sweetmorty

sweetmorty t1_j6ittn1 wrote

Reply to comment by quantumfucker in OpenAI executives say releasing ChatGPT for public use was a last resort after running into multiple hurdles — and they're shocked by its popularity by steviaplath153

It's not about getting paid to test AI technology. It's about OpenAI not being as transparent with their motives as their company name suggests and luring in free beta testers to improve their next premium ChatGPT version for Microsoft and any other corporate clients, with lucrative deals worth billions.

My impression about OpenAI was that it was some sort of academic AI think tank. Not a corporate R&D center in disguise.

7

sweetmorty t1_j22y1v1 wrote

Reply to Ford used a quantum computer to find better EV battery materials by upyoars

https://arxiv.org/abs/2208.07977

Kind of a misleading title. They've only described how to go about using VQE for simulating more complex and useful molecules other than simple benchmarking ones like H2, H2O, and LiH, and what their limitations are. Paper explains all of their methods.

I'm no battery expert but basically, the existing solid state battery simulation algorithm (DFT) has limitations on how well it can describe many body electronic structure systems. This is important for predicting whether or not a battery can keep a steady voltage. Using VQE and entangling more qubits appears to be necessary to better simulate the energy states of LiCoO2 and CoO2 molecules, which are essentially intermediate phases of matter found in batteries which transfer & hold electrical charge.

So why would Ford care about this? Obviously EVs need better batteries. But if you want to speed up your R&D time, modeling & simulation helps narrow down your candidate test materials to manufacture to ones which have the best chance of holding the best charge in simulations. In order to do that better, you want to use faster and more accurate simulation tools. That's where QC comes in. Very interesting research.

19