Questions tagged [google-sycamore]
A 54-qubit superconducting quantum processor by Google Quantum AI which is claimed to have been used to demonstrate quantum computational supremacy.
38
questions
1
vote
1
answer
124
views
Simulating noise of googles quantum computers
Is there a way to simulate the noise of googles quantum computers using circ? In the same way that any of IBM's computers can be simulated using different backends?
...
- 373
2
votes
0
answers
42
views
When we do a linear fit, what is the correlation coefficient of the estimated parameters?
In Google's quantum supremacy experiment, supplementary Section VIIIH, they calculate the correlation coefficient of the linear fit coefficients $p_0$,$p_1$. I can't figure out the definition of this ...
- 515
5
votes
1
answer
358
views
Do all physical architectures for quantum computers use the same universal gate sets?
Now I have understood that physical implementation of quantum computer need a universal quantum gate set like Clifford+T to realize any unitary quantum gate. However, I don't know if it is all the ...
- 467
10
votes
1
answer
740
views
Why Google has used $\sqrt{X}$ and $\sqrt{Y}$ instead of $X$ and $Y$ in supremacy experiment?
In supremacy experiment Google has used $\sqrt{X}$ and $\sqrt{Y}$ as two of their single qubit gates (paper).
So My questions are:
Is there any specific reason for choosing these gates and not $X$...
- 313
3
votes
1
answer
176
views
What is the role of choosing the single-qubits randomly in Google quantum supremacy experiment?
In supremacy paper and part D of section VII of supplementary information (below), it is said that there is a pseudo-random number generator that is initialized with a seed called $s$; And then the ...
- 313
7
votes
1
answer
354
views
What did exactly Google do in simulating a random quantum circuit on a classical computer in supremacy experiment?
I've been working on Google quantum supremacy paper for quite some time now and I have a problem in understanding how exactly they simulate their actual random quantum circuit on a classical computer.
...
- 313
2
votes
1
answer
88
views
In Google's Quantum Supremacy experiment, what if we use $\theta=45°$ for two-qubit $f_{sim}$ gates?
In Google's Quantum Supremacy experiment, they use $f_{sim}$(fermionic-simulation) gates with $\theta=90°$ and $\phi=30°$ as their two-qubit gates. What if we use $\theta=45°$ for the two-qubit $f_{...
- 515
18
votes
1
answer
4k
views
Which subatomic particle does each company use in quantum computing?
Probably each company (Google, Amazon, Intel, IBM, Microsoft, D-Wave and so on) uses a mix of subatomic particles and technologies. I would like to know which particles/technologies are used by each ...
3
votes
1
answer
305
views
Where are the physical gates in the Google processor?
Google's article Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor states that the processor "53 qubits, 1,113 single-qubit gates, 430 two-qubit gates, and a measurement on each qubit, ...
- 641
5
votes
1
answer
288
views
Can we conclude that errors on Sycamore are Poisson-distributed Pauli errors?
In Martinis' recent Caltech lecture on the Sycamore paper, he appears to make much of the fact that FIG. 4 of the paper show straight-line fidelity - that is, the fidelity decreases log-linearly with ...
- 12.9k
4
votes
2
answers
251
views
How exactly is solving the random circuit sampling problem a computation in the Church-Turing thesis sense?
Note: This has been cross-posted to CS Theory SE.
If we assume $\mathsf{BQP} \neq \mathsf{BPP}$, then we can say with reasonable certainty that Google's random sampling experiment falsifies the ...
- 17.7k
4
votes
1
answer
705
views
Making sense of the Sycamore's computing prowess - power consumption
I came here after reading about the announcement regarding the Sycamore processor and Google's Quantum Supremacy claim. I am hung up on several key things and I am hoping that I could find those ...
- 43
22
votes
2
answers
4k
views
What does Google's claim of "Quantum Supremacy" mean for the question of BQP vs BPP vs NP?
Google recently announced that they have achieved "Quantum Supremacy": "that would be practically impossible for a classical machine."
Does this mean that they have definitely proved that BQP ≠ BPP ?...
- 675
7
votes
1
answer
430
views
Why does Google's quantum processor outperform IBM's?
I understand that both have 53 qubit devices, yet it is Google that has demonstrated quantum supremacy (although IBM refutes this!). I'm not sure if this is true but it seems like IBM cannot replicate ...
- 3,085
13
votes
3
answers
740
views
Why do the IBM and Google processors both have 53 qubits?
As I understand from this IBM post both the IBM and Google teams have independently built 53-qubit processors. What is the significance of the number 53? It is purely coincidental, or is there a ...
- 233