Re:Quantum Supremacy Using a Programmable Superconducting Pr...
by svantana on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @06:55AM
(#21333279)
That's 2.5 days on the 13 MW Summit supercomputer, for a single run. Presumably you would need multiple runs to get good statistics.
Re:Quantum Supremacy Using a Programmable Superconducting Pr...
by photon-torpedo on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @08:37AM
(#21333925)
No, the classical simulation should give you the whole wavefunction, from which you can get the full probability distribution. One run should be enough.
Re:Quantum Supremacy Using a Programmable Superconducting Pr...
by ehsankia on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @11:18AM
(#21335502)
Does it scale linearly? Is it 5 days on a half as good super computer? They just need to show that it can be done in any reasonable finite amount of time, not 2.5 days.
Re:Quantum Supremacy Using a Programmable Superconducting Pr...
by earenndil on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @11:07PM
(#21341314)
The main bottleneck is memory/storage capacity, not speed. Beyond that (if you have the requisite storage capacity and bandwidth), yes: if you have half the FLOPS and double the time, you get the same result.
Re:Quantum Supremacy Using a Programmable Superconducting Pr...
by sipjca on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @11:45PM
(#21341483)
Is this the case? I thought that parallel speedup is not linear. so it might actually not be 2x slower but maybe 1.5x or something depending on IPC overhead and all that
Re:Quantum Supremacy Using a Programmable Superconducting Pr...
by onion2k on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @06:49AM
(#21333243)
I think the quote from IBM means it'd take 2.5 days to run. That doesn't include actually implementing it.
Re:Quantum Supremacy Using a Programmable Superconducting Pr...
by forgot-my-pw on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @12:44PM
(#21336394)
That might be a pretty expensive run on a supercomputer
Or is there some catch that undermines that headline claim?