Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Algorithms
Investigating the usefulness of Quantum Blur
arXiv
Authors: James R. Wootton, Marcel Pfaffhauser
Year
2021
Paper ID
41228
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
119
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Though some years remain before quantum computation can fully outperform conventional computation, it already provides resources that can be used for exploratory purposes in various fields. This includes certain tasks for procedural generation in computer games, music and art. The so-called `Quantum Blur' method represents the first step on this journey, providing a simple proof-of-principle example of how quantum software can be useful in these areas today. Here we analyse the `Quantum Blur' method and compare it to conventional blur effects. This investigation was guided by discussions with the most prominent user of the method, to determine which features were found most useful. In particular we determine how these features depend on the quantum phenomena of superposition and entanglement.
Why This Paper Matters
- It adds a 2021 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Though some years remain before quantum computation can fully outperform conventional computation, it already provides resources that can be used for exploratory purposes in...
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.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.