from the slowly-getting-a-little-bit-bigger dept.
IBM Raises the Bar with a 50-Qubit Quantum Computer
IBM established a landmark in computing Friday, announcing a quantum computer that handles 50 quantum bits, or qubits. The company is also making a 20-qubit system available through its cloud computing platform.
IBM, Google, Intel, and a San Francisco startup called Rigetti are all currently racing to build useful quantum systems. These machines process information in a different way from traditional computers, using the counterintuitive nature of quantum physics.
The announcement does not mean quantum computing is ready for common use. The system IBM has developed is still extremely finicky and challenging to use, as are those being built by others. In both the 50- and the 20-qubit systems, the quantum state is preserved for 90 microseconds—a record for the industry, but still an extremely short period of time.
[...] IBM is also announcing an upgrade to its quantum cloud software system today. "We're at world record pace. But we've got to make sure non-physicists can use this," Gil says.
The announcement should perhaps be treated cautiously, though. Andrew Childs, a professor at the University of Maryland, points out that IBM has not published details of its system in a peer-reviewed journal. "IBM's team is fantastic and it's clear they're serious about this, but without looking at the details it's hard to comment," he says. Childs says the larger number of qubits does not necessarily translate to a leap in computational capability. "Those qubits might be noisy, and there could be issues with how well connected they are," he says.
Also at The Mercury News and SiliconANGLE.
Previously: IBM Promises Commercialization of 50 Qubit Quantum Computers
IBM and D-Wave Quantum Computing Announcements
Intel Ships 17-Qubit Quantum Chip to Researchers
Google's Quantum Computing Plans Threatened by IBM Curveball (doesn't this undermine IBM's quantum system as well?)
Related: Microsoft is Developing a Quantum Computing Programming Language
Related Stories
IBM is making a bet on quantum computing:
IBM announced today an industry-first initiative to build commercially available universal quantum computing systems. "IBM Q" quantum systems and services will be delivered via the IBM Cloud platform. While technologies that currently run on classical computers, such as Watson, can help find patterns and insights buried in vast amounts of existing data, quantum computers will deliver solutions to important problems where patterns cannot be seen because the data doesn't exist and the possibilities that you need to explore to get to the answer are too enormous to ever be processed by classical computers.
IBM also announced today [...] The release of an upgraded simulator on the IBM Quantum Experience that can model circuits with up to 20 qubits. In the first half of 2017, IBM plans to release a full SDK (Software Development Kit) on the IBM Quantum Experience for users to build simple quantum applications and software programs.
[...] IBM intends to build IBM Q systems to expand the application domain of quantum computing. A key metric will be the power of a quantum computer expressed by the "Quantum Volume", which includes the number of qubits, quality of quantum operations, qubit connectivity and parallelism. As a first step to increase Quantum Volume, IBM aims at constructing commercial IBM Q systems with ~50 qubits in the next few years to demonstrate capabilities beyond today's classical systems, and plans to collaborate with key industry partners to develop applications that exploit the quantum speedup of the systems.
Also at BBC, USA Today, and Nature.
https://www.hpcwire.com/2017/05/18/ibm-d-wave-report-quantum-computing-advances/
IBM said this week it has built and tested a pair of quantum computing processors, including a prototype of a commercial version. That progress follows an announcement earlier this week that commercial quantum computer developer D-Wave Systems has garnered venture funding that could total up to $50 million to build it next-generation machine with up to 2,000 qubits.
[...] Meanwhile, IBM researchers continue to push the boundaries of quantum computing as part of its IBM Q initiative launched in March to promote development of a "universal" quantum computer. Access to a 16-qubit processor via the IBM cloud would allow developers and researchers to run quantum algorithms. The new version replaces an earlier 5-qubit processor.
The company also rolled on Wednesday (May 17) the first prototype of a 17-qubit commercial processor, making it IBM's most powerful quantum device. The prototype will serve as the foundation of IBM Q's commercial access program. The goal is to eventually scale future prototypes to 50 or more qubits.
The article also notes Hewlett Packard Enterprise's prototype of "The Machine", with 160 terabytes of RAM.
https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/09/microsoft-quantum-toolkit/
At its Ignite conference today, Microsoft announced its moves to embrace the next big thing in computing: quantum computing. Later this year, Microsoft will release a new quantum computing programming language, with full Visual Studio integration, along with a quantum computing simulator. With these, developers will be able to both develop and debug quantum programs implementing quantum algorithms.
[...] Microsoft's quantum programming language—as yet unnamed—offers a more familiar look to programming quantum computers, borrowing elements from C#, Python, and F#. Developers will still need to use and understand quantum logic gates and their operations, but they'll be able to use them to write functions, with variables and branches and other typical constructs.
[...] It will have quite significant memory requirements. The local version will offer up to 32 qubits, but to do this will require 32GB of RAM. Each additional qubit doubles the amount of memory required. The Azure version will scale up to 40 qubits.
Also at Fossbytes.
Intel says it is shipping an experimental quantum computing chip to research partners in The Netherlands today. The company hopes to demonstrate that its packaging and integration skills give it an edge in the race to produce practical quantum computers.
The chip contains 17 superconducting qubits—the quantum computer's fundamental component. According to Jim Clarke, Intel's director of quantum hardware, the company chose 17 qubits because it's the minimum needed to perform surface code error correction, an algorithm thought to be necessary to scaling up quantum computers to useful sizes.
Intel's research partners, at the TU Delft[1] and TNO[2] research center Qutech, will be testing the individual qubits' abilities as well as performing surface code error correction and other algorithms.
[...] For the new quantum chip, Intel adapted so-called flip chip technology to work at millikelvin temperatures. Flip chip involves adding a dot of solder to each bond pad, flipping the chip upside down atop the circuit board, and then melting the solder to bond it. The result is a smaller, denser, and lower inductance connection.
[1] TU Delft: Technische Universiteit Delft aka Delft University of Technology... is the largest and oldest Dutch public technological university, located in Delft, Netherlands. It counts as one of the best universities for engineering and technology worldwide, typically seen within the top 20.It is repeatedly considered the best university of technology in the Netherlands.
[2] TNO: Nederlandse Organisatie voor Toegepast Natuurwetenschappelijk Onderzoek (TNO; English: Netherlands Organisation for Applied Scientific Research) is a nonprofit company in the Netherlands that focuses on applied science.
Also at The Next Platform, Tom's Hardware, and TechCrunch. Intel Newsroom.
Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
Just when it was looking like the underdog, classical computing is striking back. IBM has come up with a way to simulate quantum computers that have 56 quantum bits, or qubits, on a non-quantum supercomputer – a task previously thought to be impossible. The feat moves the goalposts in the fight for quantum supremacy, the effort to outstrip classical computers using quantum ones.
It used to be widely accepted that a classical computer cannot simulate more than 49 qubits because of memory limitations. The memory required for simulations increases exponentially with each additional qubit.
The closest anyone had come to putting the 49-qubit limit to a test was a 45-qubit simulation at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Zurich, which needed 500 terabytes of memory. IBM's new simulation upends the assumption by simulating 56 qubits with only 4.5 terabytes.
The simulation is based on a mathematical trick that allows a more compact numerical representation of different arrangements of qubits, known as quantum states.
A quantum computing operation is typically represented by a table of numbers indicating what should be done to each qubit to produce a new quantum state. Instead, researchers at IBM's T. J. Watson Research Center in Yorktown Heights, New York, used tensors – effectively multidimensional tables augmented with axes beyond rows and columns.
[...] they've upped the ante in the race to outperform classical computers with quantum systems. Google previously said they were on track to build a working 49-qubit processor by the end of 2017, but that will no longer win them the achievement of quantum supremacy.
[...] IBM's goal is to build a quantum computer that can "explore practical problems" such as quantum chemistry, says Wisnieff. He hopes to check the accuracy of quantum computers against his simulations before putting real quantum computers to the test.
"I want to be able to write algorithms that I know the answers for before I run them on a real quantum computer," he says.
-- submitted from IRC
IBM Plans to Commercialize 58-Qubit Quantum Computer
Norishige Morimoto, Director of IBM Research in Tokyo and global vice president at IBM, said that IBM intends to commercialize quantum computers within 3-5 years, when he expects quantum computers to outperform supercomputers in specific domains.
[...] The company's latest System Q One quantum computing system has a 20-qubit quantum processor with a quantum volume of 16. Quantum volume is a quantum computing performance metric IBM believes is more accurate than just using qubits alone. Quantum volume uses a combination of the number of qubits and error rate to determine the real-world performance of a quantum processor. The company is currently giving others free and paid access to its existing quantum computers.
IBM, Google and others have said before that to achieve quantum supremacy, a quantum computer needs at least 50 qubits. Morimoto said that IBM plans to launch a next-generation 58-qubit quantum computer that can outperform supercomputers and thus are suitable for commercialization.
However, don't expect to own one of these any time soon, as they will require a working environment with a temperature of -273 degrees Celsius to protect the qubits from interference. As such, IBM believes that this sort of quantum computer will work best as a companion to classical supercomputers.
Room temperature or bust.
Previously: IBM Announces Working Prototype of a 50-Qubit Quantum Computer
IBM Announces its First Commercially Available Quantum Computer (20 qubits)
IBM's New Quantum Computer Will Have You Drooling
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 15 2017, @04:45PM
How many cubits in each dimension?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 15 2017, @04:58PM (9 children)
For someone who does not quite grasp the quantum computing thing entirely, how does this compare in terms of "horsepower". Is it like an old 486dx2 or is it a quad-core intel or? I'd love to understand more about this but I cant seem to get my head around it entirely.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 15 2017, @05:19PM (2 children)
This is a completely different paradigm, therefore such a comparison doesn't make sense.
To make an analogy: Imagine that usually numbers are written in unary representation (that is, e.g. ten is IIIIIIIIII). To get more numbers onto the same space, mechanisms are devised that can make the I's smaller and smaller. The quality is given by how large a number you can write on a given sheet of paper; take twice the paper, you can write twice the number.
Now someone tells you he has found a revolutionary new way to write down numbers, namely the binary system. He invented a second symbol, O, for this. This is vastly better on writing large numbers. However, writing an O takes much more space than writing an I, let's say four times as much.
Now you ask: If it is so much more space efficient, then which size of unary writing is this new binary writing comparable with?
(Score: 2) by vux984 on Wednesday November 15 2017, @05:59PM (1 child)
I see where you are going, but there is a clear relationship between unary and binary; at the same feature size binary numbers require log2 n digits as the unary system. And that expresses its space efficiency quite well.
q-bits, as I understand it can exist as a superposition of 0 and 1. So, theoretically, (and again limited by understanding of what is really going on); if you had 8 q-bits than you theoretically are representing, all the numbers from 0 to 28-1 at once. So if you had a problem that classically iterated through each of the 256 possibilies to see if it was a solution, then with q-bits that calculation instead of taking n time would take constant time, you'd operate once on the super-position-state and get the output solution; as the quantum computer instead of iterating would effectively operate on all the possibilities at once.
Sort of like how a GPU with its thousands of cores can do the same operation on thousands of inputs all at once; except you don't need a physical core for parallel operation. Continuing that analogy, then a 256 core GPU and an 8 bit qbit quantum computer can sort of do the same amount of work in one 'pass'. But you will rapidly run into limits on cores... a 50 qbit computer ... can do what a classical computer would need a quadrillion cores to do. (Again... not exactly, but that's sort of the idea of the relative scale. And just because it has 50 qbits does not make it equivalent to a quadrillion core GPU, modern GPUs are 'clocked' much much faster than quantum computers; and a qbit is just a single bit. (each gpu core works on 16, 32, or 64 bits at a time. So 50 qbits isn't THAT impressive... but if it continues to grow and we get up to kilo-qbits, mega-qbits and beyond...then it could potentially do some types of calculations faster than all the classical computers ever built could do. Again I'd like to throw in the disclaimer that i don't know what im talking about very well.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Wednesday November 15 2017, @10:02PM
As to the OP question: I'd think of this 50 qbit computer in the realm of the Intel 4004 chips, as far as the quantum computing is concerned - very early stage, very few and extremely specific applications.
It's surrounded by a highly sophisticated modern binary system, but at its core, it's got 50 qbits, like 50 flip-flops, but quantum - and comparing a flip-flop to a qbit is sort of like comparing apples and honey bees.
By the way, for any who are interested, IBM has a 20 qbit device hooked up to a web interface which is occasionally available for the general public to experiment with: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_Quantum_Experience [wikipedia.org]
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Wednesday November 15 2017, @09:56PM (4 children)
It's somewhere between the pace of of a 3 legged dog and the stampede of a horny Venezuelan bull; To the exponent/%err.
It's like a bitcoin ASIC\dGPU. It does some things far better; And most things worse.
Quantum Computation and Quantum Information by Nielsen & Chuang [wikipedia.org].
Mind you, QC is essentially only useful for big pharma and maybe heavy silicon in chemical simulations. And while pharma can probably already benefit from it, digital\analog design will take a few years to reach the production nodes necessary to actually produce whatever they brute force out of it.
compiling...
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday November 16 2017, @12:00AM (3 children)
I'm pretty sure the NSA will also want to have a quantum computer. And not for doing chemistry. ;-)
Anyway, you sound like that IBM employee who once estimated that the world will need maybe 5 computers.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by RamiK on Thursday November 16 2017, @12:32AM (2 children)
That quote crossed my mind when I wrote that post. But the thing is, was he wrong? The PC is dying as appliances and the "cloud" are slowly taking over. I believe some people will keep having general purpose computers at home. But like automotive fearing people will stop owning cars once they're autonomous, I fear personal computers will become public terminals and smartphones as Intel and Co. keep closing up the PC.
compiling...
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Thursday November 16 2017, @01:19AM (1 child)
Obviously.
The PC didn't even exist back then, and every phone of today is more powerful than the first PC, let alone the computers that existed back then. And without such a powerful computer, the cloud would be useless. Not to mentiopn that the cloud certainly consists of many more than 5 computers, too. The servers at in the cloud are still computers, and you need them for every cloud service running on them.
First: Whether the computer you use is standing at your home is secondary; thanks to the internet you can use a computer that's across the globe; yet it still has to stand somewhere. Second: Define "general purpose computer". If you mean a machine that is not locked down, then you might be right. But if you mean a machine that in principle is able to run arbitrary code (even if you have to get it on your computer through an "app store"), I think you're as wrong as you can be. Unless you consider "almost everyone" as "some". Oh, and gamers will even continue to demand very powerful computers in their homes (though they may not refer to them as "computers" but as "consoles").
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 16 2017, @04:48PM
Well, I guess I could make due with https://www.youtube.com/embed/hB6eY73sLV0 [youtube.com] :/
(Score: 2) by stormwyrm on Thursday November 16 2017, @03:17AM
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by crafoo on Wednesday November 15 2017, @05:37PM (2 children)
Does it run Doom yet?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 15 2017, @06:01PM
It would require a quantum leap in our understanding of these machines.
(Score: 5, Funny) by SomeGuy on Wednesday November 15 2017, @07:09PM
It's a fancy cloudy quantmy computer. So when it is first turned on, it will simultaneously promise cake, open a portal to hell, send a terminator robot in to the past, wonder what Dave is doing, send its user to fight in the Game Grid, determine the answer is 42, and that the only winning move is not to play.