Talk:Shor's algorithm: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 20:56, 6 August 2023

Revision as of 20:56, 6 August 2023

Line 28:

== Archive and other stuff ==

So I've gone ahead and archived most of the rest of the posts on this page. There were multiple long discussions, many from literally 15 years ago, ~2006-2008, and I figured they weren't worth keeping. @[[User:Qq8|Qq8]], @[[User:LucasLuca Innocenti|LucasLuca Innocenti]], I noticed you two were talking on one the of the older posts, but the discussion wasn't really relevant to the older post, so I figured I could archive it, and you guys could make a new post. Your guyses edits to the page have been very good! The page looks a lot better than when I first saw it.

A few months ago in April, I made a drastic series of edits to the page, pretty much wiping out most of the algorithm explanation and replacing it with the baseline of what the article is right now, which is largely based off the quantum phase estimation formulation of the algorithm. The explanation for the quantum subroutine of the algorithm from before seemed mostly like giberish, so I just decided to get rid of it. I meant to look into it at some point, to see if there was some value there, but I haven't bothered, so if anybody else wants to look into that, go right ahead :)

Line 35:

:Also should we update the Wikiproject template quality levels? I'd like to think that the article has been improved a lot. I'm not familiar with assessing that, so that's a thing that could be done if anybody wants to. [[User:Tapeworms27|Tapeworms27]] ([[User talk:Tapeworms27|talk]]) 23:43, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

::@[[User:Tapeworms27|Tapeworms27]] thanks! I mostly agree with your changes, and archiving most of the old discussions here which were either stale or outdated with the current version of the wiki anyway.

::I'm not very familiar with quality assessment levels, but having had a quick look at [[Wikipedia:Content assessment]], I'm not so sure I'd rate the current version of this page as more than C. I think there's still plenty that can be done, both in quality of writing for some of the sections, and in additional content to add. For example, adding how the algorithm works out in an explicit toy example would help a lot digesting the material. Also some additional detail about the number of qubits required in the first register is needed: currently the article just says "2n is sufficient" without saying why. [[User:Luca Innocenti|Luca]] ([[User talk:Luca Innocenti|talk]]) 20:56, 6 August 2023 (UTC)