The 3 most well known ones are parallel world's (what Google's researchers are biased towards), the Copenhagen interpretation, and pilot wave theory. Recently, a 4th interpretation has been gaining ground, which is simulation theory (which is really just a reformulating of the Copenhagen interpretation). Quantum computing doesn't offer any actual evidence for any of them. And honestly, I am of the school that says since our observable world doesn't correspond to any of these, that it is useless to wax philosophical about which one, if any of them, is correct. Or if "correct" even has a meaning in this context. The mathematics is identical no matter what you want to believe about its interpretation, so it is a difference which makes absolutely no difference.

If you held a gun to my head, I would probably lean towards simulation theory. That this is all just a mathematical construct being enjoyed by our ethereal souls, and the superposition which is exploited by quantum computers is simply the fundamental reality. It doesn't mean there are parallel realities. There remains just one reality which exists solely as a mathematical construct with superimposed, probabilistic outcomes until such time as the simulation needs to coalesce to an observable outcome that we, as a group of souls, collectively and individually choose.

But this is all highly metaphysical and philosophical nonsense which makes absolutely zero difference to anyone. If the Google researchers want to believe the superposition states are real parallel universes, who am I to tell them no? But it's not a thesis because it can neither be proven nor disproven. It is a personal bias, pure and simple.