Bibliographic record
Abstract
Open-source projects that aim to make their offerings public have competed against for-profit, proprietary companies in a number of domains. These open-source projects often arise in response to the offerings of proprietary companies in markets where products have already been commercialized. We assess what impact an open-source project might have when it enters the market for quantum computing - a market where the core technology is still being developed. We argue that an open-source quantum computer might alleviate market frictions that have impeded the development of a fault-tolerant quantum computer by providing the market with a possible mechanism for: 1.) benchmarking, 2.) the development of hardware agnostic technology, and 3.) improved liquidity on the supply side of the market for labor. Should these outcomes be realized, they may not only benefit the open-source project, but also the for-profit, proprietary companies operating in the ecosystem. In this respect, an open-source quantum project may play a more complementary role to the proprietary firms in the ecosystem, rather than a more competitive role. Our collective insights may have implications for other settings where an open-source project enters into a market where the core technology has yet to be commercialized.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".