What was the idea behind Classiq? What problem were you trying to solve?

When we established Classiq five years ago, it was becoming increasingly clear that someone would succeed in developing the first useful quantum computer in the next few years. Today, it's an arms race between tech giants like Microsoft, Google, Amazon, IBM, Intel, government, and startups all competing to do so. It was also clear that whenever someone succeeds, software would be a very significant bottleneck. There is nothing in common between the classical software stack and the quantum software stack. In classical computing, we have so many layers of abstraction, like operating systems, compilers, development environments, languages, and so on. In quantum we had nothing. That’s the problem we set out to solve. And if we succeeded in creating the right product for the market — with significant adoption — the potential was huge. The potential was actually to create the Microsoft of quantum.

Is part of the idea behind the level of abstraction you are creating that a good programmer can build software whether or not they understand the underlying mechanisms of quantum computing?

One hundred percent. This is actually what many of our customers do. Some have leading experts in quantum computing. But many others wanted to establish their quantum team with software engineers who were not quantum experts — and this is what they do with us. You don't need to be a quantum expert, you don't need to be conversant in quantum gates; you just need to speak in terms of functionality in a language that is familiar. We handle the translation into quantum code.

Is being hardware agnostic a way to future-proof your technology?

Yes. Today quantum computing is advancing incredibly fast. Still, if you ask me who will be the winner, the first to show quantum advantage, the first to come up with a full-scale quantum computer, I really have no idea. I may suggest 20 leading candidates, but I don't want to bet on which one. And more importantly, our users don't want to bet. They want to build an application today and to know that it will be relevant on whichever hardware configuration wins. But it’s important not just for the future, but also for today. Let's assume that you need to build a quantum program for an IBM machine with 120 Qbits. But then you want to run that program on an IonQ machine with 67 Qbits. The software will look dramatically different because the code is not portable. If you are hardware agnostic, you start at the high level, and you let the compiler do the hardware adaptation. You develop once, but you can run everywhere.

You are essentially building software for a technology that, while no longer experimental, is not yet widely in the market. What have you learned about how to approach that challenge?

I would say that it's critical to go to the market fast. You don’t want to develop something that’s going to be in the lab for five years, and then start to look for a market. The market is here. Even though quantum computing is not at the production stage, there are many users in enterprises, academia, and government. You need to develop something that is relevant for the users of today. At the same time, and this is critical, you need to make sure that what you develop is also scalable for the future. So I would say it’s a careful balance between building for the future, but also constantly validating your technology in today's market. The other lesson is to make sure you don’t come up with excuses and shortcuts. It's very easy to say, “Look, it's quantum. It's deep tech. It's early. We don't really need to show traction or revenues yet.” If you want to build a company, you need to bring investors and other stakeholders along. Even long-term investors need to see traction. It’s critical to be focused not only on the technology, but also on your traction from Day 1.

Are these experiments? Or are they successful applications of the technology?

On the one hand, we don't yet see quantum computing in production. So I guess the answer could be that yes, it’s experimental. On the other hand, they’re very far from being in the lab. This is hard engineering work by the brightest minds and organizations globally. Talent, resources, and funding are being invested in this arms race because it's a game changer. That’s been the big shift of the past five years or so. Quantum computing turned from a scientific challenge into an engineering endeavor. For a startup or an investor, it may be critical to know whether results will come in two years or five years. But for the general population and for the industry, I think we can be very confident that quantum computing will change the world in the coming years.

Changing the world is a big statement. What kind of changes can we expect, specifically?

Consider this example: We need fertilizers, because otherwise we wouldn't have sufficient food. Fortunately, we know how to produce them. But it’s very expensive and energy consuming: $200 billion every year and 2.5% of the global CO2 emissions are dedicated to the process of ammonia production and nitrogen fixation. We also know that all this could be done with almost no energy, because this is what every plant in the world is doing. So why can't we mimic this fantastic natural process? The answer is that we know how to calculate this chemical process that will save all of this money, and reduce pollution. But we can’t do it because chemical calculations are far too complex for classical computers. They will take billions of years. And this is a problem that could be solved with a quantum computer, almost instantly. I can give you hundreds of problems of similar magnitude that could be solved by quantum computers that just can’t be solved otherwise.

English

Q&A

Nir Minerbi: Developing for tomorrow’s tech

Q: How soon will we see these applications deployed, and how is Classiq preparing for that day?

Good question. From a business perspective, we build our business assuming nothing dramatic will happen in the next few years. It's better to be pleasantly surprised than to count on something happening in the next two years and end up disappointed. That aside, I do believe that in the next two to three years, we are going to see the first, second, and third instances of quantum advantage — when quantum computers will actually show some real commercial value. It will take a bit longer, in my view, until that will become widespread. Look at AI. Even after a big breakthrough, it takes time for things to go into widespread production. But this is the reason that all of our customers and organizations are preparing now. When it happens, the fast movers will win.

Why the CEO of Classiq Technologies is betting on software to future-proof quantum computing

The nice thing is, while there is significant risk in quantum hardware, if we play it right, the risk in software is relatively low.Nir Minerbi, Co-founder & CEO, Classiq Technologies

So you think the evolution of classic computing and quantum computing will be similar?

We see many similarities. Microsoft started with an interpreter, then they made DOS, and they also had a big team working on applications on top of the operating system. We do that as well. Another similarity is that in the first few years of Microsoft, a large percentage of the revenues came from Japan. And we see the same because Japan is so advanced in quantum. We have many partners, customers, and investors there now.

But, and this is critical for me to emphasize, we must be very modest. We are not Microsoft. We are a startup and have a long way to go.

The nice thing is, while there is significant risk in quantum hardware, if we play it right, the risk in software is relatively low. We are betting on the industry, not on a specific hardware. We build software that is compatible with all these machines. It will work regardless of who wins the hardware race.

In the next two to three years, we are going to see the first, second, and third instances of quantum advantage — when quantum computers will actually show some real commercial value.Nir Minerbi, Co-founder & CEO, Classiq Technologies

Many people still think of quantum computing as science fiction. What are the use cases you are seeing today?

The common ground for all of our customers — whether it’s BMW, Toshiba, HSBC, SoftBank, Deloitte, or Rolls-Royce — is that they develop quantum applications on top of our platform. Quantum computing is not for any specific use case or specific industry. At the same time, we are seeing some areas of focus. In finance, we see a lot of work around portfolio optimization and derivative pricing. In chemistry, we see a lot of work in molecular simulations. We see another set of applications at the intersection of quantum and AI and machine learning. One of our customers, a large hospital, is exploring quantum machine learning for signal analysis. In the aerospace industry, customers are exploring computational fluid dynamics simulations that, if they could improve upon them even a bit, would result in engines that consume dramatically less fuel.

Feature

Variant Bio: Genomic discovery on the road less traveled

How Variant Bio is mapping highly differentiated data to accelerate drug development

Sōzō Pulse

Explore exclusive survey data

Track trends over time — filter by region, sector, and stage