[ad_1]
We have just entered a new fundamental era in computer science. May be. Google scientists responded in the affirmative. Then their statement mysteriously disappeared.
Last week, a scientific article by Google and affiliated researchers was uploaded to a NASA website. Its content – if it's legit – is not trivial. In the document, scientists claim that quantum processors have "reached the regime of quantum supremacy".
This is an extremely important statement, if it's true; a milestone in quantum computing, ushering in a kind of regime change in the era of computer science.
But before taking too much in advance of ourselves and explain precisely why it is so important, a brief warning: the reason we can not be certain of the legitimacy of the paper is that shortly after the download of the research article, it was removed for reasons. unknown.
The news was originally announced by the Financial Times, who reported seeing the newspaper and also that it was later removed.
(Internet being Internet, however, many insta copies were made before the deletion, and are now available for free online reading.)
Despite the appearance, disappearance and reappearance of this provocative document, Google has not officially explained to anyone what is happening, which leaves no room for much speculation online about what happened or no. In this sense, it looks a bit like a mini quantum paradox in itself.
Assuming paper is real, what is quantum supremacy and why is it important?
Despite the incredible promise of quantum computers, their potential remains largely theoretical, even to this day. Hypothetically, however, in the future, it is predicted that quantum computers will be able to solve problems that are beyond the reach of the conventional computers we use today.
Passing such a threshold will be considered as proof of "quantum supremacy".
"Demonstrating quantum supremacy, that is, demonstrating a quantum computation that can not be performed on any conventional computer, even the world's best supercomputer, will be a key step in demonstrating that quantum computers have the potential to be very powerful and, hopefully, very useful, "Stephen Bartlett, quantum information theorist, told ScienceAlert.
Bartlett, who teaches courses in quantum physics and quantum computing at the University of Sydney, is not part of Google's quantum research team and does not comment on the paper that appears to have been disclosed – which might not be a completed search, he noted.
But Bartlett said the research community was planning a Google announcement on this in the very near future.
"It is widely accepted that quantum supremacy is" within reach "of the latest generation of quantum devices being built by Google as well as other companies and universities," Bartlett said.
"Google's clearly expressed publicly in its goals of achieving quantum supremacy."
This vocal position has reached a new level, according to the so-called research paper.
In this paper, the authors claim to have developed an experimental quantum processor called "Sycamore", which has 53 functional qubits and takes about 200 seconds to solve a particular computational problem.
As part of the experiment, a state-of-the-art supercomputer took about 10,000 years to complete the same task.
"This dramatic acceleration compared to all known classical algorithms provides an experimental realization of quantum supremacy on a computational task and heralds the advent of a much-anticipated computer paradigm," the authors write.
"To our knowledge, this experiment marks the first calculation that can only be performed on a quantum processor, so quantum processors have reached the regime of quantum supremacy."
Again, we can not be entirely sure of the veracity of the document, and even if the search is real (which seems to be the case), it may not have been the subject of the peer review necessary to justify this type of claim.
If the claims prove true, Bartlett believes that there might be broader questions about whether demonstrations like that of quantum supremacy, as what Google has long advocated, are really the last word.
"While we believe that some Quantum calculations will be out of reach of any conventional computer, so it's hard to argue that a particular set of processes can not be simulated by a suitable trick, "Bartlett told ScienceAlert.
"I suspect that the first claims of quantum supremacy will be followed by a long period of conflict, during which scientists will push the boundaries of conventional supercomputers to find a way to simulate these claimed demos."
In other words, finding ways to rigorously test quantum supremacy could be a supreme challenge in itself.
And even when we objectively exceed the threshold of quantum supremacy, quantum computers may take a long time to become as useful as conventional computers, especially since quantum computers present significant technological obstacles to perfecting.
For quantum researcher Steven Flammia, also of the University of Sydney, the ongoing improvements in the areas of quantum error correction and fault tolerance are just as important, if not more important than the theoretical attempts to achieve supremacy.
"In my mind, they are somehow more important than this initial announcement of quantum supremacy," Flammia told ScienceAlert.
"Once you can get an error correction and a fault tolerance, there is a very good theoretical reason to believe that there are no obstacles" in principle " to the intensification of quantum computing useful on a large scale. "
When these technologies have matured and quantum supremacy is assured, Dr. Bartlett believes that quantum computers should be able to solve a wide range of fundamental problems for modern life.
"The main areas of interest include drug design, the development of new high-tech materials and the major implications for information security," Bartlett said.
Even in five years, quantum computers may make significant progress in university research, Flammia says, adding that new computational capabilities could help us design elements such as better understand the process of nitrogen. fixation.
"These modest steps could be helpful for us, academics five years from now," says Flammia. "I think it's been decades before, you know, you're connecting to a quantum laptop."
Delays and cautious expectations seem quite reasonable, but in a world where quantum supremacy may have already appeared (observe this space …), who knows what the limits are?
"I think we will see a new generation of quantum coders and hackers, all of whom will find applications in quantum computing," Bartlett said.
[ad_2]
Source link