Quantum Computing

Quantum computing
A quantum computer is a computer that

takes advantage of quantum mechanical
phenomena.
IBM Q System One, a quantum computer with 20

superconducting qubits[1]
At small scales, physical matter exhibits

properties of both particles and waves,
and quantum computing leverages this
behavior, specifically quantum superposition
and entanglement, using specialized hardware
that supports the preparation and manipulation
of quantum states.
Classical physics cannot explain the operation

of these quantum devices, and a scalable
quantum computer could perform some
calculations exponentially faster than any
modern "classical" computer. In particular, a
large-scale quantum computer could break
widely used encryption schemes and aid
physicists in performing physical simulations;
however,
the current state of the art is largely
experimental and impractical, with several
obstacles to useful applications. Moreover,
scalable quantum computers do not hold
promise for many practical tasks, and for many
important tasks quantum speedups are proven
impossible.
The basic unit of information in quantum

computing is the qubit, similar to the bit in
traditional digital electronics. Unlike a classical
bit, a qubit can exist in a superposition of its
two "basis" states, which loosely means that it
is in both states simultaneously. When
measuring a qubit, the result is a probabilistic
output of
a classical bit, therefore making quantum
computers nondeterministic in general. If a
quantum computer manipulates the qubit in a
particular way, wave interference effects can
amplify the desired measurement results. The
design of quantum algorithms involves
creating procedures that allow a quantum
computer to perform calculations efficiently
and quickly.
Physically engineering high-quality qubits has

proven challenging. If a physical qubit is not
sufficiently isolated from its environment, it
suffers from quantum decoherence, introducing
noise into
calculations. Paradoxically, perfectly isolating
qubits is also undesirable because quantum
computations typically need to initialize qubits,
perform controlled qubit interactions, and
measure the resulting quantum states. Each of
those operations introduces errors and suffers
from noise, and such inaccuracies accumulate.
National governments have invested heavily

in experimental research that aims to develop
scalable qubits with longer coherence times
and lower error rates.
Two of the most promising technologies are
superconductors (which isolate an
electrical current by eliminating electrical
resistance) and ion traps (which confine a
single ion using electromagnetic fields).
In principle, a non-quantum (classical)

computer can solve the same computational
problems as a quantum computer, given
enough time. Quantum advantage comes in
the form of time complexity rather than
computability, and quantum complexity
theory shows that some quantum algorithms
for carefully selected tasks require
exponentially fewer computational steps than
the best known non-quantum algorithms.
Such tasks can in theory be solved on a large-
scale
quantum computer whereas classical computers
would not finish computations in any
reasonable amount of time.
However, quantum speedup is not
universal or even typical across computational
tasks, since basic tasks such as sorting are
proven to not allow any asymptotic quantum
speedup. Claims of quantum supremacy have
drawn significant attention to the discipline,
but are demonstrated on contrived tasks, while
near-term practical use cases remain limited.
Optimism about quantum computing is fueled

by a broad range of new theoretical
hardware possibilities facilitated by quantum
physics, but the improving understanding of
quantum computing limitations
counterbalances this optimism. In particular,
quantum speedups have been traditionally
estimated for noiseless quantum computers,
whereas the impact of noise and the use of
quantum error- correction can undermine low-
polynomial speedups.
History
The Mach–Zehnder interferometer

shows that photons can exhibit wave-
like interference.
For many years, the fields of quantum
mechanics and computer science formed
distinct academic communities.[2] Modern
quantum theory developed in the 1920s to
explain the wave–particle duality observed at
atomic scales,[3] and digital computers emerged
in the following decades to replace human
computers for tedious calculations.[4] Both
disciplines had practical applications during
World War II; computers played a major role in
wartime cryptography,[5] and quantum physics
was essential for the nuclear physics used in the
Manhattan Project.[6]
As physicists applied quantum mechanical
models to computational problems and
swapped digital bits for qubits, the fields of
quantum mechanics and computer science
began to converge. In 1980, Paul Benioff
introduced the quantum Turing machine,
which uses quantum theory to describe a
simplified computer.[7] When digital computers
became faster, physicists faced an exponential
increase in overhead when simulating quantum
dynamics,[8] prompting Yuri Manin and
Richard Feynman to independently suggest
that hardware based on quantum phenomena
might be more efficient for computer
simulation.[9][10][11] In a 1984
paper, Charles Bennett and Gilles Brassard
applied quantum theory to cryptography
protocols and demonstrated that quantum key
distribution could enhance information security.
[12][13]
Peter Shor (pictured here in 2017)

showed in 1994 that a scalable
quantum computer would be able to
break RSA encryption.
Quantum algorithms then emerged for solving

oracle problems, such as Deutsch's algorithm
in 1985,[14] the Bernstein– Vazirani algorithm
in 1993,[15] and Simon's
algorithm in 1994.[16] These algorithms did not
solve practical problems, but demonstrated
mathematically that one could gain more
information by querying a black box with a
quantum state in superposition, sometimes
referred to as quantum parallelism.[17]Peter
Shor built on these results with his 1994
algorithms for breaking the widely used RSA
and Diffie– Hellman encryption protocols,[18]
which drew significant attention to the field of
quantum computing.[19] In 1996, Grover's
algorithm established a quantum speedup for
the widely applicable unstructured search
problem.[20][21] The same year, Seth Lloyd
proved that quantum computers
could simulate quantum systems without the
exponential overhead present in classical
simulations,[22] validating Feynman's 1982
conjecture.[23]
Over the years, experimentalists have

constructed small-scale quantum computers
using trapped ions and superconductors.[24]
In 1998, a two-qubit quantum computer
demonstrated the feasibility of the
technology,[25][26] and subsequent
experiments have increased the number of
qubits and reduced error rates.[24] In 2019,
Google AI and NASA announced that they
had achieved quantum supremacy with a 54-
qubit
machine, performing a computation that is
impossible for any classical computer.[27][28][29]
However, the validity of this claim is still being
actively researched.[30][31]
The threshold theorem shows how increasing

the number of qubits can mitigate errors,[32] yet
fully fault-tolerant quantum computing remains
"a rather distant dream".[33] According to some
researchers, noisy intermediate-scale quantum
(NISQ) machines may have specialized uses in
the near future, but noise in quantum gates
limits their reliability.[33]
Investment in quantum computing research has
increased in the public and private sectors.[34][35]
As one consulting firm summarized,[36]
... investment dollars are pouring

in, and quantum- computing start-
ups are proliferating. ... While
quantum computing promises to
help businesses solve problems
that are beyond the reach and
speed of conventional high-
performance computers, use cases
are largely experimental
and hypothetical at this early stage.
With focus on business management’s point of

view, the potential applications of quantum
computing into four major categories are
cybersecurity, data analytics and artificial
intelligence, optimization and simulation, and
data management and searching.[37]
Quantum information
processing
Computer engineers typically describe a
modern computer's operation in terms of
classical electrodynamics. Within these
"classical" computers, some components
(such as semiconductors and random number
generators) may rely on quantum behavior,
but these components are not isolated from
their environment, so any quantum
information quickly decoheres.
While programmers may depend on probability
theory when designing a randomized algorithm,
quantum mechanical notions like superposition
and interference are largely irrelevant for
program analysis.
Quantum programs, in contrast, rely on precise

control of coherent quantum systems.
Physicists describe these
systems mathematically using linear algebra.
Complex numbers model probability
amplitudes, vectors model quantum states, and
matrices model the operations that can be
performed on these states. Programming a
quantum computer is then a matter of
composing operations in such a way that the
resulting program computes a useful result in
theory and is implementable in practice.
As physicist Charlie Bennett describes the

relationship between quantum and classical
computers,[38]
A classical computer is a quantum
computer ... so we shouldn't be
asking about "where do quantum
speedups come from?" We should
say, "well, all computers are
quantum. ... Where do classical
slowdowns come from?"
Quantum information
The qubit serves as the basic unit of quantum

information. It represents a two- state system,
just like a classical bit, except that it can exist
in a superposition
of its two states.[39] In one sense, a
superposition is like a probability distribution
over the two values.[40] However, a quantum
computation can be influenced by both values
at once, inexplicable by either state
individually. In this sense, a "superposed" qubit
stores both values simultaneously.[17]
A two-dimensional vector mathematically

represents a qubit state. Physicists typically
use Dirac notation for quantum mechanical
linear algebra, writing |ψ⟩ 'ket psi' for a vector
labeled ψ. Because a qubit is a two-state
system, any qubit state takes the form α|0⟩ + β|1⟩,
where |0⟩ and
|1⟩ are the standard basis states,[a] and α and β
are the probability amplitudes. If either α or β
is zero, the qubit is effectively a classical bit;
when both are nonzero, the qubit is in
superposition. Such a quantum state vector acts
similarly to a (classical) probability vector,
with one key difference: unlike probabilities,
probability amplitudes are not necessarily
positive numbers.[40] Negative amplitudes
allow for destructive wave interference.[b]
When a qubit is measured in the standard basis,

the result is a classical bit. The Born rule
describes the norm-squared correspondence
between amplitudes and
probabilities—when measuring a qubit α|0⟩ +
β|1⟩, the state collapses to |0⟩ with probability | α |
2
, or to |1⟩ with probability | β |2. Any valid
qubit state has coefficients α and β such that |
α |2 + | β |2 = 1. As an example, measuring the
qubit
1 1
|0⟩ + |1⟩ would produce either |0⟩ or
√2 √2
|1⟩ with equal probability.
Each additional qubit doubles the

dimension of the state space. As an
1 1
example, the vector |00⟩ + |01⟩
√2 √2
represents a two-qubit state, a tensor product of
the qubit |0⟩ with the qubit
1 1
|0⟩ + |1⟩. This vector inhabits a four-
√2 √2
dimensional vector space spanned by the
basis vectors |00⟩, |01⟩, |10⟩, and |11⟩. The
1 1
Bell state |00⟩ + |11⟩ is impossible to
√2 √2
decompose into the tensor product of two
individual qubits—the two qubits are entangled
because their probability amplitudes are
correlated. In general, the vector space for an n-
qubit system is 2n- dimensional, and this makes
it challenging for a classical computer to
simulate a quantum one: representing a 100-
qubit system requires storing 2100 classical
values.
Unitary operators
The state of this one-qubit quantum memory

can be manipulated by applying quantum logic
gates, analogous to how classical memory can
be manipulated with classical logic gates. One
important gate for both classical and quantum
computation is the NOT gate, which can be
represented by a matrix
Mathematically, the application of such a logic

gate to a quantum state vector is modelled with
matrix multiplication. Thus
and .
The mathematics of single qubit gates can be

extended to operate on multi-qubit quantum
memories in two important ways. One way is
simply to select a qubit and apply that gate to
the target qubit while leaving the remainder of
the memory unaffected. Another way is to
apply the gate to its target only if another part
of the memory is in a desired state. These two
choices can be illustrated using another
example. The possible states of a two- qubit
quantum memory are
The controlled NOT (CNOT) gate can then be
represented using the following matrix:
As a mathematical consequence of this

definition, ,
,
, and
. In other words, the
CNOT applies a NOT gate ( from before)
to the second qubit if and only if the first
qubit is in the state . If the first qubit is
, nothing is done to either qubit.
In summary, quantum computation can be

described as a network of quantum logic gates
and measurements. However, any
measurement can be deferred to the end of
quantum computation, though this deferment
may come at a computational cost, so most
quantum circuits depict a network consisting
only of quantum logic gates and no
measurements.
Quantum parallelism
Quantum parallelism refers to the ability of

quantum computers to evaluate a function for
multiple input values simultaneously.
This can be achieved by preparing a
quantum system in a superposition of input
states, and applying a unitary transformation
that encodes the function to be evaluated. The
resulting state encodes the function's output
values for all input values in the superposition,
allowing for the computation of multiple
outputs simultaneously. This property is key to
the speedup of many quantum algorithms.[17]
Quantum programming
There are a number of models of computation

for quantum computing, distinguished by the
basic elements in which the computation is
decomposed.
Gate array
A quantum circuit diagram implementing a

Toffoli gate from more primitive gates
A quantum gate array decomposes computation

into a sequence of few-qubit quantum gates. A
quantum computation can be described as a
network of quantum logic gates and
measurements. However,
any measurement can be deferred to the end of
quantum computation, though this deferment
may come at a computational cost, so most
quantum circuits depict a network consisting
only of quantum logic gates and no
measurements.
Any quantum computation (which is, in the

above formalism, any unitary matrix of size
over qubits) can be
represented as a network of quantum logic
gates from a fairly small family of gates. A
choice of gate family that enables this
construction is known as a universal gate set,
since a computer that can run such circuits is a
universal quantum
computer. One common such set includes all
single-qubit gates as well as the CNOT gate
from above. This means any quantum
computation can be performed by executing a
sequence of single-qubit gates together with
CNOT gates. Though this gate set is infinite, it
can be replaced with a finite gate set by
appealing to the Solovay-Kitaev theorem.
Measurement-based quantum computing
A measurement-based quantum computer

decomposes computation into a sequence of
Bell state measurements and single- qubit
quantum gates applied to a highly
entangled initial state (a cluster state),
using a technique called quantum gate
teleportation.
Adiabatic quantum computing
An adiabatic quantum computer, based on

quantum annealing, decomposes computation
into a slow continuous transformation of an
initial Hamiltonian into a final Hamiltonian,
whose ground states contain the solution.[42]
Topological quantum computing
A topological quantum computer decomposes

computation into the
braiding of anyons in a 2D lattice.[43]
Quantum Turing machine
A quantum Turing machine is the quantum

analog of a Turing machine.[7] All of these
models of computation—quantum circuits,[44]
one-way quantum computation,[45] adiabatic
quantum computation,[46] and topological
quantum computation[47]—have been shown to
be equivalent to the quantum Turing machine;
given a perfect implementation of one such
quantum computer, it can simulate all the
others with no more than polynomial overhead.
This equivalence
need not hold for practical quantum computers,
since the overhead of simulation may be too
large to be practical.
Communication
Quantum cryptography enables new ways to
transmit data securely; for example, quantum
key distribution uses entangled quantum states
to establish secure cryptographic keys.[48] When
a sender and receiver exchange quantum states,
they can guarantee that an adversary does not
intercept the message, as any unauthorized
eavesdropper would disturb the delicate
quantum system and
introduce a detectable change.[49] With
appropriate cryptographic protocols, the
sender and receiver can thus establish
shared private information resistant to
eavesdropping.[12][50]
Modern fiber-optic cables can transmit

quantum information over relatively short
distances. Ongoing experimental research aims
to develop more reliable hardware (such as
quantum repeaters), hoping to scale this
technology to long-distance quantum networks
with end-to-end entanglement. Theoretically,
this could enable novel technological
applications,
such as distributed quantum computing and
enhanced quantum sensing.[51][52]
Algorithms
Progress in finding quantum algorithms
typically focuses on this quantum circuit
model, though exceptions like the quantum
adiabatic algorithm exist.
Quantum algorithms can be roughly
categorized by the type of speedup achieved
over corresponding classical algorithms.[53]
Quantum algorithms that offer more than a

polynomial speedup over the best-known
classical algorithm include Shor's
algorithm for factoring and the related
quantum algorithms for computing discrete
logarithms, solving Pell's equation, and more
generally solving the hidden subgroup
problem for abelian finite groups.[53] These
algorithms depend on the primitive of the
quantum Fourier transform. No mathematical
proof has been found that shows that an
equally fast classical algorithm cannot be
discovered, but evidence suggests that this is
unlikely.[54] Certain oracle problems like
Simon's problem and the Bernstein– Vazirani
problem do give provable speedups, though
this is in the quantum query model, which is a
restricted model
where lower bounds are much easier to prove
and doesn't necessarily translate to speedups for
practical problems.
Other problems, including the simulation of

quantum physical processes from chemistry
and solid-state physics, the approximation of
certain Jones polynomials, and the quantum
algorithm for linear systems of equations
have quantum algorithms appearing to give
super-polynomial speedups and are BQP-
complete. Because these problems are BQP-
complete, an equally fast classical algorithm
for them would imply that no quantum
algorithm gives a super-
polynomial speedup, which is believed to be
unlikely.[55]
Some quantum algorithms, like Grover's

algorithm and amplitude amplification, give
polynomial speedups over corresponding
classical algorithms.[53] Though these
algorithms give comparably modest quadratic
speedup, they are widely applicable and thus
give speedups for a wide range of problems.[21]
Simulation of quantum systems
Since chemistry and nanotechnology rely on

understanding quantum systems, and
such systems are impossible to simulate in an
efficient manner classically, quantum
simulation may be an important application of
quantum computing.[56] Quantum simulation
could also be used to simulate the behavior of
atoms and particles at unusual conditions such
as the reactions inside a collider.[57] In June
2023, IBM computer scientists reported that a
quantum computer produced better results for a
physics problem than a conventional
supercomputer.[58][59]
About 2% of the annual global energy output is

used for nitrogen fixation to produce ammonia
for the Haber process
in the agricultural fertilizer industry (even
though naturally occurring organisms also
produce ammonia). Quantum simulations might
be used to understand this process and increase
the energy efficiency of production.[60] It is
expected that an early use of quantum
computing will be modeling that improves the
efficiency of the Haber–Bosch process[61] by the
mid 2020s[62] although some have predicted it
will take longer.[63]
Post-quantum cryptography
A notable application of quantum computation

is for attacks on
cryptographic systems that are currently in use.
Integer factorization, which underpins the
security of public key cryptographic systems,
is believed to be computationally infeasible
with an ordinary computer for large integers if
they are the product of few prime numbers
(e.g., products of two 300-digit primes).[64] By
comparison, a quantum computer could solve
this problem exponentially faster using Shor's
algorithm to find its factors.[65] This ability
would allow a quantum computer to break
many of the cryptographic systems in use
today, in the sense that there would be a
polynomial time (in the number of digits of the
integer) algorithm for solving the
problem. In particular, most of the popular
public key ciphers are based on the difficulty of
factoring integers or the discrete logarithm
problem, both of which can be solved by Shor's
algorithm. In particular, the RSA, Diffie–
Hellman, and elliptic curve Diffie–Hellman
algorithms could be broken. These are used to
protect secure Web pages, encrypted email, and
many other types of data. Breaking these would
have significant ramifications for electronic
privacy and security.
Identifying cryptographic systems that may

be secure against quantum algorithms is an
actively researched topic
under the field of post-quantum cryptography.
[66][67]
Some public-key algorithms are based on
problems other than the integer factorization
and discrete logarithm problems to which
Shor's algorithm applies, like the McEliece
cryptosystem based on a problem in coding
theory.[66][68] Lattice-based cryptosystems are
also not known to be broken by quantum
computers, and finding a polynomial time
algorithm for solving the dihedral hidden
subgroup problem, which would break many
lattice based cryptosystems, is a well-studied
open problem.[69] It has been proven that
applying Grover's algorithm to break a
symmetric (secret key) algorithm by brute
force requires time equal to roughly 2n/2
invocations of the underlying cryptographic
algorithm, compared with roughly 2n in the
classical case,[70] meaning that symmetric key
lengths are effectively halved: AES-256 would
have the same security against an attack using
Grover's algorithm that AES-128 has against
classical brute-force search (see Key size).
Search problems
The most well-known example of a problem

that allows for a polynomial
quantum speedup is unstructured search, which
involves finding a marked item out of a list of
items in a database. This can be solved by
Grover's algorithm using
queries to the database, quadratically
fewer than the queries required for

classical algorithms. In this case, the advantage
is not only provable but also optimal: it has
been shown that Grover's algorithm gives the
maximal possible probability of finding the
desired element for any number of oracle
lookups. Many examples of provable quantum
speedups for query problems are based on
Grover's algorithm, including Brassard, Høyer,
and Tapp's algorithm for finding
collisions in two-to-one functions,[71] and Farhi,
Goldstone, and Gutmann's algorithm for
evaluating NAND trees.[72]
Problems that can be efficiently addressed with

Grover's algorithm have the following
properties:[73][74]
1. There is no searchable structure in the

collection of possible answers,
2. The number of possible answers to
check is the same as the number of
inputs to the algorithm, and
3. There exists a boolean function that
evaluates each input and determines
whether it is the correct answer.
For problems with all these properties, the
running time of Grover's algorithm on a
quantum computer scales as the square root of
the number of inputs (or elements in the
database), as opposed to the linear scaling of
classical algorithms. A general class of
problems to which Grover's algorithm can be
applied[75] is a Boolean satisfiability problem,
where the database through which the
algorithm iterates is that of all possible
answers. An example and possible application
of this is a password cracker that attempts to
guess a password. Breaking symmetric ciphers
with this algorithm is of interest to government
agencies.[76]
Quantum annealing
Quantum annealing relies on the adiabatic

theorem to undertake calculations. A system is
placed in the ground state for a simple
Hamiltonian, which slowly evolves to a more
complicated Hamiltonian whose ground state
represents the solution to the problem in
question. The adiabatic theorem states that if
the evolution is slow enough the system will
stay in its ground state at all times through the
process.
Adiabatic optimization may be helpful for
solving computational biology problems.[77]
Machine learning
Since quantum computers can produce

outputs that classical computers cannot
produce efficiently, and since quantum
computation is fundamentally linear
algebraic, some express hope in developing
quantum algorithms that can speed up
machine learning tasks.[78][33]
For example, the quantum algorithm for linear

systems of equations, or "HHL Algorithm",
named after its discoverers Harrow, Hassidim,
and Lloyd, is believed to provide speedup over
classical counterparts.[79][33] Some research
groups
have recently explored the use of quantum
annealing hardware for training Boltzmann
machines and deep neural networks.[80][81][82]
Deep generative chemistry models emerge as

powerful tools to expedite drug discovery.
However, the immense size and complexity of
the structural space of all possible drug-like
molecules pose significant obstacles, which
could be overcome in the future by quantum
computers. Quantum computers are naturally
good for solving complex quantum many-body
problems[22] and thus may be instrumental in
applications
involving quantum chemistry. Therefore, one
can expect that quantum-enhanced generative
models[83] including quantum GANs[84] may
eventually be developed into ultimate
generative chemistry algorithms.
Engineering
A wafer of adiabatic quantum computers
As of 2023, classical computers

outperform quantum computers for all
real-world applications. While current
quantum computers may speed up
solutions to particular mathematical
problems, they give no computational
advantage for practical tasks. For many tasks
there is no promise of useful quantum speedup,
and some tasks provably prohibit any quantum
speedup in the sense that any speedup is ruled
out by proved theorems. Scientists and
engineers are exploring multiple technologies
for quantum computing hardware and hope to
develop scalable quantum architectures, but
serious obstacles remain.[85][86]
Challenges
There are a number of technical challenges in

building a large-scale
quantum computer.[87] Physicist David
DiVincenzo has listed these requirements for
a practical quantum computer:[88]
Physically scalable to increase the

number of qubits
Qubits that can be initialized to arbitrary
values
Quantum gates that are faster than
decoherence time
Universal gate set
Qubits that can be read easily.
Sourcing parts for quantum computers is also

very difficult. Superconducting quantum
computers, like those
constructed by Google and IBM, need helium-
3, a nuclear research byproduct, and special
superconducting cables made only by the
Japanese company Coax Co.[89]
The control of multi-qubit systems requires the

generation and coordination of a large number
of electrical signals with tight and
deterministic timing resolution.
This has led to the development of quantum
controllers that enable interfacing with the
qubits. Scaling these systems to support a
growing number of qubits is an additional
challenge.[90]
Decoherence
One of the greatest challenges involved with

constructing quantum computers is controlling
or removing quantum decoherence. This
usually means isolating the system from its
environment as interactions with the external
world cause the system to decohere. However,
other sources of decoherence also exist.
Examples include the quantum gates, and
the lattice vibrations and background
thermonuclear spin of the physical system used
to implement the qubits.
Decoherence is irreversible, as it is
effectively non-unitary, and is usually
something that should be highly controlled, if
not avoided. Decoherence times for candidate
systems in particular, the transverse relaxation
time T2 (for NMR and MRI technology, also
called the dephasing time), typically range
between nanoseconds and seconds at low
temperature.[91] Currently, some quantum
computers require their qubits to be cooled to
20 millikelvin (usually using a dilution
refrigerator[92]) in order to prevent significant
decoherence.[93] A 2020 study argues that
ionizing radiation such as cosmic rays can
nevertheless cause certain systems to decohere
within milliseconds.[94]
As a result, time-consuming tasks may render
some quantum algorithms inoperable, as
attempting to maintain the state of qubits for a
long enough duration will eventually corrupt
the superpositions.[95]
These issues are more difficult for optical

approaches as the timescales are orders of
magnitude shorter and an often-cited approach
to overcoming them is optical pulse shaping.
Error rates are typically proportional to the
ratio of operating time to decoherence time,
hence any operation must be completed much
more quickly than the decoherence time.
As described by the threshold theorem, if the
error rate is small enough, it is thought to be
possible to use quantum error correction to
suppress errors and decoherence. This allows
the total calculation time to be longer than the
decoherence time if the error correction
scheme can correct errors faster than
decoherence introduces them. An often- cited
figure for the required error rate in each gate
for fault-tolerant computation is 10−3,
assuming the noise is depolarizing.
Meeting this scalability condition is possible

for a wide range of systems. However, the use
of error correction brings
with it the cost of a greatly increased number
of required qubits. The number required to
factor integers using Shor's algorithm is still
polynomial, and thought to be between L and
L2, where L is the number of digits in the
number to be factored; error correction
algorithms would inflate this figure by an
additional factor of
L. For a 1000-bit number, this implies a
need for about 104 bits without error correction.
[96]
With error correction, the figure would rise
to about 107 bits.
Computation time is about L2 or about 107 steps
and at 1 MHz, about 10 seconds.
However, the encoding and error- correction
overheads increase the size of
a real fault-tolerant quantum computer by
several orders of magnitude. Careful
estimates[97][98] show that at least
3 million physical qubits would factor
2,048-bit integer in 5 months on a fully error-
corrected trapped-ion quantum computer. In
terms of the number of physical qubits, to
date, this remains the lowest estimate[99] for
practically useful integer factorization problem
sizing 1,024- bit or larger.
Another approach to the stability- decoherence

problem is to create a topological quantum
computer with anyons, quasi-particles used as
threads,
and relying on braid theory to form stable logic
gates.[100][101]
Quantum supremacy
Physicist John Preskill coined the term

quantum supremacy to describe the
engineering feat of demonstrating that a
programmable quantum device can solve a
problem beyond the capabilities of state- of-
the-art classical computers.[102][103][104] The
problem need not be useful, so some view the
quantum supremacy test only as a potential
future benchmark.[105]
In October 2019, Google AI Quantum, with
the help of NASA, became the first to claim to
have achieved quantum supremacy by
performing calculations on the Sycamore
quantum computer more than 3,000,000 times
faster than they could be done on Summit,
generally considered the world's fastest
computer.[28][106][107] This claim has been
subsequently challenged: IBM has stated that
Summit can perform samples much faster than
claimed,[108][109] and researchers have since
developed better algorithms for the sampling
problem used to claim quantum supremacy,
giving substantial reductions to the gap
between
Sycamore and classical supercomputers[110][111]
[112]
and even beating it.[113][114][115]
In December 2020, a group at USTC

implemented a type of Boson sampling on 76
photons with a photonic quantum computer,
Jiuzhang, to demonstrate quantum supremacy.
[116][117][118]
The authors claim that a classical
contemporary supercomputer would require a
computational time of 600 million years to
generate the number of samples their quantum
processor can generate in 20 seconds.[119]
Claims of quantum supremacy have generated
hype around quantum computing,[120] but they
are based on contrived benchmark tasks that do
not directly imply useful real-world
applications.[85][121]
Skepticism
Despite high hopes for quantum computing,

significant progress in hardware, and optimism
about future applications, a 2023 Nature
spotlight article summarised current quantum
computers as being "For now, [good for]
absolutely nothing".[85] The article
elaborated that quantum computers are yet to
be more useful or efficient than conventional
computers in any case, though it also argued
that in the long term such computers are likely
to be useful. A 2023 Communications of the
ACM article[86] found that current quantum
computing algorithms are "insufficient for
practical quantum advantage without
significant improvements across the
software/hardware stack". It argues that the
most promising candidates for achieving
speedup with quantum computers are "small-
data problems", for example in chemistry and
materials science. However, the article also
concludes that a large range of the potential
applications it considered, such as machine
learning, "will not achieve quantum advantage
with current quantum algorithms in the
foreseeable future", and it identified I/O
constraints that make speedup unlikely for "big
data problems, unstructured linear systems, and
database search based on Grover's algorithm".
This state of affairs can be traced to several

current and long-term considerations.
Conventional computer hardware and

algorithms are not only optimized for
practical tasks, but are still improving
rapidly, particularly GPU accelerators.
Current quantum computing hardware
generates only a limited amount of
entanglement before getting overwhelmed
by noise and does not rule out practical
simulation on conventional computers,
possibly except for contrived cases.
Quantum algorithms provide speedup over
conventional algorithms only for some
tasks, and matching these tasks with
practical applications proved challenging.
Some promising tasks and applications
require resources far
beyond those available today.[122][123] In
particular, processing large amounts of
non-quantum data is a challenge for
quantum computers.[86]
Some promising algorithms have been
"dequantized", i.e., their non-quantum
analogues with similar complexity have
been found.
If quantum error correction is used to
scale quantum computers to practical
applications, its overhead may undermine
speedup offered by many quantum
algorithms.[86]
Complexity analysis of algorithms
sometimes makes abstract
assumptions that do not hold in applications.
For example, input data may not already be
available encoded in quantum states, and
"oracle functions" used in Grover's algorithm
often have internal structure that can be
exploited for faster algorithms.
In particular, building computers with large

numbers of qubits may be futile if those qubits
are not connected well enough and cannot
maintain sufficiently high degree of
entanglement for long time. When trying to
outperform conventional computers, quantum
computing researchers often look for new tasks
that can be solved on
quantum computers, but this leaves the
possibility that efficient non-quantum
techniques will be developed in response, as
seen for Quantum supremacy demonstrations.
Therefore, it is desirable to prove lower bounds
on the complexity of best possible non-
quantum algorithms (which may be unknown)
and show that some quantum algorithms
asymptomatically improve upon those bounds.
Some researchers have expressed skepticism

that scalable quantum computers could ever be
built, typically because of the issue of
maintaining
coherence at large scales, but also for other
reasons.
Bill Unruh doubted the practicality of quantum

computers in a paper published in 1994.[124]
Paul Davies argued that a 400- qubit computer
would even come into conflict with the
cosmological information bound implied by the
holographic principle.[125] Skeptics like Gil
Kalai doubt that quantum supremacy will ever
be achieved.[126][127][128] Physicist Mikhail
Dyakonov has expressed skepticism of
quantum computing as follows:
"So the number of continuous parameters
describing the state of such a useful quantum
computer at any given moment must be...
about 10300... Could we ever learn to control
the more than 10300 continuously variable
parameters defining the quantum state of
such a system? My answer is simple. No,
never."[129][130]
Candidates for physical realizations
A practical quantum computer must use a

physical system as a programmable quantum
register.[131] Researchers are exploring several
technologies as
candidates for reliable qubit implementations.
[132]
Superconductors and trapped ions are
some of the most developed proposals, but
experimentalists are considering other
hardware possibilities as well.[133]
Theory
Computability
Any computational problem solvable by a

classical computer is also solvable by a
quantum computer.[134] Intuitively, this is
because it is believed that all physical
phenomena, including the operation of classical
computers, can be described
using quantum mechanics, which underlies the
operation of quantum computers.
Conversely, any problem solvable by a

quantum computer is also solvable by a
classical computer. It is possible to simulate
both quantum and classical computers
manually with just some paper and a pen, if
given enough time. More formally, any
quantum computer can be simulated by a
Turing machine. In other words, quantum
computers provide no additional power over
classical computers in terms of computability.
This means that quantum computers cannot
solve
undecidable problems like the halting problem,
and the existence of quantum computers does
not disprove the Church– Turing thesis.[135]
Complexity
While quantum computers cannot solve any

problems that classical computers cannot
already solve, it is suspected that they can
solve certain problems faster than classical
computers. For instance, it is known that
quantum computers can efficiently factor
integers, while this is not believed to be the
case for classical computers.
The class of problems that can be efficiently
solved by a quantum computer with bounded
error is called BQP, for "bounded error,
quantum, polynomial time". More formally,
BQP is the class of problems that can be
solved by a polynomial-time quantum Turing
machine with an error probability of at most
1/3. As a class of probabilistic problems, BQP
is the quantum counterpart to BPP ("bounded
error, probabilistic, polynomial time"), the
class of problems that can be solved by
polynomial-time probabilistic Turing
machines with bounded error.[136] It is known
that and is widely suspected that
, which
intuitively would mean that quantum computers
are more powerful than classical computers in
terms of time complexity.[137]
The suspected relationship of BQP to

several classical complexity classes[55]
The exact relationship of BQP to P, NP, and

PSPACE is not known. However, it is known
that ; that
is, all problems that can be efficiently
solved by a deterministic classical computer
can also be efficiently solved by a quantum
computer, and all problems
that can be efficiently solved by a quantum
computer can also be solved by a deterministic
classical computer with polynomial space
resources. It is further suspected that BQP is a
strict superset of P, meaning there are problems
that are efficiently solvable by quantum
computers that are not efficiently solvable by
deterministic classical computers. For instance,
integer factorization and the discrete logarithm
problem are known to be in BQP and are
suspected to be outside of P. On the
relationship of BQP to NP, little is known
beyond the fact that some NP problems that are
believed not to be in P are also in BQP (integer
factorization and
the discrete logarithm problem are both in NP,
for example). It is suspected that
; that is, it is believed that there
are efficiently checkable problems that are not
efficiently solvable by a quantum computer. As
a direct consequence of this belief, it is also
suspected that BQP is disjoint from the class of
NP-complete problems (if an NP- complete
problem were in BQP, then it would follow
from NP-hardness that all problems in NP are
in BQP).[138]
See also
D-Wave Systems – Canadian quantum
computing company
Electronic quantum holography
Glossary of quantum computing
IARPA
List of emerging technologies
List of quantum processors
Magic state distillation – Quantum
computing algorithm
Natural computing
Optical computing
Quantum bus
Quantum cognition
Quantum volume
Quantum weirdness – Unintuitive
aspects of quantum mechanics
Rigetti Computing
Supercomputer
Theoretical computer science
Unconventional computing
Valleytronics
Notes
a. The standard basis is also the
computational basis.[41]
b. In general, probability amplitudes are
complex numbers.
References
1. Russell, John (10 January 2019). "IBM
Quantum Update: Q System One Launch,
New Collaborators, and QC Center Plans" (h
ttps://www.hpcwire.com/2019/01/10/ibm-
quantum-update-q-system-one-launch-new-
collaborators-and-qc-center-plans/) .
HPCwire. Retrieved 9 January 2023.
2. Aaronson 2013, p. 132.
3. Bhatta, Varun S. (10 May 2020). "Plurality of
Wave–Particle Duality" (https://wwwops.cu
rrentscience.ac.in/Volumes/118/09/1365.p df)
(PDF). Current Science. 118 (9): 1365.
doi:10.18520/cs/v118/i9/1365-1374 (http
s://doi.org/10.18520%2Fcs%2Fv118%2Fi
9%2F1365-1374) . ISSN 0011-3891 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/issn/0011-3891) . S2CID
216143449 (https://api.semanticsch
olar.org/CorpusID:216143449) .
4. Ceruzzi, Paul E. (2012). Computing: A
Concise History. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: MIT Press. pp. 3, 46.
ISBN 978-0-262-31038-3. OCLC 796812982
(https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/79681298 2) .
5. Hodges, Andrew (2014). Alan Turing: The
Enigma. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton
University Press. p. xviii.
ISBN 9780691164724.
6. Mårtensson-Pendrill, Ann-Marie (1 November
2006). "The Manhattan project— a part of
physics history". Physics Education. 41 (6):
493–501. Bibcode:2006PhyEd..41..493M
(https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006PhyEd..41..49 3M)
. doi:10.1088/0031-9120/41/6/001 (ht
tps://doi.org/10.1088%2F0031-9120%2F4
1%2F6%2F001) . ISSN 0031-9120 (https://
www.worldcat.org/issn/0031-9120) .
S2CID 120294023 (https://api.semanticsch
7. Benioff, Paul (1980). "The computer as a
physical system: A microscopic quantum
mechanical Hamiltonian model of
computers as represented by Turing
machines". Journal of Statistical Physics. 22
(5): 563–591.
Bibcode:1980JSP....22..563B (https://ui.ads
abs.harvard.edu/abs/1980JSP.........22..563
B) . doi:10.1007/bf01011339 (https://doi.or
g/10.1007%2Fbf01011339) .
8. Buluta, Iulia; Nori, Franco (2 October 2009).
"Quantum Simulators". Science. 326 (5949):
108–111.
Bibcode:2009Sci...326..108B (https://ui.ads
abs.harvard.edu/abs/2009Sci...326..108
B) . doi:10.1126/science.1177838 (https://
doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.1177838) . ISSN
0036-8075 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/issn/0036-8075) . PMID 19797653 (http
s://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19797653) .
S2CID 17187000 (https://api.semanticscho
lar.org/CorpusID:17187000) .
9. Manin, Yu. I. (1980). Vychislimoe i
nevychislimoe (https://web.archive.org/we
b/20130510173823/http://publ.lib.ru/ARCH
IVES/M/MANIN_Yuriy_Ivanovich/Manin_Yu.
I._Vychislimoe_i_nevychislimoe.(1980).%5B djv
%5D.zip) [Computable and
Noncomputable] (in Russian). Soviet Radio.
pp. 13–15. Archived from the original (htt
p://publ.lib.ru/ARCHIVES/M/MANIN_Yuriy_I
vanovich/Manin_Yu.I._Vychislimoe_i_nevyc
hislimoe.(1980).%5bdjv-fax%5d.zip) on 10
May 2013. Retrieved 4 March 2013.
10. Feynman, Richard (June 1982). "Simulating
Physics with Computers" (https://web.archi
ve.org/web/20190108115138/https://peopl
e.eecs.berkeley.edu/~christos/classics/Fey
nman.pdf) (PDF). International Journal of
Theoretical Physics. 21 (6/7): 467–488.
Bibcode:1982IJTP...21..467F (https://ui.ads
abs.harvard.edu/abs/1982IJTP...21..467F) .
doi:10.1007/BF02650179 (https://doi.org/1
0.1007%2FBF02650179) .
olar.org/CorpusID:124545445) . Archived from
the original (https://people.eecs.berke
ley.edu/~christos/classics/Feynman.pdf) (PDF)
on 8 January 2019. Retrieved
28 February 2019.
11. Nielsen & Chuang 2010, p. 214.
12. Bennett, Charles H.; Brassard, Gilles
(December 1984). Quantum cryptography:
Public key distribution and coin tossing. IEEE
International Conference on Computers,
Systems & Signal Processing. Bangalore. pp.
175–179. arXiv:2003.06557
(https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.06557) .
doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2014.05.025 (https://doi.o
rg/10.1016%2Fj.tcs.2014.05.025) .
13. Brassard, G. (2005). "Brief history of quantum
cryptography: A personal perspective"
(https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/do cument/1543949)
. IEEE Information Theory Workshop on
Theory and Practice in Information-Theoretic
Security, 2005. Awaji Island, Japan: IEEE. pp.
19–23. arXiv:quant- ph/0604072
(https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-p h/0604072) .
doi:10.1109/ITWTPI.2005.1543949 (http
s://doi.org/10.1109%2FITWTPI.2005.15439
49) . ISBN 978-0-7803-9491-9.
14. Deutsch, D. (8 July 1985). "Quantum theory,
the Church–Turing principle and the universal
quantum computer". Proceedings of the Royal
Society of London. A. Mathematical and
Physical Sciences. 400 (1818): 97–117.
Bibcode:1985RSPSA.400...97D (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1985RSPSA.400...9 7D) .
doi:10.1098/rspa.1985.0070 (https://
doi.org/10.1098%2Frspa.1985.0070) .
ISSN 0080-4630 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/issn/0080-4630) . S2CID 1438116 (http
s://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1438
116) .
15. Bernstein, Ethan; Vazirani, Umesh (1993).
"Quantum complexity theory" (http://portal.
acm.org/citation.cfm?doid=167088.16709
7) . Proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual
ACM symposium on Theory of computing –
STOC '93. San Diego, California, United
States: ACM Press. pp. 11–20.
doi:10.1145/167088.167097 (https://doi.or
g/10.1145%2F167088.167097) . ISBN 978- 0-
89791-591-5. S2CID 676378 (https://api.s
emanticscholar.org/CorpusID:676378) .
16. Simon, D. R. (1994). "On the power of
quantum computation" (https://ieeexplore.i
eee.org/document/365701) . Proceedings 35th
Annual Symposium on Foundations of
Computer Science. Santa Fe, New Mexico,
USA: IEEE Comput. Soc. Press. pp. 116–
123. doi:10.1109/SFCS.1994.365701 (http
s://doi.org/10.1109%2FSFCS.1994.36570
1) . ISBN 978-0-8186-6580-6.
S2CID 7457814 (https://api.semanticschola
r.org/CorpusID:7457814) .
17. Nielsen & Chuang 2010, p. 30-32.
18. Shor 1994.
19. National Academies of Sciences,
Engineering, and Medicine 2019, p. 15.
20. Grover, Lov K. (1996). A fast quantum
mechanical algorithm for database search.
ACM symposium on Theory of computing.
Philadelphia: ACM Press. pp. 212–219.
arXiv:quant-ph/9605043 (https://arxiv.org/a
bs/quant-ph/9605043) .
doi:10.1145/237814.237866 (https://doi.or
g/10.1145%2F237814.237866) . ISBN 978- 0-
89791-785-8.
22. Lloyd, Seth (23 August 1996). "Universal
Quantum Simulators". Science. 273 (5278):
1073–1078. Bibcode:1996Sci........273.1073L
(https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1996Sc
i...273.1073L) .
doi:10.1126/science.273.5278.1073 (http
s://doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.273.5278.1
073) . ISSN 0036-8075 (https://www.worldc
at.org/issn/0036-8075) . PMID 8688088 (ht
tps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8688088) .
23. Cao, Yudong; Romero, Jonathan; Olson,
Jonathan P.; Degroote, Matthias; Johnson,
Peter D.; et al. (9 October 2019). "Quantum
Chemistry in the Age of Quantum
Computing". Chemical Reviews. 119 (19):
10856–10915. arXiv:1812.09976 (https://ar
xiv.org/abs/1812.09976) .
doi:10.1021/acs.chemrev.8b00803 (https://
doi.org/10.1021%2Facs.chemrev.8b0080
3) . ISSN 0009-2665 (https://www.worldca
t.org/issn/0009-2665) . PMID 31469277 (ht
tps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3146927
7) . S2CID 119417908 (https://api.semantic
scholar.org/CorpusID:119417908) .
Engineering, and Medicine 2019, pp. 164–
169.
25. Chuang, Isaac L.; Gershenfeld, Neil; Kubinec,
Markdoi (April 1998). "Experimental
Implementation of Fast Quantum Searching".
Physical Review Letters. American Physical
Society. 80 (15):
3408–3411. Bibcode:1998PhRvL..80.3408C
(https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1998Ph
RvL..80.3408C) .
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.80.3408 (https://
doi.org/10.1103%2FPhysRevLett.80.3408) .
26. Holton, William Coffeen. "quantum computer"
(https://www.britannica.com/tec
hnology/quantum-computer) . Encyclopedia
Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica.
Retrieved 4 December 2021.
27. Gibney, Elizabeth (23 October 2019). "Hello
quantum world! Google publishes landmark
quantum supremacy claim" (https://doi.org/
10.1038%2Fd41586-019-03213-z) . Nature.
574 (7779): 461–462.
Bibcode:2019Natur.574..461G (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019Natur.574..461
G) . doi:10.1038/d41586-019-03213-z (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2Fd41586-019-03213-
z) . PMID 31645740 (https://pubmed.ncbi.n
lm.nih.gov/31645740) .
28. Lay summary: Martinis, John; Boixo, Sergio
(23 October 2019). "Quantum Supremacy
Using a Programmable Superconducting
Processor" (https://ai.googleblog.com/201
9/10/quantum-supremacy-using-programm
able.html) . Nature. Google AI. 574 (7779):
505–510. arXiv:1910.11333 (https://arxiv.or
g/abs/1910.11333) .
Bibcode:2019Natur.574..505A (https://ui.ad
A) . doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1666-5 (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41586-019-1666-
5) . PMID 31645734 (https://pubmed.ncbi.
nlm.nih.gov/31645734) . S2CID 204836822
(https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:
204836822) . Retrieved 27 April 2022.
• Journal article: Arute, Frank; Arya, Kunal;
Babbush, Ryan; Bacon, Dave; Bardin, Joseph
C.; et al. (23 October 2019). "Quantum
supremacy using a programmable
superconducting processor". Nature. 574
(7779): 505–510. arXiv:1910.11333
(https://arxiv.org/abs/19 10.11333) .
Bibcode:2019Natur.574..505A
(https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019Na
tur.574..505A) . doi:10.1038/s41586-019-
1666-5 (https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41586
-019-1666-5) . PMID 31645734 (https://pub
med.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31645734) .
29. Aaronson, Scott (30 October 2019). "Opinion |
Why Google's Quantum Supremacy Milestone
Matters" (https://ww
w.nytimes.com/2019/10/30/opinion/googl e-
quantum-computer-sycamore.html) . The New
York Times. ISSN 0362-4331 (https://
www.worldcat.org/issn/0362-4331) . Retrieved
25 September 2021.
30. Pednault, Edwin (22 October 2019). "On
'Quantum Supremacy' " (https://www.ibm.c
om/blogs/research/2019/10/on-quantum-s
upremacy/) . IBM Research Blog. Retrieved 9
February 2021.
31. Pan, Feng; Zhang, Pan (4 March 2021).
"Simulating the Sycamore quantum supremacy
circuits". arXiv:2103.03074 (http
s://arxiv.org/abs/2103.03074) [quant-ph (h
ttps://arxiv.org/archive/quant-ph) ].
33. Preskill, John (6 August 2018). "Quantum
Computing in the NISQ era and beyond" (htt
ps://doi.org/10.22331%2Fq-2018-08-06-7
9) . Quantum. 2: 79. arXiv:1801.00862 (http
s://arxiv.org/abs/1801.00862) .
Bibcode:2018Quant...2...79P (https://ui.ads
abs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Quant...2...79P) .
doi:10.22331/q-2018-08-06-79 (https://doi.
org/10.22331%2Fq-2018-08-06-79) .
34. Gibney, Elizabeth (2 October 2019).
"Quantum gold rush: the private funding
pouring into quantum start-ups". Nature.
574 (7776): 22–24.
Bibcode:2019Natur.574...22G (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019Natur.574...22
G) . doi:10.1038/d41586-019-02935-4 (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2Fd41586-019-02935-
nlm.nih.gov/31578480) . S2CID 203626236
203626236) .
35. Rodrigo, Chris Mills (12 February 2020).
"Trump budget proposal boosts funding for
artificial intelligence, quantum computing"
(https://thehill.com/policy/technology/482 402-
trump-budget-proposal-boosts-funding- for-
artificial-intelligence-quantum) . The Hill.
Retrieved 11 July 2021.
36. Biondi, Matteo; Heid, Anna; Henke,
Nicolaus; Mohr, Niko; Pautasso, Lorenzo; et
al. (14 December 2021). "Quantum
computing use cases are getting real—what you
need to know" (https://www.mckinsey.c
om/business-functions/mckinsey-digital/o ur-
insights/quantum-computing-use-cases- are-getting-
real-what-you-need-to-know) .
McKinsey & Company. Retrieved 1 April 2022.
37. Leong, Kelvin; Sung, Anna (November 2022).
"What Business Managers Should Know About
Quantum Computing?" (http://j
ournalofinterdisciplinarysciences.com/wp-c
ontent/uploads/2022/10/3-What-Business-
Managers-Should-Know-About-Quantum-Co
mputing.pdf) (PDF). Journal of
Interdisciplinary Sciences. Retrieved
13 August 2023.
38. Bennett, Charlie (31 July 2020). Information Is
Quantum: How Physics Helped Explain the
Nature of Information and What Can Be Done
With It (https://www.youtube.com/liv e/rslt-
LwtDK4&t=4102) (Videotape). Event
occurs at 1:08:22 – via YouTube.
40. Aaronson 2013, p. 110.
41. Mermin 2007, p. 18.
42. Das, A.; Chakrabarti, B. K. (2008). "Quantum
Annealing and Analog Quantum
Computation". Rev. Mod. Phys. 80 (3):
1061–1081. arXiv:0801.2193 (https://arxiv.
org/abs/0801.2193) .
Bibcode:2008RvMP...80.1061D (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008RvMP...80.106 1D) .
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.563.9990 (https://cit
eseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=
10.1.1.563.9990) .
doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.80.1061 (https://
doi.org/10.1103%2FRevModPhys.80.106
1) . S2CID 14255125 (https://api.semantics
cholar.org/CorpusID:14255125) .
43. Nayak, Chetan; Simon, Steven; Stern, Ady;
Das Sarma, Sankar (2008). "Nonabelian
Anyons and Quantum Computation". Reviews
of Modern Physics. 80 (3): 1083–
1159. arXiv:0707.1889 (https://arxiv.org/ab
s/0707.1889) .
Bibcode:2008RvMP...80.1083N (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008RvMP...80.108 3N) .
doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.80.1083 (ht
tps://doi.org/10.1103%2FRevModPhys.80.1
083) . S2CID 119628297 (https://api.sema
nticscholar.org/CorpusID:119628297) .
44. Chi-Chih Yao, A. (1993). "Quantum circuit
complexity" (https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/do
cument/366852) . Proceedings of 1993 IEEE
34th Annual Foundations of Computer
Science. pp. 352–361.
doi:10.1109/SFCS.1993.366852 (https://do
i.org/10.1109%2FSFCS.1993.366852) . ISBN
0-8186-4370-6. S2CID 195866146 (htt
ps://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:195
866146) .
45. Raussendorf, Robert; Browne, Daniel E.;
Briegel, Hans J. (25 August 2003).
"Measurement-based quantum computation on
cluster states". Physical Review A. 68 (2):
022312. arXiv:quant- ph/0301052
Bibcode:2003PhRvA..68b2312R (https://ui.
adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2003PhRvA..68b2
312R) . doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.68.022312
(https://doi.org/10.1103%2FPhysRevA.68.0
22312) . S2CID 6197709 (https://api.sema
nticscholar.org/CorpusID:6197709) .
46. Aharonov, Dorit; van Dam, Wim; Kempe,
Julia; Landau, Zeph; Lloyd, Seth; Regev,
Oded (1 January 2008). "Adiabatic Quantum
Computation Is Equivalent to Standard
Quantum Computation". SIAM Review. 50
(4): 755–787. arXiv:quant- ph/0405098
Bibcode:2008SIAMR..50..755A (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2008SIAMR..50..75 5A) .
doi:10.1137/080734479 (https://doi.o
rg/10.1137%2F080734479) . ISSN 0036-
1445 (https://www.worldcat.org/issn/0036-
1445) . S2CID 1503123 (https://api.semant
icscholar.org/CorpusID:1503123) .
47. Freedman, Michael H.; Larsen, Michael;
Wang, Zhenghan (1 June 2002). "A Modular
Functor Which is Universal for Quantum
Computation". Communications in
Mathematical Physics. 227 (3): 605–622.
Bibcode:2002CMaPh.227..605F (https://ui.
adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2002CMaPh.227..
605F) . doi:10.1007/s002200200645 (http
s://doi.org/10.1007%2Fs002200200645) .
g/issn/0010-3616) . S2CID 8990600 (http
600) .
48. Pirandola, S.; Andersen, U. L.; Banchi, L.;
Berta, M.; Bunandar, D.; Colbeck, R.;
Englund, D.; Gehring, T.; Lupo, C.; Ottaviani,
C.; Pereira, J. L.; Razavi, M.; Shamsul Shaari,
J.; Tomamichel, M.; Usenko, V. C. (14
December 2020). "Advances in quantum
cryptography". Advances in Optics and
Photonics. 12 (4): 1017. arXiv:1906.01645
(https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.01645) .
Bibcode:2020AdOP...12.1012P (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020AdOP...12.101 2P) .
doi:10.1364/AOP.361502 (https://doi.
org/10.1364%2FAOP.361502) . ISSN 1943-
8206) . S2CID 174799187 (https://api.sem
anticscholar.org/CorpusID:174799187) .
49. Xu, Feihu; Ma, Xiongfeng; Zhang, Qiang; Lo,
Hoi-Kwong; Pan, Jian-Wei (26 May 2020).
"Secure quantum key distribution with
realistic devices". Reviews of Modern
Physics. 92 (2): 025002-3.
arXiv:1903.09051 (https://arxiv.org/abs/19
03.09051) . Bibcode:2020RvMP...92b5002X
(https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Rv
MP...92b5002X) .
doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.92.025002 (http
s://doi.org/10.1103%2FRevModPhys.92.02
5002) . S2CID 210942877 (https://api.sem
anticscholar.org/CorpusID:210942877) .
50. Xu, Guobin; Mao, Jianzhou; Sakk, Eric; Wang,
Shuangbao Paul (22 March 2023). "An
Overview of Quantum-Safe Approaches:
Quantum Key Distribution and Post- Quantum
Cryptography". 2023 57th Annual Conference
on Information Sciences and Systems (CISS).
IEEE. p. 3.
doi:10.1109/CISS56502.2023.10089619 (ht
tps://doi.org/10.1109%2FCISS56502.2023.
10089619) . ISBN 978-1-6654-5181-9.
51. Kozlowski, Wojciech; Wehner, Stephanie (25
September 2019). "Towards Large-Scale
Quantum Networks". Proceedings of the Sixth
Annual ACM International Conference on
Nanoscale Computing and Communication.
ACM. pp. 1–7. arXiv:1909.08396
doi:10.1145/3345312.3345497
(https://doi.org/10.1145%2F3345312.3345 497) .
ISBN 978-1-4503-6897-1.
52. Guo, Xueshi; Breum, Casper R.; Borregaard,
Johannes; Izumi, Shuro; Larsen, Mikkel V.;
Gehring, Tobias; Christandl, Matthias;
Neergaard-Nielsen, Jonas S.; Andersen, Ulrik
L. (23 December 2019). "Distributed quantum
sensing in a continuous-variable entangled
network". Nature Physics. 16 (3):
g/abs/1905.09408) . doi:10.1038/s41567-
019-0743-x (https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs4
1567-019-0743-x) . ISSN 1745-2473 (http
s://www.worldcat.org/issn/1745-2473) . S2CID
53. Jordan, Stephen (14 October 2022) [22 April
2011]. "Quantum Algorithm Zoo" (htt
p://math.nist.gov/quantum/zoo/) . Archived
(https://web.archive.org/web/201
80429014516/https://math.nist.gov/quantu
m/zoo/) from the original on 29 April 2018.
54. Aaronson, Scott; Arkhipov, Alex (6 June
2011). "The computational complexity of
linear optics". Proceedings of the forty-third
annual ACM symposium on Theory of
computing. San Jose, California: Association
for Computing Machinery.
pp. 333–342. arXiv:1011.3245 (https://arxi
v.org/abs/1011.3245) .
doi:10.1145/1993636.1993682 (https://doi.
org/10.1145%2F1993636.1993682) .
ISBN 978-1-4503-0691-1.
56. Norton, Quinn (15 February 2007). "The
Father of Quantum Computing" (http://archi
ve.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2
007/02/72734) . Wired.
57. Ambainis, Andris (Spring 2014). "What Can
We Do with a Quantum Computer?" (http://
www.ias.edu/ias-letter/ambainis-quantum-
computing) . Institute for Advanced Study.
58. Chang, Kenneth (14 June 2023). "Quantum
Computing Advance Begins New Era, IBM
Says – A quantum computer came up with
better answers to a physics problem than a
conventional supercomputer" (https://www.
nytimes.com/2023/06/14/science/ibm-qua ntum-
computing.html) . The New York Times.
Archived (https://archive.today/202
30614151835/https://www.nytimes.com/2
023/06/14/science/ibm-quantum-computin
g.html) from the original on 14 June 2023.
Retrieved 15 June 2023.
59. Kim, Youngseok; et al. (14 June 2023).
"Evidence for the utility of quantum computing
before fault tolerance" (https://w
ww.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC102
66970) . Nature. 618 (7965): 500–505.
Bibcode:2023Natur.618..500K (https://ui.ad
K) . doi:10.1038/s41586-023-06096-3 (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41586-023-06096-
3) . PMC 10266970 (https://www.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10266970) . PMID
37316724 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/37316724) .
60. Morello, Andrea (21 November 2018). Lunch
& Learn: Quantum Computing (http
s://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7susESgnD v8) .
Sibos TV. Archived (https://ghostarchi
ve.org/varchive/youtube/20211211/7susES
gnDv8) from the original on 11 December
2021. Retrieved 4 February 2021 – via
YouTube.
61. Ruane, Jonathan; McAfee, Andrew; Oliver,
William D. (1 January 2022). "Quantum
Computing for Business Leaders" (https://h
br.org/2022/01/quantum-computing-for-bu
siness-leaders) . Harvard Business Review.
g/issn/0017-8012) . Retrieved 12 April 2023.
62. Budde, Florian; Volz, Daniel (12 July 2019).
"Quantum computing and the chemical
industry | McKinsey" (https://www.mckinse
y.com/industries/chemicals/our-insights/th e-next-
big-thing-quantum-computings-pote ntial-impact-
on-chemicals) . www.mckinsey.com. McKinsey
and Company. Retrieved 12 April 2023.
63. Bourzac, Katherine (30 October 2017).
"Chemistry is quantum computing's killer app"
(https://cen.acs.org/articles/95/i43/C hemistry-
quantum-computings-killer-app.ht ml) .
cen.acs.org. American Chemical Society.
Retrieved 12 April 2023.
64. Lenstra, Arjen K. (2000). "Integer Factoring"
(https://web.archive.org/web/2015041023
4239/http://sage.math.washington.edu/ed
u/124/misc/arjen_lenstra_factoring.pdf) (PDF).
Designs, Codes and Cryptography. 19 (2/3):
101–128.
doi:10.1023/A:1008397921377 (https://doi.
org/10.1023%2FA%3A1008397921377) .
r.org/CorpusID:9816153) . Archived from the
original (http://sage.math.washington.e
du/edu/124/misc/arjen_lenstra_factoring.p df)
(PDF) on 10 April 2015.
66. Bernstein, Daniel J. (2009). "Introduction to
post-quantum cryptography". Post- Quantum
Cryptography. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
pp. 1–14. doi:10.1007/978-3-540- 88702-7_1
(https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978
-3-540-88702-7_1) . ISBN 978-3-540-88701-
0. S2CID 61401925 (https://api.semanticsc
holar.org/CorpusID:61401925) .
67. See also pqcrypto.org (http://pqcrypto.or g/) ,
a bibliography maintained by Daniel J.
Bernstein and Tanja Lange on cryptography not
known to be broken by quantum computing.
68. McEliece, R. J. (January 1978). "A Public-
Key Cryptosystem Based On Algebraic Coding
Theory" (http://ipnpr.jpl.nasa.gov/pr
ogress_report2/42-44/44N.PDF) (PDF).
DSNPR. 44: 114–116.
Bibcode:1978DSNPR..44..114M (https://ui.
adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1978DSNPR..44..1 14M)
.
69. Kobayashi, H.; Gall, F. L. (2006). "Dihedral
Hidden Subgroup Problem: A Survey" (http
s://doi.org/10.2197%2Fipsjdc.1.470) .
Information and Media Technologies. 1 (1):
178–185. doi:10.2197/ipsjdc.1.470 (http
s://doi.org/10.2197%2Fipsjdc.1.470) .
70. Bennett, Charles H.; Bernstein, Ethan;
Brassard, Gilles; Vazirani, Umesh (October
1997). "Strengths and Weaknesses of
Quantum Computing". SIAM Journal on
Computing. 26 (5): 1510–1523.
Bibcode:1997quant.ph..1001B (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997quant.ph..1001
B) . doi:10.1137/s0097539796300933 (http
s://doi.org/10.1137%2Fs009753979630093
3) . S2CID 13403194 (https://api.semantics
71. Brassard, Gilles; Høyer, Peter; Tapp, Alain
(2016). "Quantum Algorithm for the Collision
Problem". In Kao, Ming-Yang (ed.).
Encyclopedia of Algorithms. New York, New
York: Springer. pp. 1662–1664. arXiv:quant-
ph/9705002 (https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-p
h/9705002) . doi:10.1007/978-1-4939-
2864-4_304 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2F97
8-1-4939-2864-4_304) . ISBN 978-1-4939-
2864-4. S2CID 3116149 (https://api.semant
icscholar.org/CorpusID:3116149) .
72. Farhi, Edward; Goldstone, Jeffrey; Gutmann,
Sam (23 December 2008). "A Quantum
Algorithm for the Hamiltonian NAND Tree"
(https://doi.org/10.4086%2Ftoc.2008.v004
a008) . Theory of Computing. 4 (1): 169–
190. doi:10.4086/toc.2008.v004a008 (http
s://doi.org/10.4086%2Ftoc.2008.v004a00
t.org/issn/1557-2862) . S2CID 8258191 (ht
tps://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:82
58191) .
73. Williams, Colin P. (2011). Explorations in
Quantum Computing. Springer. pp. 242–
244. ISBN 978-1-84628-887-6.
74. Grover, Lov (29 May 1996). "A fast quantum
mechanical algorithm for database search".
75. Ambainis, Ambainis (June 2004). "Quantum
search algorithms". ACM SIGACT News. 35
(2): 22–35. arXiv:quant-ph/0504012 (http
s://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0504012) .
Bibcode:2005quant.ph..4012A (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2005quant.ph..401 2A) .
doi:10.1145/992287.992296 (https://
doi.org/10.1145%2F992287.992296) .
76. Rich, Steven; Gellman, Barton (1 February
2014). "NSA seeks to build quantum computer
that could crack most types of encryption"
(https://www.washingtonpost.c
om/world/national-security/nsa-seeks-to-b uild-
quantum-computer-that-could-crack-m ost-types-
of-encryption/2014/01/02/8fff29 7e-7195-11e3-
8def-a33011492df2_story.ht ml) . The
Washington Post.
77. Outeiral, Carlos; Strahm, Martin; Morris,
Garrett; Benjamin, Simon; Deane, Charlotte;
Shi, Jiye (2021). "The prospects of quantum
computing in computational molecular
biology" (https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fwcms.
1481) . WIREs Computational Molecular
Science. 11. arXiv:2005.12792 (https://arxi
v.org/abs/2005.12792) .
doi:10.1002/wcms.1481 (https://doi.org/1
0.1002%2Fwcms.1481) . S2CID 218889377
218889377) .
78. Biamonte, Jacob; Wittek, Peter; Pancotti,
Nicola; Rebentrost, Patrick; Wiebe, Nathan;
Lloyd, Seth (September 2017). "Quantum
machine learning". Nature. 549 (7671):
g/abs/1611.09347) .
Bibcode:2017Natur.549..195B (https://ui.ad
B) . doi:10.1038/nature23474 (https://doi.o
rg/10.1038%2Fnature23474) . ISSN 0028-
0836) . PMID 28905917 (https://pubmed.n
cbi.nlm.nih.gov/28905917) .
79. Harrow, Aram; Hassidim, Avinatan; Lloyd,
Seth (2009). "Quantum algorithm for solving
linear systems of equations". Physical Review
Letters. 103 (15): 150502. arXiv:0811.3171
Bibcode:2009PhRvL.103o0502H
(https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2009Ph
RvL.103o0502H) .
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.150502 (http
s://doi.org/10.1103%2FPhysRevLett.103.15
80. Benedetti, Marcello; Realpe-Gómez, John;
Biswas, Rupak; Perdomo-Ortiz, Alejandro (9
August 2016). "Estimation of effective
temperatures in quantum annealers for
sampling applications: A case study with
possible applications in deep learning" (http
s://doi.org/10.1103%2FPhysRevA.94.02230
8) . Physical Review A. 94 (2): 022308.
10.07611) .
Bibcode:2016PhRvA..94b2308B (https://ui.
adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2016PhRvA..94b2
308B) . doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.94.022308
(https://doi.org/10.1103%2FPhysRevA.94.0
22308) .
81. Ajagekar, Akshay; You, Fengqi (5 December
2020). "Quantum computing assisted deep
learning for fault detection and diagnosis in
industrial process systems". Computers &
Chemical Engineering. 143: 107119.
03.00264) .
doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2020.107119
(https://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.compchemen
g.2020.107119) . ISSN 0098-1354 (https://
www.worldcat.org/issn/0098-1354) . S2CID
82. Ajagekar, Akshay; You, Fengqi (1 December
2021). "Quantum computing based hybrid
deep learning for fault diagnosis in electrical
power systems" (https://doi.org/1
0.1016%2Fj.apenergy.2021.117628) .
Applied Energy. 303: 117628.
doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2021.117628 (http
s://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.apenergy.2021.11
7628) . ISSN 0306-2619 (https://www.worl
dcat.org/issn/0306-2619) .
83. Gao, Xun; Anschuetz, Eric R.; Wang, Sheng-
Tao; Cirac, J. Ignacio; Lukin, Mikhail D.
(2022). "Enhancing Generative Models via
Quantum Correlations". Physical Review X. 12
(2): 021037. arXiv:2101.08354 (https://a
rxiv.org/abs/2101.08354) .
Bibcode:2022PhRvX..12b1037G (https://ui.
adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022PhRvX..12b1
037G) . doi:10.1103/PhysRevX.12.021037
(https://doi.org/10.1103%2FPhysRevX.12.0
21037) . S2CID 231662294 (https://api.se
manticscholar.org/CorpusID:231662294) .
84. Li, Junde; Topaloglu, Rasit; Ghosh, Swaroop (9
January 2021). "Quantum Generative Models
for Small Molecule Drug Discovery".
01.03438) [cs.ET (https://arxiv.org/archiv
e/cs.ET) ].
85. Brooks, Michael (24 May 2023). "Quantum
computers: what are they good for?" (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2Fd41586-023-01692-
9) . Nature. 617 (7962): S1–S3.
Bibcode:2023Natur.617S...1B (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/2023Natur.617S...1
B) . doi:10.1038/d41586-023-01692-9 (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2Fd41586-023-01692-
nlm.nih.gov/37225885) . S2CID 258847001
258847001) .
86. Torsten Hoefler; Thomas Häner; Matthias
Troyer (May 2023). "Disentangling Hype from
Practicality: On Realistically Achieving
Quantum Advantage" (https://m-cacm.acm.
org/magazines/2023/5/272276-disentangli ng-
hype-from-practicality-on-realistically-ac hieving-
quantum-advantage/fulltext) . Communications
of the ACM.
87. Dyakonov, Mikhail (15 November 2018). "The
Case Against Quantum Computing" (ht
tps://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/hardwa
re/the-case-against-quantum-computing) . IEEE
Spectrum.
88. DiVincenzo, David P. (13 April 2000). "The
Physical Implementation of Quantum
Computation". Fortschritte der Physik. 48 (9–
11): 771–783. arXiv:quant-ph/0002077
(https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0002077) .
Bibcode:2000ForPh..48..771D (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ForPh..48..771
D) . doi:10.1002/1521-
3978(200009)48:9/11<771::AID-
PROP771>3.0.CO;2-E (https://doi.org/10.10
02%2F1521-3978%28200009%2948%3A9%
2F11%3C771%3A%3AAID-PROP771%3E3.0.
CO%3B2-E) . S2CID 15439711 (https://api.s
89. Giles, Martin (17 January 2019). "We'd have
more quantum computers if it weren't so hard
to find the damn cables" (https://www.
technologyreview.com/s/612760/quantum-
computers-component-shortage/) . MIT
Technology Review. Retrieved 17 May 2021.
90. Pauka SJ, Das K, Kalra B, Moini A, Yang Y,
Trainer M, Bousquet A, Cantaloube C, Dick N,
Gardner GC, Manfra MJ, Reilly DJ (2021). "A
cryogenic CMOS chip for generating control
signals for multiple qubits" (https://
www.nature.com/articles/s41928-020-005 28-y)
. Nature Electronics. 4 (4): 64–70.
12.01299) . doi:10.1038/s41928-020-
00528-y (https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs4192 8-
020-00528-y) . S2CID 231715555 (http
15555) .
91. DiVincenzo, David P. (1995). "Quantum
Computation". Science. 270 (5234): 255–
261. Bibcode:1995Sci...270..255D (https://u
i.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995Sci...270..2 55D)
. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.242.2165 (https://c
iteseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi
=10.1.1.242.2165) .
doi:10.1126/science.270.5234.255 (https://
doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.270.5234.25
92. Zu, H.; Dai, W.; de Waele, A.T.A.M. (2022).
"Development of Dilution refrigerators – A
review". Cryogenics. 121.
doi:10.1016/j.cryogenics.2021.103390 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.cryogenics.2021.
103390) . ISSN 0011-2275 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/issn/0011-2275) .
93. Jones, Nicola (19 June 2013). "Computing:
The quantum company" (https://doi.org/10.
1038%2F498286a) . Nature. 498 (7454):
286–288. Bibcode:2013Natur.498..286J (ht
tps://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2013Natu
r.498..286J) . doi:10.1038/498286a (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2F498286a) .
PMID 23783610 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.
nih.gov/23783610) .
94. Vepsäläinen, Antti P.; Karamlou, Amir H.;
Orrell, John L.; Dogra, Akshunna S.; Loer,
Ben; et al. (August 2020). "Impact of ionizing
radiation on superconducting qubit coherence"
(https://www.nature.com/articl es/s41586-020-
2619-8) . Nature. 584 (7822): 551–556.
arXiv:2001.09190 (http
s://arxiv.org/abs/2001.09190) .
Bibcode:2020Natur.584..551V (https://ui.ad
V) . doi:10.1038/s41586-020-2619-8 (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41586-020-2619-
t.org/issn/1476-4687) . PMID 32848227 (ht
tps://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3284822
95. Amy, Matthew; Matteo, Olivia; Gheorghiu,
Vlad; Mosca, Michele; Parent, Alex; Schanck,
John (30 November 2016). "Estimating the
cost of generic quantum pre-image attacks on
SHA-2 and SHA-3". arXiv:1603.09383
(https://arxiv.org/abs/16 03.09383) [quant-ph
(https://arxiv.org/arch ive/quant-ph) ].
96. Dyakonov, M. I. (14 October 2006). S. Luryi;
Xu, J.; Zaslavsky, A. (eds.). "Is Fault-Tolerant
Quantum Computation Really Possible?".
Future Trends in Microelectronics. Up the
Nano Creek: 4–18. arXiv:quant-ph/0610117
(https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0610117) .
Bibcode:2006quant.ph.10117D (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2006quant.ph.1011 7D) .
97. Ahsan, Muhammad (2015). Architecture
Framework for Trapped-ion Quantum
Computer based on Performance Simulation
Tool (http://worldcat.org/oclc/9 23881411) .
OCLC 923881411 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/oclc/923881411) .
98. Ahsan, Muhammad; Meter, Rodney Van; Kim,
Jungsang (28 December 2016). "Designing a
Million-Qubit Quantum Computer Using a
Resource Performance Simulator"
(https://doi.org/10.1145%2F283 0570) . ACM
Journal on Emerging Technologies in
Computing Systems. 12
(4): 39:1–39:25. doi:10.1145/2830570 (http
s://doi.org/10.1145%2F2830570) .
g/issn/1550-4832) . S2CID 1258374 (http
374) .
99. Gidney, Craig; Ekerå, Martin (15 April 2021).
"How to factor 2048 bit RSA integers in 8
hours using 20 million noisy qubits".
Quantum. 5: 433. arXiv:1905.09749 (http
s://arxiv.org/abs/1905.09749) .
Bibcode:2021Quant...5..433G (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/2021Quant...5..433
G) . doi:10.22331/q-2021-04-15-433 (http
s://doi.org/10.22331%2Fq-2021-04-15-43
3) . ISSN 2521-327X (https://www.worldca
t.org/issn/2521-327X) . S2CID 162183806
162183806) .
100. Freedman, Michael H.; Kitaev, Alexei; Larsen,
Michael J.; Wang, Zhenghan (2003).
"Topological quantum computation". Bulletin
of the American Mathematical Society. 40 (1):
31–38. arXiv:quant- ph/0101025
doi:10.1090/S0273-0979-02-
00964-3 (https://doi.org/10.1090%2FS0273
-0979-02-00964-3) . MR 1943131 (https://
mathscinet.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?m
r=1943131) .
101. Monroe, Don (1 October 2008). "Anyons: The
breakthrough quantum computing needs?"
(https://www.newscientist.com/ch
annel/fundamentals/mg20026761.700-any ons-
the-breakthrough-quantum-computing-
needs.html) . New Scientist.
102. Preskill, John (26 March 2012). "Quantum
computing and the entanglement frontier".
3.5813) [quant-ph (https://arxiv.org/archiv
e/quant-ph) ].
103. Preskill, John (6 August 2018). "Quantum
Computing in the NISQ era and beyond" (htt
ps://doi.org/10.22331%2Fq-2018-08-06-7
9) . Quantum. 2: 79. arXiv:1801.00862 (http
s://arxiv.org/abs/1801.00862) .
Bibcode:2018Quant...2...79P (https://ui.ads
abs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Quant...2...79P) .
doi:10.22331/q-2018-08-06-79 (https://doi.
org/10.22331%2Fq-2018-08-06-79) .
104. Boixo, Sergio; Isakov, Sergei V.; Smelyanskiy,
Vadim N.; Babbush, Ryan; Ding, Nan; et al.
(2018). "Characterizing Quantum Supremacy
in Near-Term Devices". Nature Physics. 14
(6): 595–600. arXiv:1608.00263
Bibcode:2018NatPh..14..595B
(https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2018Na
tPh..14..595B) . doi:10.1038/s41567-018-
0124-x (https://doi.org/10.1038%2Fs41567
-018-0124-x) . S2CID 4167494 (https://api.s
105. Savage, Neil (5 July 2017). "Quantum
Computers Compete for "Supremacy" " (htt
ps://www.scientificamerican.com/article/q
uantum-computers-compete-for-supremac y/) .
Scientific American.
106. Giles, Martin (20 September 2019). "Google
researchers have reportedly achieved 'quantum
supremacy' " (https://www.techno
logyreview.com/f/614416/google-research ers-
have-reportedly-achieved-quantum-supr emacy/) .
MIT Technology Review. Retrieved 15 May
2020.
107. Tavares, Frank (23 October 2019). "Google
and NASA Achieve Quantum Supremacy" (h
ttp://www.nasa.gov/feature/ames/quantu m-
supremacy) . NASA. Retrieved
16 November 2021.
108. Pednault, Edwin; Gunnels, John A.;
Nannicini, Giacomo; Horesh, Lior; Wisnieff,
Robert (22 October 2019). "Leveraging
Secondary Storage to Simulate Deep 54- qubit
Sycamore Circuits". arXiv:1910.09534
(https://arxiv.org/abs/1910.09534) [quant-
ph (https://arxiv.org/archive/quant-ph) ].
109. Cho, Adrian (23 October 2019). "IBM casts
doubt on Google's claims of quantum
supremacy" (https://www.science.org/cont
ent/article/ibm-casts-doubt-googles-claims
-quantum-supremacy) . Science.
doi:10.1126/science.aaz6080 (https://doi.o
rg/10.1126%2Fscience.aaz6080) .
g/issn/0036-8075) . S2CID 211982610 (htt
982610) .
110. Liu, Yong (Alexander); Liu, Xin (Lucy); Li,
Fang (Nancy); Fu, Haohuan; Yang, Yuling;
et al. (14 November 2021). "Closing the
"quantum supremacy" gap". Proceedings of the
International Conference for High Performance
Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis.
SC '21. New York, New York: Association for
Computing Machinery. pp. 1–12.
arXiv:2110.14502 (htt
ps://arxiv.org/abs/2110.14502) .
doi:10.1145/3458817.3487399 (https://doi.
org/10.1145%2F3458817.3487399) .
ISBN 978-1-4503-8442-1. S2CID 239036985
239036985) .
111. Bulmer, Jacob F. F.; Bell, Bryn A.; Chadwick,
Rachel S.; Jones, Alex E.; Moise, Diana;
et al. (28 January 2022). "The boundary for
quantum advantage in Gaussian boson
sampling" (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p
mc/articles/PMC8791606) . Science
Advances. 8 (4): eabl9236. arXiv:2108.01622
Bibcode:2022SciA...........................8.9236B
(https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022Sc
iA....8.9236B) . doi:10.1126/sciadv.abl9236
(https://doi.org/10.1126%2Fsciadv.abl923 6) .
ISSN 2375-2548 (https://www.worldca
t.org/issn/2375-2548) . PMC 8791606 (htt
ps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/P
MC8791606) . PMID 35080972 (https://pub
med.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35080972) .
112. McCormick, Katie (10 February 2022). "Race
Not Over Between Classical and Quantum
Computers" (https://physics.aps.
org/articles/v15/19) . Physics. 15: 19.
Bibcode:2022PhyOJ..15...19M (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022PhyOJ..15...19
M) . doi:10.1103/Physics.15.19 (https://do
i.org/10.1103%2FPhysics.15.19) .
113. Pan, Feng; Chen, Keyang; Zhang, Pan
(2022). "Solving the Sampling Problem of the
Sycamore Quantum Circuits". Physical
Review Letters. 129 (9): 090502.
11.03011) .
Bibcode:2022PhRvL.129i0502P (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2022PhRvL.129i05 02P)
.
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.129.090502 (http
s://doi.org/10.1103%2FPhysRevLett.129.09
114. Cho, Adrian (2 August 2022). "Ordinary
computers can beat Google's quantum
computer after all" (https://www.science.or
g/content/article/ordinary-computers-can-b eat-
google-s-quantum-computer-after-all) . Science.
377. doi:10.1126/science.ade2364 (https://doi.o
rg/10.1126%2Fscience.ade2364) .
115. "Google's 'quantum supremacy' usurped by
researchers using ordinary supercomputer"
(https://social.techcrunch.com/2022/08/0
5/googles-quantum-supremacy-usurped-by-
researchers-using-ordinary-supercompute r/) .
TechCrunch. 5 August 2022. Retrieved 7
August 2022.
116. Ball, Philip (3 December 2020). "Physicists in
China challenge Google's 'quantum advantage'
". Nature. 588 (7838): 380.
Bibcode:2020Natur.588..380B (https://ui.ad
B) . doi:10.1038/d41586-020-03434-7 (http
s://doi.org/10.1038%2Fd41586-020-03434-
nlm.nih.gov/33273711) . S2CID 227282052
227282052) .
117. Garisto, Daniel. "Light-based Quantum
Computer Exceeds Fastest Classical
Supercomputers" (https://www.scientificam
erican.com/article/light-based-quantum-co
mputer-exceeds-fastest-classical-supercom
puters/) . Scientific American. Retrieved
7 December 2020.
118. Conover, Emily (3 December 2020). "The new
light-based quantum computer Jiuzhang has
achieved quantum supremacy"
(https://www.sciencenews.org/ article/new-light-
based-quantum-computer- jiuzhang-supremacy) .
Science News. Retrieved 7 December 2020.
119. Zhong, Han-Sen; Wang, Hui; Deng, Yu-Hao;
Chen, Ming-Cheng; Peng, Li-Chao; et al. (3
December 2020). "Quantum computational
advantage using photons". Science. 370
(6523): 1460–1463. arXiv:2012.01625 (http
s://arxiv.org/abs/2012.01625) .
Bibcode:2020Sci...370.1460Z (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/2020Sci...370.1460
Z) . doi:10.1126/science.abe8770 (https://
doi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.abe8770) . ISSN
0036-8075 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/issn/0036-8075) . PMID 33273064 (http
120. Roberson, Tara M. (21 May 2020). "
{{subst:title case|Can hype be a force for
good?}}" (https://doi.org/10.1177%2F09636
62520923109) . Public Understanding of
Science. 29 (5): 544–552.
doi:10.1177/0963662520923109 (https://d
oi.org/10.1177%2F0963662520923109) .
g/issn/0963-6625) . PMID 32438851 (http
121. Cavaliere, Fabio; Mattsson, John; Smeets,
Ben (September 2020). "The security
implications of quantum cryptography and
quantum computing" (http://www.magonlin
elibrary.com/doi/10.1016/S1353-4858%28
20%2930105-7) . Network Security. 2020
(9): 9–15. doi:10.1016/S1353-
4858(20)30105-7 (https://doi.org/10.1016%
2FS1353-4858%2820%2930105-7) .
g/issn/1353-4858) . S2CID 222349414 (htt
349414) .
122. Monroe, Don (December 2022). "Quantum
Computers and the Universe" (https://m-ca
cm.acm.org/magazines/2022/12/266916-q
uantum-computers-and-the-universe/fulltex
t) . Communications of the ACM.
123. Swayne, Matt (20 June 2023). "PsiQuantum
Sees 700x Reduction in Computational
Resource Requirements to Break Elliptic
Curve Cryptography With a Fault Tolerant
Quantum Computer" (https://thequantumin
sider.com/2023/06/20/psiquantum-sees-7 00x-
reduction-in-computational-resource-re quirements-
to-break-elliptic-curve-cryptogra phy-with-a-fault-
tolerant-quantum-compute r/) . The Quanrum
Insider.
124. Unruh, Bill (1995). "Maintaining coherence in
Quantum Computers". Physical Review A. 51
(2): 992–997. arXiv:hep-th/9406058 (htt
ps://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/9406058) .
Bibcode:1995PhRvA..51..992U (https://ui.a
dsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995PhRvA..51..99 2U)
. doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.51.992 (http
s://doi.org/10.1103%2FPhysRevA.51.992) .
PMID 9911677 (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.ni
h.gov/9911677) . S2CID 13980886 (https://
api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1398088
6) .
125. Davies, Paul (6 March 2007). "The
implications of a holographic universe for
quantum information science and the nature
of physical law". arXiv:quant- ph/0703041
126. Regan, K. W. (23 April 2016). "Quantum
Supremacy and Complexity" (https://rjlipto
n.wordpress.com/2016/04/22/quantum-su
premacy-and-complexity/) . Gödel's Lost Letter
and P=NP.
127. Kalai, Gil (May 2016). "The Quantum
Computer Puzzle" (https://www.ams.org/jo
urnals/notices/201605/rnoti-p508.pdf) (PDF).
Notices of the AMS. 63 (5): 508–
516.
128. Rinott, Yosef; Shoham, Tomer; Kalai, Gil (13
July 2021). "Statistical Aspects of the Quantum
Supremacy Demonstration". arXiv:2008.05177
(https://arxiv.org/abs/20 08.05177) [quant-ph
(https://arxiv.org/arch ive/quant-ph) ].
129. Dyakonov, Mikhail (15 November 2018). "The
Case Against Quantum Computing" (ht
tps://spectrum.ieee.org/computing/hardwa
re/the-case-against-quantum-computing) . IEEE
Spectrum. Retrieved 3 December 2019.
130. Dyakonov, Mikhail (24 March 2020). Will We
Ever Have a Quantum Computer? (https://w
ww.springer.com/gp/book/978303042018
5) . Springer. ISBN 9783030420185.
Retrieved 22 May 2020.
131. Tacchino, Francesco; Chiesa, Alessandro;
Carretta, Stefano; Gerace, Dario (19
December 2019). "Quantum Computers as
Universal Quantum Simulators: State‐of‐ the‐Art
and Perspectives" (https://onlinelibr
ary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/qute.20190005
2) . Advanced Quantum Technologies. 3
(3): 1900052. arXiv:1907.03505 (https://arx
iv.org/abs/1907.03505) .
doi:10.1002/qute.201900052 (https://doi.or
g/10.1002%2Fqute.201900052) .
g/issn/2511-9044) . S2CID 195833616 (htt
833616) .
138. Bernstein, Ethan; Vazirani, Umesh (1997).
"Quantum Complexity Theory" (http://www.
cs.berkeley.edu/~vazirani/bv.ps) . SIAM
Journal on Computing. 26 (5): 1411–1473.
CiteSeerX 10.1.1.144.7852 (https://citeseer
x.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.
1.144.7852) . doi:10.1137/S0097539796300921
(https://
doi.org/10.1137%2FS009753979630092
1) .
Further reading
Textbooks
Aaronson, Scott (2013). Quantum Computing
Since Democritus. Cambridge University Press.
doi:10.1017/CBO9780511979309 (htt
ps://doi.org/10.1017%2FCBO978051197930
9) . ISBN 978-0-521-19956-8.
OCLC 829706638 (https://www.worldcat.org/
oclc/829706638) .
Akama, Seiki (2014). Elements of Quantum
Computing: History, Theories and Engineering
Applications. Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3- 319-
08284-4 (https://doi.org/10.1007%2F97
8-3-319-08284-4) . ISBN 978-3-319-08284-4.
oclc/884786739) .
Benenti, Giuliano; Casati, Giulio; Rossini,
Davide; Strini, Giuliano (2019). Principles of
Quantum Computation and Information: A
Comprehensive Textbook (2nd ed.).
doi:10.1142/10909 (https://doi.org/10.114
2%2F10909) . ISBN 978-981-3237-23-0.
OCLC 1084428655 (https://www.worldcat.or
g/oclc/1084428655) . S2CID 62280636 (http
636) .
Bernhardt, Chris (2019). Quantum Computing for
Everyone. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262- 35091-4.
OCLC 1082867954 (https://www.w
orldcat.org/oclc/1082867954) .
Hidary, Jack D. (2021). Quantum Computing:
An Applied Approach (2nd ed.). doi:10.1007/978-
3-030-83274-2 (https://doi. org/10.1007%2F978-
3-030-83274-2) .
ISBN 978-3-03-083274-2. OCLC 1272953643
S2CID 238223274 (https://api.semantics
Hiroshi, Imai; Masahito, Hayashi, eds. (2006).
Quantum Computation and Information: From
Theory to Experiment. Topics in Applied Physics.
Vol. 102. doi:10.1007/3-540-33133- 6
(https://doi.org/10.1007%2F3-540-33133-
6) . ISBN 978-3-540-33133-9.
Hughes, Ciaran; Isaacson, Joshua; Perry,
Anastasia; Sun, Ranbel F.; Turner, Jessica (2021).
Quantum Computing for the Quantum Curious
(https://link.springer.com/content/pd
f/10.1007/978-3-030-61601-4.pdf) (PDF).
doi:10.1007/978-3-030-61601-4 (https://doi.
org/10.1007%2F978-3-030-61601-4) .
ISBN 978-3-03-061601-4. OCLC 1244536372
Jaeger, Gregg (2007). Quantum Information: An
Overview. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-36944-0
(https://doi.org/10.1007%2F978-0-387-3694 4-0) .
ISBN 978-0-387-36944-0.
oclc/186509710) .
Johnston, Eric R.; Harrigan, Nic; Gimeno-
Segovia, Mercedes (2019). Programming
Quantum Computers: Essential Algorithms
and Code Samples. O'Reilly Media,
Incorporated. ISBN 978-1-4920-3968-6.
g/oclc/1111634190) .
Kaye, Phillip; Laflamme, Raymond; Mosca,
Michele (2007). An Introduction to Quantum
Computing. OUP Oxford. ISBN 978-0-19-
857000-4. OCLC 85896383 (https://www.wor
ldcat.org/oclc/85896383) .
Kitaev, Alexei Yu.; Shen, Alexander H.; Vyalyi,
Mikhail N. (2002). Classical and Quantum
Computation. American Mathematical Soc.
ISBN 978-0-8218-3229-5. OCLC 907358694
Mermin, N. David (2007). Quantum Computer
Science: An Introduction.
doi:10.1017/CBO9780511813870 (https://do
i.org/10.1017%2FCBO9780511813870) .
ISBN 978-0-511-34258-5. OCLC 422727925
Grumbling, Emily; Horowitz, Mark, eds. (2019).
Quantum Computing: Progress and Prospects.
Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
doi:10.17226/25196 (http
s://doi.org/10.17226%2F25196) . ISBN 978- 0-
309-47970-7. OCLC 1091904777 (https://w
ww.worldcat.org/oclc/1091904777) .
S2CID 125635007 (https://api.semanticschol
ar.org/CorpusID:125635007) .
Nielsen, Michael; Chuang, Isaac (2010).
Quantum Computation and Quantum Information
(10th anniversary ed.).
doi:10.1017/CBO9780511976667 (https://do
i.org/10.1017%2FCBO9780511976667) .
ISBN 978-0-511-99277-3. OCLC 700706156
S2CID 59717455 (https://api.semanticsc
holar.org/CorpusID:59717455) .
Stolze, Joachim; Suter, Dieter (2004).
Quantum Computing: A Short Course from
Theory to Experiment.
doi:10.1002/9783527617760 (https://doi.or
g/10.1002%2F9783527617760) . ISBN 978- 3-
527-61776-0. OCLC 212140089 (https://ww
w.worldcat.org/oclc/212140089) .
Susskind, Leonard; Friedman, Art (2014).
Quantum Mechanics: The Theoretical Minimum.
New York: Basic Books. ISBN 978- 0-465-
08061-8.
Wichert, Andreas (2020). Principles of
Quantum Artificial Intelligence: Quantum
Problem Solving and Machine Learning
(2nd ed.). doi:10.1142/11938 (https://doi.or
g/10.1142%2F11938) . ISBN 978-981-12-
2431-7. OCLC 1178715016 (https://www.wor
ldcat.org/oclc/1178715016) .
Wong, Thomas (2022). Introduction to Classical
and Quantum Computing (http://ww
w.thomaswong.net/introduction-to-classical- and-
quantum-computing-1e.pdf) (PDF).
Rooted Grove. ISBN 979-8-9855931-0-5.
g/oclc/1308951401) .
Zeng, Bei; Chen, Xie; Zhou, Duan-Lu; Wen,
Xiao-Gang (2019). Quantum Information Meets
Quantum Matter. arXiv:1508.02595 (htt
ps://arxiv.org/abs/1508.02595) . doi:10.1007/978-
1-4939-9084-9 (https://doi. org/10.1007%2F978-1-
4939-9084-9) .
ISBN 978-1-4939-9084-9. OCLC 1091358969
Academic papers
Abbot, Derek; Doering, Charles R.; Caves,
Carlton M.; Lidar, Daniel M.; Brandt, Howard E.;
et al. (2003). "Dreams versus Reality: Plenary
Debate Session on Quantum Computing".
Quantum Information Processing. 2 (6): 449–
472. arXiv:quant- ph/0310130
(https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/ 0310130) .
doi:10.1023/B:QINP.0000042203.24782.9a
(https://doi.org/10.1023%2FB%3AQINP.0000
042203.24782.9a) . hdl:2027.42/45526 (http
s://hdl.handle.net/2027.42%2F45526) .
Berthiaume, Andre (1 December 1998). "Quantum
Computation". Solution Manual for Quantum
Mechanics. pp. 233–234.
doi:10.1142/9789814541893_0016 (https://d
oi.org/10.1142%2F9789814541893_0016) .
ISBN 978-981-4541-88-6. S2CID 128255429
(https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:1
28255429) – via Semantic Scholar.
DiVincenzo, David P. (2000). "The Physical
Implementation of Quantum Computation".
Fortschritte der Physik. 48 (9–11): 771–783.
arXiv:quant-ph/0002077 (https://arxiv.org/ab
s/quant-ph/0002077) .
Bibcode:2000ForPh..48..771D (https://ui.ads
abs.harvard.edu/abs/2000ForPh..48..771D) .
doi:10.1002/1521-
3978(200009)48:9/11<771::AID-
PROP771>3.0.CO;2-E (https://doi.org/10.100
2%2F1521-3978%28200009%2948%3A9%2F
11%3C771%3A%3AAID-PROP771%3E3.0.C
O%3B2-E) . S2CID 15439711 (https://api.se
manticscholar.org/CorpusID:15439711) .
DiVincenzo, David P. (1995). "Quantum
Computation". Science. 270 (5234): 255–
261. Bibcode:1995Sci...270..255D (https://ui.
adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1995Sci...270..255
D) . CiteSeerX 10.1.1.242.2165 (https://cites
eerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.
1.1.242.2165) .
doi:10.1126/science.270.5234.255 (https://d
oi.org/10.1126%2Fscience.270.5234.255) .
ar.org/CorpusID:220110562) . Table 1 lists
switching and dephasing times for various
systems.
Feynman, Richard (1982). "Simulating
physics with computers". International
Journal of Theoretical Physics. 21 (6–7):
467–488. Bibcode:1982IJTP...21..467F (http
s://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1982IJTP...2
1..467F) . CiteSeerX 10.1.1.45.9310 (https://
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi
=10.1.1.45.9310) . doi:10.1007/BF02650179
(https://doi.org/10.1007%2FBF02650179) . S2CID
124545445 (https://api.semanticschol
Jeutner, Valentin (2021). "The Quantum
Imperative: Addressing the Legal Dimension of
Quantum Computers" (https://lup.lub.lu.s
e/record/e034e7b7-d17c-4863-9cee-7e654f9
7225b) . Morals & Machines. 1 (1): 52–59.
doi:10.5771/2747-5174-2021-1-52 (https://d
oi.org/10.5771%2F2747-5174-2021-1-52) .
Krantz, P.; Kjaergaard, M.; Yan, F.; Orlando, T.
P.; Gustavsson, S.; Oliver, W. D. (17 June 2019).
"A Quantum Engineer's Guide to Superconducting
Qubits". Applied Physics Reviews. 6 (2): 021318.
arXiv:1904.06560 (htt
ps://arxiv.org/abs/1904.06560) .
Bibcode:2019ApPRv...6b1318K (https://ui.ad
sabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019ApPRv...6b1318
K) . doi:10.1063/1.5089550 (https://doi.org/
10.1063%2F1.5089550) . ISSN 1931-9401 (h
ttps://www.worldcat.org/issn/1931-9401) . S2CID
119104251 (https://api.semanticschol
Mitchell, Ian (1998). "Computing Power into the
21st Century: Moore's Law and Beyond"
(http://citeseer.ist.psu.edu/mitchell98compu
ting.html) .
Shor, Peter W. (1994). Algorithms for Quantum
Computation: Discrete Logarithms and Factoring.
Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.
Santa Fe, New Mexico: IEEE. pp. 124–134.
doi:10.1109/SFCS.1994.365700 (https://doi.
org/10.1109%2FSFCS.1994.365700) .
ISBN 978-0-8186-6580-6.
Simon, Daniel R. (1994). "On the Power of
Quantum Computation" (http://citeseer.ist.ps
u.edu/simon94power.html) . Institute of Electrical
and Electronics Engineers Computer Society
Press.
External links
Media related to Quantum computer at
Wikimedia Commons
Learning materials related to Quantum
computing at Wikiversity
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
"Quantum Computing (http://plato.stanf
ord.edu/entries/qt-quantcomp/) " by Amit
Hagar and Michael E. Cuffaro.
"Quantum computation, theory of" (http
s://www.encyclopediaofmath.org/index.
php?title=Quantum_computation,_theor
y_of) , Encyclopedia of Mathematics, EMS
Press, 2001 [1994]
Quantum computing for the very curious
(https://quantum.country/qcvc) by Andy
Matuschak and Michael Nielsen
Lectures
Quantum computing for the determined
(https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=
PL1826E60FD05B44E4) – 22 video
lectures by Michael Nielsen
Video Lectures (http://www.quiprocone.
org/Protected/DD_lectures.htm) by David
Deutsch
Lectures at the Institut Henri Poincaré
(slides and videos) (https://web.archive.
org/web/20160303183533/http://www.
quantware.ups-tlse.fr/IHP2006/)
Online lecture on An Introduction to
Quantum Computing, Edward Gerjuoy
(2008) (https://web.archive.org/web/20
130901004919/http://nanohub.org/reso
urces/4778)
Lomonaco, Sam. Four Lectures on Quantum
Computing given at Oxford University in
July 2006 (http://www.cse
e.umbc.edu/~lomonaco/Lectures.html#
OxfordLectures)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?

title=Quantum_computing&oldid=1180612345"
This page was last edited on 17 October 2023, at 18:52

(UTC). •
Content is available under CC BY-SA 4.0 unless
otherwise noted.

Quantum Computing - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Quantum Computing - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Quantum Computing - Wikipedia

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A quantum computer is a computer that

IBM Q System One, a quantum computer with 20

At small scales, physical matter exhibits

Classical physics cannot explain the operation

The basic unit of information in quantum

Physically engineering high-quality qubits has

National governments have invested heavily

In principle, a non-quantum (classical)

Optimism about quantum computing is fueled

The Mach–Zehnder interferometer

Peter Shor (pictured here in 2017)

Quantum algorithms then emerged for solving

Over the years, experimentalists have

The threshold theorem shows how increasing

... investment dollars are pouring

With focus on business management’s point of

Quantum programs, in contrast, rely on precise

As physicist Charlie Bennett describes the

The qubit serves as the basic unit of quantum

A two-dimensional vector mathematically

When a qubit is measured in the standard basis,

Each additional qubit doubles the

The state of this one-qubit quantum memory

Mathematically, the application of such a logic

The mathematics of single qubit gates can be

As a mathematical consequence of this

In summary, quantum computation can be

Quantum parallelism refers to the ability of

There are a number of models of computation

A quantum circuit diagram implementing a

A quantum gate array decomposes computation

Any quantum computation (which is, in the

Measurement-based quantum computing

A measurement-based quantum computer

Adiabatic quantum computing

An adiabatic quantum computer, based on

Topological quantum computing

A topological quantum computer decomposes

Quantum Turing machine

A quantum Turing machine is the quantum

Modern fiber-optic cables can transmit

Quantum algorithms that offer more than a

Other problems, including the simulation of

Some quantum algorithms, like Grover's

Simulation of quantum systems

Since chemistry and nanotechnology rely on

About 2% of the annual global energy output is

A notable application of quantum computation

Identifying cryptographic systems that may

The most well-known example of a problem

fewer than the queries required for

Problems that can be efficiently addressed with

1. There is no searchable structure in the

Quantum annealing relies on the adiabatic

Since quantum computers can produce

For example, the quantum algorithm for linear

Deep generative chemistry models emerge as

A wafer of adiabatic quantum computers

As of 2023, classical computers