Google claims to have reached quantum supremacy | Hacker News Reader

Google claims to have reached quantum supremacy

ft.com

114 pointssomerandomness21 comments

The paper was called "Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor" and was available at [1] but is now removed.

I also found a partial abstract [2]: "The tantalizing promise of quantum computers is that certain computational tasks might be executed exponentially faster on a quantum processor than on a classical processor. A fundamental challenge is to build a high-fidelity processor capable of running quantum algorithms in an exponentially large computational space. Here, we report using a processor with programmable superconducting qubits to create quantum states on 53 qubits, occupying a state space 2^53 ~ 10^16. Measurements fro…"

Original plan was to have 72 qubits (as noted in the FT article) but was downsized to 53 for some reason. Original reporting on the 72-qubit plan here [3].

[1] (dead link) https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20190030475

[2] https://agenparl.eu/quantum-supremacy-using-a-programmable-s...

[3] https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610274/google-thinks-its-...

A little more for you:

"Document ID: 20190030475 Quantum Supremacy Using a Programmable Superconducting Processor The tantalizing promise of quantum computers is that certain computational tasks might be executed exponentially faster on a quantum processor than on a classical processor. A fundamental challenge is to build a high-fidelity processor capable of running quantum algorithms in an exponentially large computational space. Here, we report using a processor with programmable superconducting qubits to create quantum states on 53 qubits, occupying a state space 2(exp53) ~ 10(exp16). Measurements from repeated experiments sample the corresponding probability distribution, which we verify using classical simulations. While our processor takes about 200 seconds to sample one instance of the quantum circuit 1 million times, a state-of-the-art supercomputer would require approximately 10,000 years to perform the equivalent task. This dramatic speedup relative to all known classical algorithms provides an experimental realization of quantum supremacy on a computational task and heralds the advent of a much-anticipated computing paradigm. 20190801 August 2019 Copyright, Public use permitted Unclassified, Unlimited, Publicly available http://hdl.handle.net/2060/20190030475 CASI application/pdf Mandra, Salvatore Rieffel, Eleanor G. Biswas, Rupak ARC-E-DAA-TN71198 NASA/TP-2019-220319 Computer Systems"

Happily provided by Google. ;)

https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Ig1-Fl...

This must be the experiment they ran to show quantum supremacy

https://arxiv.org/abs/1905.00444

"Establishing the Quantum Supremacy Frontier with a 281 Pflop/s Simulation"

Benjamin Villalonga, Dmitry Lyakh, Sergio Boixo, Hartmut Neven, Travis S. Humble, Rupak Biswas, Eleanor G. Rieffel, Alan Ho, Salvatore Mandrà

(Submitted on 1 May 2019)

half-readable archive: https://archive.is/fKEYw

Even Better:

Bing cached the pdf! :) http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=%2220190030475%22&d=5027660...

Mirror https://filebin.net/k5rr4l0p6ldde7hr/Quantum_Supremacy_Using...

Does everybody else also get the > Below is a snapshot of the Web page as it appeared on 10/29/2006 (the last time our crawler visited it). This is the version

Emphasis 2006 :-)

PDF: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21043659

The article says:

"A paper by Google’s researchers seen by the FT, that was briefly posted earlier this week on a Nasa website before being removed, claimed that their processor was able to perform a calculation in three minutes and 20 seconds that would take today’s most advanced classical computer, known as Summit, approximately 10,000 years."

Why was that paper removed on the Nasa website? Also, I'm curious if supplementary data was provided to support the claims?

Yes, What computation are we talking about?

> To demonstrate quantum supremacy, we compare our quantum processor against state-of-the-art classical com- puters in the task of sampling the output of a pseudo- random quantum circuit[24{26]. Random circuits are a suitable choice for benchmarking since they do not pos- sess structure and therefore allow for limited guarantees of computational hardness[24, 25, 27, 28]. We design the circuits to entangle a set of quantum bits (qubits) by re- peated application of single-qubit and two-qubit logical operations. Sampling the quantum circuit’s output pro- duces a set of bitstrings, e.g. f0000101, 1011100, ...g. Due to quantum interference, the probability distribution of the bitstrings resembles a speckled intensity pattern produced by light interference in laser scatter, such that some bitstrings are much more likely to occur than oth- ers. Classically computing this probability distribution becomes exponentially more dicult as the number of qubits (width) and number of gate cycles (depth) grows.

https://archive.is/8Oeqz

Thank you.

Here's the full PDF https://drive.google.com/file/d/19lv8p1fB47z1pEZVlfDXhop082L...

The Joshua Tree Quantum Computer Achieves Quantum Supremacy: Dr. Elliot McGucken's research group hath created a quantum computer capable of simulating over five sextillion atoms in the form of water molecules, performing massively complex calculations in a fraction of a second, leveraging quantum entanglement in the Hilbert Space, thusly tapping into the power of higher dimensions and the space of parallel universes. These highly complex many-body calculations would take classical computers over a trillion trillion trillion years to solve and simulate. The JT Quantum Computer leverages the quantum multiverse to generate random numbers and pattern distributions via the entangled interactions of five sextillion atoms. Atoms in a drop of water = 3 atoms/molecule x 1.67 x 10^21 molecules = 5.01 x 10^21 atoms, or five sextillion atoms.

The patent-pending Joshua Tree Quantum Computer works as follows:

One obtains an eye-dropper and a glass of water.

One takes up a drop of water in the eye-dropper.

One drops said drop of water onto a flat piece of glass.

Immediately one achieves and observes the random pattern distribution based on the entangled interactions between the over 5.01 x 10^21 atoms (five sextillion atoms), as the combined wave function collapses and the universe splits a trillion trillion times. Using a classical computer, one would be unable to simulate this calculation even after a trillion trillion trillions years. The JT Quantum Computer leverages the entangled quantum interactions between the atoms, thusly mining the Hilbert Space of parallel universes and the multiverse in a manner that is at least several sextillion times faster than IBM's leading SUMMIT super computer.

And so the Joshua Tree Quantum Computer hath achieved quantum supremacy.

The Wright Brother's first flight lasted under a minute, and already we have crossed far further than that, with big plans for the future, and multitudinous commercial applications. A new era hath dawned.

We are currently seeking $200 million in funding to complete the design of the Redwood Quantum Computer, which will involve an entire bucket of water and which will be able to leverage the many worlds of Sean Carroll.

dx4/dt=ic friends, dx4/dt=ic :) :)

I'm not saying that this isnt significant, but their basic claim to fame "quantum simulation in classical computers is slow". i hope there's other uses for this supremacy

"The system can only perform a single, highly technical calculation, according to the researchers, and the use of quantum machines to solve practical problems is still years away."

Someone’s about to get a stern talking to on Monday it seems.

I wonder though, if it was someone from NASA or from Google that made the mistake of uploading the paper earlier than they should have.

This website had a paywall... Why do Google claim to have reached quantum supremacy, can't they prove it?

If this is true this is a revolution. If this is false this is usual quantum bullshit to justify funding. Can we agree on the truth value? The calculus tested has not at all been explained on the archive which is ridiculous.

This works if you use Firefox:

https://github.com/iamadamdev/bypass-paywalls-firefox

It was a leaked document, nothing official yet. But this is massive news. Saying it doesn’t matter because there’s no practical uses is like the people discounting the Wright Brothers because the airplane could only fly for a minute.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com