!
You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.
Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Algorithms
The NISQ Trap: Eight Years of Demonstrations the Hardware Was Built to Lose
arXiv
Authors: Amit Hagar
Year
2026
Paper ID
72249
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
182
Citations
N/A
Abstract
With a single contested exception, every NISQ-era flagship demonstration of "quantum advantage" has been classically reproduced, or closed by a simulability theorem, within eighteen months of its announcement. Six theoretical results from 2024 through April 2026 explain the pattern: the regions of circuit-space NISQ hardware can run with sufficient fidelity coincide with the regions classical algorithms compress efficiently, because the features that admit one (low effective depth, strong algebraic structure, geometric locality) are the features that admit the other. This reading dates the NISQ programme from its 2018 articulation as an interim retreat from the unmet conditions of the 1996 threshold theorems, characterises the eight years that followed as a closed loop in which the demonstrations the hardware could run were drawn from the only regions classical methods could already attack, and locates the exit from the loop where the threshold theorems originally located it: in fault tolerance. The empirical pattern could in principle break with a demonstration that escapes the current simulability results. After eight years and more than thirty advantage-class announcements, the burden of producing such a demonstration falls to the defenders of NISQ.
Why This Paper Matters
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- With a single contested exception, every NISQ-era flagship demonstration of "quantum advantage" has been classically reproduced, or closed by a simulability theorem, within...
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.