June 2026 · Pre-registered · Public dare

Joint Structure Challenge

Prove on real quantum hardware that one coupled polycontextural job produces boundary statistics that K independent cloud jobs merged in Python leave unmatched. Six levels. Auditable IBM job IDs. Publish your run. That is how the challenge works.

Plain English

What this test is
A public, pre-registered ladder: one coupled IBM job produces boundary statistics that three separate jobs + Python merge leave unmatched.
Why we did it
Polycontextural architecture is falsifiable on real hardware. The ladder is locked before the jobs run.
What QPC computed
Six levels on ibm_fez: ICC vs separable jobs (L5a), intracontext depth control (L5b), Cerrado merge (L4), open vendor dare (L6).
Headline result
L1–L5 pass on raw IBM counts · L5a gaps 0.289 · 0.101 · 0.130 · L5b intracontext 3/3 · auditable job IDs at every level.
The metric
Claim: coupled transjunction structure is measurable on IBM Heron r2. Primary readout: raw ICC on named jobs.

How QPC reports results. Two lanes.

This challenge is Lane A (Topology Certificate). Customer-facing Heron pilots are Lane B. See trilogy overview.

Lane A · Topology Certificate (this page)

Question: Is one coupled job measurably different from K separable jobs merged in software?

  • Metric: raw ICC · dual controls (separable + intracontext)
  • Reporting: pre-registered ladder · auditable IBM job IDs
  • Extension: MCGS physics-motivated instance on the same stack

Lane B · Industry pilots

Question: What business number does polycontextural execution produce?

  • Metric: domain decoder scores on quantum samples
  • Reporting: Cerrado · Traffic · Allstate on ibm_fez
  • See: Heron trilogy

Architecture metrics (Lane A) on raw ICC. Industry headlines (Lane B) use the decoder named on each pilot page. L4 Cerrado merge is a structural control on this ladder. Full 88Q industry scores sit on the trilogy page.

How we report results (pre-registered): Primary pass/fail uses raw IBM counts. Mitigated ICC is a secondary diagnostic. L5a: 3/3 pass raw, 2/3 pass mitigated (seed 11 ratio 2.5×). L5b: intracontext control. Boundary ICC is depth-independent across transpiled depths ~82 (3-job separable), ~127 (one-job intracontext), and ~200–270 (coupled cross-context).

Polycontextural power (June 2026): Optimized transjunction parameters on IBM Fez: raw ICC gaps 0.289 · 0.101 · 0.130 (seeds 7, 11, 42) vs separable < 0.02. Intracontext control (L5b): gaps 0.291 · 0.101 · 0.145 on IBM. Boundary ICC tracks cross-context coupling topology. Controls at ~82 and ~127 depth show ICC ≈ 0.

The question: when carbon, biodiversity, and social objectives live in separate IBM jobs, does classical merging recover the same joint structure as transjunctions in one circuit?

QPC measured the difference and locked the metrics before the jobs ran. L1–L5 pass on raw IBM counts.

What we measure

  1. ICC (inter-context correlation). Extra correlation at context boundaries in the coupled arm (L1–L3).
  2. Merge comparison (L4). Three objective-specific jobs + vote merge vs one coupled decoder on the same Cerrado portfolio formula.
  3. L5 · Optimized + intracontext control. Raw ICC vs 3-job separable (L5a); coupled vs one-job intracontext, depth-independent check (L5b).
  4. L6 · Public dare. Invitation to reproduce with job IDs on the published separable control.

Ladder status

L1 · Toy separability ✓ PASS

3 synthetic contextures · 4096 shots · ibm_fez · seeds 7, 11, 42.

ICC gap: 0.052 – 0.106 (raw) · 3/3 seeds pass

Example coupled job: d8i3vdtv8cos73f549cg

L2 · Cerrado real data ✓ PASS

Goiás municipalities n=12, k=4 · Ribeiro 2026 open data · one coupled job vs three separable jobs.

ICC gap (raw): 0.088 · coupled job d8i42ic2upec739loi50

Portfolio: coupled decoder 3.224 vs greedy 3.042

L3 · Heron scale ✓ PASS (per-boundary)

n=28, k=7, morph_depth=2. Per-boundary pass: biodiversity↔social boundary gap 0.098.

Job: d8i44rc2upec739loktg

L4 · Coupled vs merge ✓ PASS

IBM Fez (n=12): coupled decoder ahead of mean separable strict score by +0.061.

Pilot (n=22, Aer): one QPC job 6.002 vs three-job classical merge 5.571. Delta +0.431.

IBM Fez (n=12): coupled decoder 3.224 ahead of three-job separable mean 3.164 and greedy 3.042 (+0.061). Pilot (n=22, Aer): one QPC job ahead of three-job classical merge (+0.431).

L5 · Optimized + intracontext control ✓ PASS

5a. vs 3-job separable (raw primary): ICC gaps 0.289 · 0.101 · 0.130 · 3/3 raw, 2/3 mitigated (seed 11 mitigated ratio 2.5×). Coupled jobs: d90pcq6u9n7c73ali9lg · d90qatfqq29s738mhr00 · d90qv7mu9n7c73aljra0

5b. Intracontext control, depth-independent (IBM Fez): one job, same coupling budget rewired within each context (matched depth family). Gaps 0.291 · 0.101 · 0.145 · ratios 22× · 9× · 31× · 3/3 pass.

Intracontext jobs: d91327fqq29s738msbo0 · d913fkfqq29s738mt460 · d913fnj57qjs73b5j150

Depth-independent evidence: boundary ICC ≈ 0 at transpiled depths ~82 (3-job separable), ~127 (intracontext one-job). ICC is high when coupling crosses contexts (~200–270). Logical pre-transpile 2Q count is 42 in both coupled and intracontext arms; post-routing depths differ. See results/jsc_l5_depth_matched_ibm_fez.json.

L6 · Public dare ✓ READY

Kit: jsc_l6_challenge_kit/. L5 complete. Dare is open. Run the published separable control. Match coupled raw ICC (gap ≥ 0.05) from separable jobs, with public IDs.

Summary table

LevelMetricResultStatus
L1ICC gap (toy, 3 seeds)0.052 – 0.106Pass 3/3
L2ICC gap (Cerrado n=12)0.088Pass
L3Per-boundary ICC (n=28)0.098 (bio↔social)Pass
L4Coupled decoder − merge+0.061 (IBM) · +0.431 (pilot)Pass
L5aRaw ICC vs 3-job separable0.289 · 0.101 · 0.1303/3 raw · 2/3 mit
L5bRaw ICC vs intracontext (depth-independent)0.291 · 0.101 · 0.145Pass 3/3
L6Vendor reproduction dareKit readyOpen

What this proves

Scope as capability: JSC proves joint quantum structure on named hardware, with pre-registered pass bars and public job IDs.

Reproduce & falsify

Pre-registration: docs/QPC_JOINT_STRUCTURE_CHALLENGE.md · Machine bundle: results/qpc_jsc_bundle.json

.venv/bin/python3 vendor_benchmarks/qpc_separability/jsc_depth_matched_runner.py --mode aer
.venv/bin/python3 vendor_benchmarks/qpc_separability/jsc_depth_matched_runner.py --mode ibm --seeds 7,11,42
.venv/bin/python3 vendor_benchmarks/qpc_separability/qpc_jsc_verify.py --shots 2048
Full ICC methodology → Cerrado technical report → K=4 vs K=1 ablation → L6 challenge kit → Parameter sweep results →

L6 invitation: IBM, IonQ, Quantinuum, Google, Amazon Braket teams. Run the separable control with our published instance parameters (jsc_l6_challenge_kit/l1_instances.json). Match coupled raw ICC (gap ≥ 0.05) from separable jobs, and publish your job IDs. Send them to readytogo@quantumpolycontextural.ai or use the Design Partner form.