<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Adiabatic Quantum Computing · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1611.04471/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1611.04471/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Adiabatic Quantum Computing — mentioned by correlaterdude</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22500991</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1611.04471:22500991</guid><pubDate>Fri, 06 Mar 2020 04:26:52 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;&amp;gt; There is no indication (not even from the theory side) that the D-Wave approach can achieve any speed-up over a classical computer. You&amp;#x27;re wrong about the theory side of things[1, 2], by the way. The discussion around adiabatic quantum computing is weirdly politicized. It&amp;#x27;s true that D-Wave&amp;#x27;s computer isn&amp;#x27;t a universal quantum annealer; but in theory such a thing is equivalent to a gate-model computer. [1] https://arxiv.org/pdf/1611.04471.pdf [2] https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0256-307X/35/11/1...&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1611.04471/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>quant-ph</category></item></channel></rss>
