Quantum Algorithm Zoo (opens in new tab)

(math.nist.gov)

95 pointscskau8y ago6 comments

6 comments

5 comments · 2 top-level

Beltiras8y ago· 3 in thread

There are a couple of those that might be relevant to work I am doing. Just wondering what the horizon should be for someone to dive into QC. The engineering doesn't seem to be anywhere near where a mid-sized company can buy or rent access to a reasonably sized machine any time soon (thinking about timescale next 10 years or so). Super interesting thou.

marcosdumay8y ago

There are no reasonably sized machines.

QC is currently basic research. It's not clear when machines large enough to be useful will exist, and I don't understand the reasons behind the current development speed. But keep in mind that we have computers with ~20qubits, and people have been consistently adding 3 more qubits every 2 years, for a rather long time.

Beltiras8y ago

Isn't this the same as development of classical computers? We are still in the phase that classical computer were in in the 20's to 40's. Once you crack the lid and make something mass-producible, exponential advancement will take over for as long as physics allows it (which in QC is an extremely deep well).

1 more reply

dangirsh8y ago

Recent announcements from IBM and Google indicate they will jump from ~20 to ~50 qubits. My guess is that near-term growth will not remain linear.

cyode8y ago

Surprising to me is seeing that some of the papers cited here were published in the mid-90s. That's 5 or 10 years before when I would've guessed.

Makes me think of Ada Lovelace and how awesome the mind can be when grappling with the abstract (though I'm sure non-quantum computers were still some help here to researchers for fiddling with quantum algorithms).

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse