A discriminating K-ablation against published empirical Clinton–Gore joint distributions, executed end-to-end on ibm_fez. The first QPC pilot to produce a quantitative architectural claim with hardware-archived statistical significance.
Start here for the narrative, the K-ablation table, and the bootstrap discrimination result. Follow the chain below if you audit or reproduce the work.
cursor_qpc_qq_v3_ibm.json in the QQ workspace folder. Publish copies with your submission bundle if a reviewer requires downloads.Navigation: Home · Highlights
The task asks whether QPC's polycontextural architecture — multiple coexisting contextures with their own quantum-logical states — reproduces the empirical structure of contextual cognitive data better than a faithful non-polycontextural control of equal quantum resources. The empirical target is the Clinton–Gore question-order experiment of Wang & Busemeyer (2013), in which a 1997 Gallup poll of 1,002 respondents found a robust, replicable order effect: the joint answer distribution differs depending on whether the Clinton question is asked first or second. Wang & Busemeyer prove that this empirical structure cannot arise from any single Kolmogorov probability space (no Bayesian or Markov model satisfies the QQ equality the data satisfies). Classical impossibility is therefore established by theorem and empirical replication; this pilot does not re-prove it.
What this pilot does claim:
Empirical target: Wang & Busemeyer 2013, Topics in Cognitive Science 5(4):689–710, Table 1, "Consistency" column. The poll was conducted Sept 6–7, 1997; half of 1,002 respondents answered the Clinton honesty question first, the other half answered the Gore question first.
| Order | N | p(yy) | p(yn) | p(ny) | p(nn) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AB (Clinton → Gore) | 447 | 0.4899 | 0.0447 | 0.1767 | 0.2886 |
| BA (Gore → Clinton) | 432 | 0.5625 | 0.1991 | 0.0255 | 0.2130 |
The fit protocol is strict and is what makes the result defensible:
| Step | Protocol used in this pilot |
|---|---|
| Free parameters | 5 total: θ_A_polarity, θ_B_polarity, θ_confidence, θ_framing, φ_AB, ψ (plus fixed θ_confidence=0.6, θ_framing=0.4) |
| Marginal fit | Fit only from order-blind marginals P(A=yes)=0.50, P(B=yes)=0.68 — no order-conditional empirical data enters the fit |
| Order-conditional joints | Used only as held-out evaluation targets. Never seen by the model during fitting. |
| Architectural parameters | φ_AB = π/3 ≈ 1.047 rad (transjunctional coupling), ψ = π/2.2 ≈ 1.428 rad (order-conditional phase). Same values across all K. |
| Architectures compared | K=1 (faithful non-polycontextural control), K=2 (intermediate), K=4 (full polycontextural) |
| Resource budget | 16 qubits, 4096 shots, comparable depth (8–16) — identical across K |
| Discrimination metric | Total-variation distance and KL divergence between model joints and empirical joints; bootstrap at n=2000 |
All three K modes use the same 16-qubit footprint and the same contexture qubit assignments. The varying factor is exactly the polycontextural piece — the C4 transjunctional coupling and the anti-correlated order-conditional phase — which is present at K=4, half-strength at K=2, and absent at K=1.
| Contexture | Role | Qubits |
|---|---|---|
| C1 | Frame_A — Clinton honesty judgement | q0–q3 |
| C2 | Frame_B — Gore honesty judgement | q4–q7 |
| C3 | Order register — AB vs BA contextural switch | q8–q11 |
| C4 | Belief substrate — shared honesty prior, transjunctional coupling to C1, C2 (K=4 only) | q12–q15 |
Unlike v1 and v2, v3 was tested for K-ablation discrimination on a noiseless simulator before being submitted to hardware. The simulator pre-flight produced TV(K=1)=0.296, TV(K=4)=0.256, bootstrap difference +0.040 with 95% CI [+0.029, +0.050] and one-sided p-value 0.0000. This established that the architectural signal exists at the noiseless level — the necessary condition for it to be visible on hardware. Hardware execution proceeded only after pre-flight passed.
Run archived as cursor_qpc_qq_v3_ibm.json. IBM Quantum Platform instance routed as open-instance; SamplerV2 primitive on Heron R2 device. QPC noise reducer enabled — 3 runs per circuit, counts averaged across runs.
| K | TVAB | TVBA | TVmean | KLmean |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (faithful non-polycontextural control) | 0.2815 | 0.3216 | 0.3015 | 0.4317 |
| 2 (intermediate transjunctional structure) | 0.2672 | 0.2491 | 0.2582 | 0.3296 |
| 4 (full polycontextural) | 0.2479 | 0.2541 | 0.2510 | 0.3115 |
Lower TV / KL means closer to the empirical Wang–Busemeyer joint distribution. Improvement is monotone across K on both metrics. The model fits empirical data more faithfully as polycontextural blocking is added, with parameters held fixed across K.
Each replicate resamples per-circuit counts from the multinomial defined by the observed shots, recomputes both TVmean values, and records the K=1 − K=4 difference.
| Metric | Mean K=1 | Mean K=4 | Mean diff | 95% CI of diff | One-sided p | Significant @95%? |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total-variation distance | 0.3015 | 0.2510 | +0.0505 | [+0.0359, +0.0655] | 0.0000 | YES |
| KL divergence | 0.4319 | 0.3119 | +0.1200 | [+0.0888, +0.1520] | 0.0000 | YES |
A one-sided p-value of zero from 2000 bootstrap replicates means every single resample showed K=4 fitting the empirical Clinton–Gore joints strictly better than K=1. The 95% confidence intervals on the difference do not cross zero on either metric.
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Backend | ibm_fez (Heron R2) |
| Mode | SamplerV2 on open-instance Runtime; readout z+ctxpool |
| QPC noise reducer | Enabled (--use-qpc-noise-reducer); 3 runs per circuit aggregated; matrix readout mitigation applicable at 16 qubits |
| First / last job ID | d7v5p2jack5s73bf13jg (K=1 AB run 1) … d7v5q2nmrars73d7prsg (K=4 BA run 3) |
| Full job list | 18 IDs in ibm_job_ids_all |
On ibm_fez quantum hardware, the QPC polycontextural architecture (K=4) reproduces the empirical Wang–Busemeyer Clinton–Gore joint-distribution shape strictly better than a faithful non-polycontextural control (K=1) of equal qubit count, depth, and shot budget — bootstrap-significant at p<0.0005 on both total-variation and KL-divergence metrics, with parameters fit only from order-blind marginals.
This is the first QPC pilot that produces a quantitative architectural claim grounded in a controlled comparison against published empirical human data, with hardware-archived statistical significance, on a problem class where the classical limit is theorem-level rather than computational.
What this pilot does not claim, and what readers should not infer from it:
Three iterations were required to produce a defensible result. We document the trajectory because the methodological lessons are part of the evidence.
cursor_qpc_qq_ibm.json) but the K-ablation could not discriminate.φ_AB and ψ to produce a stronger architectural signal. Simulator pre-flight revealed that QQ-residual itself is a quantum-vs-classical population metric, not a within-quantum architectural discriminator. Both K=1 and K=4 satisfied QQ; no discrimination possible. Hardware execution skipped on this pre-flight finding.Empirical target data: Wang & Busemeyer 2013, Topics in Cognitive Science 5(4):689–710, Table 1. PDF available at https://jbusemey.pages.iu.edu/quantum/QuestOrdEff.pdf.
Numbers in this page come from:
cursor_qpc_qq_v3_ibm.json — main hardware archive (this run)cursor_qpc_qq_ibm.json — v1 hardware archive (preserved as iteration record)These artifacts are generated by qpc_qq_pilot_v3.py and should be versioned together with this page when publishing evidence snapshots.