4 ms·
I have also heard that it is not a true Quantum computer although it solves the ising problem faster than simulated annealING systems and it also uses qBits (>1
by sigmaprimus 10y ago
I have also heard that it is not a true Quantum computer although it solves the ising problem faster than simulated annealING systems and it also uses qBits (>1024 atm) and I believe both Google and UCLA own or at least use Dwave systems. So if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck.... Anyways nice article even if it did not mention Dwave. The Hacker News community comments section can take care of that!!
- kurthr 10y agoThey really aren't all that similar, and it only solves a tiny subset of Ising problems (which match D-Wave topology), and they really aren't faster than a single modern Intel core running a reasonable algorithm. http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2555 http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2555
- marcosdumay 10y agoIt can not factorize numbers in polynomial time, it can not speed-up chemical simulations, it can do basically nothing that a quantum computer does, besides simulating itself. It's also not obvious in any way what use there is in simulating quantum annealing.
- kobeya 10y agoSearch. You can use quantum annealing for unstructured search.
- marcosdumay 10y agoAFAIK (but I'm not up-to-date on the area) nobody has ever showed that quantum annealing is any faster than classical annealing.
- kobeya 10y agoIf you mean the D-wave devices specifically, the kerfuffle is that the low-clockrate quantum device does not complete tasks any faster or cheaper than a comparably priced classical computer, and the open question as to whether they can ever be made to operate faster. That's why there's only research labs buying them. But the device does work.