
Google claims to have reached quantum supremacy - somerandomness
https://www.ft.com/content/b9bb4e54-dbc1-11e9-8f9b-77216ebe1f17
======
itcrowd
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](https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20190030475)

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

[3] [https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610274/google-thinks-
its-...](https://www.technologyreview.com/s/610274/google-thinks-its-close-to-
quantum-supremacy-heres-what-that-really-means/)

~~~
bill_mcgonigle
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](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...](https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Ig1-Fl6U6lAJ:https://ntrs.nasa.gov/%3Fverb%3DListRecords%26metadataPrefix%3Doai_dc+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&client=ms-
google-coop)

~~~
h2xs
Even Better:

Bing cached the pdf! :)
[http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=%2220190030475%22&d=5027660...](http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=%2220190030475%22&d=5027660531763561&mkt=en-
US&setlang=en-US&w=dln7VmOcXbLuUMYsBmteH8_-znI5bROK)

Mirror
[https://filebin.net/k5rr4l0p6ldde7hr/Quantum_Supremacy_Using...](https://filebin.net/k5rr4l0p6ldde7hr/Quantum_Supremacy_Using_a_Programmable_Superconducting_Processor.html)

~~~
theK
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 :-)

------
hhs
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?

~~~
The_rationalist
Yes, What computation are we talking about?

~~~
buboard
> 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 dicult as the number of qubits
> (width) and number of gate cycles (depth) grows.

------
leonidasv
[https://archive.is/8Oeqz](https://archive.is/8Oeqz)

~~~
V3ritas1337
Thank you.

------
habibr
Here's the full PDF
[https://drive.google.com/file/d/19lv8p1fB47z1pEZVlfDXhop082L...](https://drive.google.com/file/d/19lv8p1fB47z1pEZVlfDXhop082Lc-
kdD/view)

------
x4ict
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 :) :)

------
buboard
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

------
iMuzz
"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."

------
lawrenceyan
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.

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

~~~
The_rationalist
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.

