Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Quantum AI

quantumai.google

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 210 posts

Re: Google Quantum AI

#141

Post by jncfhnb »

throwaway63467 wrote: post #139
jncfhnb wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds… wrong. A simulation of a plane is a model, implemented by humans, of how physics works. A simulation of a quantum system is still a human implementation of mechanics. A quantum computer per my understanding should not be able to add anything to that. You’re not able to just say well this thingy has quantum mechanics and this is a quantum computer so it’s better able to do that. Quantum computers are abou…

No that’s not how it works, quantum mechanics cannot be simulated efficiently on a classical computer, the state space grows exponentially with the number of degrees of freedom, every degree has relative phases to every other degree even when only looking at pure states, that’s why even the largest super computers cannot simulate more than 50 quantum degrees of freedom currently (see quantum supremacy).

I’m not claiming quantum mechanics can be efficiently simulated on a normal computer. I’m questioning whether arbitrary quantum mechanics systems can be effectively simulated by a quantum computer.

Re: Google Quantum AI

#142

Post by fsmv »

constantcrying wrote: post #88

Hilarious. Even the connection between AI and Quantum computing is deeply opaque. When computers first began development during WW2, they were a response to immediate demands for particular functionality from many technical areas. Quantum computing seems to go the exact opposite route, first of building up an (admittedly very interesting) technology and then later figuring out if there actually is anything useful to…

The AI connection comes from the idea that you can use Grover's algorithm to speed up generic optimization problems.

Re: Google Quantum AI

#143

Post by jncfhnb »

cwillu wrote: post #138
jncfhnb wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds… wrong. A simulation of a plane is a model, implemented by humans, of how physics works. A simulation of a quantum system is still a human implementation of mechanics. A quantum computer per my understanding should not be able to add anything to that. You’re not able to just say well this thingy has quantum mechanics and this is a quantum computer so it’s better able to do that. Quantum computers are abou…

“Wrong answers are not calculated” is a popular simplification of this, but it's misleading you here. Quantum computers are a means of systematically creating and modifying complicated sums of exponentially large FFT's, and then efficiently sampling from the resulting distribution. Note that you typically still need to sample many times to get a meaningful answer, which is where the “wrong answers are not calculated”…

> so you waste less time testing bad samples.

How is this not “wrong answers are not calculated”? You gave a lot more detail on the mechanics of how these probability amplitudes are canceling each other out but the answer seems the same?

I don’t follow how this maps to helping simulate the quantum systems. Quantum computers are good at finding solutions to problems efficiently. But the quantum systems we are describing are not solution seeking systems. They’re going to be just interacting components with entanglement whatever’s going on. How would the avoidance of bad samples aid the simulation of a system like that?

Re: Google Quantum AI

#144

Post by pquki4 »

huytersd wrote: post #36
bigfudge wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think your comment is rude, and naive in that it misses the point. The investment here is small relative the the marketing budget, which tells us something about their priorities.

[flagged]

I would very much like to know how to make one person spend only one day to set the whole thing up, including setting up a new domain, allocating/pointing to a web server, finding the pictures with the correct resolution and apply modification, creating the illustrations, making sure that "sign in" button at the top actually works, setting the background gradient in such a way that it is complaint with the company design language, designing and implementing "The Qubit Game" [0], designing and implementing the fancy "our quantum journey" interactive page [1], etc, in a company as large as Google. I am really curious who this Superman at Google is, who can do both design work and dev work and creating educational materials, get all things approved and reviewed and shipped within a day, and ensure links don't break to this day.

[0] https://quantumai.google/education/thequbitgame

[1] https://quantumai.google/learn/map

Re: Google Quantum AI

#145

Post by [deleted] »

habosa wrote: post #120
kamov wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Knowing the industry there's a bunch of people out there on the payroll continuously knocking out these assets all day long every day.

Google routinely uses agencies for this kind of work (I have been on both sides). A marketing website like this would be a ~$100,000 spend (depends how many pages and how many creative assets).

[deleted]

Re: Google Quantum AI

#146

Post by vtomole »

anonylizard wrote: post #2

How is this related to AI in any way? Is it just branded as AI to get some share of that sweet AI money (Probably Google only allows funding new projects if they are AI related at this point)

This lab does a lot of research in AI. Here are a few examples:

1. Barren plateaus in quantum neural network training landscapes: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-07090-4

2. Power of data in quantum machine learning: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-021-22539-9

3. Quantum advantage in learning from experiments: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.abn7293

Re: Google Quantum AI

#147

Post by amarcheschi »

fooker wrote: post #45
amarcheschi wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a guy I knew in a PhD in quantum computing and he told me that he was working on making an algorithm to perform edge detection on an image in O(1), apparently it's possible to do some operation much quicker with quantum computing A paper i found on edge detection https://arxiv.org/html/2404.06889v1#:~:text=Quantum%20Hadama... .

This might be a good candidate for Google's prize, unless I'm missing something?

I have literally 0 experience in this field, so I can't comment

Re: Google Quantum AI

#148

Post by adrianN »

vtomole wrote: post #131
adrianN wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is still open whether we can build quantum computers with sufficiently low noise to run Shor‘s algorithm.

> It is still open whether we can build quantum computers with sufficiently low noise to run Shor‘s algorithm. This statement should delimit between theory and experiment. Theoretically, the question of building a quantum computer with low enough noise to run Shor's has been solved. In fact it was solved by Shor himself in the 1990s: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9605011 . Experimentally, we are just getting started…

Yeah well you can rephrase my statement to say that the theory underlying quantum computers still hasn’t been validated experimentally, so it’s still open whether it models reality sufficiently well to allow us to run the algorithms it predicts on physical machines.

Re: Google Quantum AI

#149

Post by vtomole »

constantcrying wrote: post #96
Hewlberno wrote: post #47

The lack of knowledge and ignorance of quantum computing in this thread is incredible. Quantum computers do exist. They are extremely useful and do things that digital computers cannot do. Categorically cannot. The cynicism in this thread is crazy

>They are extremely useful and do things that digital computers cannot do. But that is false. A classical computer can simulate a quantum computer. Performance is the difference, not inherent ability. >The cynicism in this thread is crazy The cynicism stems from people telling others that practical quantum computers will change the world for at least a decade. Even the URL invokes deep cynicism in me, as it randomly…

> The cynicism stems from people telling others that practical quantum computers will change the world for at least a decade.

Practical quantum computers will change the world (break RSA 2048). The question is "when". The people who have a timeline of ~10 years instead of decades contribute to what we in our community call "Quantum hype" and it's very much frowned upon by most of the members in the community.

> combines Quantum computing with the current hot thing

The founder of this lab has an illustrious career in machine learning and is now researching how quantum computers can help with that.

Re: Google Quantum AI

#150

Post by cwillu »

jncfhnb wrote: post #143
cwillu wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

“Wrong answers are not calculated” is a popular simplification of this, but it's misleading you here. Quantum computers are a means of systematically creating and modifying complicated sums of exponentially large FFT's, and then efficiently sampling from the resulting distribution. Note that you typically still need to sample many times to get a meaningful answer, which is where the “wrong answers are not calculated”…

> so you waste less time testing bad samples. How is this not “wrong answers are not calculated”? You gave a lot more detail on the mechanics of how these probability amplitudes are canceling each other out but the answer seems the same? I don’t follow how this maps to helping simulate the quantum systems. Quantum computers are good at finding solutions to problems efficiently. But the quantum systems we are describi…

For simulation, it's not about the bad samples: the point is information about the distribution itself.
Post reply on HN