Real-world business tasks on gate QPUs, with QPC

Quantum Polycontextural Computing (QPC) takes published industry problems and runs them on IBM Heron r2 gate hardware as a polycontextural architecture: several objectives co-resident, coupled, one submission.

Plain English

What this hub is
A public tour of published industry optimization tasks (carbon portfolios, supply chain, D-Wave catalogue cases) re-run on IBM Heron r2 with QPC.
Why it matters
Annealers search a QUBO/BQM landscape. QPC runs co-resident contextures on the universal gate layer, one IBM job, named Runtime IDs.
What we measured
Same external metrics and open data · one coupled submission · IBM Runtime job IDs on every run.
Headline takeaway
Real business multi-objective structure executes as one auditable gate workflow on IBM Heron r2.
Start here
Cerrado compare · D-Wave catalogue on Fez · supply-chain pages linked below.

Two kinds of quantum business computing

Annealers (e.g. D-Wave)

Problems are cast as QUBO / BQM. A quantum annealer searches low-energy states of that single objective landscape. Hybrid tools often loop classical optimizers around repeated annealer calls.

Typical marketing: logistics, inventory, scheduling, with surveys and vignettes. QPC’s public cases carry open data and named IBM job IDs on the exact instance.

Gate QPUs (IBM Heron r2 · QPC)

Problems are expressed as circuits (cost layers, mixers, measurements). QPC places several objective contextures on one device layout, coupled by transjunctions, in one submission.

We report the same business metric as the published study (portfolio score, QUBO cost, energy) plus auditable IBM job IDs.

D-Wave business PDF (Wakefield survey, 2025) lists problem themes (supply chain, routing, ROI). QPC’s public cases use open academic and vendor datasets with scores and IBM job traces.

What this hub delivers

QPC on IBM Heron r2What you can check
Real business structure (multi-objective, spatial synergies, cardinality) as one polycontextural workflow on gate hardware Named IBM Runtime job IDs on every public case
The same numeric metric as the published external reference Open data plus the published evaluate() score on Cerrado, and matching cost fields on catalogue rows
Industry-standard decoding (noise reducer + portfolio repair) around the quantum samples Documented decoder scores next to the job IDs

How QPC computes (public overview)

The public architecture is:

[ Contexture A: objective 1. Cost + entanglement on block A (e.g. 52 qubits) ] ↓ transjunction (aligned business indices) [ Contexture B: objective 2. Cost + entanglement on block B ] ↓ transjunction [ Contexture C: objective 3. Cost + entanglement on block C ] ↓ measure portfolio register → classical decoder → portfolio score

On IBM Heron r2 (156 qubits), the Cerrado full-width deployment uses 3 × 52 qubits = 156Q: balanced contextures across the chip.

Flagship case: Brazilian Cerrado carbon credits

External reference: Ribeiro 2026, arXiv:2602.09047. QAOA on IBM for municipality portfolio selection in Goiás (Brazilian Cerrado). Open data: github.com/hgribeirogeo/qaoa-carbon-cerrado.

The business job (plain language)

What “success” means here

Verified on IBM Heron r2 · ibm_fez (July 2026): QPC polycontextural decoder on quantum samples from one coupled job, same published ESG metric.

Full Ribeiro instance (n=88, k=28): decoder score 44.419 · job d94mmrnu62ks73967jh0.

Full-width 156Q layout (3 × 52 qubits, n=28, k=7): decoder score 5.288 · job d94lljsql68s73c9mq50.

Auditable IBM Quantum jobs (IBM Heron r2 · ibm_fez)

QPC executionInstanceIBM job IDDecoder portfolio score
QPC polycontextural (one run)n=88, k=28d94mmrnu62ks73967jh044.419
QPC polycontextural (156Q · 3×52)n=28, k=7d94lljsql68s73c9mq505.288

Architecture baselines, ICC, and earlier Fez decoder passes: Cerrado comparison report.

Architecture proof (separate from portfolio score): coupled QPC runs on the same Cerrado data show inter-context correlation (ICC). Toy 3/3 seeds, n=12 pass, Heron r2 n=28 per-boundary pass on biodiversity↔social. See Separability results and Architecture program.

Workflow contrast (why this matters vs typical vendor hybrids)

PatternSubmissionsCerrado example
Sequential objective jobs (Classiq / multi-cloud style) 3+ Carbon QAOA, biodiversity QAOA, social QAOA → classical merge
Single weighted QUBO + QAOA (+ ZNE in paper) 1 (+ folds) Ribeiro baseline on the published instance; QPC runs the same metric on IBM Heron r2
QPC polycontextural 1 (+ optional ZNE folds) Three contextures + transjunctions on ibm_fez 156Q. Decoder score 44.419 on n=88

Relation to D-Wave’s public story

D-Wave’s survey PDF and website describe the same class of decisions: hard combinatorial choices under competing KPIs (cost, ESG, risk, geography). QPC’s public proof is reproducible numbers on IBM Heron r2.

One-sentence positioning: QPC executes published real-world optimization structure as one polycontextural IBM Heron r2 submission, with open data and verifiable job IDs.

Reproducibility

More comparable rows (same metric, external baseline)

We maintain a growing list of vendor-adjacent tasks with open data:

Cerrado portfolio ✓ Joint Structure Challenge ✓ D-Wave parity (Cases 1–3) ✓ IonQ protein (IDWKK) Coupling ablation D-Wave Mendeley QUBOs (planned) Taillard flow-shop (planned)
Comparable benchmarks Vendor replication catalog QPC preprint (Zenodo) Highlights report