Quantum information processors promise fast algorithms for problems inaccessible to classical computers. But since qubits are noisy and error-prone, they will depend on fault-tolerant quantum error correction (FTQEC) to compute reliably. Quantum error correction can protect against general noise if - and only if - the error in each physical qubit operation is smaller than a certain threshold. The threshold for general errors is quantified by their diamond norm. Until now, qubits have been assessed primarily by randomized benchmarking, which reports a different error rate that is not sensitive to all errors, and cannot be compared directly to diamond norm thresholds. Here we use gate set tomography to completely characterize operations on a trapped-Yb+-ion qubit and demonstrate with greater than 95% confidence that they satisfy a rigorous threshold for FTQEC (diamond norm ≤6.7 × 10-4).
We provide the first demonstration that molecular-level methods based on gas kinetic theory and molecular chaos can simulate turbulence and its decay. The direct simulation Monte Carlo (DSMC) method, a molecular-level technique for simulating gas flows that resolves phenomena from molecular to hydrodynamic (continuum) length scales, is applied to simulate the Taylor-Green vortex flow. The DSMC simulations reproduce the Kolmogorov -5/3 law and agree well with the turbulent kinetic energy and energy dissipation rate obtained from direct numerical simulation of the Navier-Stokes equations using a spectral method. This agreement provides strong evidence that molecular-level methods for gases can be used to investigate turbulent flows quantitatively.
International Journal of Computational Fluid Dynamics
Gel, Aytekin; Hu, Jonathan J.; Ould-Ahmed-Vall, El M.; Kalinkin, Alexander A.
Legacy codes remain a crucial element of today's simulation-based engineering ecosystem due to the extensive validation process and investment in such software. The rapid evolution of high-performance computing architectures necessitates the modernization of these codes. One approach to modernization is a complete overhaul of the code. However, this could require extensive investments, such as rewriting in modern languages, new data constructs, etc., which will necessitate systematic verification and validation to re-establish the credibility of the computational models. The current study advocates using a more incremental approach and is a culmination of several modernization efforts of the legacy code MFIX, which is an open-source computational fluid dynamics code that has evolved over several decades, widely used in multiphase flows and still being developed by the National Energy Technology Laboratory. Two different modernization approaches,‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’, are illustrated. Preliminary results show up to 8.5x improvement at the selected kernel level with the first approach, and up to 50% improvement in total simulated time with the latter were achieved for the demonstration cases and target HPC systems employed.
The familiar story of Moore's law is actually inaccurate. This article corrects the story, leading to different projections for the future. Moore's law is a fluid idea whose definition changes over time. It thus doesn't have the ability to 'end,' as is popularly reported, but merely takes different forms as the semiconductor and computer industries evolve.
This report describes findings from the culminating experiment of the LDRD project entitled, "Analyst-to-Analyst Variability in Simulation-Based Prediction". For this experiment, volunteer participants solving a given test problem in engineering and statistics were interviewed at different points in their solution process. These interviews are used to trace differing solutions to differing solution processes, and differing processes to differences in reasoning, assumptions, and judgments. The issue that the experiment was designed to illuminate -- our paucity of understanding of the ways in which humans themselves have an impact on predictions derived from complex computational simulations -- is a challenging and open one. Although solution of the test problem by analyst participants in this experiment has taken much more time than originally anticipated, and is continuing past the end of this LDRD, this project has provided a rare opportunity to explore analyst-to-analyst variability in significant depth, from which we derive evidence-based insights to guide further explorations in this important area.