Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
gilkalai.wordpress.com
Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
1–10 of 76 posts
Re: Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
#2I attempted to put the complete title but it was 35 characters too long. I have no personal take on this and am not attempting to editorialize the title, if the mods have a different opinion on what the proper shortening of the original title should be (or if they have the power to put the actual complete title) then I am all for it.
Here is the complete title: Quantum computers: amazing progress (Google & IBM), and extraordinary but probably false supremacy claims (Google).
Re: Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
#3Discussion around the matching bullish take: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21053405
Re: Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
#4The usage of the word “supremacy” is probably the primary thing that rubs people the wrong way. When I first heard of it myself, it did feel a little strange.
Doing some research into it though, it seems like the phrase and usage of quantum supremacy is pretty well defined and accepted by and large within the physics community. Supposedly the coiner of the term believed “quantum advantage” wouldn’t emphasize the point enough.
The basic components of achieving what the term defines though is relatively straightforward. It’s basically just about definitively showcasing a problem where using a classical computer would take super polynomial time, but with a quantum computer ends up taking some significantly lesser time complexity. Google’s Quantum AI Lab achieved exactly that based on the results provided in the paper released by NASA. Granted, the problem in question is extremely specific, but that doesn’t invalidate it as being an admissible problem. The author raises points in contention, but they largely just seem like nitpicks to me.
Re: Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
#5My level of expertise on quantum computing is very low.
The announce of the imminent advent of the Quantum Computer seems to be recurring every few months since at least 20 years, at this point I don't care anymore.
Re: Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
#6My level of expertise on quantum computing is very low. The announce of the imminent advent of the Quantum Computer seems to be recurring every few months since at least 20 years, at this point I don't care anymore.
No one is saying quantum computing for practical use is upon us. Quantum supremacy is a well defined milestone that doesn't say anything about everyday use of QC.
Re: Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
#7My level of expertise on quantum computing is very low. The announce of the imminent advent of the Quantum Computer seems to be recurring every few months since at least 20 years, at this point I don't care anymore.
Only popular science articles and marketing shticks discuss “imminent quantum computers” in the sense of a commercially viable machine that displaces existing classical computers. Quantum computers exist. They can solve real-world problems, like simulating molecules. They don’t, however, outperform your cell phone in any “practical”/“real-world” problem.
Google’s supremacy result is an indicator of progress, not an indicator of practicality or “advantage”. Google knows this, and hasn’t claimed anything more.
The supremacy result should be viewed only for its scientific meaning and merit and nothing more.
Re: Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
#8> As you know, I expect that quantum supremacy cannot be achieved at all.
There’s the source of his skepticism, not some specific flaw he’s identified in these new results.
Re: Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
#9> As you know, I expect that quantum supremacy cannot be achieved at all. There’s the source of his skepticism, not some specific flaw he’s identified in these new results.
Except for the part where discusses at length his criticisms with the paper itself, which apparently you don't wish to comment on.
Re: Quantum computers: amazing progress, but probably false supremacy claims
#10My level of expertise on quantum computing is very low. The announce of the imminent advent of the Quantum Computer seems to be recurring every few months since at least 20 years, at this point I don't care anymore.
No one is saying quantum computing for practical use is upon us. Quantum supremacy is a well defined milestone that doesn't say anything about everyday use of QC.
Yes, that's what I am reading now.
A few false experts friends had a very different discourse a few decades ago, but they were probably misled and ignorant.
At this point I think it might need a renaming. Quantum device or apparatus maybe?
Quantum Computer is a bit misleading...