Slashdot Mirror


Under the Hood of Quantum Computing

nanotrends writes "Gordie Rose, the CTO of Dwave Systems, the venture funded company that plans to offer paid use of a superconducting quantum computer starting in 2007, reveals secrets of his quantum computer construction. It is based on nobium superconducting 'circuits of atoms' and is not RSFQ. (Rapid Single Flux quantum)."

25 of 156 comments (clear)

  1. Advantages? by Zouden · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I read the article, but it didn't make it very clear - what will be the advantages of paid use of their quantum computer? Unless it's going to be faster than other supercomputers, I can't see the point. Is there some other advantage I'm not aware of?

    I'd be very suprised if their quantum computer will be faster than conventional computers by next year. 20 years away, maybe.

    --
    "A week in the lab saves an hour in the library"
    1. Re:Advantages? by QuantumG · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't think anyone can assess the capabilities of his systems from that article. I also don't think that was unintentional.

      --
      How we know is more important than what we know.
    2. Re:Advantages? by Mathinker · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Uhm, from the article, nobody can even assess whether it really is a quantum computer.

    3. Re:Advantages? by Kjella · · Score: 5, Informative

      I read the article, but it didn't make it very clear - what will be the advantages of paid use of their quantum computer? Unless it's going to be faster than other supercomputers, I can't see the point.

      Well, it's a quantum computer. Given the problem it might be like trying to make your CPU compete against a GeForce or ATI. If you try to do it all with CPU emulation, there's not much doubt who'll win. That said, I got the impression that current quantum computers have a so limited number of qbits (the computing power pretty much grows to 2^n with n bits), that it's faster and cheaper to just cycle through all 2^n possibilties one at a time. Currently the largest I've seen is a 12 qbit computer. Now 2^12 = 4096 states at once is a nice curiosity but nothing that makes my encryption keys worry. Basicly it's man vs Deep Blue at computer again - the quantum computer is great at testing many solutions at once but the sheer computing power of traditional computers takes home the victory. Now, if they can get hundreds of qbits together things will change massively. But the difficulty in keeping all those in a cohesive quantum state also raise drastically, so I think we're far off from a usable quantum computer.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Advantages? by RKBA · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "what will be the advantages of paid use of their quantum computer?"

      I'm sure the NSA and other government agencies have a passing interest in code breaking, which among other things means being able to factor huge numbers quickly. A quantum computer would (if it contained sufficient logic cells) be able to try all possible factors of a number at the same time, and would thus be able to factor any number almost instantaneously. It would mean the death of most common types of encryption that depend upon the difficulty of factoring as a means of insuring the privacy of data. After all, the government probably has petabytes of encrypted data from their nationwide wiretapping of telephone and Internet communications they would love to be able to decrypt quickly.

    5. Re:Advantages? by RKBA · · Score: 4, Informative
      "Now, if they can get hundreds of qbits together things will change massively."

      I think the point of the article is that D-Wave Corp claims to be able to create qbits from "large" objects (ie; large enough to be fabricated using standard IC fabrication techniques), but with niobium rather than silicon. This enables them to create a quantum computer without all the hassle of having to manipulate individual atoms as the present research lab quantum computers do. From the article:

      Superconductors are the only type of material that we know of where big lithographically defined devices (like really big. Like centimeter on a side big.) can be built that behave just like they were atomic-sized.

      Since supercooling is required, it's highly unlikely that you or I will be able to afford one of these things any time soon (assuming it's not all marketing hype in the first place), but you can be assured the NSA and other government "intelligence" agencies will be able to afford as many as they want because of all the tribute they demand from us on pain of imprisonment, in the form of exorbitant taxation.
    6. Re:Advantages? by smallpaul · · Score: 3, Informative

      I read the article, but it didn't make it very clear - what will be the advantages of paid use of their quantum computer? Unless it's going to be faster than other supercomputers, I can't see the point. Is there some other advantage I'm not aware of?

      Yes, of course the goal is to be substantially faster than other supercomputers: for certain classes of problems. These are outlined on the company's website ( http://www.dwavesys.com/optimization.php ) and ( http://www.dwavesys.com/quantumcomputing.php ). But if you want a "Neutral Point of View" , I'll quote wikipedia:

      It is widely believed that if large-scale quantum computers can be built, they will be able to solve certain problems faster than any classical computer...
      Integer factorization is believed to be computationally infeasible with an ordinary computer for large numbers that are the product of two prime numbers of roughly equal size (e.g., products of two 300-digit primes). By comparison, a quantum computer could solve this problem relatively easily. If a number has n bits (is n digits long when written in the binary numeral system), then a quantum computer with just over 2n qubits can use Shor's algorithm to find its factors. It can also solve a related problem called the discrete logarithm problem. This ability would allow a quantum computer to "break" many of the cryptographic systems in use today, in the sense that there would be a relatively fast (polynomial time in n) algorithm for solving the problem....
      This dramatic advantage of quantum computers is currently known to exist for only those three problems: factoring, discrete logarithm, and quantum physics simulations. However, there is no proof that the advantage is real: an equally fast classical algorithm may still be discovered (though some consider this unlikely). There is one other problem where quantum computers have a smaller, though significant (quadratic) advantage. It is quantum database search, and can be solved by Grover's algorithm. In this case the advantage is provable. This establishes beyond doubt that (ideal) quantum computers are superior to classical computers.

      From D-Wave's website:

      For several decades, computer scientists have been trying to classify all of the problems we know of. Whenever a new problem comes up, it is placed in one of the existing categories of problems. These categories describe how difficult the problems within it are, and why.

      One of the most interesting categories contains problems that are called NP-complete. These all have the feature that in order to solve the problem all possible solutions must be tried, and the number of possible solutions grows exponentially with the problem size.

      An example is the Travelling Salesman Problem, although there are literally thousands of them. This category is a particularly interesting target from a commercial perspective because most real-life business problems are in it.

      ...

      Quantum computers can be used to get approximate solutions to large NP-complete optimization problems much more quickly than the best known methods running on any supercomputer.

    7. Re:Advantages? by lgw · · Score: 5, Informative

      As far as I know, only RSA-style cryptograophy is affected by quantum computing. There are other ways to do public key encryption, such as elliptical curve cryptography that should be unaffected, as they depend on a different class of problem being hard, and of course quantum computing won't help with symmetric key crypto at all.

      The NSA has been advising the security community against using RSA-style encryption for some time now - it's not like they're trying to keep the weakness a secret for some nefarious reason.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    8. Re:Advantages? by mickwd · · Score: 4, Funny

      Or, following the principles of Heisenburger's Uncertain Cat, we can determine if it really is a live quantum computer, but we can't know where it is.

    9. Re:Advantages? by ZombieWomble · · Score: 4, Informative

      I do believe you're mistaken. Quantum bits are exactly like regular bits in their possible observable states - that is, they are either "on" or "off" when observed. The interesting part of quantum computing comes from the fact that, when they're not being observed, they exist in a superposition of both "on" and "off" states. Now, if you put 8 of these bits together, you have a 'qbyte' which, while when it's observed it can only represent the same range as a regular byte, can be used in calculations representing every single possible permutation of the data at once - i.e. every number from 0 through 255. Each bit you add doubles the number of states you can simultaneously test using this superposition property - this is what the GP meant when he said that quantum computing scales as 2^n.

    10. Re:Advantages? by EJB · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not to mention Darwin's apple or Rembrandt's Mona Lisa. ;-)

      (Try "Schrodinger's cat" or the "Heisenberg uncertainty principle")

    11. Re:Advantages? by ZombieWomble · · Score: 3, Informative
      That sounds rather stupid. Why only test for "on" or "off" when you can test for any of the states?

      Two points: what other states, and how do you propose we measure them? Quantum bits will typically have only the 1/on and 0/off states, by design - partly because it meshes well with our classical computing methods, and partly because most make use of concepts like spin which are naturally in up/down or the like. When isolated, they evolve into a state expressed by a|0> + b|1>, where a and b are the probability that you will observe the 0 state or the 1 state, respectively. This superposition state is impossible to observe, since the wavefunction collapses into one or the other on observation, so we can only observe either the 1 or the 0. More generally, you have a state for the entire register which is the superposition of every possible 'classical' state, with individual probabilities of being observed when you check the register of a, b, c and so forth.

      Also, your post makes little since, everything is observed, which is why it exists, just because it isent observed by humans dosent mean its not observed,

      This is very true, in general, and is the very reason why quantum computing is hard. The qubits have to be completely isolated from everything except the read/write mechanism, so that these particles will only be observed by humans, and nothing else, otherwise many of the requirements to make a quantum computer effective cannot be reasonably achieved.

    12. Re:Advantages? by PatriceVignon · · Score: 4, Insightful
      One of the most interesting categories contains problems that are called NP-complete. These all have the feature that in order to solve the problem all possible solutions must be tried, and the number of possible solutions grows exponentially with the problem size. An example is the Travelling Salesman Problem, although there are literally thousands of them. This category is a particularly interesting target from a commercial perspective because most real-life business problems are in it. ... Quantum computers can be used to get approximate solutions to large NP-complete optimization problems much more quickly than the best known methods running on any supercomputer.
      Sorry, but that is simply not true. If you have a classical NP complete problem (e.g. Travelling Salesman), you can solve it by trying out exponentially many steps, 2^n, and most people believe that you cannot find faster (classical) algorithms. With a quantum you can improve this to 2^(n/2) by the so-called Grover search algorithm. This is not nearly enough to make these problems tractable in practice. And to make things worse, this "speed-up" will most likely be eaten up by the necessary error correction.
      Lance Fortnow posted a very nice summary of this on his blog:
      But I'm not a physicist or an engineer and suppose we can overcome these obstacles and actually build a working machine. Then I can imagine the following conversation in 2025:
      Quantum People: We now have a working quantum computer.
      Public: Yes after 30 years and 50 billion dollars in total funding. What can it do?
      Q: It can simulate quantum systems.
      P: I'm happy for you. What can it do for the rest of us?
      Q: It can factor numbers quickly.
      P: Yes, I know. We've had to change all of our security protocols because of your machine. Does factoring have any purpose other than to break codes?
      Q: Not really. But we can use Grover's algorithm for general search problems.
      P: That sounds great! So we can really solve traveling salesperson and scheduling problems much faster than before?
      Q: Not exactly. The quadratic speed-up we get from Grover's algorithm isn't enough the offset the slow-down by using a quantum computer combined with error correction. But we can solve Pell's equation, approximate the Jones polynomial and a few other things very quickly.
      P: Are those algorithms particularly useful?
      Q: No.
      P: They why did you build a quantum computer?
      Q: Because we could.
    13. Re:Advantages? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Of course being able to efficiently simulate quantum systems would do a lot for many people. Let's start with quantum chemistry. When you deal with large molecules (as f.ex. in pharmacy), you are basically solving a large quantum system. The basic equations are well known, but the size of the problem is what makes it difficult. A quantum computer could resolve this problem. Or in other words, quantum computers might cause more health for the people.

      Or think about material sciences. Again, the basic (quantum) equations are well known, but are too large to calculate directly. Again, a quantum computer might be very helpful. It's hard to say what advantages the new materials might bring us (maybe room-temperature superconductors?), but it's allmost certain that there will be some advantage.

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
  2. "Quantum" computer is misleading by kestasjk · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What D-Wave has done is begun with the standard approaches to building metal-based processors and modified them in such a way that these processors use quantum mechanics in order to accelerate computation.

    Wow, they use quantum mechanics? Every chemical reaction in our universe uses quantum mechanics; they couldn't be more vague if they tried. They're clearly trying to capitalize on the 'quantum computer' buzz.
    --
    // MD_Update(&m,buf,j);
    1. Re:"Quantum" computer is misleading by slashdotmsiriv · · Score: 5, Informative

      From dwave's site: "There are many potential ways to build quantum computers (QCs). Of these, four types have emerged as being most likely to succeed. These are based on (A) assemblies of individual atoms trapped by lasers; (B) optical circuits, for example using photonic crystals; (C) semiconductor-based designs, usually including atomic-scale control of dopant atom distribution or quantum dots; and (D) superconducting electronics. D-Wave focuses exclusively on superconducting electronics. This is because superconductors have the unique property that very large structures can be built out of them that behave according to the rules of quantum mechanics. Because of this, design of superconducting QCs does not require new technology development. This is in contrast to the other three types of QCs, in which information is stored using atoms or individual photons (particles of light), and controlling and manipulating this information requires technologies that do not yet exist. The two superconductors used to build QCs are aluminum and niobium. At room temperature these materials are metals. When they are cooled down close to absolute zero, the electrons in the metals pair to form particles called Cooper pairs. These particles carry charge in the superconductor. Cooper pairs are very different from electrons. One key difference is that Cooper pairs are what physicists call bosons, while electrons are fermions. Bosons are allowed to occupy the same quantum state, while fermions are not. In a superconductor, all the Cooper pairs can (and do) exist in exactly the same state. This means that all of the charge carriers in the superconductor are fundamentally linked. They directly inherit their behavior from the scale of a single Cooper pair. One way to think of this is that a chunk of superconductor amplifies the quantum effects that exist at the level of extremely tiny individual particles up to the scale of the whole chunk, even if the chunk is very large. This amplification of quantum effects is responsible for the well-known properties of superconductors, such as zero resistance to current flow and exclusion of magnetic field. It is also extremely useful for building components of QCs. Superconductors naturally shield themselves from external noise, creating a safe haven for quantum effects. This ability to build large things that behave like small things overcomes many practical problems in building real QCs."

  3. Re:RTFA, WTF? by kfg · · Score: 4, Informative

    ... What have I missed here?

    For starters; a link to the company's website instead of somebody's "See Spot run" blog post:

    http://www.dwavesys.com/quantumcomputing.php

    KFG

  4. Woo Woo science by Valacosa · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A functional quantum computer? Really?

    I used to be a undergrad lab assistant. I never worked in quantum computing, but our neighbours were some of these guys. I picked up a few things, one of those things being that quantum computing is hard.

    Classical computers use the laws of classical physics to operate. Classical physics is deterministic, and that's how we want our classical computers to behave. As the chip and die sizes get smaller and smaller (what are we at now, 65nm?) CPUs are more likely to suffer from quantum effects, but AFAIK there's circutry in there to compensate for that. Error checking.

    A quantum computer is just a machine that uses the laws of quantum mechanics rather than the laws of classical mechanics to operate. The advantage is that some algorithms, when implemented on a quantum computer, are 2n instead of n^2. I never really understood this, maybe a better physicist will come along and explain it. Anyway, to build a quantum computer one needs two things:
    - (a) You need some Quantum bits (qbits) to store data
    - (b) You need to get those bits to interact with each other in some fashion

    There are many approaches to building a quantum computer. One guy (Raymond Laflamme) has a bunch of different atoms that are different elements all in the same molecule, those interact with each other but he has only developed the ability to read / write to about 5 different qbits. I read about another guy on Slashdot here who made a giant array of qbits using atoms in a laser trap. That gets you a lot of qbits, but they don't interact at all. There are many approaches.

    Anyway, the reason I think Dwave Systems is full of bullshit is that any approach thus far is good at (a) or (b), but not both. Someone who got a powerful quantum computer up and running would most assuredly win a Nobel Prize. Also, why the hell would he need to woo venture capital? I know I'm up in Canada, but I'm sure most governments are throwing scads and scads of research money at Quantum computing. Answer? Venture capitalists are more naive.

    If there's anything I learned from here, it's that a lot of Con artists use buzzwords to try and justify their woo-woo science. "Quantum" is one of them.

    Smart money on this guy being a fraud.

    --
    "Live as if you'll die tomorrow." Ridiculous. You could die later today.
    1. Re:Woo Woo science by Iwanowitch · · Score: 5, Funny
      any approach thus far is good at (a) or (b), but not both.
      Ooh, Heisenberg-approaches!
      --
      One CS student VS 893 DOS games: Let's play oldies
    2. Re:Woo Woo science by Valacosa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're half right. I had forgotten about the quantum properties of transistors.

      Though a transister does use Quantum Mechanics to function, it is a discrete unit (a "black box" if you will) with a preidctable outcome. A quantum computer, on the other hand, uses a property of QM known as "superposition of states". A qbit in a quantum computer isn't 0 or 1, but some combination of 0 and 1 at the same time. It's only when the qbit is "observed" (read) that it becomes a 0 or 1.

      If we can get these qbits to interact with each other without reading them (or "collapsing the wavefunction", in quantum mechanics lingo) then we can have various superpositions of 0s and 1s interacting with each other within an algoritm. Essentially the algorithm run by the quantum computer is acting in parallel with itself. When we observe the qbits when the algoritm is finished, we see the desired result. I know that sounds like magic, but I've probably explained it poorly. I've explained it better in the past.

      Incidentially, someone who is uneducated (not stupid, mind you, just uneducated) may have difficulty distinguishing between the BS in the original article and the more scientifically accepted BS I've spouted. See? That's how these con artists are allowed to succeed!

      --
      "Live as if you'll die tomorrow." Ridiculous. You could die later today.
  5. Re:Umm yeah right. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What would be the point of funding something already useful? Things are funded on the basis of their potential, not on what they can do now.

  6. It just sounds a lot like a RSFQ chip. by AWeishaupt · · Score: 4, Informative

    From what has been described on the blog and website, i'm not convinced that what they're working on is much more than simply a superconducting RSFQ - Rapid Single Flux Quantum - chip, which although can concievably run at a breakneck speed compared to todays Silicon CPU's, is not a Quantum Computer in the normal sense. This thing isn't going to run Shor's Algorithm. Also, i'm surprised to notice that there are people here who still consider QCs as science fiction - they're not. Quantum Computing has been practical in the lab since the 90's - and, for example, composite numbers have been factorised in polynomial time. The challenge faced by QCT research groups around the world at present is mainly building the things with a large number of qubits, and still maintaining successful operation. With regards to solid state devices such as the Kane QC model, one of the approaches being investigated involves building multiple small QCs and interconnecting them via conventional microelectronics - perhaps SETs, RSFQs, spintronics or maybe even plain old silicon microelectronics - to create a useful, many-qubit, computer.

  7. ACK by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    As a physicist who had courses in Quantum Computation I had to vomit when I just read the Title Superconducting Quantum Computer.

    There are only two Quantum Algorithms with applications in real live AFAIK Shor's factoring Algorithm to find the Prime Factors of a number in polynomial time, and a boosted search algorithm, which gives a \sqrt(O) speed boost. The largest number Shor's Algorithm could be used on is 15. And it won't be usefull before we reach 16 bit's or so (which we won't in my lifetime with any of the approaches discussed today). The larges stable aray of qubits is 8 AFAIK, and you cannot do anything with those so far everybody is just working on stbility and prooves of concept.

    1) Hence there is no usefull quantum computer in existence. Anyone who want's to sell you one is a liar.

    Superconductivity, is well known and not very hard to achieve. I can make pretty much any material superconducting if you just give me a liquid Helium 3/4 demixer. So once I have a working quantum computer, I can add some lead, empty a bottle of Liquid Helium over it, and claim, that I have a super conducting Quantum computer. To be fair it's often inherent in the design of a Quantum computer that it needs to be very cold. But it doesn't always need to be so. But what remains is

    2) Saying a quantum computer is superconducting doesn't add any infomation about the usefullness of such a device.

    So what could this headline mean:
    Someone allows you to use his NMR (Nuclear Magnetic Resonance) device if you give him money.

    (NMR is standard in todays chemistry labs, and very simple useless quantum algorithms (see "Deutsch algorithm") have been implemented with it.)

    Where is the beef? Can an article still be kicked out at this stage?

  8. It's a *quantum* computer by WilliamSChips · · Score: 3, Funny

    If you assess the capabilities of the system, it disappears!

    --
    Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.
  9. MIT Technology Review Article on DWave by citanon · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://www.technologyreview.com/read_article.aspx? id=14591&ch=infotech

    Computers have infiltrated nearly every field of business and science, and they keep getting faster. Nonetheless, researchers routinely encounter problems impossible for even the most powerful supercomputers to solve. The remedy could be quantum computers, which would use the fantastic properties of quantum mechanics to crack such problems in seconds rather than centuries. Since the 1980s, physicists in academic labs and at firms such as IBM, Hewlett-Packard, and NEC have pursued a variety of quantum computing approaches, but none seems likely to deliver a working machine in less than 10 years.

    Company: D-Wave Systems

    Headquarters: Vancouver, British Columbia

    Amount invested: $22 million Canadian (about $17.5 million U.S.)

    Lead investor: Draper Fisher Jurvetson

    Key founders: Geordie Rose, Alexandre Zagoskin, Bob Wiens, Haig Farris

    Technology: Quantum computers

    Vancouver startup D-Wave Systems, however, aims to build a quantum computer within three years. It won't be a fully functional quantum computer of the sort long envisioned; but D-Wave is on track to produce a special-purpose, "noisy" piece of quantum hardware that could solve many of the physical-simulation problems that stump today's computers, says David Meyer, a mathematician working on quantum algorithms at the University of California, San Diego.

    The difference between D-Wave'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's states. But that interdependence is easily disrupted by the particles' interactions with their environment. In contrast, D-Wave's design takes advantage of the far more robust property of quantum physics known as quantum tunneling, which allows particles to "magically" hop from one location to another.

    Incorporated in April 1999, D-Wave originated as a series of conversations among students and lecturers at the University of British Columbia. Over the years, it has amassed intellectual property and narrowed its focus, while attracting almost $18 million in funding, initially from angel investors and more recently from the Canadian and German governments, and from venture capital firms. The company plans to complete a prototype device by the end of 2006; a version capable of solving commercial problems could be ready by 2008, says president and CEO Geordie Rose.

    The aggressiveness of D-Wave's timetable is made possible by the simplicity of its device's design: an analog chip made of low-temperature superconductors. The chip must be cooled to -269 C with liquid helium, but it doesn't require the delicate state-of-the-art lasers, vacuum pumps, and other exotic machinery that other quantum computers need.

    The design is also amenable to the lithography techniques used to make standard computer chips, further simplifying fabrication. D-Wave patterns an array of loops of low-temperature superconductors such as aluminum and niobium onto a chip. When electricity flows through them, the loops act like tiny magnets. Two refrigerator magnets will naturally flip so that they stick together, minimizing the energy between them. The loops in D-Wave's chip behave similarly, "flipping" the direction of current flow from clockwise to counterclockwise to minimize the magnetic flux between them. Depending on t