from the one-year's-work-shrunk-to-7.8-seconds dept.
Scientists from quantum computing company D-Wave have demonstrated that, using a method called quantum annealing, they could simulate some materials up to three million times faster than it would take with corresponding classical methods.
Together with researchers from Google, the scientists set out to measure the speed of simulation in one of D-Wave's quantum annealing processors, and found that performance increased with both simulation size and problem difficulty, to reach a million-fold speedup over what could be achieved with a classical CPU.
The calculation that D-Wave and Google's teams tackled is a real-world problem; in fact, it has already been resolved by the 2016 winners of the Nobel Prize in Physics, Vadim Berezinskii, J. Michael Kosterlitz and David Thouless, who studied the behavior of so-called "exotic magnetism", which occurs in quantum magnetic systems.
[...] In contrast, D-Wave's latest experiment resolved a meaningful problem that scientists are interested in independent of quantum computing. The findings have already attracted the attention of scientists around the world.
Journal Reference:
Andrew D. King, Jack Raymond, Trevor Lanting, et al. Scaling advantage over path-integral Monte Carlo in quantum simulation of geometrically frustrated magnets [open], Nature Communications (DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-20901-5)
Related Stories
D-Wave plans to build a gate-model quantum computer
For more than 20 years, D-Wave has been synonymous with quantum annealing. Its early bet on this technology allowed it to become the world's first company to sell quantum computers, but that also somewhat limited the real-world problems its hardware could solve, given that quantum annealing works especially well for optimization problems like protein folding or route planning. But as the company announced at its Qubits conference today, a superconducting gate-model quantum computer — of the kind IBM and others currently offer — is now also on its roadmap.
D-Wave believes the combination of annealing, gate-model quantum computing and classic machines is what its businesses' users will need to get the most value from this technology. "Like we did when we initially chose to pursue annealing, we're looking ahead," the company notes in today's announcement. "We're anticipating what our customers need to drive practical business value, and we know error-corrected gate-model quantum systems with practical application value will be required for another important part of the quantum application market: simulating quantum systems. This is an application that's particularly useful in fields like materials science and pharmaceutical research."
Previously: A Quantum Computer Just Solved a Problem Three Million Times Faster than a Classical Computer
(Score: 2) by Subsentient on Monday March 08 2021, @12:36PM (2 children)
I'm suuuuper sure humanity won't use the new era of quantum computers to find innovative ways to annihilate itself and/or enslave their fellow men, because humans are so great with so much integrity, foresight, compassion, and wisdom.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 08 2021, @01:16PM
What?! That's the opposite of what I want!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 08 2021, @03:17PM
It is going to be the biggest boom since the stonemasons partied at the great oyramid of Giza.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Monday March 08 2021, @12:50PM (3 children)
As I understand it, this was not any sort of standard computation. It was more like running an analog computer - something completely different. And with many of the same features/disadvantages of analog computers: inaccuracy and an inability to produce results that can be replicated.
So far, quantum computers are still a solution in search of a problem. Maybe they'll get there, but this isn't it.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Monday March 08 2021, @02:20PM
My understanding is that the research into quantum computing has been focused on problems where the solution can be verified quickly using "standard" computation, but cannot be developed quickly using those tools. So you use the analog methods to get to an alleged solution that you can check, and then check it.
This would be incredibly useful for solving whole classes of problems computers can't handle right now, and currently depend on the even less reliable wetware.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by jimtheowl on Monday March 08 2021, @05:44PM
"The calculation that D-Wave and Google's teams tackled is a real-world problem; in fact, it has already been resolved by the 2016 winners of the Nobel Prize in Physics, Vadim Berezinskii, J. Michael Kosterlitz and David Thouless"
https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2016/press-release/ [nobelprize.org]
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Tuesday March 09 2021, @01:37PM
Yes, like many in private enterprise, D-Wave is not to be trusted. For years now, D-Wave has been making these sorts of extraordinary claims.
There's enough uncertainty that D-Wave can't be outright dismissed as frauds and cranks. Exaggerate and mischaracterize, yes. However, it may be possible to convert quantum algorithms so they can be solved by simulated annealing. There's plenty in this area that we just do not know.
(Score: 1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 08 2021, @01:53PM (7 children)
We should stop differentiating between quantum computers and classical computers. A computer is a computer is a computer, whether it's quantum, classical or Black.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 08 2021, @03:55PM
Analog computers, digital computers and quantum computers have very different performance characteristics and processes. In the case of analog computers, they may not even involve a flow of electricity in the actual calculations. And while we're at it, people calculate different from all three. It's helpful to distinguish between the forms of computers in some fashion, this seems as good a way as anything.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 08 2021, @04:30PM (1 child)
QPU(Quantum Processing unit) card...
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Tuesday March 09 2021, @10:14AM
With current technology, you might not be happy with the cooling requirements. ;-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 2) by Gaaark on Monday March 08 2021, @10:17PM (3 children)
I'm wondering what kind of punch-card to use with a quantum computer...
--- Please remind me if I haven't been civil to you: I'm channeling MDC. ---Gaaark 2.0 ---
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 08 2021, @11:29PM
A ballot, specifically one with hanging chads.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 09 2021, @02:11AM
One with hanging chads.
(Score: 2) by maxwell demon on Tuesday March 09 2021, @10:12AM
Obviously a quantum punch card, where you can have superposition between “there is a hole” and “there is no hole”. But you better be a good typist, as you cannot proofread them; looking at them would collapse their state. :-)
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 08 2021, @06:31PM (1 child)
The question solved was "Does this make me look fat?". And although the answer it came up with was still wrong, it was solved in a fraction of the time and less wrong than classical computing.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Monday March 08 2021, @09:32PM
The correct answer is of course, myeenowell... (watch her face for clues)... nnyynnnyyyynnn,,, (i saw something!)... no.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 09 2021, @12:51PM
Wake me when it can factor 15
(Score: 2) by Lester on Tuesday March 09 2021, @07:16PM (1 child)
I work in the IT world, and once upon a time I coded a lot in different languages. Although I don't code professionally anymore, I like to keep up to date. So I play with new languages, like nim, rust, go, and test programas new etc
When I first heard about quantum computing, I wanted to know a little more. I have read articles, read wikipedia entries, but I am totally lost, there no way I can understand qbits, quantum computing and all that stuff.
I have to admit it, I'm getting old.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 10 2021, @08:17AM
uhm... it's not your age. the underlying math is different. no matter how good you are on a piano, if you want to learn the violin you start at the beginning.
you can't rely on your knowledge of classical computing. you first need quantum mechanics and the underlying math.