# James Wootton114

Sep 21 2017 13:51 UTC
Sep 21 2017 05:41 UTC

What does this imply for https://scirate.com/arxiv/1608.00263? I'm guessing they still regard it as valid (it is ref [14]), but just too hard to implement for now.

Sep 21 2017 05:28 UTC
Sep 20 2017 05:09 UTC
Sep 13 2017 05:09 UTC
Sep 08 2017 07:21 UTC
Sep 05 2017 02:00 UTC
James Wootton published A repetition code of 15 qubits
The repetition code is an important primitive for the techniques of quantum error correction. Here we implement repetition codes of at most $15$ qubits on the $16$ qubit \emphibmqx3 device. Each experiment is run for a single round of syndrome measurements, achieved using the standard quantum technique of using ancilla qubits and controlled operations. The size of the final syndrome is small enough to allow for lookup table decoding using experimentally obtained data. The results show strong evidence of error correction, and also give insight into the nature of noise in the device.
Aug 30 2017 05:51 UTC

Seems so obvious now you say it! Well done for trying this out.

Do you know how the results compare to Wen style stabilizers, where both plaquette and vertex stabilizers alternate between two Paulis? I guess using Y and Z would be best for biased noise, given your results.

Aug 30 2017 05:45 UTC
Aug 15 2017 04:42 UTC
Aug 14 2017 06:39 UTC
Jul 14 2017 10:02 UTC
James Wootton scited Open Quantum Assembly Language
May 28 2017 06:43 UTC
May 26 2017 07:32 UTC
May 22 2017 11:04 UTC
May 22 2017 10:49 UTC

There are tasks we could use quantum computers for that would be practically impossible otherwise. And there are tasks that we could do a bit faster on a quantum computer, but it would still be reasonable to use a classical one. 'advantage' could mean either of those. I think it's the absolute dominance over classical computers in the former that people are trying to invoke with 'supremacy'.

The need to use such tainted words is probably an inevitable consequence of trying to explain that one thing is so much better than another. Those words will have been used before in contexts that we don't agree with. Maybe 'transcendence' gets away with it by having kinda spiritual connotations, but that probably makes it a bad fit for science.

Anyways, 'advantage' seems to be the primary option besides supremacy and it isn't too bad. My reservations with it aren't strong enough to try and champion anything else.

May 22 2017 10:27 UTC

'Supremity' could also be an option. It is a word, though a bit archaic. It has the same meanings, but without the baggage. It probably wouldn't be as readily understandable as 'advantage', but 'advantage' doesn't quite mean the right thing.

On the other hand, we could just say "quantum computers outperform classical computers" instead of trying to come up with a fancy *Adjective*$^{ TM}$.

May 09 2017 09:41 UTC