I'm often asked if I'll redo the 2019 quantum factoring estimate. Denser storage by yokes, smaller magic factories by cultivation, slimmer approx arithmetic by Chevignard et al… surely the cost is lower now?
Yes, it's lower now.
security.googleblog.com/2025/05/trac...
arxiv.org/abs/2505.15917
Mike finally paid for the "pro" version of sketchup, so we owned the 3d models attached to the paper, meaning the yoked surface codes paper is now published! www.nature.com/articles/s41...
The message of this paper is: anytime someone says they're 10x better than surface codes, actually it's 4x.
Actually, I think the claim is now that MZMs were shown in a 2023 PRB paper… see the discussion on Scott’s blog here rb.gy/u0hywx
Maybe not though? I’ll concede that I’m pretty confused.
My disappointment at noticing this response was grammatically accurate was immense.
To clarify, apparently the topological qubit evidence was provided to a group of invited scientists in a presentation on the 18th, and does not appear in the Nature paper.
Just to clarify, I think they presented the qubit evidence in an invited meeting on the 18th. It’s confusing, but I don’t think it’s the Nature paper that’s making the claim we’re seeing in headlines.
Welp, there goes my April Fools paper idea.
Our work nature.com/articles/s41... on below-threshold error correction has won IOP Publishing's Physics World Breakthrough of the Year!
Shared with Bluvstein et al’s work on neutral atoms
Congrats to the field of quantum error correction! Excited for what's next
physicsworld.com/a/two-advanc...