| ▲ | MathMonkeyMan 8 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The title of this post changed as I was reading it. "It looks like the 'JVG algorithm' only wins on tiny numbers" is a charitable description. The article is Scott Aaronson lambasting the paper and shaming its authors as intellectual hooligans. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Strilanc 16 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Agree. Scott is exactly correct when he just straight calls it crap. It's inaccurate to say it wins on small numbers because on small numbers you would use classical computers. By the time you get to numbers that take more than a minute to factor classically, and start dreaming of quantum computers, you're well beyond the size where you could tractably do the proposed state preparation. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | measurablefunc 7 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Scott Aaronson is the guy who keeps claiming quantum supremacy is here every year so he's like the proverbial pot calling the kettle black. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||