scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Topic

Quantum

About: Quantum is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 60044 publications have been published within this topic receiving 1233923 citations.


Papers
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, it is shown that a certain "criterion of physical reality" formulated in a recent article with the above title by A. Einstein, B. Podolsky and N. Rosen contains an essential ambiguity when it is applied to quantum phenomena.
Abstract: It is shown that a certain "criterion of physical reality" formulated in a recent article with the above title by A. Einstein, B. Podolsky and N. Rosen contains an essential ambiguity when it is applied to quantum phenomena. In this connection a viewpoint termed "complementarity" is explained from which quantum-mechanical description of physical phenomena would seem to fulfill, within its scope, all rational demands of completeness.

2,638 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
06 Aug 2018
TL;DR: Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) technology will be available in the near future, and the 100-qubit quantum computer will not change the world right away - but it should be regarded as a significant step toward the more powerful quantum technologies of the future.
Abstract: Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) technology will be available in the near future. Quantum computers with 50-100 qubits may be able to perform tasks which surpass the capabilities of today's classical digital computers, but noise in quantum gates will limit the size of quantum circuits that can be executed reliably. NISQ devices will be useful tools for exploring many-body quantum physics, and may have other useful applications, but the 100-qubit quantum computer will not change the world right away --- we should regard it as a significant step toward the more powerful quantum technologies of the future. Quantum technologists should continue to strive for more accurate quantum gates and, eventually, fully fault-tolerant quantum computing.

2,598 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors proposed a new technique, the squeezed-state technique, that allows one to decrease the photon-counting error while increasing the radiation pressure error, or vice versa.
Abstract: The interferometers now being developed to detect gravitational waves work by measuring the relative positions of widely separated masses. Two fundamental sources of quantum-mechanical noise determine the sensitivity of such an interferometer: (i) fluctuations in number of output photons (photon-counting error) and (ii) fluctuations in radiation pressure on the masses (radiation-pressure error). Because of the low power of available continuous-wave lasers, the sensitivity of currently planned interferometers will be limited by photon-counting error. This paper presents an analysis of the two types of quantum-mechanical noise, and it proposes a new technique---the "squeezed-state" technique---that allows one to decrease the photon-counting error while increasing the radiation-pressure error, or vice versa. The key requirement of the squeezed-state technique is that the state of the light entering the interferometer's normally unused input port must be not the vacuum, as in a standard interferometer, but rather a "squeezed state"---a state whose uncertainties in the two quadrature phases are unequal. Squeezed states can be generated by a variety of nonlinear optical processes, including degenerate parametric amplification.

2,582 citations

Journal ArticleDOI
Frank Arute1, Kunal Arya1, Ryan Babbush1, Dave Bacon1, Joseph C. Bardin1, Joseph C. Bardin2, Rami Barends1, Rupak Biswas3, Sergio Boixo1, Fernando G. S. L. Brandão1, Fernando G. S. L. Brandão4, David A. Buell1, B. Burkett1, Yu Chen1, Zijun Chen1, Ben Chiaro5, Roberto Collins1, William Courtney1, Andrew Dunsworth1, Edward Farhi1, Brooks Foxen5, Brooks Foxen1, Austin G. Fowler1, Craig Gidney1, Marissa Giustina1, R. Graff1, Keith Guerin1, Steve Habegger1, Matthew P. Harrigan1, Michael J. Hartmann6, Michael J. Hartmann1, Alan Ho1, Markus R. Hoffmann1, Trent Huang1, Travis S. Humble7, Sergei V. Isakov1, Evan Jeffrey1, Zhang Jiang1, Dvir Kafri1, Kostyantyn Kechedzhi1, Julian Kelly1, Paul V. Klimov1, Sergey Knysh1, Alexander N. Korotkov1, Alexander N. Korotkov8, Fedor Kostritsa1, David Landhuis1, Mike Lindmark1, E. Lucero1, Dmitry I. Lyakh7, Salvatore Mandrà3, Jarrod R. McClean1, Matt McEwen5, Anthony Megrant1, Xiao Mi1, Kristel Michielsen9, Kristel Michielsen10, Masoud Mohseni1, Josh Mutus1, Ofer Naaman1, Matthew Neeley1, Charles Neill1, Murphy Yuezhen Niu1, Eric Ostby1, Andre Petukhov1, John Platt1, Chris Quintana1, Eleanor Rieffel3, Pedram Roushan1, Nicholas C. Rubin1, Daniel Sank1, Kevin J. Satzinger1, Vadim Smelyanskiy1, Kevin J. Sung11, Kevin J. Sung1, Matthew D. Trevithick1, Amit Vainsencher1, Benjamin Villalonga1, Benjamin Villalonga12, Theodore White1, Z. Jamie Yao1, Ping Yeh1, Adam Zalcman1, Hartmut Neven1, John M. Martinis5, John M. Martinis1 
24 Oct 2019-Nature
TL;DR: Quantum supremacy is demonstrated using a programmable superconducting processor known as Sycamore, taking approximately 200 seconds to sample one instance of a quantum circuit a million times, which would take a state-of-the-art supercomputer around ten thousand years to compute.
Abstract: The promise of quantum computers is that certain computational tasks might be executed exponentially faster on a quantum processor than on a classical processor1. A fundamental challenge is to build a high-fidelity processor capable of running quantum algorithms in an exponentially large computational space. Here we report the use of a processor with programmable superconducting qubits2-7 to create quantum states on 53 qubits, corresponding to a computational state-space of dimension 253 (about 1016). Measurements from repeated experiments sample the resulting probability distribution, which we verify using classical simulations. Our Sycamore processor takes about 200 seconds to sample one instance of a quantum circuit a million times-our benchmarks currently indicate that the equivalent task for a state-of-the-art classical supercomputer would take approximately 10,000 years. This dramatic increase in speed compared to all known classical algorithms is an experimental realization of quantum supremacy8-14 for this specific computational task, heralding a much-anticipated computing paradigm.

2,527 citations

Book
01 Jan 1991
TL;DR: The distinction between level clustering and level repulsion is one of the quantum analogues of the classical distinction between globally regular and predominantly chaotic motion (see Figs. 1, 2, 3) as mentioned in this paper.
Abstract: The distinction between level clustering and level repulsion is one of the quantum analogues of the classical distinction between globally regular and predominantly chaotic motion (see Figs. 1, 2, 3). In order to reveal level repulsion under conditions of global classical chaos special care may be necessary: (i) subspectra referring to different values of the quantum numbers related to symmetries must be dealt with separately and (ii) for systems with quantum localization only levels whose wavefunctions have overlapping support must be admitted. A “level” may either be an energy eigenvalue E in the case of autonomous systems or, for periodically driven systems, a quasi-energy φ, i.e. an eigenphase of the unitary Floquet operator transporting the wavevector from period to period.

2,495 citations


Network Information
Related Topics (5)
Quantum entanglement
39.5K papers, 1M citations
97% related
Open quantum system
20.4K papers, 924.6K citations
95% related
Hamiltonian (quantum mechanics)
48.6K papers, 1M citations
95% related
Quantum information
22.7K papers, 911.3K citations
95% related
Quantum computer
30K papers, 907.2K citations
93% related
Performance
Metrics
No. of papers in the topic in previous years
YearPapers
20241
20234,611
20229,970
20215,149
20205,186
20194,657