The “JVG algorithm” only wins on tiny numbers

(scottaaronson.blog)

26 points | by jhalderm 2 hours ago ago

12 comments

  • MathMonkeyMan an hour ago

    The title of this post changed as I was reading it. "It looks like the 'JVG algorithm' only wins on tiny numbers" is a charitable description. The article is Scott Aaronson lambasting the paper and shaming its authors as intellectual hooligans.

    • measurablefunc 16 minutes ago

      Scott Aaronson is the guy who keeps claiming quantum supremacy is here every year so he's like the proverbial pot calling the kettle black.

  • guy4261 an hour ago

    > (yes, the authors named it after themselves) The same way the AVL tree is named after its inventors - Georgy Adelson-Velsky and Evgenii Landis... Nothing peculiar about this imh

    • abound an hour ago

      Same with RSA and other things, I think the author's point is that slapping your name on an algorithm is a pretty big move (since practically, you can only do it a few times max in your life before it would get too confusing), and so it's a gaudy thing to do, especially for something illegitimate.

    • johncarlosbaez 35 minutes ago

      Adelson-Velsky and Evgenii Landis were not the ones who named their tree the "AVL tree".

      In my "crackpot index", item 20 says:

      20 points for naming something after yourself. (E.g., talking about the "The Evans Field Equation" when your name happens to be Evans.)

    • croes 30 minutes ago

      Named after != named by

  • RcouF1uZ4gsC an hour ago

    Scott References the top comment on this previous HN discussion

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47246295

  • kmeisthax an hour ago

    I mean, considering that no quantum computer has ever actually factored a number, a speedup on tiny numbers is still impressive :P

    • Tyr42 an hour ago

      Hey hey, 15 = 3*5 is factoring.

      • ashivkum 29 minutes ago

        my understanding is that they factored 15 using a modular exponentiation circuit that presumes that the modulus is 3. factoring 15 with knowledge of 3 is not so impressive. Shor's algorithm has never been run with a full modular exponentiation circuit.