
TL;DR
This paper proposes a practical framework for quantum computer procurement, emphasizing capability layers, institutional fit, and strategic flexibility over hardware selection.
Contribution
It introduces a procurement framework that distinguishes capability layers, compares main commercial platforms, and guides institutions on quantum acquisition strategies.
Findings
Most institutions should start with small, near-term capable systems.
Large on-premises quantum systems are justified only with clear mission and upgrade plans.
The framework helps compare platforms based on institutional needs and access models.
Abstract
The phrase ``buy a quantum computer'' hides several different procurement problems. An institution may be seeking cloud access for teaching, reserved capacity for research, a local instrument for hardware training, an optimization appliance, or a strategic installation that reshapes facilities, staffing, and budgets. Because these choices differ in purpose, operating burden, and useful lifetime, the decision should be framed as acquisition of \emph{quantum capability} rather than selection of a presumed hardware winner. This manuscript develops a practical procurement framework that distinguishes five capability layers, separates peer-reviewed results from commercial offerings, pricing anchors, and public roadmaps, and compares the main commercial platform families -- superconducting circuits, trapped ions, neutral atoms, quantum annealing, and photonics -- through the lens of…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
