Quick Navigation

Overview Topics Abstract Importance Paper Tools References Reactions Discussion Publication Related

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing Quantum Simulation

What Have Google's Random Quantum Circuit Simulation Experiments Demonstrated about Quantum Supremacy?

arXiv

Authors: Jack K. Horner, John F. Symons

Year

2020

Paper ID

20674

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Quantum computing is of high interest because it promises to perform at least some kinds of computations much faster than classical computers. Arute et al. 2019 (informally, "the Google Quantum Team") report the results of experiments that purport to demonstrate "quantum supremacy" - the claim that the performance of some quantum computers is better than that of classical computers on some problems. Do these results close the debate over quantum supremacy? We argue that they do not. We provide an overview of the Google Quantum Team's experiments, then identify some open questions in the quest to demonstrate quantum supremacy.

Why This Paper Matters

This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
Quantum computing is of high interest because it promises to perform at least some kinds of computations much faster than classical computers.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Become a member Sign in

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

[1] DOI https://doi.org/arXiv:2009.07359 [2] arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.07359 [3] Publisher https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.07359

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0

Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.