James Clarke believes quantum computing wont become practical until the industry is making chips crammed with upwards of a million error-corrected quantum bits.

The goal of making a quantum system with that many qubits isnt unique to any one company IBM, Google and startups like PsiQuantum have all stated plans to build such grandiose machines but Clarke, director of quantum hardware at Intel, thinks the semiconductor giant has a unique advantage in making this reality possible with its manufacturing-driven development approach.

In a peer-reviewed research paper published earlier this year, Intel says it successfully fabricated more than 10,000 arrays, each with three to 55 quantum dots, on a 300-millimeter wafer with a yield higher than 95 percent. This milestone, which the chipmaker achieved in partnership with Dutch research institute QuTech, represented a significantly higher yield and a higher number of qubits than what universities and laboratories, including those used by other companies, have achieved to date.

Clarke says attaining such a feat was non-trivial, made possible in large part by the fact that Intel, unlike most other companies pursuing quantum, runs its own fabs, which the company also used to manufacture the control logic needed that allows such a high density of qubits.

What weve done is weve taken the university-like approach for fabricating qubits, and we have used the tools in our toolbox from our advanced transistor fab to make these devices with very high uniformity, very high yield and good performance, Clarke tells The Next Platform.

When Intel started its quantum efforts in 2015 with QuTech, which is associated with the Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, the two organizations explored multiple ways of making qubits. One promising avenue was the superconductor qubit, which allowed the company to produce a 17-qubit superconductor test chip in 2017.

But Clarke says eventually Intel and QuTech found greater capabilities with spin qubits, which involves encoding the zero or one of the qubit into the spin of a single electron. Each of these electrons are essentially trapped in the channel of what looks like a transistor, which is why the chipmaker has been able to use its transistor fabs to make these types of quantum chips.

The decision to forgo the superconductor qubit route, which other organizations are taking, has apparently paid off, according to Clarke, as Intels spin qubits are roughly a million times smaller.

So while were not there today, over the future, we feel that we will be able to scale a lot faster, get to have a much higher density of qubits in our devices, he says.

The ability to pack 10,000 arrays of spin qubits into a single wafer comes with an exciting implication for Clarke, even though its currently theoretical.

If we were to produce several of these wafers or I should say, when we do, when we do this regularly if we tested them all, we will have created more qubits across those wafers than any company has ever created in the lifetime of their experiments. That would be my assumption, he says. Universities are making these, and their research labs, theyre producing a couple at a time. Even in the superconducting space, I think the count would be a lot smaller.

The other benefit Intel gets from manufacturing its own quantum chips is that, like other chips it develops, it can run statistical analyses to make further improvements.

We can feed that information back to our fab to make better devices. We can then cherry-pick the best devices at that stage and feed it forward for further testing. So by having a wafer full of devices, we really get a massive amount of data, which actually allows us to go much faster, Clarke says.

Even if this allows Intel to go faster, Clarke believes the industry is still roughly a decade away from having a quantum computer that can be used for practical purposes, in areas like cryptography, optimization, chemistry, materials and finance. That may seem like a long time, but when put into perspective with other technologies Intel has developed, the timeline doesnt seem out of place.

If you look at the timeline between the first transistor to the first integrated circuit to the first microprocessor, those timelines tend to happen on a 10 to 15 year time frame. And so in every big advancement that Intel has delivered high-k metal gate, tri-gate these all happened on a decadal type timeline. Thats not to say that people cant develop faster, but these are hard things to do. Quantum is harder than making a transistor. So why would we expect that to happen quicker than a typical technology development cycle? he says.

More:
Turning A Million-Qubit Quantum Computing Dream Into Reality - The Next Platform

Todays classical supercomputers can do a lot. But because their calculations are limited to binary states of 0 or 1, they can struggle with enormously complex problems such as natural science simulations. This is where quantum computers, which can represent information as 0, 1, or possibly both at the same time, might have an advantage.

Last year, IBM debuted a 127-qubit computing chip and a structure called the IBM Quantum System Two, intended to house components like the chandelier cryostat, wiring, and electronics for these bigger chips down the line. These developments edged IBM ahead of other big tech companies like Google and Microsoft in the race to build the most powerful quantum computer. Today, the company is laying out its three-year-plan to reach beyond 4,000-qubits by 2025 with a processor it is calling Kookaburra. Heres how it is planning to get there.

To scale up its processing abilities for qubits, IBM will flesh out development on both the hardware and software components for the quantum chips. First to come is a new processor called Heron that boasts 133 qubits. In addition to having more qubits, the Heron chip has a different design from its predecessor, Eagle. It actually allows us to get a much larger fraction of functioning 2-qubit gates. Its using a new architecture called tunable couplers, says Jerry Chow, director of quantum hardware system development at IBM Quantum.

Along with this plan for this new processor for Heron, we want to be able to have multiple Herons that are all addressable via one control architecture, he adds. We want to be able to have classical communication linked across these chips and processors as were building them out.

Before you can understand what a qubit is, you need to understand what a bit is, and what a gate is, too. On classical computers, information is encoded as binary bits (0 or 1). Transistors are switches that control the flow of electrons. Transistors are connected to several electrodes, including a gate electrode. Changing the electrical charge on the gate electrode controls whether the transistor is on in state 1, or off, in state 0. Physical changes to these states allow computers to encode information. Logic gates are made up of a specific arrangement of transistors. A bunch of transistors can make up an integrated circuit which can store chunks of data. These circuits are all interconnected on the surface of a chip.

[Related: The trick to a more powerful computer chip? Going vertical.]

Qubits work differently from bits, and quantum gates work differently than classical gates. Unlike classical bits, which can have a value of 1 or 0, under the right conditions, qubits can stay in the wave-like, quantum superposition state, which represents a combination of all possible configurations0, 1, or a superposition of the two. Firing microwave photons at qubit-specific frequencies allows researchers to control their behavior, which can be to hold, change, or read out units of quantum information.

Unfortunately, qubits are quite fragile: They are heat-sensitive, unstable, and error-prone. When qubits talk to each other or to the wiring in their environment, they can lose their quantum properties, making calculations less accurate. When describing how long they can stay in their superposition states, experts refer to their coherence time. The coherence time and how long it takes to do a gate sets the limit on how big of a quantum calculation you can do with a set of qubits.

[Related: IBMs latest quantum chip breaks the elusive 100-qubit barrier]

The way that weve been designing our current processors, Falcon, Hummingbird, Eagle, have been using fixed coupling between qubits, and weve been using a microwave-based 2-qubit cross-resonance gate, says Chow. In those cases, they were using different frequencies to talk to the corresponding qubit. Now, theyre adding individualized magnetic field controls for the couplers between the qubits, Chow says, which allows them to turn on qubit interactions with the varying microwave frequencies.

Classical computers have cores, which are groupings of transistors that can run multiple tasks in parallel. You can envision it as having multiple checkout registers open at a supermarket instead of having everyone line up for one. CPUs that offer multiple cores, or multi-threading, can split up a big task into smaller pieces that can be fed to the different cores for processing.

Now, IBM wants to apply this concept to quantum computing as well, through a technique called circuit knitting. This effectively takes large quantum circuits, finds ways to break them down into smaller, more digestible quantum circuits, which can be almost parallely run across a number of processors, Chow explains. With this classical parallelization, it increases the types of problems and capabilities that were able to address. Parallelization could also be useful for decreasing error rates.

This design offshoot is separate from the development of Osprey or Condor, which are on track to hit 433 and 1,121 qubits, respectively, in the next few years. But we also want to have some modularity built-in that will allow us to scale even further. At some level, just the amount of the number of qubits that were going to be able to pack into a single chip will start to become limited, says Chow. Were testing some of those boundaries with Osprey and with Condor currently.

With Heron, the idea is for engineers to test ways to establish quantum links across multiple quantum chips. Were exploring what we call these modularly couplers that will allow us to effectively have multiple chips that are connected together, Chow says. This will create what is essentially a larger, quantum coherent processor made up of three individual quantum chips with the same underlying quantum processor. To this end, IBM hopes to couple three chips into a 408-qubit system, called Crossbill, in 2024.

To scale even more, IBM is also working on long-range couplers that can connect up clusters of quantum processors through a meter-long cryogenic cable (superconducting qubits need to be kept very cold). Were calling this the inter-quantum communication link, says Chow, and it can extend quantum coherent connections within the shared cryogenic environment.

Combining parallelization, chip-to-chip connection, as well as long-range coupling is what could enable them to achieve their 2025 goal of a 4,158-qubit system: The Kookaburra.

Going quantum doesnt mean redesigning an entire computer from the ground up. Much of the quantum system runs on classical computing infrastructure. The way that we typically have our systems is you have your quantum processor inside the refrigerator and youre constantly talking to it with the classical infrastructure, Chow says. The classical infrastructure is generating these microwave pulses, generating the read-outs. When you program a circuit it just turns into this orchestration of gates, operations that go to the chips.

But instead of having just quantum processors, one controller can also feed into classical processors, like CPUs and GPUs, which would be connected in parallel to the quantum chip, but not in any quantum way. That way, it can do threaded applications utilizing both classical and quantum computing powers.

The quantum processor is providing a different resource from a GPU or a super large CPU, says Chow. But overall, the whole thing is going to be something that feels like a supercomputer that is still orchestrated together.

[Related: Recent AWS glitches illustrate the power, and fragility, of cloud computing]

In IBMs vision of the future of computation, machines will have components that can run quantum circuits on the quantum hardware. However, this component will be stitched together with classical memory and classical infrastructure. This type of hybrid structure can be used for problems like molecular simulations, which uses a hybrid quantum-classical algorithm called the variational quantum eigensolver.

Quantum circuits are not like classical circuits. The logic for the gates is different, and the language for the algorithms is different.

When IBMs first quantum computer was launched onto the cloud in 2016, it came with an assembly language, called OpenQASM, which has been used to build up programs. This coming year, IBM will integrate dynamic circuits that can measure qubits and process classical information concurrently into their OpenQASM 3 library. This is also a hardware improvement that hinges on improved control electronics and better real-time messaging between the control side of the circuit and the measurement side. It can allow for more error corrections and parity checks.

The basic language coding for these types of operations will form primitives, or the basic computation elements of an algorithm, all of which will be a part of IBMs Qiskit Runtime platform, a computing service and programming model for quantum calculations. Qiskit contains different levels of assembly languages for kernel developers who might have to work with the code and the hardware and an API in the Qiskit stack for algorithm developers to work serverlessly.

At this higher level for algorithm developers, you dont need to care about running it on any particular backend when you have this cloud environment where you can access the CPUs, GPUs, and QPUs, all orchestrated together, Chow says. It allows us to use the classical resources in concert with our quantum resources to handle some of the larger quantum circuit problemsones that might be pushing on things like quantum advantage.

See original here:
IBMs massive Kookaburra quantum processor might land in 2025 - Popular Science

How much easier it is to be critical than to be correct.Benjamin Disraeli 19th Century Prime Minister of the UK

by David Shaw, Doug Finke, and Andr M. Knig

Scorpion Capital is an activist investor specializing in taking short positions in publicly traded stocks (and therefore stand to gain if the stock price moves down). They recently took such a position in IonQ, a leading trapped ion quantum computing hardware company. IonQ listed on the NYSE in October 2021 in a SPAC assisted floatation. SPACs themselves have been controversial in some circles, where they are viewed as a way to avoid the usual scrutiny of a traditional IPO process.

Scorpion issued a scathing short report aimed to move market sentiment against IonQ [1]. Its important to recall that this style of research does not aim to present a balanced picture or even a structured analysis. Its a scatter gun of bad things that might hurt the stock price. Some of these such as allegations of revenue irregularities are a matter specifically for the company, which has responded with its own press release [2].

However, some of the accusations could mislead debate around the wider quantum industry, and confuse investors more generally. We want to discuss those points here.

Academics have been talking about quantum computing for over forty years [3]. Richard Feynman first speculated about the idea in 1981 [4] and it was formalised by David Deutsch in 1985 [5]. Many would date progress on hardware to Alain Aspects famous experiments in 1982 [6]. Fidelities in the lab slowly improved, notably in the period 2008-2017 [7][10]. Activity has really intensified in the last three years with multiple demonstrations of beyond classical calculations [11][13] (albeit on artificial problems), and tentative logical qubit demonstrations [14][16]. Multiple commercial players have defined roadmaps to build large scale machines [17].

For a recent review of progress see Quantum Outlook 2022.

Just Toys? Up to about 50-60Q we can mostly simulate these quantum devices on conventional computers. In that sense everything less is a toy and the field often learns by working on toy problems. However, this is deadly serious R&D. The IonQ 11Q device deservedly debuted in Nature in 2019 [18]. In has continued to perform well in independent benchmarks [19]. But are any of the current generation of devices powerful enough for commercial computing applications? No. Scaling up is definitely required.

1+1=2? Such calculations are not a target use case for quantum computers (we dont try to do math using wind tunnels). Even so, to a casual observer this might seem like this should be easy for any computing device. It turns out that this isnt necessarily so when working with low-depth NISQ circuits and todays gate sets [20]. Todays hybrid algorithms aim to leave as much work as possible on classical hardware.

Even with envisaged intermediate scale quantum machines, early commercial applications are unproven. Many academics are sceptical (as we pay them to be), pointing to the difficulties facing known NISQ approaches. Some entrepreneurs are battening down for the long term. Others point to the tradition of constructive criticism driving innovation, and of commercial programs making jumps that defied traditional labs. Recent progress in AI is arguably a good example of the latter [21].

A publicly quoted company, with the need to publish results quarter to quarter is a challenging environment in which to manage such an evolving narrative. Only the largest companies can traditionally combine such emerging activities with a public listing.

There are hold-out quantum skeptics, and no one has a roadmap where the physics is completely de-risked (though some are closer than others). However, for the long-term, mushrooming government support around the world reflects the clear majority expert opinion this revolution is going to happen [22][24]. The only question is when.

Trapped ion technology is a technology quite alien to those used to the digital world.

Is it really a 32Q device? This may sound like a fairly straightforward question. But the nature of trapped ion technology blurs the answer. The qubits are individual ions, and you can load a variable number of ions into a typical trap. Some qubits may play an active role in the calculation, others supporting roles. A key question is how many qubits are available for use in the target algorithm? IonQs next generation device does seem to have successfully operated with up to about 21Q in 2021 when it did well in independent benchmark tests [19] (though it clearly wasnt performing at the aggressive targets IonQ had set of 32Q and 4M QV).

Trapped ion quantum computers confound our expectations in many ways. They are set to have very slow gate speeds compared to conventional computers. The point is that quantum computers enable us to use algorithms that complete in exponentially fewer processing steps. Raw trapped ion gate speeds are also set to be slow compared even to other proposed quantum platforms. Here a true comparison is much more subtle. What really matters is which platform can achieve the desired combination of scale, fidelity and speed, and how along the way it keeps down the overheads associated with error correction [25].

Outsourced fabrication Its not necessarily an issue if a trapped ion player outsources the fabrication of the trap and vacuum systems. A basic trap is now a relatively standard component. The really challenging part of the setup for a machine like this is the laser system and the control logic. None of todays commercial players have yet fully recreated the sector-leading 2Q gate fidelities achieved with hero devices in the lab. Trap design and fabrication is set to become more of a focus as players innovate to meet other scaling challenges: miniaturisation and modularisation.

Miniaturization A key challenge for conventional trapped ion setups is gate control. Established approaches use lasers to drive gates. This makes miniaturisation a real challenge. AQT already have a rack-based trapped ion system, but they use optical trapped ion qubits [26]. These require a less demanding setup. Other trapped ion players are typically using hyperfine trapped ion qubits, which in principle offer longer lifetimes and so access to higher fidelities. But working with the special laser setups required looks harder. True large-scale trapped ion systems probably require integrated photonic solutions (if you stick with lasers some are working on ways to control ion traps with microwaves instead [10], [27]). Such systems are at an early stage as conventional photonic platforms dont work well at the required wavelengths [28]. Innovative solutions are emerging.

Modularization The other key scaling challenge is how to interconnect modules. Here trapped ion proponents often point to photonic interconnects. This is more of a challenge than sometimes portrayed. The currently best demonstrated fidelities and speeds dont look good enough [29]. Again, innovative solutions are emerging.

Working with trapped ion based approaches certainly are a bet that some better quantum technology isnt able to get over the line first. IonQ has to innovate to meet the scaling challenge. A positive from the SPAC is that it has an impressive $500M pile of cash to help it drive this process. And they do have ideas. The real question is how quickly can any player move to solve multiple challenges at once: fidelity, miniaturisation and modularity?

You have to be very careful with roadmap promises. Analysts on public equities wont be impressed when they change or are missed. Many R&D phase companies choose to stay private. Some choose to stay in stealth.

These arent old-time software startups where everyone can eat pizza and get things delivered by pulling an all-nighter. These are long term endeavours that have to combine skills from physicists, engineers and computer scientists just to make things work. In the real-world, marketing flair and commercial skills are set to be an equally important part of the mix. Combining such impenetrable disciplines amidst great uncertainty; mixing founding and new senior talent; retaining everyone around a realistic common company narrative (and realistic pay expectations) are going to be challenges many in the sector will face.

The pressures and dynamic of a SPAC process probably doesnt help keep everyone on board. Senior hires bouncing in and out never looks good.

Academic founders face particular challenges In many areas investors traditionally look for founders to fully commit to the new business. However, in the quantum space there are other considerations. Many anticipate that the talent pipeline will be a key issue. Keeping connections with a home institute helps shore-up a natural recruitment pool. It also gives insight into governmental programs of support for the local quantum sectors. An additional pressure is going to be managing to get the best out of academic and corporate lab teams. Each should have contrasting strengths, but also likely different cultures.

(In preparing this piece, a striking feature has been former academic colleagues, but now commercial competitors of IonQ founders Chris Monroe and Jungsang Kim jumping to their defense as physicists. Disagreements naturally continue on whose hardware plans are best.)

Existing and potential investors in quantum technology already face many distractions: an unsettled global economic environment; interest rates across developed economies are on an upward trajectory; inflation stalks the land. But where are investors to invest? Investing in innovative ventures is a vital opportunity to bring uncorrelated exposure into a portfolio.

First, we should point out that all companies have problems. Sometimes it is an engineering program that has slipped its schedule, sometimes it is disagreements within management, sometimes it is unhappy customers, and many other things. A person can certainly look at a company and write a report that only discusses these issues. But a report that only focusses on the bad things, but does not mention any of the good things happening at a company does not give an accurate picture. It also would be incorrect to assume that any problem a company currently faces will be permanent. But again, pointing out that a problem might be temporary wont be mentioned if your sole purpose is to write a report that drives down the price of the stock so you can make a profit.

We scorn the use of hype to create an unrealistic positive picture of how quickly quantum can add value. We equally scorn the use of scatter gun defamation (anti-hype) to paint an equally unrealistic negative picture. Neither benefits the industry or society in general. Both are traps for investors.

Quantum computing is at the very early stages of development and the ultimate proof of whether a company is good or not will be determined by whether a company can deliver on its roadmap and be competitive.

At this stage no one can say for sure which of the companies working in quantum can achieve this. The best that can be done is to bring in a well-qualified team that understands the technology, the market value chain, and real-world company cultures to perform careful due diligence. We dont think a hedge fund that doesnt have people knowledgeable about the technology, and has a motivation to be biased, fits this description.

Many think that SPAC mania in the financial markets is anyway coming to an end (and such vehicles will likely be more thoroughly regulated) [30]. But businesses should think not just about the route to flotation, SPAC or IPO, but also what milestones they need to hit to be ready for life on the public market. Venture investors will expect a plan that allows the business to move on at some point.

Quantum computing is engaged in a long marathon that will take many years to play out. The quantum technology sector overall presents an even wider landscape of opportunities. Business adopters should avoid immediate judgements, but engage with companies that can execute and bring to market competitive products that provide commercial value. Governments should encourage the creative destruction of the innovative process. Investors should weigh the best advice they can find, and make their choices. And IonQ needs to demonstrate that Scorpion Capitals criticismwas indeed nothing but aggressivefinancial posturing.

[1] Scorpion Capital | Activist short selling focused on publicly traded frauds and promotes, Scorpion Capital. https://scorpioncapital.com (accessed May 07, 2022).

[2] IonQ Reiterates Unwavering Commitment to Building the Quantum Future, May 04, 2022. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220504006319/en/IonQ-Reiterates-Unwavering-Commitment-to-Building-the-Quantum-Future (accessed May 07, 2022).

[3]J. Preskill, Quantum computing 40 years later, arXiv:2106.10522 [quant-ph], Jun. 2021, Accessed: May 07, 2022. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2106.10522

[4]R. P. Feynman, Simulating physics with computers, Int J Theor Phys, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 467488, Jun. 1982, doi: 10.1007/BF02650179.

[5]Quantum theory, the ChurchTuring principle and the universal quantum computer | Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspa.1985.0070 (accessed May 07, 2022).

[6]A. Aspect, P. Grangier, and G. Roger, Experimental Realization of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen-Bohm Gedankenexperiment: A New Violation of Bells Inequalities, Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 49, no. 2, pp. 9194, Jul. 1982, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.49.91.

[7]J. Benhelm, G. Kirchmair, C. F. Roos, and R. Blatt, Towards fault-tolerant quantum computing with trapped ions, Nature Phys, vol. 4, no. 6, pp. 463466, Jun. 2008, doi: 10.1038/nphys961.

[8]R. Barends et al., Superconducting quantum circuits at the surface code threshold for fault tolerance, Nature, vol. 508, no. 7497, Art. no. 7497, Apr. 2014, doi: 10.1038/nature13171.

[9]J. P. Gaebler et al., High-Fidelity Universal Gate Set for $^9$Be$^+$ Ion Qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 117, no. 6, p. 060505, Aug. 2016, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.060505.

[10]T. P. Harty, M. A. Sepiol, D. T. C. Allcock, C. J. Ballance, J. E. Tarlton, and D. M. Lucas, High-fidelity trapped-ion quantum logic using near-field microwaves, Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 117, no. 14, p. 140501, Sep. 2016, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.140501.

[11]F. Arute et al., Quantum supremacy using a programmable superconducting processor, Nature, vol. 574, no. 7779, Art. no. 7779, Oct. 2019, doi: 10.1038/s41586-019-1666-5.

[12]H.-S. Zhong et al., Phase-Programmable Gaussian Boson Sampling Using Stimulated Squeezed Light, Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 127, no. 18, p. 180502, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.180502.

[13]Y. Wu et al., Strong quantum computational advantage using a superconducting quantum processor, arXiv:2106.14734 [quant-ph], Jun. 2021, Accessed: Aug. 02, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2106.14734

[14]L. Egan et al., Fault-tolerant control of an error-corrected qubit, Nature, pp. 16, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41586-021-03928-y.

[15]C. Ryan-Anderson et al., Realization of real-time fault-tolerant quantum error correction, arXiv:2107.07505 [quant-ph], Jul. 2021, Accessed: Oct. 09, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2107.07505

[16]L. Postler et al., Demonstration of fault-tolerant universal quantum gate operations, arXiv:2111.12654 [quant-ph], Nov. 2021, Accessed: Dec. 02, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2111.12654

[17]Quantum Hardware Outlook 2022, Fact Based Insight, Dec. 13, 2021. https://www.factbasedinsight.com/quantum-hardware-outlook-2022/ (accessed Feb. 02, 2022).

[18]K. Wright et al., Benchmarking an 11-qubit quantum computer, Nature Communications, vol. 10, no. 1, Art. no. 1, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-13534-2.

[19]T. Lubinski et al., Application-Oriented Performance Benchmarks for Quantum Computing, arXiv:2110.03137 [quant-ph], Oct. 2021, Accessed: Nov. 01, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2110.03137

[20]agaitaarino, How do I add 1+1 using a quantum computer?, Quantum Computing Stack Exchange, Dec. 23, 2018. https://quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com/q/1654 (accessed May 05, 2022).

[21] J. M. Thornton, R. A. Laskowski, and N. Borkakoti, AlphaFold heralds a data-driven revolution in biology and medicine, Nat Med, vol. 27, no. 10, pp. 16661669, Oct. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41591-021-01533-0.

[22]M. G. Raymer and C. Monroe, The US National Quantum Initiative, Quantum Sci. Technol., vol. 4, no. 2, p. 020504, Feb. 2019, doi: 10.1088/2058-9565/ab0441.

[23]T. Skordas and J. Mlynek, The Quantum Technologies Flagship: the story so far, and the quantum future ahead, Shaping Europes digital future European Commission, Oct. 16, 2020. https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single-market/en/blogposts/quantum-technologies-flagship-story-so-far-and-quantum-future-ahead (accessed Dec. 20, 2020).

[24]S. Mallapaty, Chinas five-year plan focuses on scientific self-reliance, Nature, vol. 591, no. 7850, pp. 353354, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1038/d41586-021-00638-3.

[25]M. Webber, V. Elfving, S. Weidt, and W. K. Hensinger, The Impact of Hardware Specifications on Reaching Quantum Advantage in the Fault Tolerant Regime, arXiv:2108.12371 [quant-ph], Sep. 2021, Accessed: Sep. 30, 2021. [Online]. Available: http://arxiv.org/abs/2108.12371

[26]I. Pogorelov et al., A compact ion-trap quantum computing demonstrator, PRX Quantum, vol. 2, no. 2, p. 020343, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.020343.

[27]B. Lekitsch et al., Blueprint for a microwave trapped ion quantum computer, Science Advances, vol. 3, no. 2, p. e1601540, Feb. 2017, doi: 10.1126/sciadv.1601540.

[28]D. Awschalom et al., Development of Quantum InterConnects for Next-Generation Information Technologies, PRX Quantum, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 017002, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.017002.

[29]L. J. Stephenson et al., High-rate, high-fidelity entanglement of qubits across an elementary quantum network, Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 124, no. 11, p. 110501, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.110501.

[30]B. Masters, New reforms should stop failing Spacs in their tracks, Financial Times, Apr. 04, 2022. Accessed: May 07, 2022. [Online]. Available: https://www.ft.com/content/e38125db-caa6-40ce-b16e-1dc0745e1b48

May 7, 2022

More here:
Weathering the First Quantum Short - Quantum Computing Report

BOSTON, May 10, 2022 Aliro Quantum, the first pureplay quantum networking company, today announced that it has been named a2022 Technology Pioneerby theWorld Economic Forum. Aliro Quantum is co-founded by Professor Prineha Narang and spun out of herNarangLabat Harvard University. The company was selected as a 2022 Technology Pioneer for enabling quantum networks for quantum secure communications, clustered quantum computing, quantum sensing, and ultimately the quantum Internet.

Just as todays Internet led to a revolution in computing and society more broadly, the quantum Internet is expected to have a profound impact on how we live our lives.Aliro is the first pure-play quantum networking company in the US, building and scaling quantum networks, towards the future quantum Internet.

Powerful quantum systems such as those we are pioneering at Aliro will enable breakthroughs in energy, medicine, materials science and other novel applications we have yet to imagine, said Jim Ricotta, CEO and Chairman of Aliro Quantum. Recognition by the World Economic Forum is significant validation of the teams hard work developing the foundational technologies needed for quantum networks and the quantum Internet, and we look forward to contributing to the World Economic Forums work in this area. Our VC investors have identified quantum networks as a massive and disruptive opportunity, and we are already engaged with a number of major commercial and government organizations to build their next generation networks

Recognized as a leading Young Scientist by the World Economic Forum for her work in quantum science and tech in 2018, Narang, Co-founder and Chief Technology Officer for Aliro, added: When we founded Aliro in 2019, our mission was to make quantum technology accessible, a mission that drives us as we build out the Aliro quantum networking stack to unlock the power of quantum networks and the quantum Internet. Today Aliro is leading the charge in entanglement-based quantum networks, enabling quantum secure communications, clustered quantum computing and quantum sensing. Our work stands to realize the promise of quantum tech at scale!

Professor Narang will be discussing the roadmap to scalable quantum systems and the key role of quantum networks as a featured speaker at the upcomingCommercialising Quantumconference hosted byTheEconomist May 17 19. The event will focus on the near-term scope of quantum advantage, a theme that is underscored by Aliros selection as a 2022 Technology Pioneer.

The World Economic Forums Technology Pioneers program recognizes early to growth-stage companies from around the world that are involved in the use of new technologies and innovation that are poised to have a significant impact on business and society. Technology Pioneers have been selected based on the communitys selection criteria, which include innovation, impact and leadership as well as the companys relevance with the World Economic Forums Platforms. Information about this years Technology Pioneers can be found here:http://wef.ch/techpioneers22.

Were excited to welcome Aliro Quantum to our 2022 cohort of Technology Pioneers, said Saemoon Yoon, Community Lead, Technology Pioneers, World Economic Forum. Aliro and its fellow pioneers are at the forefront of industries that are critical to solving some of our worlds most complex issues today. We look forward to their contribution to the World Economic Forum in its commitment to improving the state of the world.

About Aliro

Aliro Quantum is a quantum computing and networking company that spun out ofNarangLabat Harvard University. Aliro is leading the charge on quantum network development by offering the foundational technologies needed for organizations around the world to build scalable and powerful distributed quantum systems. Aliro has put together a team of world-class experts in quantum and classical networking.

Aliro is working with industry and academic partners through the Quantum Economic Development Consortium (QED-C), the NSF Center for Quantum Networks (CQN), and the NSF Quantum Leap Challenge Institute Hybrid Quantum Architectures and Networks (HQAN). Aliro is partnering with leading quantum hardware vendors including IBM, Honeywell Quantum Solutions (now Quantinuum), and Rigetti Computing. To learn more, visitwww.aliroquantum.com.

About World Economic Forum

The World Economic Forum, committed to improving the state of the world, is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation. The Forum engages the foremost political, business and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas. (www.weforum.org).

About the Technology Pioneers

The World Economic Forum believes that innovation is critical to the future well-being of society and to driving economic growth. Launched in 2000, the Technology Pioneer community is composed of early to growth-stage companies from around the world that are involved in the design, development and deployment of new technologies and innovations, and are poised to have a significant impact on business and society.

The World Economic Forum provides the Technology Pioneers community with a platform to engage with the public- and private-sector leaders and to contribute new solutions to overcome the current crisis and build future resiliency.

Source: Aliro Quantum

Read the original:
Aliro Quantum Selected as a 2022 Technology Pioneer by the World Economic Forum - HPCwire

One of the highest profile players in the quantum computing space is Alphabets Google. Google Inc. announced in 2019 that they had attained quantum superiority. In other words, its quantum processor, Sycamore, had successfully performed its first-ever function beyond the capabilities of classical computers.

However, this was soon questioned by IBM, who claimed that the same problem could be solved by a standard computer just over the space of days, compared to Sycamores mere minutes.

Then, in the second half of 2020, a smaller version of Sycamore reached another milestone performing its first quantum chemistry reaction.

In May 2021, Google opened its new Quantum AI Campus in Santa Barbara, California, along with a new goal: to build the worlds first useful, error-corrected quantum computer by 2029. 1

Google has even, to a certain extent, opened this effort up to the public in collaboration, when it announced Quantum Computing Service in December 2021. This allows approved customers the opportunity to send their own computing programs to Google to be run on their quantum computing hardware at the lab in Santa Barbara.

With this kind of computing power, Google is hoping to solve problems humanity hasnt been able to for centuries. Some of these include developing better medicines, solving world hunger and climate crises. However, this is a long way off for now.

The only recent news regarding Google and quantum computing has been speculative. For example, there have been rumours that Google Inc. may or may not take Sandbox, its secretive quantum department unrelated to its quantum AI campus, public. However, nothing concrete has been confirmed and it could be years before any further tangible quantum milestones are reached.

Original post:
Are these the best quantum computing stocks to watch? - IG UK

Article content

BURNABY, British Columbia & PALO ALTO, Calif. D-Wave Systems Inc. global leader in quantum computing software, services, and systems, and the only quantum computing company building both annealing and gate model quantum computers today announced Alan Baratz, CEO, and John Markovich, CFO, will present at the 17th Annual Needham Technology & Media Conference on Wednesday, May 18 at 3:45pm ET.

The presentation slides will be available on our Investor Relations page.

To schedule a meeting with D-Wave during the conference, please contact your representative at Needham or ir@dwavesys.com.

About D-Wave Systems Inc.

D-Wave is a leader in the development and delivery of quantum computing systems, software, and services, and is the worlds first commercial supplier of quantum computersand the only company building both annealing quantum computers and gate-model quantum computers. Our mission is to unlock the power of quantum computing today to benefit business and society. We do this by delivering customer value with practical quantum applications for problems as diverse as logistics, artificial intelligence, materials sciences, drug discovery, scheduling, cybersecurity, fault detection, and financial modeling. D-Waves systems are being used by some of the worlds most advanced organizations, including NEC Corporation, Volkswagen, DENSO, Lockheed Martin, Forschungszentrum Jlich, University of Southern California, and Los Alamos National Laboratory. With headquarters and the Quantum Engineering Center of Excellence based near Vancouver, Canada, D-Waves U.S. operations are based in Palo Alto, Calif. D-Wave has a blue-chip investor base that includes PSP Investments, Goldman Sachs, BDC Capital, NEC Corp., Aegis Group Partners, and In-Q-Tel.

View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20220510005608/en/

Contacts

D-Wave Media Contact: Alan Auyeung Axicom media@dwavesys.com

Investor Relations Contact: Kevin Hunt ir@dwavesys.com

#distro

View original post here:
D-Wave to Participate in 17th Annual Needham Technology & Media Conference - The Province