4 ms·
In that sense, this is a pretty big step because for the first time there is a quantum computer that cannot be simulated by a classical one. It's also expected
by cpuguy83 5y ago
In that sense, this is a pretty big step because for the first time there is a quantum computer that cannot be simulated by a classical one.
It's also expected they will have a processor with over 400qubits next year and over 1000 in 2 years. This are huge leaps.
Still they aren't currently doing anything useful and need to prove themselves.
- skohan 5y agoWhat are the innovations allowing for these large leaps? It seems like forever that progress was extremely slow.
- cpuguy83 5y agoNote: I'm a total laymen and have a single source of information, which I read just before seeing the article on hacker news: https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/11/ibm-clears-the-100-qubit-mark-with-its-new-processor/ https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/11/ibm-clears-the-100-q... The Ars article goes into a little more technical detail (a little) than the press announcement.
- eof 5y agoI am surprised to see that growth given my intuition that each additional qubit would be harder than the previous to add to the system. Are there any moores law type predictions/historical trackers for qubits?
- baby 5y agoMy understanding is that adding qubits is not hard, but using them together is hard. Also, it sounded like some qubits are only added for error correction.
- dekhn 5y agoI wouldn't trust the claim it can't be simulated; right after google declared quantum supremacy another group noticed that the classical solution was actually much faster than google said (and that's before any real optimization work gets started). https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.14502 https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.14502 Also as pointed out, these aren't full qubits, nor does any doubling mean the QC will suddenly be able to do anything useful.