Live data from Hacker News

IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

www-03.ibm.com

41–50 of 116 posts

Re: IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

#41
post #31
post #21

What are they doing about error correction? Not that it makes this any less impressive (everything starts somewhere ), are they simply ignoring the problem?

It's a bit too early for quantum computers to do fault-tolerant (error corrected) computation. This is because you need more than one physical qubit to make a logical (error corrected) qubit. You need 7 physical qubits to encode a logical qubit if you use the Steane code [0]. So with 50 qubits, they could theoretically make 7 error corrected qubits. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steane_code

In fact, the smallest quantum error-correcting code using qubits uses only five qubits. [1] So you could fit 10 of these codewords into 50 qubits.

But that's not right. At least two more qubits are needed for fault-tolerant error correction. So that means you could fit nine codewords into 50 qubits (since 9x5+2=47 But that's not right. There exist more efficient codes that put multiple encoded qubits into a single code block. [2] For example, three qubits can be encoded into eight, still with distance three. [3] Six of these could fit into 50 qubits (since 6x8+2=50), giving 18 encoded qubits.

But that's not right. The IBM systems are superconducting qubits, with very constrained interactions. Not every qubit can talk directly to every other qubit. So you'd probably want every code block to have its own extra qubits dedicated to error correction. If you need 8+2 qubits per code block, then you could fit five code blocks, for 15 encoded qubits, into 50.

Obviously this is really complicated.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stabilizer_code#Example_of_a_s...

[2] http://www.codetables.de/TableIII.php

[3] http://www.codetables.de/QECC.php?q=4&n=8&k=3

Re: IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

#42
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please expand on that. What encryption is vulnerable and what isn't?

I don't know a lot about it, only just enough to know what search term to look for, and Wikipedia had an article that probably fits the bill: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography

Non-mobile link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-quantum_cryptography

Re: IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

#43
post #25
post #11

The article appears to be saying that they are offering an actual quantum computer as a service, but as I recall, their previous offering was a simulation of a quantum computing environment. Yet, this same article refers to that thing as if it were a real QC. This makes me skeptical that the thing being offered here is a real quantum computer...Anyone here have any insight into whether this is legitimate?

Their previous offerings have been 2 physical quantum computers that can be accessed over the cloud. One with 5 qubits, and another with 16 qubits[0]. These computers have had thousands of users who have run millions of quantum algorithms [1]. [0]: https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/52403.wss [1]: https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/10/ibm-50-qubit-quantum-com...

Wait, I didn't think we had actual quantum computers yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing

Re: IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

#44
post #19
post #3

I look forward to supercool (no pun intended) qSeries mainframes and whatever wild OSs they'll run. Right now, it looks like it's a batch processing like thing, with a single problem using the machine at any given time with long setup/teardown times.

I expect quantum computers will always run in batch mode. Storing quantum state in classical memory is impossible, so task switching would be very problematic.

We can try to partition the machine so your process can use some qubits and mine uses others. I suppose a classical computer would be running the OS, at least at first.

Re: IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

#46
post #44
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I expect quantum computers will always run in batch mode. Storing quantum state in classical memory is impossible, so task switching would be very problematic.

We can try to partition the machine so your process can use some qubits and mine uses others. I suppose a classical computer would be running the OS, at least at first.

Yeah, if you have a 5000-qubit computer and two people want to run 2000-qubit jobs, I can see them being able to run simultaneously.

There will always need to be a classical computer running the quantum computer.

Re: IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

#47
I've been following quantum computing since D-Wave made its press release some years back. Now I'm a complete skeptic.

The huge red flag I can't get over is if it is as so, why can no one validate it after all this time?

Why is there the proverbial "it works but not in the way you think it works" (i.e., quantum annealing) or "it works but we can use non-QM systems to simulate it faster, better, cheaper by a factor of a trillion"?

If QM computing was truly feasible (assuming that QM does have an underlining phenomena that is physically real), why are the results after all this time so fuzzy?

Re: IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

#48
post #26
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What stands out to you in the last 20 years?

IBM has been awarded more patents per year than any other company for the last 24 years[1]. In 2016 alone, IBM published ~22 patents per day, and ended up being ~2500 patents ahead of Samsung (#2). [1]: http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/51353.wss

I was responsible for a couple of those parents and I can tell you that's all nonsense. IBM employees are encouraged to patent _anything_, regardless of how useless or silly it may be.

Re: IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

#49
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their previous offerings have been 2 physical quantum computers that can be accessed over the cloud. One with 5 qubits, and another with 16 qubits[0]. These computers have had thousands of users who have run millions of quantum algorithms [1]. [0]: https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/52403.wss [1]: https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/10/ibm-50-qubit-quantum-com...

Wait, I didn't think we had actual quantum computers yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing

From your link: "A small 16-qubit quantum computer exists and is available for hobbyists to experiment with via the IBM quantum experience project."

Re: IBM Q system in development with working 50 qubit processor

#50
post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their previous offerings have been 2 physical quantum computers that can be accessed over the cloud. One with 5 qubits, and another with 16 qubits[0]. These computers have had thousands of users who have run millions of quantum algorithms [1]. [0]: https://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/52403.wss [1]: https://www.engadget.com/2017/11/10/ibm-50-qubit-quantum-com...

Wait, I didn't think we had actual quantum computers yet. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing

We don't.
Post reply on HN