Who Has The Best Quantum Computer?

[@kintrbr]

this would be a great yearly series.

[@ivoryas1696]

セルム Eh, yo. _Pin_ this.

[@feynstein1004]

@@ivoryas1696 Agreed

[@muppidikishanrao362]

@@ivoryas1696 uhi 0n

[@erikbudrow1255]

Agreed

[@alexalani10110]

Then it would have to happen 25 days after this comment, which would be awesome.

[@JordanTensor]

Great to see the focus on error rates and quantum volume, rather than just qubit counts! The road to full error corrected quantum computers may be long and difficult, but it should be interesting.

[@masternobody1896]

my brain is the best quantum computer cause human can make a quantum computer

[@missouripacificproductions4955]

@@masternobody1896 ..l

[@yvonbrousseau6723]

@@masternobody1896 brain best quantum computer up to now... to be continued

[@ivoryas1696]

@@masternobody1896 What do you mean?

[@zhoubaidinh403]

Gotta' lose the Nasa garb brah if you want to be objective!

[@zachpeters4253]

I just got a job at Quantinuum, thought I would brush up on my quantum computing knowledge. This is awesome!

[@GodofStories]

Sales/Biz side?

[@zachpeters4253]

@@GodofStories No, r&d side!

[@estring123]

hi who's the leader in quantum computers right now?

[@hassan7569]

Awesome seeing Qiskit being mentioned, since that's the team I work at.

[@estring123]

hi who's the leader in quantum computers right now?

[@blakebeaton8410]

So nice to know all this when, despite my best efforts, I have no idea how a quantum computer works... It apparently isn't possible to explain how a single calculation would work using laymen's terms. I've watched many, many videos and I still have yet to find one that helps me understand how a quantum computer works in a way that is anywhere comparable to what is out there for classical computers. DOS is no exception but the analogy of 2 waves on the ocean has been the closest one yet. What needs to be done is a forensic examination of a single calculation that explains why superposition would/could be helpful (in my humble opinion).

[@Josefinocchio]

Blake I suggest the book of Carlo Rovelli - Helgoland. In my oppion it is a good start to better understand and accept quantum mechanics.

[@blakebeaton8410]

@@Josefinocchio Wonderful, I'll put it on the list for future reading. Thank you.

[@mark9118]

Quantum computers will never replace "classical" computers for the vast majority of tasks. Quantum computing will be used (if successful) in software that does "simulations" where no precise answer is possible (nor needed), such as weather forecasting, simulating a nuclear reaction, etc. These are now done on super-computers (which area basically a huge number of smaller computers working in parallel), mainly for scientific and military applications. The reason why this is called quantum computing is because, like quantum mechanics (which deals with description of the physical properties of at the scale of atoms and subatomic particles), it deals with the PROBABILITIES of how things work, or where particles are located, and not the precise physics of Newton, Einstein, and others who did classical mechanics. So quantum mechanics does not replace classical mechanics, they just operate at different scales. classical

[@Josefinocchio]

@@mark9118 never is too long. Today quantum do not replace classical. Quantum computing is like a nuclear weapon, it is so powerful that is a national security issue and it is very restricted and regulated to they layman. It will remain like this for long time. There is nothing like quantum in classical 1-superposition 2-Entanglement 3-interference , that means quantum is exponentially paralell computing, billion , trillion times faster to whatever can be parallelized which is most of computing . If error correction solved.

[@mark9118]

@@Josefinocchio My contention is that quantum computing will not replace classical computing, for the same reason that quantum mechanics (physics) will not replace classical mechanics. They are dealing with two different things (as I explained previously quantum mechanics only deals with atomic or sub-atomic particles), so it is not just a matter of "catching up." Besides, if you present your credit card for payment, the computer transactions generated do not require (nor can they benefit from) parallel processing, since they only require a few very short transactions with limited amounts of data. As an IT application developer, I have developed both transaction systems (like credit card authorization) and also decision support/analytics systems with huge databases using parallel processing (using a lot of conventional computers linked together) and I know the difference between these types of applications and what kind of processing they require. Even within parallel processing systems, there is a difference between a simulation where one is computing probabilities (suitable for quantum computers), and where one is computing to achieve precise processing of data (not suitable for quantum computing).

[@robertreichner222]

Just wanting to support you while you’re taking care of yourself.

[@domainofscience]

Hey Robert, thanks so much, that's very kind of you. I really appreciate it :)

[@adrielcohen]

Amazing, I’ve try to understand better the question of R&D in QC and you showed up on YT to give me all answers to my questions, thank you so much !!

[@PMA_ReginaldBoscoG]

Good video and loved the part where you used the meme concept 😂

[@sivakumar-vn7ex]

Bro are you from India?

[@PMA_ReginaldBoscoG]

@@sivakumar-vn7ex are you too?😁

[@sivakumar-vn7ex]

@@PMA_ReginaldBoscoG Yes bro i am from Tamil Nadu, India

[@samreciter]

Awesome - looked for such a video comparison since years now. I did some internet search myself - but it's tedious to find data and things to compare. Thanks for mentioning the upcoming metrics - that gives a pointer for future comparisons.

[@zero.the.prototype]

I enjoyed this video. HOORAY! But seriously, thank you for helping me to escape the misery of the production factory floor for a quarter hour. It was very humanising ♡

[@xelaxander]

It's worth noting that Quantum Annealing is targeted at a very specific kind of problem. In some formulation it's called Ising Problem (bits take values -1 and 1) or QUBO (bits take values -1 and 1). Essentially they amount to minimizing a quadratic polynomial over a huge number of binary variables. These can be NP-Hard, but translating typical integer optimization problems as commonly found in industry and making Quantum Annealers useful is non-trivial. With annealers, there's four metrics to target: 1. Maximal Problem Size (I.e. how many variables can be used) 2. Solution Quality : Given one relaxation (problem solving attempt) how close can one get to an optimal solution 3. Solution probability: How likely is it, that one relaxation produces a close to optimal solution. 4. Connectivity: How many Interactions between variables one can have. DWave has issues with the last point whereas optical circuits are not limited there. I believe DWave was quite smart by focusing on these to avoid competition and have a useful product ready early, even if it's not the ideal quantum computer.

[@Stephen_Lafferty]

A fascinating review of the state-of- the-art! Thank you, and I look forward to future updates!

[@loturzelrestaurant]

Science is important to spread and i often offer Recommendations, but today i wanna do it a bit differently and try to bring-in People to watch 'some More News', a Satire-Version of corrupt and biased News-Channel. Just like Scientists bring Attention to Climate-Change and such Issues, that KZbinr bringts Attention to Homelessness and various other Issues. Unbiased and informed, his Talks about 'Obvious Solutions to Obvious Problems' are a Masterpiece.

[@ranchan1111]

Someone who talks about QC that actually knows what the hell he is talking about! Thank you! I'm so glad you mention that qubit count isn't super effective as a full measure. I'm a bit skeptical of quantum volume because it is built by IBM to make their superconducting play look more effective than it is. I think we need a metric which requires error correction as part of the circuit. I also think it would be nice to have a metric that looks forward at possible scalability (because most architectures have scalability roadblocks that they haven't solved). Superconducting bits tend to perform well in small scales, but they have a lower ceiling than trapped ions or neutral atoms (to my knowledge)

[@jackstephenbaker4199]

4:33 is wrong. The 127 qubit machine by IBM (Washington) has a QV of 64 (although when it first went up it was listed at 32). The 128 QV machines by IBM are usually 27 qubits.

[@QuantumKhan]

Short and useful. Liked it very much.

[@jasonhendler8892]

I howled seeing that you used a sequence of Vince McMahon photos to indicate the progressive scale of the issues to be solved.

[@sublimejourney3384]

Yeah it really put things into perspective lol

[@KenanSeyidov]

Would you be open to conducting an analogous analysis on the state of the art in Neuromorphic computing?

[@foute90s]

Thanks for the video. Very insightful, specifically interesting how you explain the not yet well developed industry standards on how to compare quantum computers. I'll be much better prepared to interpret news releases on the topic now.

[@रोहित1]

Your channel is one of my favorites ❤

[@PhillJenkins]

Quantinuum is listed in the quantum VOLUME slide, but no mention of the company in the Future Predicitions slide. No explanation why? IBM seems to be the most open about it all, at least publishing the most, which is usually an indication of being the furtherest along becasue they have enough people and progress to say something intelligent.

[@zapy422]

It would be nice if these companies could collaborate together for the sake of humanity combining their different approaches

[@reedsexton3973]

It would be nice if all of these companies would stop researching quantum for the sake of humanity

[@michaelconnor2162]

No competition, no point

[@vgacoralreef]

@@reedsexton3973why?

[@andrewyork3869]

Tbf, they are almost all running in entirely different directions even thise that seem similar on the surface.

[@paulmendoza9736]

you are so cool! I've only watched a couple of your videos but I like how you organize and present information.

[@nandishajani]

What software you use to create these maps? And how you animate them? Is there any video you have created for behind the scenes for your process?

[@Turjak_art]

PowerPoint

[@manusartifex3185]

Paintbrush 🖌

[@danielduarte5073]

Excellent report

[@OccultDemonCassette]

So, if we're able to get a decently working quantum computer by the end of this decade... what can they do? WIll they always be used for very specific calculations like supercomputer projects are, or are we going to see consumer grade quantum GPUs or quantum smartphones in like 30-40 years?

[@foute90s]

I think this all depends on the question if it is possible to get the Qbits physically stable without the need of much correction like cooling or high power lasers. If we don't, the size and power consumption of the quantum processor would be too high for any home application.

[@steprato1853]

really interesting video! can you do an updated version?

[@nikhileswarids3153]

I think this channel would help to think from first principles of what so many scientists historically told in ancient times

[@Jahid_diaries]

Hello, sir.You are one of my conquest find on youtube.Hat's off to your enormous effort🖐️

[@thepeff]

I just kinda stumbled on this channel. So far it has been a great find

[@giannitherock]

Thank you for this awsome video (and the preceding one), it helps me put everything in prospective.

[@SakiSkai]

I have seen a lot of quantum computer videos but I have yet to see a quantum computer in action, loading a program, executing it and reading the output. Am I missing something?

[@Takyodor2]

I think the "missing something" is expecting a quantum computer to do the same thing as a regular computer. I'm certainly not an expert, but I think the basic idea of a quantum computer is that it can find the solution to a very specific problem countless times faster than a regular computer, so if a regular computer feeds the quantum part a problem, and then measures the output after the "quantum stuff" is done, the whole thing has executed a program (not the quantum computer on its own).

[@SakiSkai]

@@Takyodor2 I am not expecting the quantum computer to do the same as a regular pc. I am talking about showing the simple process of inputing data, processing and reading output. I want to see how it's done on a quantum computer. The actual program doesn't matter.

[@georgelafner8760]

I actually love you and your channel

[@uerueluem]

Liked this overview. Would be interesting where the military companies such as Lockheed Martin stands by today. From your video, I assume you didn’t find any information then. From other videos, I learned that they are investing money in this field.

[@Josefinocchio]

Excellent video. You are wonderfully talented. Oscar for science visual facilitation

[@Wildboy789789]

Ionq hit 23 AQ in august... right on target to hit 25 by december, really exciting

[@Snowflake_tv]

Thank you. I watched it with respect.

[@roenne2]

I think quantum computing is going to follow in the footsteps of fusion power. Its going to be X years away for a very very long time, perhaps forever. I hope I am wrong 🙂

[@madjunir]

There's high incentive to get Quantum computers sooner rather than later. Specially since they'll break encryption to steal tons of classified info and tons of Bitcoins

[@GovenorJerryBrown]

No Quantum is a prerequisite for stabilizing fusion. That is the issue. Technology has to be strategically performed in proper sequence. Regardless, Fusion never had the intensity of funding and research in applications which QC has recently. IONQ, Honeywell and the US Army have been able to achieve 99.9% accuracy with barium ions. The discoveries in QC being made now are fundamental and simply need scalability. The basics have all been solved.

[@sachitvarshney1495]

@@madjunir Yeah Bitcoin better watchout

[@ayoCC]

The difference is that this has private funding with real progress already. Even at a snail pace they will reach more qubits, while Fusion isn't getting any real funding because it doesn't have the same opportunities.

[@waclawkoscielniak9291]

You are 100% correct.

[@someonethereto]

Amazing video professor. Can you plz make a Map of Astrophysics?

[@Wildboy789789]

Ionq and ibm hit their goals for the year, the 25 algorithmic qubits and 433 physical qubits

[@maneaabdullah6059]

thank you for everything you doing for us

[@maigowang]

I don't get the computation at 4:01 about the quantum volume -- if 4x4 gives you 16, why does 5x5 give you 32?

[@spal3907]

very good effort to make this video . i love your topics and approch to explain ,its always satisfies my mind curosities because i am always searching similar topics .a big 👏from me

[@jacoby310]

What do you think about algorithm-based benchmarking vs QV?

[@inspacetime]

Archer, a deep technology company (ASX: AXE) has successfully developed and patented a quantum computing processor chip (CQ chip) that works at room temperature which is a groundbreaking achievement.

[@jurjenbos228]

If you've watched this video, you'll have a hard time believing that claim

[@ErikKoppany]

QCI is not on the list with its optical approach. Why is that? Anybody knows?

Yeah! Nice video, thank you so much.

[@ThijquintNL]

congrats on 1 mil subs!

[@oliverjones1879]

Great Vid!

[@tehhistorianofepic]

11:28 You could say this video puts me into a *super* position... I'll see myself out

[@Philmad]

Cool video, even cooler end. Thanks for the effort

[@gregorydessingue5625]

Great video! Thank you.

[@Schrute4319]

Hey! Would be awsome if you would make a video of "Map of Thermodynamics and statistical mechanics".

[@riccardobellese1205]

Great job as always!

[@briankleinschmidt3664]

Quantinuum system model H1-2? I have a couple of those in the storage shed.

[@astroch]

No mentioning China is missing half of the picture in this video

[@ManojKumar-ds6jm]

Can you make a video about The Map of Electronics

[@Harishnaeem]

Love the fact you added the Vince mcmahon meme .

[@ManuelBasiri]

Why this cannel no longer creates content? I hope it's still alive. One of the best on KZbin

[@vgames1543]

Could you maps of: -Politics -Psychology -Philosophy

[@davidcunningham2074]

Great research

[@DanielKivari]

So why is it called Quantum Volume when it is calculated using only two dimensions? 🤔 One would think that it would be a measure of Quantum Area. Is this just a poorly throughout convention or am I misunderstanding something?

[@mishuk2008]

Please make separate short videos explaining each technology if your time permits. TIA

[@Sanjay-dl5qc6ms2h]

Great work sir ❤👍

[@lol-vq8dh]

Im quite hyped

[@thewatcher1914]

😰WOOOOOW the best chanel ever 👋🏻hi am the new member from 🇲🇦am just lerin the English but I understand every thing, I like this chaine . Thank you for all .

[@betanapallisandeepra]

Great work sir.. thank you for doing it.. I like yor work..

[@electronsmind1398]

Many thanks

[@999nines]

Why doesn’t IonQ show in your comparison?

[@danielbuchta1063]

Thank you very much:)

[@Xnoob545]

Great outro there, 10/10 "Oh yeah, like and scruibe- bollocks"

[@LOGICZOMBIE]

GREAT WORK

[@pinkplayspkmn5011]

I’m currently working on getting my degree in electrical computer engineering I wanna join one of these companies and help make this possible 🙌🏿

[@mark9118]

You might want to study quantum physics.

[@Ikbeneengeit]

4:05 how is 6x6=64?

[@121qwert2]

I look forward to your updates.

[@manusartifex3185]

Do you think they’d be available for regular users ? I think I’d like to get my hands on this space

[@dipanjanbera5493]

if i work on quantum algorithms, qml this type of things can i work with hardware site also with this knowledge ?

[@StarGateSG7]

P.S. I literally work right beside by that massive grouping of crows you filmed which by coincidence is only two Km away from D-Wave's headquarters!

[@peenicefaez6578]

0:46 Me every time my teacher asks me questions about the lecture

[@leewiggin9264]

Hey, great channel. Would love to buy some of your posters. Is there any way to buy them in the UK? Can only find US based delivery on the platforms you have advertised.

[@domainofscience]

Yes I believe my store on RedBubble has UK based manufacturing and shipping.

[@vgacoralreef]

Love this

[@sethlawson8544]

What do you think of Microsoft's announcement of detecting Majorana modes?

[@gama3181]

11:45 triple BAM

[@TheDjeff7]

Can you please do an update ? :)

[@gottenm9106]

most of those companies make their predictions based on nothing and go out with huge statements just to get funding

[@Soneoak]

Like everything that started from nothing. Even farming.

[@kartiktiwari291]

Please make your video on MAP OF PSYCHOLOGY

[@georgesamir7077]

Can you make a video for Data Science , please ?

[@larryphillips4164]

I made a 6.7 million qubit quantum computer in my garage and let it run for 20 minutes, I went and made lunch and when I came back into the garage there were 2 electromagnetic sparkly human type beings fighting each other. The being that had a DARPA uniform on was beating the other sparkly beings ass and it ended up destroying my quantum computer in the process of the beat down. It then turned to me and said “understand” before disappearing into a heatwave... I haven’t built another one since then.

[@tobias2694]

Is investing in quatumcomputer a good idea fir the future?

[@DarkWizardGG]

Invest in AI first then sooner or later u can invest in QC.😁😉👍

[@Philmad]

It is said that no current QC is yet having an advantage for real life purpose, beginning of last section. Is this true for all QC or just Gate based I.e. universal QC? Cheers

[@summerQuanta]

That's a bit subtle. First, for a given application like factorization, there are known quantum algorithms that are much more efficient than known classical algorithms. However it's not enough to prove that there is no classical algorithm that could actually be as fast. Then, it's true that the quantum computing hardware at the moment doesn't provide enough computing power to run these algorithms for significant real life applications. There is arguably one exception which is boson sampling but it's very debated. Google used their QC to do boson sampling much faster that any known classical algorithm can, and thus claimed that this is demonstration of quantum supremacy. However boson sampling is still possible on classical computers and IBM started a debate about what is the real speedup given by Google's QC . This also raises the question of which speedup do we want to claim quantum supremacy as classical hardware improves all the time. Finally, boson sampling has no other real other interest aside than displaying this "quantum supremacy" . I would still argue it has not any real life purpose in itself either although don;t quote me on that

[@vornamenachname2625]

@@summerQuanta "However it's not enough to prove that there is no classical algorithm that could actually be as fast." There is currently no such prove, and such a prove are extrem hard. So you can only speak about the best know classical algorithm. "Finally, boson sampling has no other real other interest aside than displaying this "quantum supremacy" " The lack of interest means that the best know classical algorithm is not a meaningfull metric.

[@rom5457]

About to reach a million

[@melm4251]

keen for a DoS bookshelf tour. think i can see a copy of 'Harry Potter and DiVincenzo's Criteria'

[@thstroyur]

Quantum information and computation is really one of the coolest (LOL) and most promising and exciting tech developments in recent times; however, I find it a bit silly to be worrying about having "enough info for us people outside the industry to analyse these claims", because this is not even consummer-grade stuff yet, and, AFAIK, there aren't even any indications that it will ever be. So, unless you have of the order of millions of bucks to spare on a D-Wave or whatever, I don't think most of us relate or care about these specs, anymore than we do other nascent hardware alternatives like DNA computing. IMO.

[@Josefinocchio]

I understand your claim. It is true about how far it is from consumers. However quantum nechanics tell us what reality is, this only isolate fact justify by far the study and discussion of the field even if we never will be able to “use” it. Traditional computation is just an illusion of Church and Turing. At that time they were not aware of true nature of computation which is quantum, like everything else in universe.all processes in universe are quantum that”s include computation which belongs to the physical universe.

[@thstroyur]

@@Josefinocchio I get what you're saying - but _this_ is not _that_ ; if you wanna talk about new _theoretical_ developments in QI, like, I dunno, a new improved version of Shor's algorithm, or even new materials with potential application, OK, fine, keep us up-to-date - but this here is just commercial stuff. Like, if you care about things like SpaceX and all those private companies on the spacefaring sector, then this will be right up your alley - while, at the same time, far removed from your own lived reality.

[@wilberforce95]

This race and upcoming NASA missions are keeping me excited for the future.

[@Young_Ruya]

I enjiyed this video! Horay! Thank you!

[@maximesahmed410]

That was awesome thank you and the last part was really funny I did enjoy the video.. 😂😆

[@jefferyjimson8574]

please can you explain waves in as simple terms as possible please - can you correct this - waves are vibrations that carry energy (dont have a physical form/ are not made of anything) (eg. sound waves - vibrations that move through the air carrying the enegy of sound)

[@nohilscience999]

What softwares are you using to make posters and videos ?

[@marcinwozniak8184]

Can you make update for half year ?

[@humanaugmented2525]

I love your diagrams

[@kelvinhbo]

Quantum computers are like fusion reactor, we'll always be 10 years away from it.

[@tongshengwu171]

no

[@drmonkeys852]

Quantum computing is a much younger field than fusion reactors so this isn't the case at all. (20-30 years ago it was considered a fringe curiosity unlike fusion which was been mainstream since the 1940s with the atomic energy revolution)