Quantum Bayesian Networks

December 15, 2015

Artiste-qb.net Makes Dec 8 watershed Quantum Computing announcement on Dec 15

Filed under: Uncategorized — rrtucci @ 10:11 pm

There is no denying. Google and NASA are publicity geniuses. Geniuses I tell you!

On Nov 20, Google and NASA announced in dramatic and coy Apple fashion, that they would hold a press conference on Dec. 8 to announce a major QC breakthrough. At the Dec 8 conference and subsequent blog post and arXiv paper, Hartmut Neven announced that Google is now “faster than the universe” (Steve Jurvetson expression), having achieved a 10^8 speedup compared to classical computers. According to TMZ, Hartmut Neven was wearing a black turtle neck and jeans to the event(citation needed).

Quite predictably, on Dec 9, just one day later, Scott Aaronson posted in his blog a voluminous refutation of Google’s claims, but most of the general public showed itself quite disinterested in his opinion on the matter. If only his blog were more succinct. Someone who wishes to remain anonymous once tweeted: “Thank God Scott Aaronson is too wordy for Twitter”.

Since Dec.8, our company artiste-qb.net’s publicity department, 50 persons strong, has been struggling to come up with our own “watershed announcement” to match Google’s. We decided to send Mark Zuckerberg a book for his baby girl and Jack Ma a baseball cap. We also sent a TMZ spy to capture in a photo the precise moment when Mark and Jack were trying these items on for fit, just before they decided to discard them. Here is what we came up with.

Addendum (17 Oct 2017) I’ve been recently told that in some parts of China, wearing a hat is a sign of bad luck. Sorry, didn’t mean to offend. In America, a baseball hat is considered a very friendly garment and the color green is a symbol of hope, springtime, and renewal.



  1. Great update, thanks! I suspect Scott will miss the pun and that Steve loves the pun. Hartmut can sit back and enjoy the fun.

    Comment by lisa — December 16, 2015 @ 12:11 am

  2. Hi Lisa. Thanks. I assume you are referring to QuPy standing for Quantum Python or cutie pie. Didn’t think many people would catch it. We must think alike….oh, sorry for insulting you

    Comment by rrtucci — December 16, 2015 @ 12:28 am

  3. Take a good look at this (and let them rot!) I suspect you gonna see where this is heading to, better than others.


    Next incoming blow will be harder so just relax and wait. Have a wonderful 2016!

    Comment by Theo — December 17, 2015 @ 3:56 pm

  4. Thanks Theo. Hope this leads to something interesting in quantum computing like better quantum compilers.

    Comment by rrtucci — December 17, 2015 @ 6:51 pm

  5. Hello Mr. Tucci. This is Burt, the author of the article on talkMarkets that you commented on. Do you have any view on when a working circuit computer will appear? I’ve read some of the commentary on the web, including Aronson’s, and there are very different opinions. BTW, it’s pretty surprising how vituperative this becomes. After all, this is engineering.

    Also, I looked through a few of your papers noted on your company’s website. You might be interested that these would have application in high frequency trading. The problem using Bayesian (or other) network techniques there is that they are too slow. Financial systems do have regularity, but the regularity is highly unstable, and the structure can change quickly (often in seconds) and with irregular cyclicality. Right now, the practice is to use simple econometrics or ML algos. Of course everyone knows that there is an underlying causal structure, just can’t get it fast enough.

    Comment by burt rothberg — December 20, 2015 @ 11:34 pm

  6. Thanks Burt.
    Personally, I expect a handful of gate model (aka circuit) QCs to be available to state governments and mega corporations ten years from now, but that is just my own prediction of the future, so it is “somewhat” 🙂 uncertain. The reason I believe this is because the amount of money going into QC development has picked up significantly in the last year. How fast a technology grows depends strongly on the amount of money and commitment being put into it. The whole Manhattan project only lasted 5 years. As I always say in the sales pitch of artiste-qb.net, if I am right about the ten years, then now is a good time to get QC software patents, because US patents last 20 years, and Google, IBM and Microsoft, all of which are already strongly committed to QC, are all notorious acquirers of patents.

    As to the applications of QC to Wall Street, absolutely. It is now becoming painfully evident that so called Deep Learning learns very slowly and requires tons of data. Maybe learning the structure of Bayesian Networks from data is a faster way of machine learning. One of my patents is in fact for using quantum computers for learning the structure of classical Bayesian Networks from data. See


    Comment by rrtucci — December 21, 2015 @ 12:02 am

  7. Well good luck to you. Anyway this whole thing has me juiced up so I started Vazirani’s MOOC on edX. I’ll probably spend the whole night listening. Like the old days at MIT.

    Comment by burt rothberg — December 22, 2015 @ 5:05 am

  8. Thanks Burt. I’m a big fan of MOOCs.

    Comment by rrtucci — December 22, 2015 @ 5:40 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: