Google claims an advanced computer, for the first time, has achieved “quantum supremacy” by being several times faster than conventional computers.
The Sycamore quantum processor in giant technology took 200 seconds to perform a specific task, whereas, the existing best supercomputer in the world would have taken around 10,000 years to complete the task.
It took decades for scientists to develop fast speed quantum computers. The unit of information in traditional computers is “bit”, with a value either 1 or 0. However, in quantum systems, the basic unit is “qubit” (quantum bit) that can have both values, 1 and 0, simultaneously.
Now it would be possible to make several calculations at the same time. But there is a need to synchronize the qubits using entanglement, which is a quantum effect. Scientists have also built working devices that have enough qubits to make them compatible with conventional computers.
Sycamore have 54 qubits, one of them did not work, therefore, only 53 qubits held the device together.
John M. Martinis of Google along with the colleagues set the processor for sampling task. Sycamore took 3 minutes and 20 seconds to complete the task. Whereas, according to scientists, Summit, the best supercomputer of the world, would have taken 10,000 years to complete that task.
Prof Jonathan Oppenheim of UCL said it is indeed an impressive device that performed interesting test but the required quantum computers would still take decades to be available.
IBM is also independently working on quantum computers and raised a few questions on the figures given by Google. IBM researchers Edwin Pednault, John Gunnels and Jay Gambetta said that a classical system would have solved the same task in 2 and half days.
According to them the estimation is exaggerated, in fact the classical cost of stimulation can be lessened with a few additional refinements. They also doubted the Google’s quantum supremacy definition as it could be misleading.
It is believed that the current model does not match the exact definition, neither the quantum computers can ever be supreme over classical computers. Instead, both have their own qualities and would work by depending on each other.
Read next: Latest report shows the rise of Amazon and Google
The Sycamore quantum processor in giant technology took 200 seconds to perform a specific task, whereas, the existing best supercomputer in the world would have taken around 10,000 years to complete the task.
It took decades for scientists to develop fast speed quantum computers. The unit of information in traditional computers is “bit”, with a value either 1 or 0. However, in quantum systems, the basic unit is “qubit” (quantum bit) that can have both values, 1 and 0, simultaneously.
Now it would be possible to make several calculations at the same time. But there is a need to synchronize the qubits using entanglement, which is a quantum effect. Scientists have also built working devices that have enough qubits to make them compatible with conventional computers.
Sycamore have 54 qubits, one of them did not work, therefore, only 53 qubits held the device together.
John M. Martinis of Google along with the colleagues set the processor for sampling task. Sycamore took 3 minutes and 20 seconds to complete the task. Whereas, according to scientists, Summit, the best supercomputer of the world, would have taken 10,000 years to complete that task.
Prof Jonathan Oppenheim of UCL said it is indeed an impressive device that performed interesting test but the required quantum computers would still take decades to be available.
IBM is also independently working on quantum computers and raised a few questions on the figures given by Google. IBM researchers Edwin Pednault, John Gunnels and Jay Gambetta said that a classical system would have solved the same task in 2 and half days.
According to them the estimation is exaggerated, in fact the classical cost of stimulation can be lessened with a few additional refinements. They also doubted the Google’s quantum supremacy definition as it could be misleading.
It is believed that the current model does not match the exact definition, neither the quantum computers can ever be supreme over classical computers. Instead, both have their own qualities and would work by depending on each other.
Read next: Latest report shows the rise of Amazon and Google
