at this stage should be 90% of users and organizations should find configurable packaged quantum solutions to be sufficient for *all* of their quantum computing needs, and only 10% users and organizations would need to design or develop their own quantum algorithms or quantum applications.

# Critical mass of configurable packaged quantum solutions

At some point in the coming decade a sufficient number of configurable packaged quantum solutions will be deployed so that a sufficient fraction of users and organizations will be using quantum computing through configurable packaged quantum solutions so that we will be able to say that quantum computing is now *widely in use*, that *adoption of quantum computing is widespread*. It’s difficult to predict when such a *critical mass* of adoption of quantum computing will occur.

It will likely come sooner in some application categories or industries first, while some application categories or industries will be laggards.

The only point of this paper is that the *concept* and *availability* of configurable packaged quantum solutions will *dramatically accelerate* the process of widespread adoption of quantum computing so that the critical mass will be reached sooner than if each customer had to design and develop their own quantum algorithms and quantum applications from scratch.

# No need for full quantum error correction (QEC) — near-perfect qubits should be sufficient

Although *quantum error correction (QEC)* is often touted as being essential and a precondition for widespread adoption of quantum computing, it is the position of this paper that full, automatic, and transparent quantum error correction will not be needed to enable *configurable packaged quantum solutions* — near-perfect qubits should be sufficient. And maybe some degree of manual error mitigation.

Yes, full, automatic, and transparent quantum error correction will indeed be needed for the widespread adoption of quantum computing in terms of many firms being able to easily develop and deploy *custom* production-scale practical real-world applications — and are in fact required to achieve The FORTRAN Moment, the elite nature of development of configurable packaged quantum solutions will likely only require near-perfect qubits, and possibly some limited degree of manual error mitigation.

The elite designers and developers of configurable packaged quantum solutions should have most of their needs met by near-perfect qubits, only occasionally needing to do any manual error mitigation.

And users and customers won’t have any need to know what goes on deep under the hood of these configurable packaged quantum solutions. It’s all automatic, all of the time, and all transparent.

For more on near-perfect qubits, see my paper:

*What Is a Near-perfect Qubit?*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/what-is-a-near-perfect-qubit-4b1ce65c7908

For more on quantum error correction, logical qubits, and fault-tolerant quantum computing, see my paper:

*Preliminary Thoughts on Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computing, Quantum Error Correction, and Logical Qubits*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/preliminary-thoughts-on-fault-tolerant-quantum-computing-quantum-error-correction-and-logical-1f9e3f122e71

# Debugging and logging

As easy to use and automatic as configurable packaged quantum solutions will be, there will still be times when users scratch their heads and wonder why they are not getting their expected acceptable results. Debugging is necessary.

*Explainability* should help a lot and cover most such situations — the software literally tells you why the results are what they are, and what decisions were made and why.

But sometimes even explainability won’t be enough. Debugging will be needed.

Beyond high-level explainability, detailed levels of *logging* should provide enough information to work through most issues. Levels of logging can be configured to control the level of detail.

Most sophisticated computations will require a sequence or series of steps, each with intermediate results before the final results are reached. Logging of *intermediate results* can dramatically help users to understand what was going on. Again, the level of detail of logging of intermediate results can be configured to match the immediate user needs.

# The ENIAC Moment won’t necessarily depend on or result in a configurable packaged quantum solution

The ENIAC Moment of quantum computing will be the first instance of a production-scale practical real-world quantum application in action. It will be a glorious, momentous event. It will require an immense level of effort. It will require a very elite technical team. But it will be a very hand-crafted affair that won’t be easily replicated in many organizations. It will prove what can be done, but it won’t blaze a trail which can easily be followed by any but the most skilled elite practitioners and teams. And it’s unlikely to be the result of deploying a configurable packaged quantum solution as envisioned by this paper.

It’s remotely possible that it *could* be a configurable packaged quantum solution, but very unlikely.

Other elite teams at other organizations are likely to attempt to replicate the work of The ENIAC Moment, the hard way, but usually with yet another hand-crafted, custom application.

But it or those copy cats could in fact be or turn into a *precursor* for a configurable packaged quantum solution.

# The ENIAC Moment might provide the basis or impetus to kick start configurable packaged quantum solutions

As I just ended the preceding section, the implementation for The ENIAC Moment or those who attempt to replicate it are unlikely to even remotely resemble the notion of a a configurable packaged quantum solution as described in this paper, but it or those copy cats could well *evolve* into a *precursor* for a configurable packaged quantum solution.

I expect that somewhere in the world a very special team will keep this paper in mind and turn the blueprint for the initial hand-crafted application from The ENIAC Moment into the rudimentary outline for a first cut at a true configurable packaged quantum solution.

They may or may not succeed at that initial cut. It may take them a number of cuts. Or, maybe they fail in the end, possibly running out of funding, and maybe then one or more teams at other organizations pick up the mantle and finally do manage to craft a workable cut at a configurable packaged quantum solution which replicates that initial ENIAC moment but with a generalized approach which can then be readily deployed by *any* team at *any* organization without the need for a super-elite team or specialized quantum expertise.

That would be the true *birth* of the *era of configurable packaged quantum solutions*.

There might also be a number of intermediary stages, where the original ENIAC moment implementation is incrementally evolved, incrementally making it more and more general, but still requiring significant quantum expertise, until finally the stage is reached where quantum expertise is no longer needed.

# When can we expect the birth of the era of configurable packaged quantum solutions?

Unfortunately, not real soon. Maybe three to five years. Maybe seven years.

It could take years to transition from The ENIAC Moment for quantum computing through all of the evolutionary stages to what really does appear to be a true *configurable packaged quantum solution*.

Or, it could happen in just a few months. One can dream!

Predicting the timeline is a classic fool’s errand — so many factors will apply.

In any case, The ENIAC Moment itself is still years off (three to five years, maybe?), so the birth of the era of configurable packaged quantum solutions is months to years after that.

Figure two to five to seven years.

Betting on four to five years seems relatively safe at present, but nothing in quantum computing is an actual slam dunk certainty. After all, quantum itself is based on uncertainty!

# Configurable packaged quantum solutions may actually be easier to design and build than full-custom applications

Although the level of skill and effort needed to design, implement, package, and test a configurable packaged quantum solution will be daunting, the simple fact will remain that designing and implementing *any* quantum application will be very, very daunting until we do get to the stage where we have mastered the process of designing and developing a configurable packaged quantum solution.

So, even though it might seem as though taking shortcuts would reduce costs and accelerate development, the engineering rigor of the process of designing and developing a configurable packaged quantum solution might actually counter-intuitively be a faster and less risky path.

One of the key reasons for this paradox is that it can be difficult to monitor, manage, and constrain the design process for a full-custom application, while the raw engineering rigor required for a configurable packaged quantum solution will automatically constrain the process out of raw necessity, by definition.

I’m sure that we will see both approaches play out in the coming years.

Some applications might more naturally gravitate to one of the two approaches even as other applications gravitate more naturally to the other approach. Personal and organizational preferences and biases will likely play a role as well.

# Vendors and sources of configurable packaged quantum solutions

Configurable packaged quantum solutions could come from a wide range and variety of vendors and sources:

**Academic research labs.**More for specialized research applications.**Government research labs.**More for specialized applications related to the research interests of the particular government lab or project or team.**Open source applications and solutions.**Open source community and ecosystem for support and enhancement. Major universities. Government research labs. NASA. Major companies, including industrial, manufacturing, pharmaceutical, technology, and financial firms seeking to develop a community and ecosystem to support their efforts rather than shoulder all of the cost of maintaining, enhancing, and supporting the solutions.**Major application software vendors.**Commercial and business orientation. Traditional firms with classical orientation.**Newer, quantum-specific application software vendors.**Startups.**Major consulting firms.**Accenture, BCG, McKinsey, others. Actual solution may be a small portion of a much larger consulting engagement. Establishing best practices.**Newer, quantum-specific application consulting firms.**Startups.**Cloud service vendors.**AWS, Microsoft, IBM, Google, Oracle, others. Either raw infrastructure alone (but easy to use) or full turnkey access to complete solutions, with no specialized knowledge or significant work required.

Some vendors or sources could simply develop and distribute the raw solution (for free, for a fee, or a subscription), while some could be added value resellers/re-sourcers, such as bundling consulting and/or infrastructure.

# Encourage open source software projects

Open source software projects are popular in classical computing. The key benefits:

**Free software.****Free and open access to source code.****Community.**Of both users and technical contributors. Both support and development and enhancement.**Ecosystem.**Encourages collateral projects to support and build on the project.**Develop a broader and deeper talent pool.****Lower technical, management, and business risk.**Less dependence on in-house key staff.

Open source software projects encourage widespread adoption of applications and solutions in general.

Configurable packaged quantum solutions in particular should be a good fit as open source software projects.

This would help to amortize effort across a wider base of technical contributors.

# Ecosystem for configurable packaged quantum solutions

The concept of an *ecosystem* is relevant for products in general, but certainly for configurable packaged quantum solutions. It includes:

**Online support community.**Sharing of experiences. Best practices. Troubleshooting problems. Discussion of proposals for improvements and enhancements.**Online development community.**Distinct sub-community for those seeking to work under the hood to actually implement improvements and enhancements. And to fix bugs and other deficiencies and limitations.**Toolkits, libraries, frameworks, and network services used under the hood to develop a particular configurable packaged quantum solution.****Add-on vendors.**Optional extensions for the core product. May be free, purchased, or by subscription.**Hardware vendors.****Tools and support software.**Anything to make it easier.**Cloud infrastructure and service vendors.****Consultants.**From individual freelance consultants to the major consulting firms.

# Need for sample configurable packaged quantum solutions

Although the elite nature of the level of expertise needed to conceptualize, design, and develop a configurable packaged quantum solution is such that they are able to do it all without any significant guidance, it would still be helpful to offer a collection of *sample configurable packaged quantum solutions* that people can use as templates, if for no other reason than to encourage a more standardized approach to the design of configurable packaged quantum solutions.

And to encourage students, classes, and college professors to pursue projects that might result in configurable packaged quantum solutions, or at least train students to be familiar with the technology..

Each sample solution should have these characteristics:

**Introduction to the application problem to be solved.**Short summary plus extended detail.**100% solves the specified application problem.****Can easily be copied and modified to adapt to similar situations.**Or used as a module for even radically different applications.**All source code is included.**Including unit tests. Preferably in a GitHub repository.**Full documentation for all functions and features of the solution.****All application functions and features are implemented.****All application functions and features have been fully tested.**Include all functional test cases. And sample test results.**A variety of sample input data.**And corresponding sample output result data.**A variety of sample input parameters.**And corresponding sample output result data.**Everything is in a GitHub repository.**All code. All test data. Sample of test results. All sample input data. Sample of output result data for all sample input data and parameters.

Leave nothing to the imagination — except future projects.

# Quantum expertise

There are a variety of areas of education, training, knowledge, skill, expertise, and experience that can involve quantum computing, including:

**Formal education.**Physics, quantum chemistry, mathematics, computer science, computer engineering, electrical engineering, engineering in general.**Technical education.**All aspects of technology related to quantum computing.**Specialized training.**Specific technologies, specific products, specific methods, specific tools.**Quantum mindset.**A general awareness and intuition about quantum effects.**Quantum experience.**Actual experience using quantum technologies and exposure to work which is based on quantum effects.**Very elite.**A much more select set of individuals, teams, and organizations whose education, training, knowledge, skill, expertise, and experience in quantum effects, quantum technologies, and quantum computing are far beyond what is typical for individuals, teams, and organizations.**Quantum Aware.**A much broader set of individuals, teams, and organizations whose education, training, knowledge, skill, expertise, and experience in quantum effects, quantum technologies, and quantum computing are far more limited than the*very elite*.**Quantum Ready.**A more select set of individuals, teams, and organizations whose education, training, knowledge, skill, expertise, and experience in quantum effects, quantum technologies, and quantum computing are much more limited than the*very elite*, but much more sophisticated and useful than those who are merely*Quantum Aware*.

For the purposes of this paper, *no* quantum expertise is required to acquire, deploy, manage, and utilize configurable packaged quantum solutions. Not even Quantum Ready or Quantum Aware are required since a configurable packaged quantum solution is a complete *black box* which requires no knowledge of what’s inside to use it.

# Training for quantum

This informal paper won’t go into any detail on training — especially since configurable packaged quantum solutions won’t require *any* training for quantum, but it’s worth highlighting some of the levels of training for quantum.

**Academic education.**Focus on theory and experimental work. Limited practical experience.**Up-skilling current staff.**Training current non-quantum staff for work with quantum. Primarily for Quantum Aware and Quantum Ready, but also for those who are intended to transition to a role which is primarily quantum.**Ongoing up-skilling even for very skilled quantum staff.**Every year there is something new to learn, even for the most elite of experts in quantum.**Training technical staff who don’t have first-line responsibilities for quantum but whose responsibilities overlap with quantum.**Such as IT staff who maintain all computing equipment, which might now include a mix of classical and quantum.**Training non-technical staff who are impacted by quantum.**Financial budgeting. Talent staffing. Training staff — those responsible for training in general and overall, which must now include quantum. General planning. No need for technical detail, but there are impacts of quantum. Managers. Executives.**Technical training for staff whose main responsibility is quantum.**All quantum all of the time.

Again, to be clear, virtually none of those training issues are relevant to individuals, teams, and organizations which are acquiring, deploying, and operating configurable packaged quantum solutions as espoused in this paper. In essence, this section highlights how much is being saved or avoided by this approach.

Only organizations seeking to *develop* or *modify* quantum algorithms and quantum applications, or to *create* configurable packaged quantum solutions themselves, will need to deal with the issues highlighted by this section.

# Talent pool for quantum

This informal paper won’t go into any detail on the talent pool for quantum — especially since configurable packaged quantum solutions won’t require *any* expertise with quantum, but it’s worth highlighting some of the issues for the talent pool for quantum.

Some of the issues for the talent pool for quantum:

**A very wide range of technical and managerial talent are relevant to working with quantum technologies.**Ranging from minimal awareness to the most elite of experts.**Extremely limited talent pool of the super-elite.**Capable of doing conceptualization, design, and development from scratch for all algorithms and modules needed for a complete, complex quantum application.**Very limited talent pool of the moderately elite.****Limited talent pool of those with even modest quantum skills.****Limited total count of skilled individuals.****Limited total count of available skilled individuals.****Excessive salary and other compensation and benefit requirements.****Difficulty of attracting quantum talent.****Difficulty of dislodging quantum talent from current positions.****Difficulty of retaining quantum talent.****How to amortize the efforts of the limited pool over a relatively large number of instances of each unique application.**

Again, to be clear, virtually none of those quantum talent pool issues are relevant to individuals, teams, and organizations which are acquiring, deploying, and operating configurable packaged quantum solutions as espoused in this paper. In essence, this section highlights how much is being saved or avoided by this approach.

Only organizations seeking to *develop* or *modify* quantum algorithms and quantum applications, or to *create* configurable packaged quantum solutions themselves, will need to deal with the issues highlighted by this section.

# Broader is better, but it can be too expensive

Not every single quantum application will be a great candidate for becoming a configurable packaged quantum solution. Yes, broader and more general — and more resilient, are definitely better, but they can be quite expensive and may not deliver sufficient value relative to their cost.

The essential challenge is to identify opportunities which are not prohibitively expensive, but do offer a very big bang for the buck. A classic cost-benefit analysis.

# Significant hardware advances are needed

Current quantum hardware is woefully inadequate for the task of supporting *production-scale* quantum applications.

Qubit count is not the current limiting factor. IBM has 65 and 127-qubit quantum computers, but they’re not really usable for algorithms using that many qubits. Still, 160 and 256-qubit hardware would be a good start for some more serious applications than at present.

The two big areas requiring dramatic improvement on the hardware front are:

**Qubit fidelity.**Near-perfect qubits are needed. Barely two nines at best currently. Really need four to five nines. Or at least 3.5 nines. Or three nines at an absolute minimum.**Qubit connectivity.**Nearest neighbor connectivity and SWAP networks just don’t cut it.

In short, the hardware needs to be able to support quantum Fourier transform (QFT) and quantum phase estimation (QPE) for a significant number of qubits. 20 to 30 qubits as a starter. 32 to 48 bits to start getting serious. 50 to 80 qubits to show a dramatic quantum advantage. 100 to 150 for more serious work. 200 to 250 to really start showing the power of quantum computing. And beyond. But we have to start somewhere. Right now, we’re nowhere on the QFT/QPE front.

There are plenty of other areas of improvement needed, including coherence time, circuit depth, and total circuit size. And fine granularity of phase as well.

For more detail on hardware improvements needed, see my research paper:

*Essential and Urgent Research Areas for Quantum Computing*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/essential-and-urgent-research-areas-for-quantum-computing-302172b12176

# Significant research is required

Much more research is needed on all fronts of quantum computing in order to adequately support configurable packaged quantum solutions. This paper outlines the broad picture, but there are plenty of details that must be attended to.

Hardware, qubit technology, architecture, control software, algorithms, programming models, applications, application frameworks, etc. You name it, it needs research.

For more detail on areas where more research is needed, see my research paper:

*Essential and Urgent Research Areas for Quantum Computing*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/essential-and-urgent-research-areas-for-quantum-computing-302172b12176

And to put it in more perspective, see my paper that makes it clear that we are still in the *pre-commercialization* phase of quantum computing, well before the *commercialization* phase, and that we need to take care to avoid *premature commercialization*. Focusing on research is the best thing to do at this stage. See my paper:

*Prescription for Advancing Quantum Computing Much More Rapidly: Hold Off on Commercialization but Double Down on Pre-commercialization*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/prescription-for-advancing-quantum-computing-much-more-rapidly-hold-off-on-commercialization-but-28d1128166a

And I have another paper which dives deeper into *pre-commercialization* itself:

*Model for Pre-commercialization Required Before Quantum Computing Is Ready for Commercialization*- https://jackkrupansky.medium.com/model-for-pre-commercialization-required-before-quantum-computing-is-ready-for-commercialization-689651c7398a

# Quantum-inspired solutions are great, but they don’t advance quantum computing itself

*Quantum-inspired computing* has great potential. And *quantum-inspired solutions* can benefit from the same overall approach as configurable packaged quantum solutions — and they have the quality that they don’t require any quantum hardware or quantum hardware advances. But, they don’t advance quantum computing itself per se — they’re still only *classical computing* and don’t offer an *exponential speedup* or any *dramatic quantum advantage*.

Still, the overall approach espoused by this paper should certainly be considered for *quantum-inspired applications*.

# Intellectual property (IP) — is a proprietary interest helpful or harmful?

Intellectual property (IP), including trade secrets, copyrights, and patents, can be a double-edged sword, sometimes helpful and sometimes harmful, although generally merely an *annoyance*. Will proprietary IP be a net force for positive effect or negative effect when it comes to configurable packaged quantum solutions?

The short answer: a very mixed bag, sometimes good, sometimes bad, sometimes great, and sometimes ugly and terrible. If done with care, it can be a great net positive. If done inappropriately, it can be a horrific net negative. Going into all of the details is beyond the scope of this informal paper. The only point here is to raise awareness.

The goal from the perspective of this paper is *inclusivity* — encouraging and facilitating development and widespread use of configurable packaged quantum solutions.

A counter-goal from the perspective of this paper is to discourage strict proprietary property such as trade secrets and prohibitive patent licensing fees which discourage widespread adoption of a technology. *Exclusivity* is discouraged if widespread adoption is the goal.

Some key points:

**Trade secrets and onerous patent protection can inhibit widespread adoption.**It’s the potential for widespread adoption which incentivizes generalized applications in the first place.**But the outsize potential for revenue and profits from a few key applications also incentivizes generalized applications.**A few key applications could attract outsize investment and provide outsize benefits to those who use it. That could be a big net positive in some niche sectors.**Moderate pricing of heavily-protected configurable packaged quantum solutions could still incentivize widespread adoption.**Strict IP protection is not an absolute deal killer, provided that the pricing is considered reasonable and fair.**It will be a horse race between open source and proprietary IP.**Maybe the initial generalized applications will indeed be IP-based to prove the concept. But then maybe wider adoption for a wider range of applications will trend toward open source.**Patents can frequently be worked around.**Open source projects can generate the needed enthusiasm to generate workarounds.**But some patents could be too complex or too onerous to work around.**Hopefully few and far between. Not the general case.**Generally patent holders wish to widely license their IP.**That’s a good thing.**But sometimes patent holders and owners of trade secrets seek to prevent competition.**That’s a bad thing.**Academic institutions have an interest in technology transfer.**Modern academic institutions frequently seek to protect and license their valuable IP. Sometimes they will in fact license their IP freely or even donate to open source projects. Sometimes they will freely license at a very nominal rate. But, sometimes they may license at an onerous rate and/or exclusively so that widespread use is discouraged. Again, a very mixed bag, but the hope is that they will be a net positive for configurable packaged quantum solutions.**Sliding scales for licensing fees are encouraged.**Sure, larger firms with much at stake can afford expensive licensing arrangements, but smaller firms, startups, freelance consultants, students, and academic institutions really do need free licensing for experimentation, prototyping, and low-volume use. Higher-use can still incur more expensive licensing.

# Provisioning a configurable packaged quantum solution

Clearly a configurable packaged quantum solution will need access to one or more quantum computers, either locally or remotely in the cloud. As well as one or more classical computers for the main body of the application.

The customer may opt to provision the quantum computing themselves, through their IT department or data center, or may outsource it to a *quantum computing service provider*.

And if the configurable packaged quantum solution itself is accessed through an external *application service provider*, all provisioning of quantum computing could be provided or arranged through and by the application service provider, so that the customer doesn’t even need to be aware of any provisioning issues.

A quantum computer could be:

**Local to the computer system running the classical portion of the application.****Accessible via a local area network.****Accessible in the cloud via the external Internet.**

The quantum computer could be:

**Dedicated.**For this one application.**Shared.**By any number of applications.**Governed by a service level agreement (SLA).**

# Three stages of adoption for quantum computing: The ENIAC Moment, configurable packaged quantum solutions, and The FORTRAN Moment

Although this paper focuses on configurable packaged quantum solutions, the larger picture consists of three stages of adoption of quantum computing for deployment of production-scale practical real-world quantum applications:

**The ENIAC Moment****.**Very limited deployments. Relying on super-elite technical teams at only the most elite of organizations.**Configurable packaged quantum solutions.**Widespread deployments of a relatively few applications. Requires little quantum expertise.**The FORTRAN Moment****.**Widespread development of custom applications. No longer requires super-elite technical teams and is no longer limited to only the most elite of organizations.

The initial stage of adoption for quantum computing solutions — led by The ENIAC Moment — relies on super-elite technical professionals using a wide range of tricks and supreme cleverness to achieve workable quantum solutions. For example, manual error mitigation. Only the few and most elite organizations will have the talent, skill, and resources to design, develop, and deploy quantum applications at this stage.

The ENIAC Moment will mark the start of this stage, to be followed by other teams and organizations attempting to replicate the success of The ENIAC Moment, but only at great cost and using the most elite of technical teams.

Anybody can design and develop a *toy quantum application*, but achieving production-scale practical real-world quantum applications will be a monumental feat requiring great skill, effort, resources, and risk.

Some of the more elite consulting firms will likely be able to assist large organizations design, develop, and deploy quantum applications at this stage, but only at great cost — and great risk.

The second stage of adoption for quantum computing solutions — based on *configurable packaged quantum solutions* — as discussed in this paper, also relies on similar super-elite professionals to create complete frameworks for solutions which can then be configured and deployed by non-elite professionals and less-elite organizations to achieve practical, production-scale quantum solutions. Those non-elite professionals are able to prepare their domain-specific input data in a convenient form compatible with their non-elite capabilities, but not have to comprehend or even touch or even examine the underlying quantum algorithms or application code.

Deployment of quantum applications will become widespread in this second stage, but the total number of unique quantum applications will remain quite modest and limited.

Consulting firms will facilitate planning, deployment, validation, monitoring, and maintenance of configurable packaged quantum solutions at a reasonably modest cost. Modest being a relative term. Although non-elite technical teams can accomplish all of this work, less-elite organizations will tend to seek the comfort of knowing that a more-sophisticated and experienced technical team is watching over the entire process.

More-sophisticated organizations will develop their own talent pool to manage planning, deployment, validation, monitoring, and maintenance of configurable packaged quantum solutions at a lower cost (they hope!) without the need to rely on expensive consulting firms.

But overall, organizations deploying configurable packaged quantum solutions won’t need to know much at all about *quantum technology* since it’s all buried deep under the hood and they will be able to rely on external organizations for any hard-core *quantum expertise*.

The final stage of adoption for quantum computing solutions — led by The FORTRAN Moment — relies on much more advanced and high-level programming models, higher-level algorithmic building blocks, true higher-level quantum programming languages, application frameworks, and libraries, as well as logical qubits based on full, automatic, and transparent quantum error correction to enable non-elite professionals to develop full-custom quantum solutions from scratch without the direct involvement or dependence on super-elite technical professionals for their quantum expertise. This will eventually happen, but quite a few years down the road. For now, the target to aim for is configurable packaged quantum solutions.

A follow-on paper will discuss these three stages in greater depth and detail.

# The FORTRAN Moment will herald widespread full-custom quantum algorithms and applications

As just mentioned, The FORTRAN Moment for quantum computing will finally usher in the era of full-custom quantum algorithms and applications, when the vast majority of organizations will finally be able to easily design and develop their own custom quantum algorithms and applications.

The key capabilities which will enable The FORTRAN Moment include:

**Advanced and high-level programming models.****Higher-level algorithmic building blocks.****True higher-level quantum programming languages.****Application frameworks.****Libraries.****Perfect logical qubits based on full, automatic, and transparent quantum error correction (QEC).**

The FORTRAN Moment will:

**Remove the remaining obstacles and impediments to designing and developing custom quantum algorithms and applications.****But… still require at least some degree of skill and expertise at design and development.**Classical computing skills should be sufficient, but required.**Open the door for much more widespread custom quantum algorithm and application development.****But the need, benefits, and opportunities for configurable packaged quantum solutions will remain and remain dominant.**Configurable packaged quantum solutions will likely remain dominant. Half to 80% of organizations may still prefer configurable packaged quantum solutions even though custom quantum algorithms and applications are now within reach.**Custom quantum algorithms will expand the richness of applications in a typical organization.**

# Summary and conclusions

- Developing quantum applications is and will continue to be a real challenge, for years to come.
- Most organizations won’t have the resources or specialized expertise to develop quantum applications in-house for years to come.
- Generalized applications can be applied to a wider range of situations for a wider range of users and customers.
- The resources and costs of generalized applications can be amortized across a wider range of users and customers.
- A generalized application can be made more robust and resilient, more reliable.
- A generalized application can be readily and simply deployed without the need to develop or modify any code.
- No elite or even quantum team is required to deploy or use such a generalized application.
- A generalized application can be made even more flexible by making it configurable.
- A configurable packaged quantum solution is simply such a generalized quantum application which is configurable. And resilient. And ready to go.
- Turnkey solution. Everything is in place. No coding required. All of the necessary code has already been written and thoroughly tested. Just supply input data, some parameter settings, and possibly an application configuration description.
- Generative coding. Quantum circuits will not be handcrafted and hardwired into the application as might be the case for simple or toy or experimental applications, but automatically generated dynamically by classical code based on the input data, input parameters, and configuration data.
- Automatic scaling of algorithms. No manual intervention or technical expertise required. The joys of generative coding.
- Significant hardware advances are needed. Current quantum hardware is woefully inadequate. Qubit fidelity and qubit connectivity need dramatic improvement. Near-perfect qubits are required.
- Significant research is required. Hardware, qubit technology, architecture, control software, algorithms, programming models, applications, application frameworks, etc. You name it, it needs research.
- Quantum-inspired solutions. Benefit from the same overall approach, but don’t require hardware advances. But they don’t advance quantum computing itself per se — they’re still only classical computing and don’t offer an exponential speedup or any dramatic quantum advantage.
- No specialized knowledge, training, or expertise is required to work with a configurable packaged quantum solution.
- Insulate users, customers, and classical application code from any knowledge or dependence on any of the concepts of quantum computing.
- Full explainability. The decisions leading to application results are fully reported and fully explained. Reports exactly what it did and why. Leaves little to the imagination. Not the raw quantum computing per se or the physics, but the overall process and the math but in application terms.
- Configurable packaged quantum solutions won’t become available until after The ENIAC Moment. It could take years to transition from The ENIAC Moment for quantum computing (first demonstration of a production-scale practical real-world quantum application) through all of the evolutionary stages to what really does appear to be a true configurable packaged quantum solution. Or, it could happen in just a few months.
- The application that results in The ENIAC Moment won’t necessarily be a configurable packaged quantum solution, but it could provide the basis or inspiration that eventually leads to the first true configurable packaged quantum solution.
- Once configurable packaged quantum solutions become available, quantum computing can become widely available to a wide range of users and organizations.
- Users and organizations using configurable packaged quantum solutions will achieve the benefits of quantum computing without the need for any specialized quantum knowledge, training, or expertise. They won’t have to compete in the marketplace for pricey and difficult to find quantum talent.
- No need to be Quantum Ready. Or even Quantum Aware. All of the quantum magic is hidden deep under the hood.
- Proprietary intellectual property (IP), including trade secrets, copyrights, and patents, can be a double-edged sword, sometimes helpful and sometimes harmful, although generally merely an annoyance. It will be a very mixed bag, sometimes good, sometimes bad, sometimes great, and sometimes ugly and terrible. If done with care, it can be a great net positive. If done inappropriately, it can be a horrific net negative. Going into all of the details is beyond the scope of this informal paper. The only point here is to raise awareness.
- Widespread design and development of full-custom quantum algorithms and applications won’t come for most organizations until after The FORTRAN Moment is reached, with much richer and much higher-level programming models, algorithmic building blocks and true high-level quantum programming languages — and perfect logical qubits supported by full, automatic, and transparent quantum error correction (QEC).
- When will configurable packaged quantum solutions be widely available? Unfortunately, not for at least a few years, at best. Maybe three to five years. Maybe seven years. Four to five years might be a good bet. But with quantum, nothing is a truly safe bet.

Finally, to repeat the caveat from the introduction:

**Caveat:**This paper*proposes*and*envisions*a*potential future*for quantum applications which would greatly facilitate the adoption of quantum computing by the widest possible audience and market. There is no guarantee that this envisioned future will come to fruition, nor is there any certainty or confidence as to when it might come to fruition. The only confidence is that it won’t happen in the very near future (next year or two), and is likely to take at least a few years to develop — and require significant progress in the advancement of quantum computing hardware.**Counter-caveat:**The proposal of this paper may not be a certainty but it certainly is a golden*opportunity*.

For more of my writing: ** List of My Papers on Quantum Computing**.