BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

David Wecker

David Wecker contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
quant-ph

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 15 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
3works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2014arXiv

Defining and detecting quantum speedup

The development of small-scale digital and analog quantum devices raises the question of how to fairly assess and compare the computational power of classical and quantum devices, and of how to detect quantum speedup. Here we show how to define and measure quantum speedup in various scenarios, and how to avoid pitfalls that might mask or fake quantum speedup. We illustrate our discussion with data from a randomized benchmark test on a D-Wave Two device with up to 503 qubits. Comparing the performance of the device on random spin glass instances with limited precision to simulated classical and quantum annealers, we find no evidence of quantum speedup when the entire data set is considered, and obtain inconclusive results when comparing subsets of instances on an instance-by-instance basis. Our results for one particular benchmark do not rule out the possibility of speedup for other classes of problems and illustrate that quantum speedup is elusive and can depend on the question posed.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Comment on: "Classical signature of quantum annealing"

In a recent preprint (arXiv:1305.4904) entitled "Classical signature of quantum annealing" Smolin and Smith point out that a bimodal distribution presented in (arXiv:1304.4595) for the success probability in the D-Wave device does not in itself provide sufficient evidence for quantum annealing, by presenting a classical model that also exhibits bimodality. Here we analyze their model and in addition present a similar model derived from the semi-classical limit of quantum spin dynamics, which also exhibits a bimodal distribution. We find that in both cases the correlations between the success probabilities of these classical models and the D-Wave device are weak compared to the correlations between a simulated quantum annealer and the D-Wave device. Indeed, the evidence for quantum annealing presented in arXiv:1304.4595 is not limited to the bimodality, but relies in addition on the success probability correlations between the D-Wave device and the simulated quantum annealer. The Smolin-Smith model and our semi-classical spin model both fail this correlation test.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Quantum annealing with more than one hundred qubits

Quantum technology is maturing to the point where quantum devices, such as quantum communication systems, quantum random number generators and quantum simulators, may be built with capabilities exceeding classical computers. A quantum annealer, in particular, solves hard optimisation problems by evolving a known initial configuration at non-zero temperature towards the ground state of a Hamiltonian encoding a given problem. Here, we present results from experiments on a 108 qubit D-Wave One device based on superconducting flux qubits. The strong correlations between the device and a simulated quantum annealer, in contrast with weak correlations between the device and classical annealing or classical spin dynamics, demonstrate that the device performs quantum annealing. We find additional evidence for quantum annealing in the form of small-gap avoided level crossings characterizing the hard problems. To assess the computational power of the device we compare it to optimised classical algorithms.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access