Archive for the ‘Quantum Computer’ Category

Microsofts quantum computing platform is now in limited preview – TechCrunch

Microsoft today announced that Azure Quantum, its partner-centric quantum computing platform for developers who want to get started with quantum computing, is now in limited preview. First announced at Microsoft Ignite 2019, Azure Quantum brings together the hardware from IonQ, Honeywell, QCI and Microsoft, services from the likes of 1QBit, and the classical computing capabilities of the Azure cloud. With this move to being in limited preview, Microsoft is now opening the service up to a small number of select partners and customers.

At its current stage, quantum computing isnt exactly a mission-critical capability for any business, but given how fast things are moving and how powerful the technology will be once its matured a bit over the next few years, many experts argue that now is the time to get started especially because of how different quantum computing is from classical computing and how it will take developers a while to develop.

At Ignite, Microsoft also open-sourced its Quantum Development Kit, compilers and simulators.

With all of this, the company is taking a different approach from some of its competitors. In addition, Microsoft also currently has to partner with quantum hardware companies simply because its own quantum hardware efforts havent quite reached the point where they are viable. The company is taking a very different approach from the likes of IBM or Rigetti by betting on a different kind of qubit at the core of its machine. And while it has made some breakthroughs in recent months, it doesnt yet have a working qubit or if it does, it hasnt publicly talked about it.

See the rest here:
Microsofts quantum computing platform is now in limited preview - TechCrunch

Quantum computing will (eventually) help us discover vaccines in days – VentureBeat

The coronavirus is proving that we have to move faster in identifying and mitigating epidemics before they become pandemics because, in todays global world, viruses spread much faster, further, and more frequently than ever before.

If COVID-19 has taught us anything, its that while our ability to identify and treat pandemics has improved greatly since the outbreak of the Spanish Flu in 1918, there is still a lot of room for improvement. Over the past few decades, weve taken huge strides to improve quick detection capabilities. It took a mere 12 days to map the outer spike protein of the COVID-19 virus using new techniques. In the 1980s, a similar structural analysis for HIV took four years.

But developing a cure or vaccine still takes a long time and involves such high costs that big pharma doesnt always have incentive to try.

Drug discovery entrepreneur Prof. Noor Shaker posited that Whenever a disease is identified, a new journey into the chemical space starts seeking a medicine that could become useful in contending diseases. The journey takes approximately 15 years and costs $2.6 billion, and starts with a process to filter millions of molecules to identify the promising hundreds with high potential to become medicines. Around 99% of selected leads fail later in the process due to inaccurate prediction of behavior and the limited pool from which they were sampled.

Prof. Shaker highlights one of the main problems with our current drug discovery process: The development of pharmaceuticals is highly empirical. Molecules are made and then tested, without being able to accurately predict performance beforehand. The testing process itself is long, tedious, cumbersome, and may not predict future complications that will surface only when the molecule is deployed at scale, further eroding the cost/benefit ratio of the field. And while AI/ML tools are already being developed and implemented to optimize certain processes, theres a limit to their efficiency at key tasks in the process.

Ideally, a great way to cut down the time and cost would be to transfer the discovery and testing from the expensive and time-inefficient laboratory process (in-vitro) we utilize today, to computer simulations (in-silico). Databases of molecules are already available to us today. If we had infinite computing power we could simply scan these databases and calculate whether each molecule could serve as a cure or vaccine to the COVID-19 virus. We would simply input our factors into the simulation and screen the chemical space for a solution to our problem.

In principle, this is possible. After all, chemical structures can be measured, and the laws of physics governing chemistry are well known. However, as the great British physicist Paul Dirac observed: The underlying physical laws necessary for the mathematical theory of a large part of physics and the whole of chemistry are thus completely known, and the difficulty is only that the exact application of these laws leads to equations much too complicated to be soluble.

In other words, we simply dont have the computing power to solve the equations, and if we stick to classical computers we never will.

This is a bit of a simplification, but the fundamental problem of chemistry is to figure out where electrons sit inside a molecule and calculate the total energy of such a configuration. With this data, one could calculate the properties of a molecule and predict its behavior. Accurate calculations of these properties will allow the screening of molecular databases for compounds that exhibit particular functions, such as a drug molecule that is able to attach to the coronavirus spike and attack it. Essentially, if we could use a computer to accurately calculate the properties of a molecule and predict its behavior in a given situation, it would speed up the process of identifying a cure and improve its efficiency.

Why are quantum computers much better than classical computers at simulating molecules?

Electrons spread out over the molecule in a strongly correlated fashion, and the characteristics of each electron depend greatly on those of its neighbors. These quantum correlations (or entanglement) are at the heart of the quantum theory and make simulating electrons with a classical computer very tricky.

The electrons of the COVID-19 virus, for example, must be treated in general as being part of a single entity having many degrees of freedom, and the description of this ensemble cannot be divided into the sum of its individual, distinguishable electrons. The electrons, due to their strong correlations, have lost their individuality and must be treated as a whole. So to solve the equations, you need to take into account all of the electrons simultaneously. Although classical computers can in principle simulate such molecules, every multi-electron configuration must be stored in memory separately.

Lets say you have a molecule with only 10 electrons (forget the rest of the atom for now), and each electron can be in two different positions within the molecule. Essentially, you have 2^10=1024 different configurations to keep track of rather just 10 electrons which would have been the case if the electrons were individual, distinguishable entities. Youd need 1024 classical bits to store the state of this molecule. Quantum computers, on the other hand, have quantum bits (qubits), which can be made to strongly correlate with one another in the same way electrons within molecules do. So in principle, you would need only about 10 such qubits to represent the strongly correlated electrons in this model system.

The exponentially large parameter space of electron configurations in molecules is exactly the space qubits naturally occupy. Thus, qubits are much more adapted to the simulation of quantum phenomena. This scaling difference between classical and quantum computation gets very big very quickly. For instance, simulating penicillin, a molecule with 41 atoms (and many more electrons) will require 10^86 classical bits, or more bits than the number of atoms in the universe. With a quantum computer, you would only need about 286 qubits. This is still far more qubits than we have today, but certainly a more reasonable and achievable number.The COVID-19 virus outer spike protein, for comparison, contains many thousands of atoms and is thus completely intractable for classical computation. The size of proteins makes them intractable to classical simulation with any degree of accuracy even on todays most powerful supercomputers. Chemists and pharma companies do simulate molecules with supercomputers (albeit not as large as the proteins), but they must resort to making very rough molecule models that dont capture the details a full simulation would, leading to large errors in estimation.

It might take several decades until a sufficiently large quantum computer capable of simulating molecules as large as proteins will emerge. But when such a computer is available, it will mean a complete revolution in the way the pharma and the chemical industries operate.

The holy grail end-to-end in-silico drug discovery involves evaluating and breaking down the entire chemical structures of the virus and the cure.

The continued development of quantum computers, if successful, will allow for end-to-end in-silico drug discovery and the discovery of procedures to fabricate the drug. Several decades from now, with the right technology in place, we could move the entire process into a computer simulation, allowing us to reach results with amazing speed. Computer simulations could eliminate 99.9% of false leads in a fraction of the time it now takes with in-vitro methods. With the appearance of a new epidemic, scientists could identify and develop a potential vaccine/drug in a matter of days.

The bottleneck for drug development would then move from drug discovery to the human testing phases including toxicity and other safety tests. Eventually, even these last stage tests could potentially be expedited with the help of a large scale quantum computer, but that would require an even greater level of quantum computing than described here. Tests at this level would require a quantum computer with enough power to contain a simulation of the human body (or part thereof) that will screen candidate compounds and simulate their impact on the human body.

Achieving all of these dreams will demand a continuous investment into the development of quantum computing as a technology. As Prof. Shohini Ghose said in her 2018 Ted Talk: You cannot build a light bulb by building better and better candles. A light bulb is a different technology based on a deeper scientific understanding. Todays computers are marvels of modern technology and will continue to improve as we move forward. However, we will not be able to solve this task with a more powerful classical computer. It requires new technology, more suited for the task.

(Special thanks Dr. Ilan Richter, MD MPH for assuring the accuracy of the medical details in this article.)

Ramon Szmuk is a Quantum Hardware Engineer at Quantum Machines.

Read more here:
Quantum computing will (eventually) help us discover vaccines in days - VentureBeat

Playing God and parental drive in Devs, Fringe and Arrival – SYFY WIRE

Tales of experiments gone wrong are a staple of science fiction, filled with depictions of scientists flexing their abilities and resources for personal reasons. Motives range from a thirst for power to a savior complex stemming from an incident closer to home. The common thread of the latter includes parents doing everything in their power to save their child. When combined with great intellect the ramifications of this drive can be far-reaching.

This is the case in the recent Alex Garland sci-fi limited series Devs, which grapples with free will versus determinism via the overreach of tech companies, and those pulling the strings. Depicting a version of the near future that doesn't look too dissimilar to the current proliferation of controlling Silicon Valley moguls, Devs portrays the development of secret quantum technology and its potential impact on the moral fabric of society. Fitting into a larger narrative of parents, technology, and the loss of a child, CEO Forest (Nick Offerman) sits alongside the likes ofFringe's Walter Bishop (John Noble) and Amy Adams as linguist Louise Banks in Arrival. Trauma implicitly shapes us and informs future actions, which is magnified further when the person suffering is also in possession of the power to change this outcome. Who will play God to save their loved ones?

Spoilers ahead for Devs.

Motives clouded by individual stakes are often more dangerous because it becomes impossible to put any sense of reasoning or distance on a decision that includes an emotional tether. The first episode of Devs reveals that Amaya boss Forest will do anything including murder to protect the secrets being held in the belly of the woodland area of the sprawling tech company campus. A creepy statue of his daughter (also called Amaya) towers over the redwood trees, her hands expectedly cupped as if she is waiting for a giant ball to be tossed toward her.

Midway through the series, it is revealed that Amaya (Amaya Mizuno-Andr), along with Forest's wife Lianne (Georgia King), died in a car accident, which occurred while Lianne was on the phone to her husband, chastising him for calling when they were so close to home. The theme of a scientist using their prowess to alter events to avoid a tragedy is another repeated theme, which Alex Garland's series explores from a quantum physics and philosophical perspective. Forest isn't attempting time travel, but he does want to go back to a version of reality before this incident.

Most people would probably do anything to change a life-altering event like this one. Beyond wishful thinking, this is not something most people can contemplate. However, Forest is reminiscent of Fringe's Walter Bishop in his attempt to save his child. Both men possess the necessary scientific acumen to aid their quest, even if it has wider implications for the nature of existence. Taking on the masculine attribute of fixing things, these two men will alter the fabric of existence to reach a satisfactory solution. In contrast, Louise Banks learns of a language that changes how she perceives time but doesn't use this knowledge to save her heart. The memories peppering Arrival of her sick daughter who died are "recollections" of events that have yet to occur. She has the power to stop this from ever happening, but at what cost?

Hubris is a factor that ensures men like Forest and Walter believe that what they are doing is for the greater good when it only serves themselves. Louise knows her daughter will die and her husband will leave her but chooses to keep her secret and do nothing to change it. She is a time traveler without ever having to time-travel; instead, she is privy to information that could determine how she acts in the present. She takes on a godlike sensibility because she is omniscient a power she uses to stop an intergalactic war but never wields to save her marriage or the child she knows will die from an incurable illness.

"Despite knowing the journey and where it leads, I embrace it. And I welcome every moment of it," she says without a flicker of regret. As a mother she is going to fight for her child; similarly, she is not going to not have this baby because she knows her life will be cut short. If she does, she will lose every precious second spent with Hannah. Rather, she cherishes their short time together, rather than fighting for a version of events that doesn't and will never exist. It might read as defeatist or selfish, but her heartbreaking choice is full of love for her daughter. If Forest and Walter are adamant about fixing their dilemma, Louise is leaning into the nurturing stereotype of mothers. She cares for her sick daughter rather than finding a cure to an incurable illness.

In Fringe, after Walter's son Peter dies from a genetic disease, he dedicates his time to watching his parallel universe doppelganger, Walternate, attempt to find a cure for his son. Circumstances lead Walter to travel through a portal to this other reality to save the boy who is not his son. He thought this was the right thing, but his stubborn refusal to listen to others has far-reaching and long-term effects that far outweigh the risk he took. Nina Sharp (Blair Brown) and his lab assistant Carla Warren (Jenni Blong) try to stop him, but their attempts are futile Nina loses an arm for her troubles. After Peter's mother sees the boy she thinks Walter has brought back to life, his difficult decision to return him to his world becomes impossible. His arrogance and lies he told thereafter will haunt him throughout the series, testing the bond between father and son further.

Unlike Walter, Forest doesn't believe there is a multi-verse with another version of his family running around; his theory is predicated on one world with one set of events occurring. The Devs team is working on a top-secret quantum computing project that will eventually allow them to see any moment in history. Imagine watching a high-def recorded version of events including the crucifixion of Jesus Christ and Marilyn Monroe sleeping with husband Arthur Miller. Guidelines are put in place to stop violations of privacy (such as the latter) or skipping ahead to events that have yet to happen; however, both rules are broken by various members of the team.

A machine with this capability will put to bed (or prove) countless conspiracy theories; the ripple effect of the secrets this system possesses is huge. In the wrong hands, this computer could be weaponized, and its capacity to be used for an act of tyranny is great. Deciding who holds the power is not a debate in this company because Forest sits at the top of the chain. Nevertheless, his grief ensures his actions are clouded by emotion rather than rational an argument often leveled as a reason why a woman would make a bad leader. Grief is not gendered, and the actions of each protagonist in Devs, Arrival, and Fringe suggest the fathers are far more likely to wield their scientific ability as a battle cry against the circle of life. Forest adds credence to the latter theory because his actions are influenced by the desire to be with his family again, no matter the cost.

An underlying debate throughout Devs is whether we have free will or not. Forest is firmly on the deterministic side of the argument, believing everything is predetermined. His family was always going to die in that car accident, he was always going to make the phone call that distracted his wife. This takes away his responsibility and assuages his guilt while giving him hope he can be reunited with them in some form.

Rather than placing all bets on the afterlife, his computer exists as his personal time machine, sending him back to before his world changed. At first, it lets him watch his daughter as he remembered her blowing bubbles and playing, but it is much more than a sophisticated DVR player with every moment in history available to binge-watch.

For Forest to successfully bring his plan to fruition he needs to ensure his secret does not get out. Similarly, any theory that suggests he is incorrect is in opposition to his endgame and that person will also have to go which is why Lyndon (Cailee Spaeny) is fired. In Episode 5, Garland portrays multiple versions of the timeline; in some, the crash never happened, in others it did but it was less severe. If this was indeed the case, free will is still on the table, and therefore these deaths were preventable. Lily tossing the gun out of the lift reveals his hypothesis is incorrect, even if he ultimately gets his happy ending. The complexity of this powerful machine is not lost on the other workers who have conflicting theories and cannot risk what will happen if Forest maintains power over it.

"If Ex Machina is about a man who is trying to act as if he's God via technology and science, I thought there's a companion story, which is about people not trying to act as if they're God, but trying to create God," Alex Garland explained in a recent interview with Rolling Stone. Forest still thinks he can use his resources to bend the fabric of existence to his whim, but he is reframing his role, not as creator but as a martyr to the machine he dies to enter. He also tells Lily in the finale that Devs is a cheeky play on the Latin word "Deus," which means deity or God. The gold production design is also an homage to a different form of creation, a location Garland calls a "strange, twilight, gold, womb-space." Family is the big driving force and linking back to biology further emphasizes this, even if Forest's resurrection of his deceased loved ones is far from a natural event in human evolution.

In this sampling of TV and film scientists using their abilities to alter the fabric of reality or leaning into their fate, the gender line is drawn dividing fathers who will literally destroy the matter of all things, and a mother who has accepted her future without defying quantum physics. However, in the recent season of Outlander, Claire Fraser (Caitriona Balfe) uses her skills as a physician and knowledge of life-saving treatments beyond simple tips and tricks. In "discovering" penicillin over a century before it was actually discovered, she is playing God and her hubris is comparable to Forest and Walter's. The impact her choices have on the future is minimal so far, but in Season 5 this looks set to change. This hasn't been done to save her daughter, but rather it shows how deeply conflicted she is as a doctor flung out of time and underscores her nurturing abilities that exist beyond her role as a mother.

Possessing the knowledge from a future timeline to save lives is one conundrum, but these narratives demonstrate it is far more complex when your own flesh and blood are in peril. As Devs and Fringe suggest, even time and space cannot stand in the way of this moral quandary when a figure is willing to play God. Not every expert will rip a hole in the world under the banner of being a parent (and that's OK).

See original here:
Playing God and parental drive in Devs, Fringe and Arrival - SYFY WIRE

Trump betting millions to lay the groundwork for quantum internet in the US – CNBC

In the 1960s the U.S. government funded a series of experiments developing techniques to shuttle information from one computer to another. Devices in single labs sprouted connections, then neighboring labs linked up. Soon the network had blossomed between research institutions across the country, setting down the roots of what would become the internet and transforming forever how people use information. Now, 60 years later, the Department of Energy is aiming to do it again.

The Trump administration's 2021 budget request currently under consideration by Congress proposes slashing the overall funding for scientific research by nearly 10% but boosts spending on quantum information science by about 20%, to $237 million. Of that, the DOE has requested $25 million to accelerate the development of a quantum internet. Such a network would leverage the counterintuitive behavior of nature's particles to manipulate and share information in entirely new ways, with the potential to reinvent fields including cybersecurity and material science.

Whilethetraditional internet for general useisn't going anywhere, a quantum networkwouldoffer decisive advantages for certain applications: Researchers could use it to develop drugs and materials by simulating atomic behavior onnetworked quantum computers, for instance, and financial institutions and governments would benefit from next-level cybersecurity. Many countries are pursuing quantum research programs, and with the 2021 budget proposal, the Trumpadministration seeks to ramp up thateffort.

"That level of funding will enable us to begin to develop the groundwork for sophisticated, practical and high-impact quantum networks," says David Awschalom, a quantum engineer at the University of Chicago. "It's significant and extremely important."

A quantum internet will develop in fits and starts, much like the traditional internet did and continues to do. China has already realized an early application, quantum encryption, between certain cities, but fully quantum networks spanning entire countries will take decades, experts say. Building it willrequire re-engineering the quantum equivalent of routers, hard drives, and computers from the ground up foundational work already under way today.

Where the modern internet traffics in bits streaming between classical computers (a category that now includes smart phones, tablets, speakers and thermostats), a quantum internet would carry a fundamentally different unit of information known as the quantum bit, or qubit.

Bits all boil down to instances of nature's simplest eventsquestions with yes or no answers. Computer chips process cat videos by stopping some electric currents while letting others flow. Hard drives store documents by locking magnets in either the up or down position.

Qubits represent a different language altogether, one based on the behavior of atoms, electrons, and other particles, objects governed by the bizarre rules of quantum mechanics. These objects lead more fluid and uncertain lives than their strait-laced counterparts in classical computing. A hard drive magnet must always point up or down, for instance, but an electron's direction is unknowable until measured. More precisely, the electron behaves in such a way that describing its orientation requires a more complex concept known as superposition that goes beyond the straightforward labels of "up" or "down."

Quantum particles can also be yoked together in a relationship called entanglement, such as when two photons (light particles) shine from the same source. Pairs of entangled particles share an intimate bond akin to the relationship between the two faces of a coin when one face shows heads the other displays tails. Unlike a coin, however, entangled particles can travel far from each other and maintain their connection.

Quantum information science unites these and other phenomena, promising a novel, richer way to process information analogous to moving from 2-D to 3-D graphics, or learning to calculate with decimals instead of just whole numbers. Quantum devices fluent in nature's native tongue could, for instance, supercharge scientists' ability to design materials and drugs by emulating new atomic structures without having to test their properties in the lab. Entanglement, a delicate link destroyed by external tampering, could guarantee that connections between devices remain private.

But such miracles remain years to decades away. Both superposition and entanglement are fragile states most easily maintained at frigid temperatures in machines kept perfectly isolated from the chaos of the outside world. And as quantum computer scientists search for ways to extend their control over greater numbers of finicky particles, quantum internet researchers are developing the technologies required to link those collections of particles together.

The interior of a quantum computer prototype developed by IBM. While various groups race to build quantum computers, Department of Energy researchers seek ways to link them together.

IBM

Just as it did in the 1960s, the DOE is again sowing the seeds for a future network at its national labs. Beneath the suburbs of western Chicago lie 52 miles of optical fiber extending in two loops from Argonne National Laboratory. Early this year, Awschalom oversaw the system's first successful experiments. "We created entangled states of light," he says, "and tried to use that as a vehicle to test how entanglement works in the real world not in a lab going underneath the tollways of Illinois."

Daily temperature swings cause the wires to shrink by dozens of feet, for instance, requiring careful adjustment in the timing of the pulses to compensate. This summer the team plans to extend their network with another node, bringing the neighboring Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory into the quantum fold.

Similar experiments are under way on the East Coast, too, where researchers have sent entangled photons over fiber-optic cables connecting Brookhaven National Laboratory in New York with Stony Brook University, a distance of about 11 miles. Brookhaven scientists are also testing the wireless transmission of entangled photons over a similar distance through the air. While this technique requires fair weather, according to Kerstin Kleese van Dam, the director of Brookhaven's computational science initiative, it could someday complement networks of fiber-optic cables. "We just want to keep our options open," she says.

Such sending and receiving of entangled photons represent the equivalent of quantum routers, but next researchers need a quantum hard drive a way to save the information they're exchanging. "What we're on the cusp of doing," Kleese van Dam says, "is entangled memories over miles."

When photons carry information in from the network, quantum memory will store those qubits in the form of entangled atoms, much as current hard drives use flipped magnets to hold bits. Awschalom expects the Argonne and University of Chicago groups to have working quantum memories this summer, around the same time they expand their network to Fermilab, at which point it will span 100 miles.

But that's about as far as light can travel before growing too dim to read. Before they can grow their networks any larger, researchers will need to invent a quantum repeater a device that boosts an atrophied signal for another 100-mile journey. Classical internet repeaters just copy the information and send out a new pulse of light, but that process breaks entanglement (a feature that makes quantum communications secure from eavesdroppers). Instead, Awschalom says, researchers have come up with a scheme to amplify the quantum signal by shuffling it into other forms without ever reading it directly. "We have some prototype quantum repeaters currently running. They're not good enough," he says, "but we're learning a lot."

Department of Energy Under Secretary for Science Paul M. Dabbar (left) sends a pair of entangled photons along the quantum loop. Also shown are Argonne scientist David Awschalom (center) and Argonne Laboratory Director Paul Kearns.

Argonne National Laboratory

And if Congress approves the quantum information science line in the 2021 budget, researchers like Awschalom and Kleese van Dam will learn a lot more. Additional funding for their experiments could lay the foundations for someday extending their local links into a country-wide network. "There's a long-term vision to connect all the national labs, coast to coast," says Paul Dabbar, the DOE's Under Secretary for Science.

In some senses the U.S. trails other countries in quantum networking. China, for example, has completed a 1,200-mile backbone linking Beijing and Shanghai that banks and other companies are already using for nearly perfectly secure encryption. But the race for a fully featured quantum internet is more marathon than sprint, and China has passed only the first milestone. Kleese van Dam points out that without quantum repeaters, this network relies on a few dozen "trusted" nodes Achilles' heels that temporarily put the quantum magic on pause while the qubits are shoved through bit-based bottlenecks. She's holding out for truly secure end-to-end communication. "What we're planning to do goes way beyond what China is doing," she says.

More from Tech Drivers:With America at home, Facebook, Google make moves to win more of gaming marketThe 87-year-old doctor who invented the rubella vaccine now working to fight the coronavirus

Researchers ultimately envision a whole quantum ecosystem of computers, memories, and repeaters all speaking the same language of superposition and entanglement, with nary a bit in sight. "It's like a big stew where everything has to be kept quantum mechanical," Awschalom says. "You don't want to go to the classical world at all."

After immediate applications such as unbreakable encryptions, he speculates that such a network could also lead to seismic sensors capable of logging the vibration of the planet at the atomic level, but says that the biggest consequences will likely be the ones no one sees coming. He compares the current state of the field to when electrical engineers developed the first transistors and initially used them to improve hearing aids, completely unaware that they were setting off down a path that would someday bring social media and video conferencing.

As researchers at Brookhaven, Argonne, and many other institutions tinker with the quantum equivalent of transistors, but they can't help but wonder what the quantum analog of video chat will be. "It's clear there's a lot of promise. It's going to move quickly," Awschalom says. "But the most exciting part is that we don't know exactly where it's going to go."

See the original post:
Trump betting millions to lay the groundwork for quantum internet in the US - CNBC

Announcing the IBM Quantum Challenge – Quantaneo, the Quantum Computing Source

Today, we have 18 quantum systems and counting available to our clients and community. Over 200,000 users, including more than 100 IBM Q Network client partners, have joined us to conduct fundamental research on quantum information science, develop the applications of quantum computing in various industries, and educate the future quantum workforce. Additionally, 175 billion quantum circuits have been executed using our hardware, resulting in more than 200 publications by researchers around the world.

In addition to developing quantum hardware, we have also been driving the development of powerful open source quantum software. Qiskit, written primarily in Python, has grown to be a popular quantum computing software development kit with several novel features, many of which were contributed by dedicated Qiskitters.

Thank you to everyone who has joined us on this exciting journey building the largest and most diverse global quantum computing community.

The IBM Quantum Challenge As we approach the fourth anniversary of the IBM Quantum Experience, we invite you to celebrate with us by completing a challenge with four exercises. Whether you are already a member of the community, or this challenge is your first quantum experiment, these four exercises will improve your understanding of quantum circuits. We hope you also have fun as you put your skills to test.

The IBM Quantum Challenge begins at 9:00 a.m. US Eastern on May 4, and ends 8:59:59 a.m. US Eastern on May 8. To take the challenge, visit https://quantum-computing.ibm.com/challenges.

In recognition of everyones participation, we are awarding digital badges and providing additional sponsorship to the Python Software Foundation.

Continued investment in quantum education Trying to explain quantum computing without resorting to incorrect analogies has always been a goal for our team. As a result, we have continuously invested in education, starting with opening access to quantum computers, and continuing to create tools that enable anyone to program them. Notably, we created the first interactive open source textbook in the field.

As developers program quantum computers, what they are really doing is building and running quantum circuits. To support your learning about quantum circuits:

Read the Qiskit textbook chapter where we define quantum circuits as we understand them today. Dive in to explore quantum computing principles and learn how to implement quantum algorithms on your own. Watch our newly launched livelectures called Circuit Sessions, or get started programming a quantum computer by watching Coding with Qiskit. Subscribe to the Qiskit YouTube channel to watch these two series and more. The future of quantum is in open source software and access to real quantum hardwarelets keep building together.

View original post here:
Announcing the IBM Quantum Challenge - Quantaneo, the Quantum Computing Source