IBM Boosts the Amount of Computation You Can Get Done On Quantum Hardware (arstechnica.com) 29
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: There's a general consensus that we won't be able to consistently perform sophisticated quantum calculations without the development of error-corrected quantum computing, which is unlikely to arrive until the end of the decade. It's still an open question, however, whether we could perform limited but useful calculations at an earlier point. IBM is one of the companies that's betting the answer is yes, and on Wednesday, it announced a series of developments aimed at making that possible. On their own, none of the changes being announced are revolutionary. But collectively, changes across the hardware and software stacks have produced much more efficient and less error-prone operations. The net result is a system that supports the most complicated calculations yet on IBM's hardware, leaving the company optimistic that its users will find some calculations where quantum hardware provides an advantage. [...]
Wednesday's announcement was based on the introduction of the second version of its Heron processor, which has 133 qubits. That's still beyond the capability of simulations on classical computers, should it be able to operate with sufficiently low errors. IBM VP Jay Gambetta told Ars that Revision 2 of Heron focused on getting rid of what are called TLS (two-level system) errors. "If you see this sort of defect, which can be a dipole or just some electronic structure that is caught on the surface, that is what we believe is limiting the coherence of our devices," Gambetta said. This happens because the defects can resonate at a frequency that interacts with a nearby qubit, causing the qubit to drop out of the quantum state needed to participate in calculations (called a loss of coherence). By making small adjustments to the frequency that the qubits are operating at, it's possible to avoid these problems. This can be done when the Heron chip is being calibrated before it's opened for general use.
Separately, the company has done a rewrite of the software that controls the system during operations. "After learning from the community, seeing how to run larger circuits, [we were able to] almost better define what it should be and rewrite the whole stack towards that," Gambetta said. The result is a dramatic speed-up. "Something that took 122 hours now is down to a couple of hours," he told Ars. Since people are paying for time on this hardware, that's good for customers now. However, it could also pay off in the longer run, as some errors can occur randomly, so less time spent on a calculation can mean fewer errors. Despite all those improvements, errors are still likely during any significant calculations. While it continues to work toward developing error-corrected qubits, IBM is focusing on what it calls error mitigation, which it first detailed last year. [...] The problem here is that using the function is computationally difficult, and the difficulty increases with the qubit count. So, while it's still easier to do error mitigation calculations than simulate the quantum computer's behavior on the same hardware, there's still the risk of it becoming computationally intractable. But IBM has also taken the time to optimize that, too. "They've got algorithmic improvements, and the method that uses tensor methods [now] uses the GPU," Gambetta told Ars. "So I think it's a combination of both."
Wednesday's announcement was based on the introduction of the second version of its Heron processor, which has 133 qubits. That's still beyond the capability of simulations on classical computers, should it be able to operate with sufficiently low errors. IBM VP Jay Gambetta told Ars that Revision 2 of Heron focused on getting rid of what are called TLS (two-level system) errors. "If you see this sort of defect, which can be a dipole or just some electronic structure that is caught on the surface, that is what we believe is limiting the coherence of our devices," Gambetta said. This happens because the defects can resonate at a frequency that interacts with a nearby qubit, causing the qubit to drop out of the quantum state needed to participate in calculations (called a loss of coherence). By making small adjustments to the frequency that the qubits are operating at, it's possible to avoid these problems. This can be done when the Heron chip is being calibrated before it's opened for general use.
Separately, the company has done a rewrite of the software that controls the system during operations. "After learning from the community, seeing how to run larger circuits, [we were able to] almost better define what it should be and rewrite the whole stack towards that," Gambetta said. The result is a dramatic speed-up. "Something that took 122 hours now is down to a couple of hours," he told Ars. Since people are paying for time on this hardware, that's good for customers now. However, it could also pay off in the longer run, as some errors can occur randomly, so less time spent on a calculation can mean fewer errors. Despite all those improvements, errors are still likely during any significant calculations. While it continues to work toward developing error-corrected qubits, IBM is focusing on what it calls error mitigation, which it first detailed last year. [...] The problem here is that using the function is computationally difficult, and the difficulty increases with the qubit count. So, while it's still easier to do error mitigation calculations than simulate the quantum computer's behavior on the same hardware, there's still the risk of it becoming computationally intractable. But IBM has also taken the time to optimize that, too. "They've got algorithmic improvements, and the method that uses tensor methods [now] uses the GPU," Gambetta told Ars. "So I think it's a combination of both."
Re: (Score:2)
Somehow it got attributed to Bill Gates and 640k.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The TRS-80 Model I had a completely extravagant maximum of 48K, at the time. It was also much cheaper than alternatives such as the Apple II. You may have misplaced that quote.
Re: 640 qubits. (Score:2)
Apple Ii came initially with 4K of RAM and yes, it was expensive. The RAM was arranged as 8 chips of 4Kbits each, so I personally find it extravagant for a calculator of that era to have 2K of RAM. Perhaps you meant 2Kbits?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
more of the same (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which funding?
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. So they are now at 133 Qbits. After about half a century of research. Know how many they need to attack current RSA? Well, RSA 2048 (already on the short side) would need about 7000 QBits and they would need to go through a long and complex calculation. And given that QBit numbers do not scale up exponentially (more like the inverse), I guess current RSA is at risk of being broken by aQC around the year 100'000 or later.
Re: (Score:2)
So I have to much longer hang on to this VeraCrypt file before I can recover the lost password...
Re: (Score:2)
That will take a lot longer. QCs suck at breaking symmetric encryption.
Re: (Score:2)
So much this. Currently, the record for factoring a 2 digit number on a quantum computer means that counting set-up time, it is literally not as smart as a 5th grader using pencil and paper!
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. So they are now at 133 Qbits. After about half a century of research. Know how many they need to attack current RSA? Well, RSA 2048 (already on the short side) would need about 7000 QBits and they would need to go through a long and complex calculation. And given that QBit numbers do not scale up exponentially (more like the inverse), I guess current RSA is at risk of being broken by aQC around the year 100'000 or later.
As someone for whom this stuff is not academic or an armchair issue, I don't think we can afford to be so blase. Yes, progress is slow, but it has been accelerating, and whether it's by a long series of incremental improvements or (more likely) a series of incremental improvements mixed with one or two breakthroughs that provide leaps ahead, we have to assume that QC will become a threat to classical asymmetric crypgtography.
Not RSA. No one who knows what they're doing uses RSA any more. Good cryptograph
Re: (Score:2)
Bullshit. Only a lunatic would use the crappy "post quantum" stuff at this time. And there is nothing wrong with RSA. It just needs to be implemented right and with generous key sizes.
Beam me up (Score:2)
So they invented the Heisenberg Compensator.
Will this help with the quantum teleportation?
Cuz WFH is getting to me, but if I didn't have the commute...
This is all and nice, but... (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I am not a quantum expert. But I have followed the research for about 35 years now.
Re: (Score:2)
Still essentially nothing (Score:2)
My 30 year old programmable pocket calculator is not impressed.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, not quite "zero", but historical 1kHz 4-bit processors still do not feel threatened in any way.
Amazing that Watson can do that! (Score:2)
Still surprised about Watson.