Submit your quantum advantage candidate

01 Choose a pathway

Submissions are organized into three pathways:

Observable estimations

Submissions in this tracker report expectation values for observables alongside rigorous error bars for validation.

Variational problems

Submissions must provide upper bounds on the ground-state energy. Verified entries include evidence that the algorithm respects the variational principle.

Classically verifiable problems

Submissions must demonstrate quantum advantage by scoring solutions against known answers or efficiently checkable witnesses.

02 Choose a candidate type

Each submission is reviewed for one of three tracker categories:

Active candidates

Problem instances where quantum computations currently appear to challenge leading classical methods, and where further benchmarking is needed to determine whether an advantage exists.

Superseded candidates

Problem instances where quantum computations once appeared to challenge leading classical methods, but for which subsequent classical progress has closed or reversed the apparent gap.

Baseline benchmarks

Problem instances that provide useful reference points for comparing quantum and classical methods, including examples where the state-of-the-art solutions are classical.

03 Prepare your submission

If the problem is already listed in the tracker, provide:

• The problem instance being addressed
• A short summary of your method and main result (at least 1 page), including supporting evidence such as figures, link to a paper and / or code
• Quantum and / or classical resource details, including hardware and runtime

If the problem is not yet listed, you should provide as well the problem details:

• A summary of the problem description (at least 1 page), including justification for why the instance is nontrivial and relevant to quantum advantage
• The files describing the problem (quantum circuits or Hamiltonian)
• Problem category (Baseline / Active / Superseded)

04 Submit through GitHub

Open a new issue and choose the template that matches your pathway and whether the problem instance already exists in the tracker.

05 Review process

Submitters indicate whether they are proposing a contribution for Active Candidates or Baseline Benchmarks, and each submission is evaluated by independent reviewers.

Reviewers assess whether the submitted benchmark is sufficiently documented and whether the supporting quantum and classical evidence is appropriate for the proposed category. For submissions seeking Active Candidate status, reviewers may request additional clarification or classical benchmarking if they believe another established method should be considered. Discussion and reviewer feedback takes place publicly on GitHub so the broader community can follow and contribute to the evaluation.

Submissions may be accepted as Active Candidate, kept pending while issues are resolved, included as Baseline Benchmarks, or reclassified later if new evidence changes the assessment (e.g. an Active Candidate may be reclassified as Superseded after a new classical method submission).

06 Join the discussion

Review and discussion happen publicly on GitHub.

Community members are encouraged to comment on open submissions.