{"id":954,"date":"2005-06-22T07:21:40","date_gmt":"2005-06-22T14:21:40","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/?p=954"},"modified":"2005-06-22T07:21:40","modified_gmt":"2005-06-22T14:21:40","slug":"954","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/2005\/06\/22\/954\/","title":{"rendered":"Hyperbole Wednesdays"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Two posts over at <a href=\"http:\/\/qualgorithms.blogspot.com\/\">Quantum Algorithms<\/a>, one on <a href=\"http:\/\/qualgorithms.blogspot.com\/2005\/06\/d-wave-systems.html\">D-Wave Systems<\/a> and another one on a supposed algorithm for solving NP-complete problems efficiently on a quantum computer.<br \/>\nWhen I was a graduate student at Berkeley, when a paper came out claiming that quantum computers could solve NP-complete problems, we would all race to see who could figure out where the problem in the paper was.  I usually don&#8217;t like to write blog articles about papers like the one commented upon in Quantum Algorithms (for the preprint, see <a href=\"http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/quant-ph\/0506137\">here<\/a>), but I&#8217;m not about to get a blogger username to just comment on the site cus I&#8217;m lazy, so I thought I&#8217;d just stick my comments here.  As far as I can tell the paper is incorrect.  In particular if you examine Figure 3, the circuit described does not perform as described.  If I understand correctly, the state after the oracle gate is [tex]${1 over 2^n} sum_{x,y=0}^{2^n-1}(-1)^{f(x)}|y&gt;|x&gt;$[\/tex].  The author then applies a unitary gate between the y and x registers and then a measurement of the qubits.  This is supposed to allow one to identify a place where [tex]$f(x)=1$[\/tex], but as far as I can tell, one only gets an exponentially small information about such a location if there is only one marked item.<br \/>\nThe other article on Quantum Algorithms points to <a href=\"http:\/\/www.technologyreview.com\/article\/404367\/quantum-calculation\/\">an article<\/a> in the MIT Technology Review about the Vancouver based D-Wave systems.  Here the hyperbole is even more mysterious:<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>\nVancouver startup D-Wave Systems, however, aims to build a quantum computer within three years. It won&#8217;t be a fully functional quantum computer of the sort long envisioned; but D-Wave is on track to produce a special-purpose, &#8220;noisy&#8221; piece of quantum hardware that could solve many of the physical-simulation problems that stump today&#8217;s computers, says David Meyer, a mathematician working on quantum algorithms at the University of California, San Diego.<br \/>\nThe difference between D-Wave&#8217;s system and other quantum computer designs is the particular properties of quantum mechanics that they exploit. Other systems rely on a property called entanglement, which says that any two particles that have interacted in the past, even if now spatially separated, may still influence each other&#8217;s states. But that interdependence is easily disrupted by the particles&#8217; interactions with their environment. In contrast, D-Wave&#8217;s design takes advantage of the far more robust property of quantum physics known as quantum tunneling, which allows particles to &#8220;magically&#8221; hop from one location to another.\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>It sounds to me, from the article, that the proposal is a quantum computer which implements a quantum adiabatic algorithm.  The question of whether adiabatic quantum algorithms can be more efficient than classical algorithm is, from what I know, fairly controversial (see, for example, <a href=\"http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/quant-ph\/0206003\">here<\/a>.)  I would have a hard time telling a venture capitalist to put money in something quite so controversial, but hey, what do I know, I&#8217;m just a lowsy academic nerd and a chicken.  If they can sell solutions to hard problem instances and actually succeed, then what do I know!  And they will be rich!<br \/>\nUpdate: Suresh <a href=\"http:\/\/blog.geomblog.org\/2005\/06\/intriguing.html#comments\">says I&#8217;m lazy<\/a>.  And I am.  So looking again at <a href=\"http:\/\/arxiv.org\/abs\/quant-ph\/0506137\">quant-ph\/0506137<\/a>, the main problem is already apparent in equation (5).  There the author has miscontrued the tensor product.  If we take the output of this circuit seriously, the initial state [tex]$|00rangle$[\/tex] is transformed into [tex]$0$[\/tex].  Not the state zero.  The amplitude for the first qubit in this formula is zero.  <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Two posts over at Quantum Algorithms, one on D-Wave Systems and another one on a supposed algorithm for solving NP-complete problems efficiently on a quantum computer. When I was a graduate student at Berkeley, when a paper came out claiming that quantum computers could solve NP-complete problems, we would all race to see who could &hellip; <\/p>\n<p class=\"link-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/2005\/06\/22\/954\/\" class=\"more-link\">Continue reading<span class=\"screen-reader-text\"> &#8220;Hyperbole Wednesdays&#8221;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[20,63],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-954","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-computer-science","category-quantum"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/954","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=954"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/954\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=954"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=954"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/dabacon.org\/pontiff\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=954"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}