Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
→Article is confusing: Reply Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit Reply |
||
Line 63:
:@[[User:Luca Innocenti|Luca Innocenti]], you recently replaced "non-quantum algorithms" with "classical algorithms", which is physics jargon that many computer scientist do not accept. It is a shorthand for "algorithms using classical rather than quantum physics" but is confusing because the systematic study of "classical algorithms" is more recent than quantum physics (60 years vs 110 years). Would you be open to restoring "non-quantum algorithms", which is clear to most people? Thanks [[User:Qq8|Qq8]] ([[User talk:Qq8|talk]]) 21:48, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
::@[[User:Qq8|Qq8]] I changed it because "classical algorithm" just sounds like a more direct term to me, and it's the standard I've always seen people use. That said, you might be absolutely right that different terminology is used in different fields. Could you point to modern cs references (presumably discussing quantum algorithms) using the "non-quantum algorithm" terminology? [[User:Luca Innocenti|Luca]] ([[User talk:Luca Innocenti|talk]]) 06:14, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
:::@[[User:Luca Innocenti|Luca Innocenti]] I am perfectly aware of the term in the field. However, the Wikipedia is mostly for non-scientists, and the text should be accessible to ordinary people. "Classical algorithms" is confusing. "Non-quantum algorithms" seems clear. I can find some papers that use it, but that's kind of irrelevant, TBH. [[User:Qq8|Qq8]] ([[User talk:Qq8|talk]]) 15:57, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
== Shor NMR ==
| |||