Quantum computers may actually be useful

SLAM: debunk creationism, pseudoscience, and superstitions. Discuss logic and morality.

Moderator: Alyrium Denryle

Post Reply
Modax
Padawan Learner
Posts: 278
Joined: 2008-10-30 11:53pm

Quantum computers may actually be useful

Post by Modax »

From MIT News link
A quantum algorithm that solves systems of linear equations could point in a promising new direction.

In recent years, quantum computers have lost some of their luster. In the 1990s, it seemed that they might be able to solve a class of difficult but common problems — the so-called NP-complete problems — exponentially faster than classical computers. Now, it seems that they probably can't. In fact, until this week, the only common calculation where quantum computation promised exponential gains was the factoring of large numbers, which isn't that useful outside cryptography. In a paper appearing today in Physical Review Letters, however, MIT researchers present a new algorithm that could bring the same type of efficiency to systems of linear equations — whose solution is crucial to image processing, video processing, signal processing, robot control, weather modeling, genetic analysis and population analysis, to name just a few applications.

Quantum computers are computers that exploit the weird properties of matter at extremely small scales. Where a bit in a classical computer can represent either a "1" or a "0," a quantum bit, or qubit, can represent "1" and "0" simultaneously. Computations performed on a string of qubits are thus the equivalent of computations performed on every possible value of a string of ordinary bits. Since eight classical bits can represent 256 different values, a single eight-qubit calculation is the equivalent of 256 classical calculations.

Quantum computers with maybe 12 or 16 qubits have been built in the lab, but quantum computation is such a young field, and the physics of it are so counterintuitive, that researchers are still developing the theoretical tools for thinking about it.

Systems of linear equations, on the contrary, are familiar to almost everyone. We all had to solve them in algebra class: given three distinct equations featuring the same three variables, find values for the variables that make all three equations true.

Computer models of weather systems or of complex chemical reactions, however, might have to solve millions of equations with millions of variables. Under the right circumstances, a classical computer can solve such equations relatively efficiently: the solution time is proportional to the number of variables. But under the same circumstances, the time required by the new quantum algorithm would be proportional to the logarithm of the number of variables.

That means that for a calculation involving a trillion variables, "a supercomputer's going to take trillions of steps, and this algorithm will take a few hundred," says mechanical engineering professor Seth Lloyd, who along with Avinatan Hassidim, a postdoc in the Research Lab of Electronics, and the University of Bristol's Aram Harrow '01, PhD '05, came up with the new algorithm.

Because the result of the calculation would be stored on qubits, however, "you're not going to have the full functionality of an algorithm that just solves everything and writes it all out," Lloyd says. To see why, consider the eight qubits that can represent 256 values simultaneously. Nine qubits could represent 512 values, 10 qubits 1,024, and so on. This doubling rapidly yields astronomical numbers. The trillion solutions to a trillion-variable problem would be stored on only about 40 qubits. But extracting all trillion solutions from the qubits would take a trillion steps, eating up all the time that the quantum algorithm saved.

With qubits, however, "you can make any measurement you like," Lloyd says. "You can figure out, for instance, their average value. You can say, okay, what fraction of them is bigger than 433?" Such measurements take little time but may still provide useful information. They could, Lloyd says, answer questions like, "In this very complicated ecosystem with, like, 10 to the 12th different species, one of which is humans, in the steady state for this particular model, do humans exist? That's the kind of question where a classical algorithm can't even provide anything."

Greg Kuperberg, a mathematician at the University of California, Davis, who works on quantum algebra, says that the MIT algorithm "could be important," but that he's "not sure yet how important it will be or when." Kuperberg cautions that in applications that process empirical data, loading the data into quantum memory could be just as time consuming as extracting it would be. "If you have to spend a year loading in the data," he says, "it doesn't matter that you can then do this linear-algebra step in 10 seconds."

But Hassidim argues that there could be applications that allow time for data gathering but still require rapid calculation. For instance, to yield accurate results, a weather prediction model might require data from millions of sensors transmitted continuously over high-speed optical fibers for hours. Such quantities of data would have to be loaded into quantum memory, since they would overwhelm all the conventional storage in the world. Once all the data are in, however, the resulting forecast needs to be calculated immediately to be of any use.

Still, Hassidim concedes that no one has yet come up with a "killer app" for the algorithm. But he adds that "this is a tool, which hopefully other people are going to use. Other people are going to have to continue this work and understand how to use this in different problems. You do have to think some more."

Indeed, researchers at the University of London have already expanded on the MIT researchers' approach to develop a new quantum algorithm for solving differential equations. Early in their paper, they describe the MIT algorithm, then say, "This promises to allow the solution of, e.g., vast engineering problems. This result is inspirational in many ways and suggests that quantum computers may be good at solving more than linear equations."
This looks big. The article is very conservative, but based on past discussions here, it seems likely to me (although what do I know?) that a self-improving AI would be able to exploit this for truly ridiculous computing power. We may be only scratching the surface of the space of useful quantum algorithms. Also, I remember seeing some research showing that quantum computation might be possible using single atoms as qubits - at room temperature Scary, but still cool.

[edit] My biggest question is, would these algorithms make quantum more relevant for logical, symbolic AI?
User avatar
Starglider
Miles Dyson
Posts: 8709
Joined: 2007-04-05 09:44pm
Location: Isle of Dogs
Contact:

Re: Quantum computers may actually be useful

Post by Starglider »

Since eight classical bits can represent 256 different values, a single eight-qubit calculation is the equivalent of 256 classical calculations.
This is somewhat misleading. It's technically correct, but those calculations are putting every possible sets of variable values into the same equation. In a lot of cases, the majority of the values didn't make sense anyway.
To see why, consider the eight qubits that can represent 256 values simultaneously. Nine qubits could represent 512 values, 10 qubits 1,024, and so on. This doubling rapidly yields astronomical numbers. The trillion solutions to a trillion-variable problem would be stored on only about 40 qubits.
Existing quantum computers use the same kind of digital encoding of integers and floating point values that conventional computers do. So sixteen qubits can represent sixteen binary variables, two integers in the range 0-255, or a single very low precision floating point value. 40 qubits isn't even enough for a single double-precision float, the bare minimum standard for scientific computing. Normally, you still need a minimum number of qubits equal to the bit width of the maximum set of live variables. You could theoretically make an analogue quantum computer, which would have one variable per qubit (but not more variables than qbits) at infinite resolution, but AFAIK no known technique could provide useful precision doing that.

Since you can't get new degrees of freedom out of nowhere, this technique repurposes some of the value space of the superposition to load multiple variables onto one set of qubits, but it can only do that at the cost of reducing the possible range of those variables, and clearly it is nontrivial to implement. The reduction in total qubits required may be worth the hassle under some circumstances, but I can't see it making quantum computing suddenly more practical.
My biggest question is, would these algorithms make quantum more relevant for logical, symbolic AI?
Quantum computing is pretty useless for most processing, because it involves working with complex models with lots of potential avenues for inference. Search in a large space, in other words. Even if the technique magically provides a huge effective bit-width (and I can't see how that's possible), there's the very low I/O rate, and it doesn't seem flexible enough to encode even a connectionist AI in its entirety.

I'm sure the simulated evolution people will be getting all worked up about it anyway though.
User avatar
Fingolfin_Noldor
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 11834
Joined: 2006-05-15 10:36am
Location: At the Helm of the HAB Star Dreadnaught Star Fist

Re: Quantum computers may actually be useful

Post by Fingolfin_Noldor »

A qubit does not automatically correspond to one bit. In actual truth, a qubit could say be a coupling between 3 spaces and you get |111> which implies there are a total of 2^3 combinations.

As for the paper in question, I'd wait to see if it can even be implemented at all. Lots of schemes out there, but if they can't be implemented experimentally, there's no point in even suggesting them.
Image
STGOD: Byzantine Empire
Your spirit, diseased as it is, refuses to allow you to give up, no matter what threats you face... and whatever wreckage you leave behind you.
Kreia
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12267
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Re: Quantum computers may actually be useful

Post by Surlethe »

IIRC, qubit designs lose theoretical stability above 3K. Didn't IBM spend something like $15 mil to build a 7-bit machine to implement Shor's Algorithm?
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
User avatar
Winston Blake
Sith Devotee
Posts: 2529
Joined: 2004-03-26 01:58am
Location: Australia

Re: Quantum computers may actually be useful

Post by Winston Blake »

Systems of linear equations, on the contrary, are familiar to almost everyone. We all had to solve them in algebra class: given three distinct equations featuring the same three variables, find values for the variables that make all three equations true.
I think this is misleading. I think they're actually talking about solving systems of linear differential equations, which is a very different problem than algebraic ones. Signal processing and robot control (the only fields listed that I know anything about), are heavily based on this.
Robert Gilruth to Max Faget on the Apollo program: “Max, we’re going to go back there one day, and when we do, they’re going to find out how tough it is.”
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12267
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Re: Quantum computers may actually be useful

Post by Surlethe »

There are certainly applications - cryptography, difference equations in economics, stress analysis? etc. - where it is necessary to perform Gaussian elimination on very ginormous matrices.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
Post Reply