Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
arxiv.org
Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
1–10 of 15 posts
Re: Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
#2This is paper was published in Nature last month [0]. It mainly focuses on machine learning algorithms for near-term universal quantum computers (tens to hundreds of qubits). It also talks about machine learning algorithms for quantum annealers like D-Wave's.
[0]:http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v549/n7671/full/nature2...
Re: Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
#3Meanwhile Google already has their Quantum AI lab. They're busy with Numerics Flow, a Tensor Flow-like quantum machine learning framework which looks great.
Anybody else active in this field?
Re: Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
#4Why is a summary of what actual scientists are doing important enough to get published? I'm not quite sure what this paper is doing but maybe I don't get it as the scientists all seem very smart.
Re: Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
#5Why is a summary of what actual scientists are doing important enough to get published? I'm not quite sure what this paper is doing but maybe I don't get it as the scientists all seem very smart.
It is called a review article. Such a paper is meant to summarize the current understanding in an ongoing field of research. It is useful for researches who are not (yet) intimately familiar with that field. They might want to add contributions of their own in that area or they might find that they can transfer some ideas to their own fields of research. For people working in that area themselves a review paper is also useful to find citations and discussions of recent research papers.
Re: Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
#6Why is a summary of what actual scientists are doing important enough to get published? I'm not quite sure what this paper is doing but maybe I don't get it as the scientists all seem very smart.
You might notice this was written by actual researchers working in the field, and that it was published in the Reviews section of Nature.
Not sure what your issue with the article is. Review papers are among the most cited and important publications in science. There are entire journals dedicated to them, and their impact factor is often an order of magnitude higher than that of original research journals.
Re: Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
#7Why is a summary of what actual scientists are doing important enough to get published? I'm not quite sure what this paper is doing but maybe I don't get it as the scientists all seem very smart.
If you tried to be as smart as them you'd quickly appreciate the utility of review articles. We can't really have an apprenticeship style of education so we who cannot physically study under the scientists rely on their publications, including the more accessible review papers...
Admittedly maybe getting it out in nature is a bit of an eyeball grabber but.. Still useful.
Re: Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
#8Why is a summary of what actual scientists are doing important enough to get published? I'm not quite sure what this paper is doing but maybe I don't get it as the scientists all seem very smart.
The reason is that review papers offer a roadmap of the field allowing new researchers or generally anyone interested to understand what has been studied and what still remains to be examined. It's incredibly useful because otherwise you would have to manually read hundreds of research papers and synthesize that information manually into a clear picture (which they do for you).
Re: Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
#9Meanwhile Google already has their Quantum AI lab. They're busy with Numerics Flow, a Tensor Flow-like quantum machine learning framework which looks great. Anybody else active in this field?
>They're busy with Numerics Flow, a Tensor Flow-like quantum machine learning framework
I wasn't able to find anything about Google's Numerics flow. Would you provide a reference?
> Anybody else active in this field?
Yes. Rigetti Computing has also been working in this area. https://medium.com/rigetti/rigetti-partners-with-cdl-to-driv...
Re: Quantum Machine Learning [pdf]
#10Why is a summary of what actual scientists are doing important enough to get published? I'm not quite sure what this paper is doing but maybe I don't get it as the scientists all seem very smart.
If you tried to be as smart as them you'd quickly appreciate the utility of review articles. We can't really have an apprenticeship style of education so we who cannot physically study under the scientists rely on their publications, including the more accessible review papers... Admittedly maybe getting it out in nature is a bit of an eyeball grabber but.. Still useful.
Plenty of review papers in Nature, actually! Not really surprising or eyeball-grabbing to see one.