D-Wave Claims 'Quantum Supremacy,' Beating Traditional Computers
- Reference: 0176696443
- News link: https://tech.slashdot.org/story/25/03/12/1835207/d-wave-claims-quantum-supremacy-beating-traditional-computers
- Source link:
The research shows quantum annealers rapidly generating samples that closely match solutions to the Schrodinger equation, supporting observed stretched-exponential scaling in matrix-product-state approaches. According to the paper, D-Wave's processors completed these magnetic materials simulations in under 20 minutes, while the same calculations would require nearly a million years on Oak Ridge National Laboratory's supercomputers.
The claim hasn't gone unchallenged. Miles Stoudenmire from the Flatiron Institute's Center for Computational Quantum Physics argues that classical computers can achieve comparable results using methods developed since D-Wave's initial findings. "We're just saying, 'Look, this one problem at this one time didn't beat classical computers. Try again,'" Stoudenmire noted. The quantum computing community has increasingly shifted terminology from "supremacy" to "advantage" or "utility," focusing on solving practical business or scientific problems faster, more accurately, or more economically than classical alternatives.
[1] https://www.science.org/doi/epdf/10.1126/science.ado6285
[2] https://www.wsj.com/articles/d-wave-claims-quantum-supremacy-beating-traditional-computers-155ca634
Aren't DWave macines not general purpose? (Score:2)
I had understood that DWave had achieve quantum supremacy on a tightly restricted domain of problems years ago. And the restricted domain was relaxation annealing algorithms. So, e.g., they couldn't run Shor's algorithm to break encryption.
Given that, I believe that they have achieved quantum supremacy IN THEIR DOMAIN.
Re: (Score:2)
> Given that, I believe that they have achieved quantum supremacy IN THEIR DOMAIN.
It might be possible that they are "masters of their domain".
However, with these stories it's usually only a few weeks before some random researcher demonstrates that the same problem could be solved in a couple of hours on a Commodore 64 or something. So I'll wait a while and see.
Quantum = random modeling (Score:2)
My prediction -- conventional computers will continue to be used for problems with precise answers, but quantum computers will be used for probabilistic answers.
For example, quantum computers might help in weather forecasts.
"Stretched exponential scaling .. (Score:2)
... in matrix product state approaches"
Err, what? English translation anyone?
"Yes, vapor is an important part of our ware." (Score:2)
I feel like if they had really built a better and more efficient way to compute, then we would be finding out about it not secondhand from the journal Nature, but in Best Buy.
A new kind of Turing completeness! (Score:2)
Made with 100% vaporware and bullshit.
Over and over and over (Score:2)
"Quantum Supremacy" requires mathematical proof that the classical computation version being beaten is operating at the maximum possible efficiency, a feat that may in fact be impossible. Thus, shut up.
VC speedrun (Score:2)
Who needs utility or use cases now when you can jump right to supremacy in a market you make up the rules forl
The quantum computing wall (Score:2)
So, the bottom line is that there are serious limitations to quantum computing being useful. Probably the most difficult is coherence - a qubit decays very quickly (microseconds to milliseconds), and can be disrupted by the smallest cosmic rays, EM interference, or stray photons.
Disruption is generally handled by massive error correction overhead (think, hundreds or thousands of physical qubits to represent one "logical" qubit).
Coherence puts an upper bound on what kinds of computations you can do - you ha