The December 2022 issue of IEEE Spectrum is here!

Close bar

D-Wave's Quantum Computing Claim Gets Boost in Testing

In some cases, D-Wave's computer proved 3600 times faster than standard computers

2 min read
D-Wave's Quantum Computing Claim Gets Boost in Testing

D-Wave's supposed quantum computers have attracted plenty of skepticism alongside some serious interest from huge corporations such as Google and Lockheed Martin. Now recent testing has shown that D-Wave's machine can indeed beat standard computers head-to-head in solving certain problems.

The D-Wave computer performed up to 3600 times faster than a high-performance machine running IBM software while solving an optimization problem, according to the New York Times. D-Wave's machine only proved slightly faster than the standard computing on two other optimization problem tests, but the results still seem encouraging for the company's future prospects.

“Ours is the first paper to my knowledge that compares the quantum approach to conventional methods using the same set of problems,” Catherine McGeoch, the Beitzel professor in technology and society at Amherst College in Massachusetts, says in a press release.

McGeoch, a founder of "experimental algorithmics" in computer science, was enlisted by D-Wave as an outside consultant to devise tests for comparing the company's machines with conventional computers. She plans to present a co-authored paper on the test results at the 2013 Association for Computing Machinery (ACM) International Conference on Computing Frontiers in Ischia, Italy on May 15.

The latest success of D-Wave's computer does not mean that it or quantum computers in general will replace consumer laptops anytime soon. Instead, D-Wave's machine has proven good at tackling specific optimization problems with one best solution—puzzles similar to the "traveling salesperson" problem that asks for the shortest possible route to visit a list of cities exactly once before returning to the original city.

That means D-Wave's machine and quantum computers could prove particularly helpful in tackling problems involving shipping logistics for packages or goods, flight scheduling for airlines, or DNA analysis, says McGeoch, adding:

"There are degrees of what it can do. If you want it to solve the exact problem it’s built to solve, at the problem sizes I tested, it’s thousands of times faster than anything I’m aware of. If you want it to solve more general problems of that size, I would say it competes—it does as well as some of the best things I’ve looked at. At this point it’s merely above average but shows a promising scaling trajectory."

McGeoch still held off on definitively saying whether D-Wave's machine is truly a quantum computer or not. But D-Wave recently received additional validation for its quantum computing claim from a group of independent researchers. Nature News reports that the group compared a D-Wave machine's performance with simulations of quantum versus classical computing, and found that the D-Wave device matched up well with the quantum computing simulation.

Further testing may eventually vindicate D-Wave's approach despite the early torrent of skepticism (IEEE Spectrum labeled the company a technology "loser" in 2010). D-Wave has already sold commercial versions of its computers to companies such as U.S. defense manufacturer Lockheed Martin.

Geordie Rose, CTO for D-Wave, has suggested that the company's patent portfolio in this area of quantum computing should ensure that it won't see serious competitors for at least another 15 years. But as the field of quantum computing continues to look more and more promising, D-Wave surely won’t have the field all to itself forever.

Photo: D-Wave Systems

Correction: Amherst College is in Massachusetts, not Maryland as stated originally

The Conversation (0)

Why Functional Programming Should Be the Future of Software Development

It’s hard to learn, but your code will produce fewer nasty surprises

11 min read
A plate of spaghetti made from code
Shira Inbar

You’d expectthe longest and most costly phase in the lifecycle of a software product to be the initial development of the system, when all those great features are first imagined and then created. In fact, the hardest part comes later, during the maintenance phase. That’s when programmers pay the price for the shortcuts they took during development.

So why did they take shortcuts? Maybe they didn’t realize that they were cutting any corners. Only when their code was deployed and exercised by a lot of users did its hidden flaws come to light. And maybe the developers were rushed. Time-to-market pressures would almost guarantee that their software will contain more bugs than it would otherwise.

Keep Reading ↓Show less