P-Computers Can Solve Spin-Glass Problems Faster Than Quantum Systems
Postedabout 1 month agoActive25 days ago
news.ucsb.eduResearchstory
informativeneutral
Debate
40/100
P-ComputersQuantum ComputingSpin-Glass Problems
Key topics
P-Computers
Quantum Computing
Spin-Glass Problems
Discussion Activity
Very active discussionFirst comment
8d
Peak period
27
Day 9
Avg / period
14
Comment distribution28 data points
Loading chart...
Based on 28 loaded comments
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 7, 2025 at 11:38 AM EST
about 1 month ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 15, 2025 at 11:54 AM EST
8d after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
27 comments in Day 9
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Dec 16, 2025 at 11:08 PM EST
25 days ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 46182975Type: storyLast synced: 12/15/2025, 7:35:31 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
This makes me wonder: Would it be possible to implement an equivalent to Shor's algorithm on a p-computer. Maybe the quantumness isn't necessary at all
"Notably, while probabilistic computers can emulate quantum interference with polynomial resources, their convergence is in general believed to require exponential time [10]. This challenge is known as the signproblem in Monte Carlo algorithms [11]."
... of https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64235-y
- https://www.nature.com/articles/s41928-025-01439-6 (link text: "In one study")
- https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64235-y (link text: "In the most recent paper")
It's possible that an entirely different approach is made possible by p-computers, but this would be tricky to find. Furthermore, it seems that the main advantage of p-computers is sampling from a Boltzmann-like distribution, and I'm not aware that this is the bottleneck in any known factorisation algorithm.
Shor’s algorithm works on the quantum Fourier transform. The quantum Fourier transform works because you can pick a frequency out of a signal using a “test wave.” The test wave can select out the amplitude of interest because the information of the test wave constructively interferes, whereas every other frequency cancels. This is the interference effect that can only happen with complex/negative probability amplitudes.
First of all, a quantum annealer is not a universal quantum computer, just to elucidate the title.
Then, it seems like they are comparing a simulation of p-computers to a physical realization of a quantum annealer (likely D-wave, but not named outright for some reason). If this is true, it doesn't seem like a very relevant comparison, because D-wave systems actually exist, while their p-computer sounds like it is just a design. But I may have misunderstood, because at times they make it sound like the p-computer actually exists.
Also, they talk about how p-computers can be scaled up with TSMC semiconductor technology. From what I know, this is also true for semiconductor-based (universal) quantum computers.
University press releases should not be posted on HN. a press release is just a published paper + PR spin. If the PR spin were true, it would be in the paper. Just link to the paper.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-64235-y
Title: "Pushing the boundary of quantum advantage in hard combinatorial optimization with probabilistic computers"
Abstract: "Adaptive parallel tempering [...] scales more favorably and outperforms simulated quantum annealing"
HN title should be changed to match the paper title or abstract.
I'm not sure how this compares to quantum with its dozens to hundreds of qubits