[wasabi991011]

I'm having a hard time understanding this article.

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.

[gowld]

The submission is an ad.

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.