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

P-computers can solve spin-glass problems faster than quantum systems

news.ucsb.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–29 of 29 posts

Re: P-computers can solve spin-glass problems faster than quantum systems

#21

Post by supernetworks »

inkysigma wrote: post #16
cubefox wrote: post #12

I'm confused. Do p-computers have any complexity theoretic advantage over classical computers, similar to how quantum computers have such an advantage in some areas? Or are they just normal computers in the end?

The answer should be no right? I think BPP is expected to be equal to P and BQP to be not equal to P.

by complexity class that would be consensus, although the argument for building BPP systems is about the energy cost being orders of magnitude less and perhaps also some polynomial speedup

Re: P-computers can solve spin-glass problems faster than quantum systems

#22

Post by supernetworks »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #20
supernetworks wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, this paper is the main subject of the article

The article links two papers (text: "Two recent papers underscore that potential."): - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41928-025-01439-6 (link text: "In one study") - https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64235-y (link text: "In the most recent paper")

yes understood, the first article isn't the main subject of the article.

Re: P-computers can solve spin-glass problems faster than quantum systems

#25

Post by ogogmad »

MontyCarloHall wrote: post #3
m_dupont wrote: post #2

Very interesting article. This makes me wonder: Would it be possible to implement an equivalent to Shor's algorithm on a p-computer. Maybe the quantumness isn't necessary at all

I doubt it. Shor's algorithm relies on the quantum Fourier transform, which requires the complex phase information encoded in the quantum wavefunctions. The quantum probability norm (L2) accounts for interference between the complex amplitudes of these wavefunctions; the classical L1 probability norm does not.

I'm not sure that it's just L1 vs L2, since the Wigner formulation of quantum mechanics uses real-valued quasi-probabilities, but ones which can take negative values.

Oh, and also, if you swap out h-bar in Wigner's equations with some wavelength \lambda, you can interpret it in terms of classical wave optics... somehow. I'm not sure.

Re: P-computers can solve spin-glass problems faster than quantum systems

#26

Post by gowld »

wasabi991011 wrote: post #18

I'm having a hard time understanding this article. First of all, a quantum annealer is not a universal quantum computer, just to elucidate the title. Then, it seems like they are comparing a simulation of p-computers to a physical realization of a quantum annealer (likely D-wave, but not named outright for some reason). If this is true, it doesn't seem like a very relevant comparison, because D-wave systems actually…

The submission is an ad.

University press releases should not be posted on HN. a press release is just a published paper + PR spin. If the PR spin were true, it would be in the paper. Just link to the paper.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64235-y

Title: "Pushing the boundary of quantum advantage in hard combinatorial optimization with probabilistic computers"

Abstract: "Adaptive parallel tempering [...] scales more favorably and outperforms simulated quantum annealing"

HN title should be changed to match the paper title or abstract.

Post reply on HN