Ang karunungan ay kapangyarihan. Now, let's put that power to the test. It's time for... K-check! Hello everyone, ako po si Gaby Concepcion, the attorney, not the artista. At ako naman po si O.J. Sirkinya and this is K-check, the newest and smartest game show on Philippine television. We searched all over the country for people na hindi nagsasawang dagdagan ang kanilang kaalaman. Dito po sa K-check, titing na natin kung gaano katalas at katindi ang brainpower nila. And in the final week of competition, malalaman natin kung sino ang tatanghaling kaunang-unahang K-check champion. Apat na contestants ang dadaan sa ating karunungan check sa aro na ito. Selina sa graduating U.P. Diliman, B.S. Electronics Engineering student, a proud batang genya and a frustrated crusher who uses a popular song as a timer for anything she does. Ano kaya yung song na yun? Wen J. on the other hand is a graduating mechanical engineering student of U.P. Diliman who works part-time as a tutor and virtual assistant. Like most people, and like most Pinoy, he loves Adobo and Sinigang. Ann Jeanette is a grade 12 STEM student from Kesson City Academy. She's a photojournalist, managing editor and layout artist of their school newspaper. And finally, Dan is a second year A80 other student from U.P. Diliman who may be familiar to all of you because of his appearances on TV. He likes to sing and do impressions. Wag lang yung tatang kaing. Gawan tayo ng impressions, Sam. True, Attorney Gaby. These four will be competing under the watchful eyes of today's K-check panel of experts. First is Professor Wendell Kapili of the College of Arts and Letters, U.P. Diliman. Professor Ricky Nelyas of the Institute of Chemistry, U.P. Diliman. And finally, Professor Neil Santillian, Chairperson of the U.P. Diliman Department of History. And now, contestants, papasok na po tayo sa K-check Paramihan where each correct answer is worth 10 points. This is your chance to bank as many points as you can and take the all-important early lead. Let's begin. Celine, first question. Which superhero's secret identity is Clark Kent? Superman. K-check. Wenjay, in which province can you find Baguio City? Correct answer is Bengeth. And Jeanette, what does the I stand for in the Government Institution Initials, GSIS? The correct answer is insurance. Dan, bronchial asthma is a disease of what system of the human body? Respiratory system. K-check. Back to Celine. In general, what does an herbivore eat? Plants. K-check. Wenjay, Mike Tyson became a world champion in what sport? Boxing. K-check. And Jeanette, in what country can you find the city of Melbourne? The correct answer is Australia. Dan, which Oscar Award winner popularized the songs My Way and Strangers in the Night? Frank Sinatra. K-check. Back to Celine. In what U.S. state can you find the cities of Dallas and Houston? Texas. K-check. Wenjay, which flightless bird of Antarctica gave its name to one of Batman's art enemies? Engwin. K-check. And Jeanette, what sport is associated with La Tour de Filipinas and the Old Tour of Luzon? Carnies. Malé. The correct answer is cycling. Dan, what city is home of the bears and the bulls in major league sports? Memphis. Malé. The correct answer is Chicago. And that's it for our first round, the K-check Paramihan round. And that's it for our first round, the K-check Paramihan round. Nako, it was a very fairly good round, don't you think? It was. It was, attorney Gabby. And I'm looking forward to more. I think our audience members are enjoying this show so far. But I wonder what our panel of experts thinks, particularly Professor Ricky. Sige, may tanong ako kaya, Jeanette. Interest mo daw ay photojournalism. So, paano ka nag-interest dito at ano mga plan mo about this? Kasi po, si Kuyo po, nag-gaganon din po. So, nakikita ko po sa kanya yung ma... Ganon po. So, parang naging interesadun na rin po ako sa photojournalism. Pero ang galing, kahit na K-12 student pa lang siya, talagang she's holding her ground as against our college contest. Absolutely. I'm excited to see how Anjanette will fare throughout this competition. Pero meron pa rin ako ang answered question dito sa ating contestant na sis Saline. Ano ba yung kanta na yun na ginagamit mo as a timer for certain things that you do? All-to-well 10-minute version po. Misasasabihan ko yung roommates ko. Bilisan niyo maligwa, isang all-to-well lang. Ganon. All-to-well ni Taylor Swift. Yes po, by Taylor Swift. I am quite familiar with that song, but I haven't used it to time myself yet. So, maybe after this show, I'll try to do that Saline. After this show, I'll try to look up that song. Go for it. Go for it. Yeah, but now let's look at the scores. Saline has a total of 30 points. Wenjay has 20 points. Anjanette kaya pang humambol, naguumpisa pa lang tayo. Dan has 20 points. And I'm sure yung mga viewers natin nakikisagot din yan, ha? Syempre. So, ating mga viewers, how did you do against our contestants? At ready na ba kayong lahat para sa ating pabilisan round? That's next. Here on... K-Check! Tuloy pa rin ang ating karunungan check so far. Ang update ng ating mga points, Saline with 30, Wenjay with 20, Anjanette with 0, and Dan with 20 points. Ngayon, Professor Wendl, baka gusto mong tanungin ang iyong katokayo sa ating isa sa mga contestants natin. Si Wenjay. Wenjay, since ikaw ay galing mechanical engineering, I'm just curious, para din studying mechanical engineering, ano ginagawa ng mga tiga mechanical engineering outside mechanical engineering? Wow. Ako for me ang mechanical engineering po, actually it does mechanical engineering, pero ako personally ang gusto ko po ay mag-manage ng projects or ng tao. So personally, I would like people management po for my trap. Mechanical engineering is just a, parang it's your initial step, parang foray into that venture. Yes. Thank you. gusto talaga ni Wenjay pahirapan ang buhay nga. Well, that's not too mechanical an answer from a mechanical engineering student. So go for it, Wenjay. But now, balik mo na tayo sa competition. We're now going into K-Check pabilisan. Here, you need to buzz in first to get the right to answer the question. Correct answers are worth 20 points, pero sa round ito minus 10 points ang maling sagot. Kaya sa inyong apat? Think before you press that buzzer. Let's begin. Question number one. Listed at 7 feet 2 inches, which Filipino basketball player suited up for the Adelaide 36ers? Wenjay? Kayo sa ato. Listed at 7 feet 2 inches, which Filipino basketball player suited up for the Adelaide 36ers of the Australian National Basketball League? Wenjay? Kayo sa ato. K-Check. Question number two. What is the English name of the island in the Pacific Ocean where you can find large cobstone heads called Moai? Answer? Easter Island. Question number three. Literally translated as, quote, so close to the heart, unquote, they are small snacks served with tea throughout the day in China. What is this famous food generally called? Correct answer? Dimsa. Question number four. How many moons or natural satellites does the planet Mars have? Dan? None. Maling. Angenet? Two. Angenet? Two. K-Check. Question number five. Which small island state separated from Malaysia in 1965 to become an independent nation? Wenjay? Singapore. Wenjay, Singapore. K-Check. Question number six. Bulusan volcano made the news when it erupted last June. In the province, can you find Bulusan volcano? Correct answer? Sorsogon. Question number seven. What is the name of the supersonic airliner which was the fastest commercial plane from 1976 to early in the 21st century? Correct answer? Concord. Question number eight. You can still give me an answer. In current events, Gustavo Petro recently became the first leftist president of which South American country? Correct answer? Columbia. Question number nine. Which famous merchant and explorer from Venice traveled throughout or through Asia along the Silk Road during the 13th century? Correct answer? Marco Polo. We're almost done with this round. You can still give me an answer. Question number ten. A starving beluga whale stranded in the river Sen near Paris made the news after it was given vitamins when it refused food. In what country did this happen last August? The queue is in the question. Correct answer? France. Question number eleven. What song by Glass Animals made it to number one in the music charts in March 2021 and then again in March 2022 and now has more than one billion streams on Spotify? Correct answer? Heatwaves. Who's gonna get this final question? Question number twelve. Rupiya is the official currency of all the 270 million people of which country? Yes, Dan. Egypt. Malay. Wenjay. India. Malay. Who's gonna dare? Time is up. The correct answer is Indonesia. And that's the end of our K-check pa-bilisan round. And that's the end of our K-check pa-bilisan round. Attorney Gabby, what do you think of that round? Well, it went by so fast and based on our scores today sabi nga nung isang artista dati you can never can tell kasi nag-iiba, di ba? Tama. Nag-iiba ang shifting ng mga points natin. So we really need to wait for this one. Tama. What about you, Prof. Neal? What do you think? Di maganda yung laban kanina. Slowly but surely baka bi-bilisa lang maya sa round three. Pero may tanong ako para kay Dan. So, Dan, binanggit sa intro kanina you're doing impressions, di ba? I grew up watching a lot of Babalu and F.P.J., mga films po nila. And then to the point na, minsan sa bahay. Ito na, nandito na. Lala ba na ako? Minsan, marini ko po isarili ko na... Ito na nga, kasama ko si Red Fordwood. Hindi ako! Okay, I think kay Babalu yung ginawa mo impression, di ba? Yes, pa. Pwede ka bang gumawa ng sample para kay F.P.J.? Anong mo na sa look, Judge. Medyo mediocre pa lang naman po. Merong request mula sa panel of experts. Pwede ka bang gumawa ng impression para kay Sir O.J.? Wow. Galingan mo, Dan. Galingan mo, Dan. Galingan! Well, mukhang malayo pa ang tatahakin mo, Dan. You're in theater arts, pagbutihin mo yan. Gaya lang, kailangan ninyong pagbutihin ang ating show. At titig na nanating ngayon ang current standing ninyo. Celine has 30 points. Wenjay has 50 points. Ang Jeanette has 20 points. Dan, kailangan mo ang pagbutihin. Attorney Gabby, may chance pa ba silang humabon? Of course, anything goes at this point. May chance pa talagang humabol ang hahabol. And at this point, it's still anyone's game. But this time, our contestants will face their toughest challenge yet dahil ang ultimate pagalingan round. Susunod na, here on K-Check.  Celine has 30 points. Wenjay has 50 points. Ang Jeanette has 20 points. Dan has zero points. So talagang, we need to wait for the next round to see. Attorney Gabby, get gitan pa silang ayon. At malalaman natin sa ating susunod na round, ang ating final round, the K-Check ultimate pagalingan kung sino ba ang mananalo sa competition ito. Sa huling round, correct answers are worth 30 points. Wrong answers get a 15 point deduction. At para mas madagdagan ang kaalaman ng ating mga contestants at viewers. Sa round na ito, sa mga professors ng ating panel of experts manga galing ang mga tanong. At the end of this round, malalaman natin kung sino ang tatang haling K-Check daily winner. Kaya sa inyong apat, contestants, let's begin. Andito tayo sa ating pagalingan challenge kung saan hindi lamang sasagot, magpapagalingan sa mga tanong sa mga tanong din ang ating panel of experts. Prof Wendel, umpisahan mo na. First question. He is one of the world's best selling musical artists with sales of over 88 million records. He received 10 Grammy Awards and 4 Primetime Emmy Awards among others. And according to Billboard, he is the best performing male soloist in the history of the Billboard mainstream. Top 40, who is he? Dan? Is it Bruno Mars? Alit. Ang Jeanette? Justin Bieber. Alit. Ang tamang sagot ay si Justin Timberlake. Prof Freaky, alam mo ba yung sagot doon? Hindi. Sorry. Tanong na lang ang ibigay mo. Diamond is a crystalline structure of a single element. What is this element? Selene. Carbon. Kasaman ng graphite, graphene, bakibol sa tibapa, ito ay mga alotropes ng carbon. K-check. Diamonds are the girls best friend. What about for you, Prof Neal? Sa anong bansa matatagpuan ang Ural Mountains o Bulubunduking Ural? Ang Bulubunduking ito ay sang traditional lahagnan ng dalawang continente. Europa at Asyang. Tamang sagot ay Russia. Okay, second round, Prof Wendel. Okay, question. Name the first Filipino film to be included in the competition section of the Berlin Film Festival. In 2008, the film won the viewers' choice award for best film of all time from Asia. Given by CNN Pacific Screen Awards beating nine other films around the world voted by thousands of film fans. So it is widely considered as one of the greatest Filipino films of all time. Ano po itong pelikulang ito? Ang tamang sagot ay Himala, directed by national artist and UP Speech and Theatre Arts alumnos Ishmael Bernal. Wala do kasing Himala. Prof Ricky? Okay, math naman tayo. Given a sequence of five consecutive ad integers, if the sum of the first two ad integers is 52, what is the sum of the last two integers? Celine? 64. Ang mga numbers ay 25, 27, 29, 31 at 33. Ang tamang sagot ay 64. Kcheck. Natakot naman ako doon. Ako din. Nahirapan na ko sa yung galing ni Celine. Okay, susurod at panong ay ano ang pinakamaliit nabansa sa Asia. Ito ay isang bansa na matatagpo ang sa South Asia at dahil sa global warming, may posibilidad na mawawala ang bansa ng ito. Ang tamang sagot ay Maldives. We should go there before it disappears, Professor Wendel. Okay. By Republic Act No. 11547, which city was declared the chocolate capital of the Philippines? Andranette? Bahol. Malik. Ang tamang sagot ay Davao City. Malagos chocolates, remember. Right, with plugging. Professor Ricky. Okay, next. What layer of the earth includes the drill, upper portion of the mantle and the crust? Wenjay. Gothenburg discontinuity. Malik. Ang tamang sagot ay lithosphere. You learn something new every day. Okay, sa kasaysaya ng Japan. Ano ang tawag sa military government na pinaunlad na mga pamilyang Minamoto, Ashikaga, at Tokogawa? Pusible, hindi ba kayin nagbabasa sa mga manga? Ang tamang sagot ay Shogunate o Shogunato. Okay, ato last question sa aking area. Name the broadcasting and observation tower in Sumida, Tokyo that became the tallest structure in Japan in 2010. Wenjay. Tokyo Tower. Malik. Tapusik ko lang yung tanong no and the tallest tower in the world in 2011. Ang tamang sagot ay Tokyo Sky Tree. Next, prof Ricky. What do you call the sensory system of a fish that is located below the skin and is used to detect movements and vibration in the water? Dan. Dan. Is it sonar? Malik. Wenjay. Skills na lang. Malik. Ang tamang sagot ay lateral line. Ang hirap talaga na mga questions di prof Ricky. And for our last question, prof Neil. So huling tanong ano ang kinikilalang banalabundok na nasa isang aktibong vulkan na nasa hangganan ng Laguna at Kesson Province. Wenjay. Mount Shamad. Malik. Salin. Mount Makiling. Malik. Ito ay ang bundok na sikat na kanlungan ng maraming groupong resolista. Ang tamang sagot ay Banahaw. And that's it for our K-check Ultimate Pagalingan Round. Congratulations to Salin, our K-check daily winner with a final score of 75 points. We will see Salin again on Friday when she competes with their other daily winners for a spot in our semifinals. Thanks to Wenjay and Jeanette and Dan for joining and to the members of our panel of experts. Prof. Wendell, Prof. Ricky and Prof. Neil. This is OJ Sarkina. And I'm attorney Gaby Concepcion. Join us again tomorrow for another K-check.


What's going on everyone? Sam here with Layton Sports Cards, ripping 2021 and 2021-22 Donors Optic Basketball Hobby 4 box mixer number 21, random team style. Let's look again at your random results. As always, find these on the website under the results tab as well as the link in chat. So good luck here everybody. Let me, I want to just see if I can change the microphone really quick because I think I'm going to the wrong one here. Once that guys. Oh, is that good? Can you hear me? Can you hear me or no? Let me turn the game up. Hello. Hello. Hello. Good. No, not good. Good. Good. Hello. Good. Good. Better. Better. I don't know. I just punched it one day.  I punched it. That's what I did. That actually happened. 100%. I'll start with 21-22 Optic and then we'll go into 2021. This is Bayesley Hollow. I think Velocity, Zyre, Williams to 79. Nice one there for the Grizzlies. Use Monogoruba. Green Kauai, that's going to be to 149. Stargazing of Stephakar. Non-Holo that is. 75 years Jalen Johnson. We've got T.J. McConnell, 14 out of 99 going to the Pacers on the Optographs Auto. Scrappy Defender, T.J. McConnell. That's a Vaughn card right there. That's a Vaughn card. Zach Levine Elite Dominator is like random role-player autograph. Like Vaughn will come in and say something. If Vaughn's in here, he'll say something about that. Devanthe Graham, Trey Murphy, Hollow, Trey Young, aka the older Peyton Pritchard, literally exactly. Exactly. Oren, John Wall to 199. LeBron would be cool for sure. Some nice LeBron numbered Quinn. That's an extra card in there. First dice roll of the day. 1-2-3 left, 4-5-6 right. This will go for the entire break on these All-Star cards unless they're super low numbered or an autograph. It's going to be a 3 going to the left with Jason Tatum and the Celtics. So all those cards will go to the team represented on the left. Yeah, maybe, nothing big, just a 1-1. Anthony Davis, Dominators to 99. There you go Quinn. Nice one there. Nice numbered 80. Dondra, Eaton, Hollow. Jason Press, then Rookie, Hollow. Lighted up, Donovan Mitchell. Most moody. Red, Eric Gordon. Color match to 99 for the Rockets. Does Donovan Mitchell have any cab cards, like cab jersey cards? I don't think so. Probably not until maybe they might Photoshop them and like some of the products coming out this year. But I think in Hoops, he's cabs but has a jacket. Yeah, that's what I think so far. That'd probably be for right now what the case is going to be. Next one. And guys, Mosaic, Choice, tiered 20 box full case. Again, tiered random team style.  One being from the top tier, one being from the bottom tier. Yeah, Don Russell tell. That's a good point. Don Russell will be the tell of what they're going to do. So for Caspans, would that be the card that like minus his rookie card obviously? Yeah, that's what you want to go after. Yeah, like colored stuff. Greg Brown, the third hollow. I would say so, yeah. What's up Snipes? Malmer. Kade Rookie Base. Screen, Chris Paul to 149. Bloom, a T-Style to 59. Second year, or third year. No, third year, yeah, third year T's. Malmer. Trey Young, elite dominators. There's Ross Sampson to 99 on the auto for the Rockets. Nice one there, Houston. Base. Yes, we did Snipes. Got two cases of 22-23 upper decks artifacts. There's De'Erin Fox Hollow. Yes, we did. Yes, sir, we did. Orange Ben Simmons to 199. Sign me up right now. You got it. You got it. Kade Cunningham. Oh, God. Don't even get me started with that, Carl. Kaminga Rookie. Really? Hollow, Kevin Durant, optic, elite dominators. That's interesting, Vaughn. It's not listed on personals yet, Snipes, but once it is, we'll let you know for sure. Like, we'll, I'm sure one of the fellas or lady or somebody will be in here and they can let you know once it goes up for personals. I'll let Wahoos know. There's Jonathan Kaminga. What's up, Caverne? Cheryl Sasser. That's their class. Hollow, Trey Young. Mobley, base rookie. Paisa. Hey, what's up, James? Welcome back, buddy. Shae Gildress Alexander. How you been? Seven miles. That's impressive. She's back here in a dream of doing that right now. Franz Wagner. Left Allen Iverson with the Sixers. Okay. Jack, what's up, dude? That's done. That's good. Yeah, go ahead. All right, let's do 2020s now. Got Cheryl Sasser. Oh, my God. Bounty's dropping you guys the link again to what's it called? Tiered Random Teams. Tiered Random Teams. The only group break tonight with spots still. That is football. Full 20 box case. Green, Drew Holliday to 149. Hey, what's up, Jack? Glad to have you here, man. Appreciate it. What's going on? All right, he's Halliburton. Missed a few spots. Shaving. Yeah, I know, man. That's brutal, dude. Karris Lavert, Orange, 2199. Pacers. Raining 3s. Chauncey Billups, Hollow. Oh, it's because like this right here is super blonde, so it comes in patchy. It's annoying, dude. So annoying. Yeah, so frustrating. Camel Walker, All-Stars. Raining 3s, Buddy Heal, 299. Hollow, Nicola Jokic, nice Joker. For Denbeer. We've got Gordon Hayward to 49 on the Dominator's Auto. Nice one there, Hornets. That's sick. Oh, I've seen Yogi. I've seen Yogi's beard. That is a thing. That is a thing of God, Rob. That is a thing of God. Part of your upper lip. There you go, Sin. Yeah, dude, my beard is just tough. Vernon Carey Jr., nice one there. Yeah, we're talking about beards, Yogi, and you're like the poster child of good beards. Because like, Sin Victa was making fun of my spots here because like, you can see it's there and it's thick. It's just blonde. It's just super blonde. It's like, I just can't get that part, man. Brutal. Yours is past the belly button, Wahoo. Oh my gosh. Dude, that's awesome. I'm in on that, for sure. It would be a patch auto. You're right. That's actually pretty funny, Quinn, but yes, you are 100% correct on that. At least I'm in here's Kemba. Wopper, Wopper, Wopper. Beard gummies? I'm in on that. Say I'm out of it. Oh my god, it's brutal. You rule. The disease of being here is just flowing through late right now.   It'll genuinely ruin your life. Tim Hardaway Jr., hollow. Someone leaked, there's like a new one coming out and people already have it. It hasn't even aired yet. Welcome to the BK commercial. Yeah, Devon Macelle to 59. Nice one there for the spurs till it airs twice during the Super Bowl. Oh god. You're getting it stuck in packing tape. Oh no, Wahoo. Good god, that sounds painful. Denny Avdia. Pascal Siakum, pink velocity to 79 for the Raptors. Bring back the king. The king?  He always had great commercials. He did, man. I love the one when that one player or Randy Moss ladder went backward and BK took it and the king was the guy that gets the lap. That was so good. Yeah, that was funny. Love that character. Oh, jeez. That's wild yogis.  No, I said yogis. Because you can't read. I guess so. On three. Paul George. Little piece of me for shipment. Yeah, watch when technology gets really good. There's going to be Wahoo clones running all over the place. Russell Westbrook. Yeah, yeah, we do, Earth. I can drop you the link for one for a couple really quick. Go man, Yen. Let me see. Oh, maybe we don't currently. I know we had them here. I could bring you over to Layton Gaming. I know they have some. Or maybe they don't. We have it in stock. I just don't know. Maybe we don't have it on the site for personals right now currently. That's the only thing I could think of, Earth. I know we have it in stock though. I just don't know if they're, I guess they're just not on the website currently. All stars Russ. Oh, two out of five? That's nasty. Oh, okay. Wahoo knows the site better than I do. There's the link to it. Geez, man. I got to go home. Hello is a Cole Anthony. Nice one there. That is Wahoo doing Wahoo's things right there. Cole Anthony Rookie. Green Montrez Herald to 149. Yeah, it's not showing up in the miscellaneous section. That's what I'm saying. If you go under all personals, it's under there. It's under there. Gotcha, gotcha, Donny knows the vibes. It's not very often I'm right. I'll take it. Yeah. Mosaic's going to be fun, Mooc. Who are you chasing Mosaic? Well, you're jazzed for, what are you, Broncos for football? Because you're jazzed for basketball. I know that. Who's your football team? Hello, Allen Iverson. Oh, stop it. Oh, be topping. Yeah, illusions is going to be fun.   Never mind. My bad, my bad, my bad. That makes sense. So I'm assuming you could have it shipped to your house if you want as well. I mean, if, like, rip on YouTube means that it's going to be ripped live on YouTube and Twitch and then upload it to YouTube after. Bonner, I already got a couple of schticks that are loaded up in the chamber for illusions tomorrow. So you get ready. Nick Richards, Hollow Trade Jones. We're all going to lose your mind. We are. Everybody's going to lose your mind. Landry Schmidt. I know Fawn's excited. Oh, nine and eight, five? That's not bad at all. What'd you send? Do you send them PSA or you send them to another grading company, didn't you, Yogi? There's James Hardin to 59. I know you're talking about another grading company, correct? I know your Dmit, your spider is huge. If I purchase today for YouTube, it'll be postponed until the break comes up. So the way we do it is we rip personal boxes after group breaks are over at around 12, 12, 30 a.m. Eastern time, then we do personals. So it won't be ripped until tonight. It won't be ripped until tonight. Ooh, redemption. That could be big time. That could be big time. Let me see a filler really quick, if you don't mind. That could be huge right there. Thank you, sir. Come on, baby. Well, Mello is a big redemption. Oh, okay. I was like, who's redemption? Rated rookie signatures. Seven. Killian Hayes. Not bad. That'll be going to the Pistons. Congrats, Detroit. We'll take a Killian Hayes. Very nice. Very, very nice. Congrats on that, Pistons. Yeah, no problem, Earth. And it will be ripped. It will be available on YouTube as well after. So you can just search up, like, Top Scrone, Black Star Wars break for whatever your first name last initial is. Gosh, green and base. Do a quick recap here. We had Autos, Killian Hayes, Pistons, Gordon Hayward Hornets, Ralph Sampson Rockets, and Teacher McConnell Pacers. That'll do it for the break. Thank you guys again for the fill. Next up, we've got, I'm out.


Thank you IBM for saying up this conference, which I've enjoyed a lot. So today I'm going to tell you about some work that we've been doing at Google, which has also been in collaboration with our previous speaker, Garnet, and our next speaker for Microsoft, Nathan Wiebe. And that work concerns quantum simulation with low depth circuits. I'm going to give this talk at a fairly high level, so hopefully most of the room will sort of follow along. But if you're more interested, I would refer you to these three papers, especially the last two, which go into a lot more detail. So I'm going to start with a rather, I think, uncontroversial statement that if we're going to do something interesting in the near term, it's going to need to be with a rather low depth circuit, just due to limitations of fidelity and coherence and whatnot. And as we heard in some prior talks, there's been some work in sort of identifying what it might take to get to the point of classical attractability, a particular proposal that our group is interested in. Concerns simulating random circuits, as McBremner talked about. We think that you can get to this classically intractable regime with maybe 50 qubits, gate depth 40, and about 99% fidelity. However, the supremacy experiment is not intrinsically useful. And of course, we'd really like to be able to do useful things with quantum computers. So the supremacy experiment, I think it sort of gives us optimism that with a low depth circuit we can prepare rather complex quantum states. So the question then becomes what's sort of the value in being able to do this. And sort of rhetorical answer to this is that such states can provide descriptions of complex quantum systems, which maybe you couldn't model classically. So of course, systems of interacting electrons of the sort that Garner and Bella talked about before are such systems that are often very hard to model classically. And often, in many instances anyways, describing these systems is a bottleneck for computational chemistry and material science. So to give some sense of this, I mean, exactly using known methods, exactly computing something like methane might take seconds on a laptop, maybe minutes to do ethane. It's gonna be quite difficult to do propane to chemical precision. It could easily take days. Now whether this is going to be asymptotically exponential scaling or not is sort of something that Garner and I talked a lot about. It may not be, but the fact of the matter is that going to even slightly larger systems than this today to high precision is essentially intractable. And to send, especially simulating something like this, a superconductor simulating this at the atomic level would be extremely challenging. So the question sort of becomes, well if we wanna model these things and we can create complex states, how do we make the right states? And the idea that I think is very popular with people in this room is that that of variational algorithms that you can essentially train quantum circuits to prepare these states in a way sort of similar to a neural network. So I'll be talking a bit about that today. And specifically, I'll be focusing on ways that we can use insights from chemistry and Hamiltonian simulation to sort of do this with lower depth circuits. So I should go through this very quickly. We're interested in solving the Schrodinger equation for molecules. There's Coulomb operators and particles have connect energy. We're usually working in the Born-Oppenheimer approximation, which means that we're looking at the electronic wave function and the potential of the nuclei. So there's an energy surface that is sort of parameterized by where the nuclei are. In the case of molecular hydrogen, it's just the bond length. You've seen a lot of plots like this already at this conference. And energy surfaces are very important to chemists because they teach us about chemical reactions. In particular, changes in energy on these surfaces are responsible for determining the rates of chemical reactions. And we're especially obsessed with what we call chemical accuracy, because that's the accuracy that you need in the energy surfaces to compute the rates accurate to within an order of magnitude at room temperature. And it's especially achieving this accuracy, which is, in many cases, classically intractable. And that's especially so for the sorts of systems Garnet talked about, certain strongly correlated systems, especially those involving transition metals. And so what's at stake here is essentially a paradigm shift from essentially a qualitative and descriptive way of using computation that's sort of done after the experiment to a protective and quantitative paradigm, which would really allow for in silico material discovery, that sort of thing. So I debated whether or not I needed this slide at all. I'll go through it rather quickly. I'm sort of interested in variational algorithms. These are based on the variational principle. They are especially straightforward to understand in terms of preparing ground states of systems. The idea is that you have some parameterized quantum state. You create with a circuit. You measure its energy, and then you use some classical outer loop to try to find parameters that minimize the energy. So the first step in this is you need to come up with a parameterization of a circuit that's going to prepare the state. And I write cleverly here because I'm of the belief that it's very important to sort of include insights from say chemistry in order to correctly structure these circuits. Now popular ways of coming up with these circuits include, for instance, taking a low depth trotter approximation to the 80 back state preparation. Another idea that's been talked a lot about is unitary couple cluster, which is basically a way of using perturbation theory in order to come up with sort of a good initial guess for what terms you should use in this thing and what initial parameters you should take. But anyways, once you've come up with that, you need to prepare some reasonable classical guess state. Maybe it's the classical mean field state. It should reflect a good classical approximation to the problem. So you prepare that state presumably easily. You then prepare this parameterized circuit.  You measure its energy pretty straightforward. And then you hopefully are close enough to the ground state that you can use some greedy optimization like gradient descent to suggest new parameters. And the last couple steps here are then iterative. So quickly, I was going to tell you about this rather old experiment that we did. It's almost two years old now. So this was a simulation of molecular hydrogen on superconducting qubits. We did two different algorithms. One was the phase estimation algorithm I'm not talking about. But the red dots were the result of our variational experiment, which as you can see performed fairly well for this system. But I think perhaps the most interesting part about this experiment was actually if you take a close look at the errors in the results that we got. So in red here is the errors in the red points on the left as a function of the bond length. And so in this case, we essentially determine the optimal parameters experimentally by using this classical outer loop. But because this is a small system, we also knew what the theoretically optimal variational parameters were. So we also ran the circuit at these theoretically optimal parameters. And when we did that, we get the green dots. And you can see that the circuit run at the theoretically optimal parameters gave energies that were almost in order of magnitude worse than the circuit ran at the parameters that were determined to be the optimal experimentally. So that's pretty easy to understand what's going on here. Variational algorithms are robust to certain types of control errors. For instance, if one of your parameters is a rotation angle and you're systematically over-rotating something, then in the course of the classical optimization, instead of finding theta star the optimal parameter, you'll find theta star minus epsilon or something like this. The optimization will drive you to the correct angles. So this is one of the things that this robustness to systematic errors, it's one of the things that I think sort of inspires hope that variational algorithms might have a chance. Of course, these are heuristic algorithms, which differentiate them from a lot of the simulation approaches that we talked about earlier today. OK, so now I'm going to sort of dive into ways that actually, no, I've got a slide ahead of myself there. OK, so in the experiment I just showed, we actually did use unitary coupled cluster. And unitary coupled cluster, like other structured onsots like Traurized, AdiVac, state preparation, it does require a large number of arbitrarily connected gates in order to implement. These methods usually have some cost that's proportional, polynomially, in the number of terms in the Hamiltonian. And in the normal representation, the Hamiltonian has end of the fourth terms, which I'll talk about. And so that leads to quite a high cost. Now, I probably can't give this talk here without at least mentioning that IBM had a recent result. They did a variational chemistry experiment as well, where they sort of surpassed this problem with the very expensive variational onsots by proposing to use what they called a hardware efficient onsots, which essentially just used the gates available on their device. In fact, I took this picture from their paper, it was sort of layers of entangling gates and then parameterized rotation gates. And this allowed them to extend their approach to larger molecules and what we had looked at before. We went up to three qubits previously, they went up to six qubits and they've now looked at bigger things than molecular hydrogen. Which is, I think, very exciting and allowed them to sort of look at a lot of the more challenging parts of this experiment, like what happens when you have more variational parameters, they study new optimization techniques and new representations. But something which I think we also need to keep in mind here is that accuracy is very important in these quantum chemistry simulations. And in particular, these experiments do not surpass the accuracy of classical mean field methods, which means that I believe anyways that this is sort of evidence that we need to think carefully about how to structure the variational onsots because in this case there is a product state that has lower energy than these results. And there's other challenges too, which just come up sort of generically and make the experiment much more difficult. So one thing, for instance, is that a very large number of measurements are required. If there's end of the fourth terms, then naively it looks like you're gonna need end of the eight measurements. Now in practice it's probably a bit better than that, but this is still a lot of measurements. Now the measurements is a classical resource. It corresponds to how many repetitions of the circuit that you need to make. But still, this is a real cost. I mean if you're looking for robustness to systematic errors and you have to repeat your experiment 10 million times, there's going to be drifting parameters, which sort of negate the effects of that. So that can be a real challenge. So what I'm gonna talk about in the rest of this talk is basically ideas that sort of build on this idea, IBM sort of started of this structured variational onsots, which, or sorry, hardware efficient variational onsots, thinking about an onsots that fits on the hardware that you have and is sort of very efficient in that sense, but uses insights from chemistry to come up with a good initial parameterization. All right. Okay, so to explain this, I need to go back to the basics somewhat here. So whenever you're simulating a wave function on any computer, you need to discretize it somehow. So if you have eta electrons, you're gonna need to somehow confine them to a grid of endpoints, which means that your wave function can potentially span n choose eta possible configurations. Now if you're going to simulate these things classically, you should be very worried about that because the number of configurations is growing combinatorially. So for this reason, classically it's very important to choose a basis where the wave function is, where the ground state or whatever state you're interested in is compact, meaning it has support on the fewest number of configurations possible. And because of this, chemists classically have long used molecular orbitals, which are a very acceptable solution to this problem. They're very compact. They are obtained from the mean field solution and they sort of look like this. I mean, this is, for some molecule what some molecular orbitals look like, they're usually made from atomic orbitals. And I should mention that normally we're gonna simulate these things in second quantization, where each qubit basically encodes an orbital. It's one if there's an electron there and zero otherwise. And so once you've made discretization choices like this, in second quantization as Garnet pointed out, you get a Hamiltonian that tends to look like this, where these things are fermionic operators, Adag or P-A-Q excites from orbital Q to orbital P. This would be the one body term containing information about the kinetic energy and external potential. This is the two body term that just comes from the Coulomb interaction between electrons. Now, there's different ways you can come up with these values of these coefficients here, but by far the most common way in chemistry is what's called the Galerkin discretization, which uses integrals over the basis functions that look like this. Now, if you're concerned about, as I am, the end of the fourth terms in this Hamiltonian, you might come up with some ideas just by looking at the form of these integrals. You might notice, for instance, that if you were to choose basis functions which were spatially disjoint, meaning that they didn't overlap in space, then instead of end of the fourth of these, there's actually n squared of them. So these phi's here are the basis functions, and you might notice that phi P and phi S, they have the same electron position variable. So phi P doesn't equal phi S, or phi Q doesn't equal phi R, and the basis functions are spatially disjoint, then the integrand is zero everywhere. And this would lead you to a Hamiltonian that looks like this, and you would have a diagonal potential. However, for the case of spatially disjoint basis functions, you run into problems in the one-body term, because this would also diagonalize the one-body term, and that can't be correct. In fact, it turns out this sort of discretization is kind of pathological for Galerkin discretizations. Of course, there are other discretizations you can choose. For instance, a finite difference discretization would be fine. However, there are reasons that chemists tend to prefer the Galerkin discretizations. For one thing, they have variationally bounded basis set air. And if you're using a variational method when you're trying to push the energy down, it's nice to know that your basis set air is variational from above. Whereas finite difference discretizations, for instance, don't have this property, and there's also other convergence issues related to them that you might or might not be concerned about. So I'm now gonna tell you about a way that you can use basis functions, which do admit this nice discretization, which have some other nice properties, which will also lead us in some way to gain n squared terms. And this is to use the plane wave basis, which I think should be kind of familiar to many people here. Plane waves are what you think. In my equations here, this omega is a volume parameter. It's just the volume of the unit cell over which the plane waves are defined. And so the wavelength of the plane wave is sort of this omega to the 1 third if it's the fundamental harmonic. So using the plane wave basis, it turns out that the Coulomb operator isn't end of the fourth. It has end of the third terms. You can write it like this. This is an exact representation that you would get where you two have done the integrals that I showed on the previous page. And interestingly, it has this nice analytic form. There's, the integral can be evaluated exactly. I won't get into it in this talk, but if you follow the sort of research that say Andrew and Robin spoke about this morning, you're interested in these signal processing algorithms. There's huge advantages to the fact that these coefficients are analytical because it means they can be computed on the fly. And in that paradigm of the simulation, that's very beneficial. But the reason we have end of the third terms just comes from conservation of linear momentum because plane waves are eigenstates of the momentum operator. And the two-body term, the electron-electron interaction is translationally invariant, so it needs to conserve linear momentum. So you can choose that you're getting plane wave P and Q excited, and you can choose maybe to take it from one place, but this constrains the other parameter because they all have to add up. The other thing to keep in mind is if you're using plane waves, you now have a periodic representation of the system. You can think of the periodized Coulomb operator, which looks like this. This is just the Fourier series of the one over r potential. And so, you know, that is of course ideal in many cases for periodic systems, like crystals. If you wanna do a sort of atomistic model of periodic systems, instead of, say, mapping it to a Hubbard model, which was the sort of thing that Bella was talking about earlier, that can be very good for gaining, say, qualitative understanding of materials. But if you wanna do, say, material design where the properties you're looking for depend sensitively on the particular structure, you're going to need to do some sort of explicit representation of the periodic system, the crystal, or whatever it is that you're interested in. So I should also mention, though, that if you don't want periodicity, you have to do a little bit more work to remove the images that are created by plane waves. So for instance, you need twice as many plane waves for each non-periodic dimension, so you'll need twice as many more if you're looking at graphing in steve diamond, or four times as many more for a polymer, eight times as many more for a single molecule. Now, this is a different issue than the intrinsic basis at discretization there. I was just talking about reducing periodicity. So you might be kind of skeptical that, you know, some basis functions like this are as good at representing the system as some very fancy thing that looks like this, and that's fair, but there's a lot known about this. So in particular, the basis at discretization error converges is determined by cusps in the wave function. This is sort of intuitive, but it was proven very rigorously 60 years ago. So we know that is the case. And so in the first moment of the wave function, if you're thinking about the density, and mind you, in most classical methods, like DFT or mean field methods, the only cusps you have appear in the density because those methods aren't correlated, so there's no electron-electron cusps. But certainly, there's cusps at the nuclei. Now, the Gaussians, they are centered on the nuclei, and as you add more Gaussians, they can get sharper and sharper, and they can resolve those cusps. And in this way, they can suppress the basis at error in a way that's very chast factory. It's, you know, it's taking care of. Plain waves do struggle a bit with nuclear cusps. However, in practice, you're almost always going to use pseudo-potentials when you're modeling these systems. For instance, in pretty much all the work in this area, including, say, Microsoft's work counting T gates for ferred oxen, or even in IBM's recent simulation experiment, an active space is used. And in an active space, what you do is you recognize that, say, only certain electrons are important for bonding. For instance, the valence electrons, and usually the core electrons, they can sort of be treated classically. So you take those core electrons, you freeze them, and you treat them with, say, a mean field method, which then dresses the nuclei with some external potential. This softens the Coulomb potential and restores analyticity to it. And for that reason, the wave function no longer has a cusp there, and the Fourier transform will suppress those errors extremely effectively. So for neither plane waves or goushians is the nuclear cusp really the thing to worry about, despite what is often people's intuition. By far, the bigger issue is the electron-electron cusp. So this occurs at all points in space, where two electrons might overlap. And goushians are centered on nuclei. The electron-electron cusp is everywhere. So goushians don't have any special advantage for resolving this electron-electron cusp. And yet, when you're interested in a correlated calculation, in fact, in many cases, most of the correlation energy comes from resolution of this electron-electron cusp. So it's very important. And it turns out that all single particle basis functions are sort of similarly inadequate at resolving this. And they lead to algebraic convergence of the basis set error, which goes like 1 over n.  However, at small sizes, it certainly is the case that there are a number of systems where you're certainly going to need more plane waves than goushians. The converse is also true. There are also some, you know, there are periodic systems, especially, where plane waves are near the ideal basis to model the system. It sort of depends. But I could give sort of a whole talk about this. It's a long conversation. But another thing to keep in mind is that often people aren't just doing single-point calculations. They do a series of calculations, and then they extrapolate how the basis set error is converging. And molecular orbitals are a little bit strange. They, you know, the very high-energy ones don't exactly mean something. So they sort of, they're a little bit less refinable, or a little bit less systematic in the way they converge than plane waves, which, you know, converge in really a very systematic way. So anyways, OK, I've hopefully convinced you plane waves aren't like the end of the world, and I'm going to sort of move on. So how are we going to get the n squared terms with plane waves? Well, what happens when we Fourier transform the plane wave basis?  What I'm thinking of specifically here is you can take the Fourier transform in the mode operators and just plug that into the plane wave Hamiltonian.  And the reason why is because the discrete Fourier transform is a unitary transformation. And I'm transforming just a finite number of plane waves here. And so you can't go from a finite number of continuous functions unitary transformed into something not continuous. So what I've shown here is it's actually the square of the basis functions that you do get. It's sort of like each color is a different one. So it's sort of like plane waves trying very hard to be a grid. And they're a little bit different, though. I mean, the key thing is that they do overlap. And because they overlap, that's sort of what ends up admitting this Galeric Indiscrimination part is not pathological in them. But anyways, if you just plug this into the plane wave Hamiltonian, you do get a Hamiltonian of this form. It does diagonalize the periodized Coulomb operator anyways, which is maybe not so surprising, but it's a very nice feature. It's something that's very hard to take advantage of classically because classically, if you work in this basis, the initial state is very much not packed, which is usually what you're looking for. But quantum mechanically, we don't really care about that. We care about how many terms there are. So this is sort of a nice feature. And there's also a nice form, again, for the coefficients here. And there's nice form for these, but I'm not going to bother. Something I'm not really going to spend a lot of time talking about is that as many of you know, you need to map the fermion operators to qubit operators somehow. And when you do that, say, using the Jordan-Wigner transformation, you tend to get qubit Hamiltonians that look like this. So this came from the kinetic operator, and it's an n local term. And there's n squared of them. And it's still better than this end of the fourth Hamiltonian, but it doesn't look like a great thing to implement on your planar lattice or a linear array of qubits. But in sort of our first paper on this, we showed that there was sort of a straightforward way of implementing a whole trotter step of this Hamiltonian in depth of n on a planar lattice, which can, of course, be used for a variational algorithm, can be used for an error correction, trotterized phase estimation, all that. And the way that we did this was we recognized that in the plane wave basis, the kinetic operator, that's at this part here that looks terrible, is diagonal. And you can simulate it very easily. And then you can apply this Fourier transform in n depth on a planar lattice. This isn't the quantum Fourier transform. It's not related at all, actually. It's sort of more like a fast Fourier transform. And people have looked at this sort of fermionic fast Fourier transform before. It's like the fast Fourier transform, but there's some extra signs because they're fermions. But we showed you could do it on a planar lattice, which wasn't, I mean, it was somewhat obvious, actually. But so anyways, you can do that in n depth. And then the other part, the potential, becomes diagonal. And even on a planar lattice, you could then simulate that in n depth. But it turns out we could do even better than this. And we showed this in an even more recent paper. And so not only can you do better in terms of the total number of gates, but it turns out this algorithm works on a linear array, which was quite surprising. So this is the Hamiltonian again. And I'm going to show you how to do a trial step of this on a linear array in gate depth n. So the first thing I'm going to talk about is how one might implement this term here. So we have n squared of these ZPQ terms. And so basically what you'd need to do is you would need to put each qubit adjacent to every other qubit at one point so that you can implement this term, which couples the two qubits. And so you do this using the swap network. And there's sort of a straightforward swap network that does this. So if you imagine, this is my line of five qubits. And these are the different layers of gates. These black things are going to be, imagine it's a swap gate. You see that using the swap network that looks like this, it's sort of fully parallelized except for one qubit. And you just shift it back and forth. If you do this in n layers, every qubit sort of goes past every qubit and is adjacent at least once. So that's very simple. And that allows you to implement this term in a depth of exactly n. But that didn't solve the hard part, because the hard part is what are we going to do about this term that is n local and has n squared terms. So to deal with that, we're going to use what's called the fermionic swap. So again, this has appeared in some prior simulation literature but not really in the context of the algorithm we're outlining here. But the idea is that there is some gate which it essentially changes the Jordan-Wigner encoding. So it changes the canonical order of the fermion. And so it's actually swapping orbitals, which is different than swapping qubits. Because if you look at this thing up here, I mean you can swap qubits all you want. And qubit 7 and qubit 11 might be next to each other. But you're still going to have a string of like 4 z's somewhere else. And so it's different than just swapping the orbitals. Because if the orbitals are adjacent, then this term is just xx plus yy. And it turns out that this fermionic swap gate, it's in general not a local gate. But it is a local gate if applied between adjacent orbitals. So both the kinetic operator and the fermionic swap are two local qubit operators under the Jordan-Wigner transformation if applied to neighboring qubits.  And so now imagine the qubit's not moving. And instead the fermions, the orbital, not the fermions, the orbitals are going to be moving. And this gate is different than a swap gate. It's something else. But anyways, at doing the same network, it will place every orbital adjacent exactly once, at which point you can implement this zp, zq term. And you can also implement this term, which is just xp, xq. And they're adjacent at that point. So doing this, you could implement all the terms in the Hamiltonian in a very straightforward fashion. And you might imagine doing all of these operations at once, meaning you could do the diagonal part of the potential. You can do the kinetic part. And you can do the fermionic swap all at once. And you write that down in a single gate that would look like this. You could say that this thing was in your gate library. And if you were to say that, then you would conclude that you need exactly n squared over 2 gates of exactly n depth to simulate a charge step of a whole Hamiltonian. Of course, I should mention that, say that you don't have this gate in your library. Why wouldn't you? But let's say you don't. You can, of course, just decompose this into any three entangling gates. So this can be decomposed into a series of three CZs in some rotations or something like this. But I think that this is sort of remarkable because for an explicit trotter step, this appears optimal in some sense, even for an arbitrary connectivity device. Because we have a Hamiltonian that has n choose two interactions and n choose two parameters. And yet, we're able to implement a trotter step of this whole Hamiltonian using exactly n choose two gates on a linear array. And it's fully parallel, so it's also sort of optimal depth in that sense. So this means that even if you gave me an arbitrarily connected quantum computer, I could do any two local gate. I would just draw a line through your device and simulate my algorithm on a line because I don't know how to beat it. Which is kind of surprising. It's not what we would have expected at all. I don't really have time to talk about it, or at least I didn't think I did. I'm going pretty fast here. But we can also implement an arbitrary single particle basis change in depth of just n over two. I should mention that this result borrows heavily from some previous Microsoft work from Hastings, Wecker, Bella Bauer, Matthias Troyer, and Nathan. Which showed that this procedure for preparing arbitrary slater determinants using given rotations. So it's based on that, except for we specialized it to a linear array and also showed you could take advantages of some things like spin symmetry and particle number to reduce the number of gates required. There's also a very nice paper out recently from, it was a collaboration between people at Michigan, NASA, and Google. I was not a part of this one actually. But this was basically looking at doing the same algorithm for the Hubbard model. So actually if you just take the exact algorithm I outlined, we've shown in this paper that it allows you to do charge steps with the Hubbard model in square root n depth on a linear array, which I think that's good news. But also this newer paper shows techniques for preparing the initial states of the Hubbard model that you would probably be interested in for say D-Wave superconductivity, which would, you need a different state preparation procedure and they show how to do that too. So yeah, that all seems good. So I've put together this kind of crazy table here which is the history of these algorithms according to me I guess. So these are all sort of advances in quantum algorithms for quantum chemistry. So I have the year here, the archive number. This is the representation like Jordan Wigner Gaussians, Bravik Tive Gaussians, C.I. Matrix Gaussians. This is the algorithm. So some of these algorithms are variational algorithms and variational algorithms, they are heuristics. Let's not forget that. Because of that I've listed their ultimate cost as a lower bound. You know, because it's just sort of what they cost. Maybe that's sort of an abusive notation. The other algorithms here are for the phase estimation, the phase estimation based algorithm which then requires some time evolution that you either do with typically Trotter or Taylor or now signal processing. And I've suppressed logarithmic factors to the most part here. There's the layout of the chip here. So all these algorithms, variational or the time evolution ones, they tend to have the structure that there's some primitive like a Trotter step or the selective E in the signal processing or something. And then you repeat that a certain number of times. And I've broken them up because the primitive depth tends to reflect improvements in the implementation of the algorithm. I'm giving datas here because it's sort of like, well you know the cost of your algorithm. Whereas the repetitions that has to do with like tighter bounds typically. So you can see the cost has come down significantly since people started getting serious about quantifying the costs here. It sort of, the starting gun was sort of fired by the Microsoft guys actually, I think at this conference four years ago essentially. And they showed these terribly pessimistic results that this is gonna take 300 million years because it's end of the 10th scaling. And just sort of immediately after other groups including Microsoft and the Harvard people and a number of other groups just started hacking away at this and it's been coming down. And so as Garnet was talking about advances in classical algorithms for electronic structure, the same thing is sort of going on here which I think is good news. And we're starting to get down quite low here now. And you can make a variational algorithm of course out of these trotter steps I described. And that would have end depth on a linear array. So that's really, yeah so that seems good. Nathan is gonna show some unpublished data from a collaboration we have. So Nathan's speaking next. Which is looking at using these algorithms I described for a particular problem we're interested in and it looks like the scaling is even improved over this. So yeah, I think that's exciting. I need to quickly plug my, or so we, it was started at Google but it's really not a Google project at this point. There's 23 collaborators. And so it's basically an electronic structure package for quantum computers. So if you want to compile algorithms for chemistry or Hubbard models or any of these things to a quantum computer, you should check out www.openfermeon.org. It's all open source, Apache 2. There's like I say a lot of contributors. It's built in a platform agnostic way and it will remain that way. Meaning that we're not going to wet it to any sort of particular circuit simulator or hardware compiler or something because we want this to be sort of an open platform that can work with IBM QuizKit or with Liquid or with Project Q or whatever you have. And so I think this really sort of simplifies what's required to obtain and study these quantum chemistry algorithms because now you can just sort of, you put in the molecular geometry and you choose a basis set and you choose Bravik Atayev or whatever and it will compute the molecular orbitals, do the integrals, give you the Hamiltonian, you can do all sorts of things with it. So check it out. All right, so what's next? Well, modest goal here, but we would like to work towards trying to implement a variational algorithm like this on hardware in the classical intractable regime. This is no small order, but I think it's something worth working towards and there's really a large variety of challenges that one needs to overcome here. So one thing I didn't really talk about at all is I think there's a significant need for better strategies for measuring the energy and then for feeding it back and doing the optimization. So actually, IBM's recent experiment, I think sort of highlighted this and they have produced some nice solutions to say the optimization and things like this, but it's something that I think we can get a lot better at too. I also think that there's still room for better variational algorithms. We really need to think about how we can use this resource we have that creates very complex states in order to model the complex states that we actually have. And I think that, for instance, that there are ideas that's following the development of the classical methods, for instance, Intenser Networks that might be able to teach us things about the structure of the ground states we're looking for, which we could then use in our circuits. So I think that's encouraging. There's a question of what systems you might wanna look at first. Maybe there's sort of a quantum supremacy and electronic structure, like what's the first electronic structure problem that you could solve on a quantum computer that you probably wouldn't be able to solve otherwise. And in one of our papers, the first paper I talked about, we spent a lot of time talking about why I think Jellium, which is an awesome name, the uniform electron gas seems like an especially attractive target. So there's a lot of nice things about Jellium, but one of them is that it is a widely sort of practice benchmark for classical methods, especially in the quantum Monte Carlo community, there are thousands of papers that sort of measure themselves about how well they do on this specific problem. Now Jellium, it's literally just a molecule without the nuclei. So it's just like the essence of the electronic structure problem. And so it's very simple in a way, but it's very classically intractable in some regimes. And even its size is as small as, I mean, 100, getting the correct answer within the basis is even with enough accuracy to resolve the difference between phases is classically intractable. Also for Jellium, it turns out the plane wave basis is optimal because the Hartree-Fox solution to Jellium is plane waves, which means that you can't complain about the basis I'm using because it's the optimal basis. So that's nice. It's also a rather important system. So it has, you know, Jellium is in two dimensions. One of the systems where you see the fractional quantum Hall effect in where it's studied. But also it's sort of tied to the history of density functional theory in an important way because sort of the universal functional doesn't depend on the nuclei and Jellium is just the molecule without the nuclei. So the universal functional is just sort of like getting the energy of Jellium in a sense. But also the first density functional and the most widely used one still probably, the LDA functional, which is the one that scales to the largest system sizes today, is based on approximations to the energy of Jellium. So if you can calculate the energy to Jellium better, you could potentially improve the LDA functional. You know, I don't, LDA is already pretty not working well for other reasons. So I don't know if that's really gonna change things, but it's a cool connection. Also I think that these improvements are not just relevant in the context of near term devices. So I didn't speak much about what we did in terms of doing sort of new LCU based approaches for these algorithms and so forth. But I think that they're starting to make air correction of chemistry look a lot more plausible. So something that I'm really a fan of people doing is counting teagates just as Andrew Childs was presenting to us today, because that really helps us figure out what the cost is gonna be with an air correction. And from talking a lot with Austin Fowler in my group, at least his perspective is if we have less than a billion teagates and we have something on the order of low hundreds of logical qubits required, then you can potentially do the state distillation in series, meaning you just have only one tea factory. And if you have less than a billion teagates for the algorithm, then that would be feasible. And the long story short is this means that you could solve these problems with, given the air rates that we have today, if we made our device, it's planar and had more qubits, a million physical qubits, that we could solve these problems, which doesn't seem so ridiculous to me anyways. So another thing is I think that there's more work to be done here with connections between the basis and the algorithm still. It's sort of this boring topic unless you're really into the field basis, like it's not that exciting, but it is that exciting. So we should develop, so for instance, classically recently a lot of methods have improved by looking at the use of correlated basis sets. So instead of using orbitals, well you'll still use orbitals, but in addition to using orbitals, which are single particle basis functions, you might use geminols, which are anti-symmetrized two particle basis functions. So it would be like adding a hardcore boson to the system. They can explicitly resolve the electron electron cusp and they can change that algebraic convergence of the basis set error, which I think, you know, that could be nice. Also if you really offended by these basis functions and you're interested in error correction, you can just go to first quantization, where the number of qubits is the number of particles times the log of the number of basis functions. And so you can, 20 qubits gets you a million plane waves and I don't think anyone's gonna complain about that. So that was the talk. You can take your revenge for my aggressive questions now. Okay, thanks, Ryan, for a nice talk. We have some time for questions. Let's start with Jens. So my question starts off at the very end of your talk, which is like, why is there so much emphasis on Gaussian orbitals or plane wave functions? Like given that in classical methods, like tensor network methods or DFT, like these highly curated sets of orbitals like key to the functioning and not Gaussian orbitals? So I would answer this by saying that in fact that the electronic structure community is essentially divided into two camps and for whatever reason they tend not to talk so much and you may only sort of be more familiar with one of these camps, but I mean about half of theoretical or computational chemists do use plane waves as their primary basis. And this is especially if you're looking at materials. Now for single molecules, very often Gaussians are preferred and there's a number of reasons for this. I mean, so one thing is that when you don't have, when you're not worried about electron correlation and if you're using say DFT or mean field methods or even some methods beyond that, there is no electron electron cusp because it's a single determinant method. And if there's no electron electron cusp, the only thing to worry about is the nuclear cusp and the Gaussians are very good at resolving that. But if you're really interested in getting chemical accuracy in the correlation energy, then this advantage between Gaussians and plane waves is less clear. Of course, for systems of reduced periodicity, you do need extra work for plane waves and you know, but you know, let's remember though that looking at materials is a very important problem too and plane waves are the standard there. Further questions? I see one in the back, Kristen. Yeah, sorry. So I have both a question and a comment. So I have to make a comment on one of the earlier slides where you commented on the stuff we did here. Yeah, yeah. And sorry. And so the thing is I agree with you that if you were to do just a hardly far calculation, the energies would be better on those curves. But the reason, I mean, that leads to questions of why do you do experiments like that at all? It's like that's six qubits, that's something you can do on your watch these days, right? And so what is it that you want to gain from them? And I agree that there's ways you can tweak the experiment to make them look better and get the energy down lower. But I think the main point of those experiments is actually to really understand what is it that goes wrong in the actual, in the actual. So this is why we didn't care at all about how really good we are with the actual curve, but we cared more about how good we are with the noise model of our model. So I guess the response to that, though, is that what the noise is going to do to the system depends on your onsots. And your onsots, in my mind, is a combination of the initial state you start in and the circuit you apply. And also, to some extent, even the Hamiltonian you're measuring. And all these things are different if, for instance, you start in the Hartree-Fox state. And certainly, were you to start in that basis, you'll get a better result. Because just the state you initialize in before you apply an entangling gate will have lower energy. I agree that it will have a lower energy. But I mean, the noise process is still the same noise process as T1, T2, D4, and that's what we mostly cared about in the entire process. But I'm seeing that that will have, I mean, how that affects different circuits it depends on the circuit to some extent. You'll see different errors if you use a different circuit. So to the extent that you're interested in studying that. Well, I also want to mention, though, I actually, I really like that experiment. It's really important to actually do these things because there's a lot of complexity in things like the outer loop and using more parameters and better representations, which you guys used in terms of the tapering qubits and this sort of thing. So I didn't really mean to be too critical on that. And then I have another question. So you're switching between the basis. Do you see that like, do you plan to use that in the context of a variational algorithm? Or do you plan to use that in the context of time evolution? So we're not switching between the basis sets. Or what do you mean, are you talking about the T and V, the split operator? Yes, exactly. Yeah, so that was in our first paper on the topic. That's what we came up with. But then we had the second paper where we realized we could do this fermionic swap network thing and we don't do that anymore. We do them all at once. But you plan to use that more in the context of time evolution or variational algorithms? Oh, both. I mean, certainly it's now the lowest depth structured variational thing I can think of. So it's certainly what I'm interested in for variational algorithms. But also Nathan will tell you some numerics for using that in the context of Trotter. OK, so we're out of time. So we have a coffee break now and then we'll reconvene at 4 o'clock with Nathan Wiebe. So let's thank our speakers again.


You're in danger the moment you move your focus from Jesus himself to what Jesus does. Keep Jesus at the center. People of God and especially ministers, we need to carry the Holy Spirit's power while remaining focused on Jesus. Now some find Jesus, receive his power, and then take their eyes off of him. Many will say to me on that day, Lord, Lord, as electricity is grounded by wires to accomplish a purpose. So the power of the Holy Spirit must be grounded upon Christ in our lives. I teach and practice healing, deliverance, the prophetic, and spiritual gifts. These are wonderful demonstrations of the power that the church needs now more than ever. But if I'm more focused on receiving from his hand than I am on knowing his heart, I'm on dangerous grounds. While carrying his power, live in his presence.


solem maht pa ˈgkKEm toothbrush g.l갈se rhi,  arter dat bang gata mAbon . l precautions are at home, I am very scared to talk aboutthos too About the government, about government pocket we will make elections Some will say in the 是 there is a opposing politician of equity that she should go to block, out of a house, and so on They will make our rational development Right малень c слídha sesame co Іlchibas ________ P C зав ________ .. sloory. It is a very difficult situation regarding Audi,


Um, so I'll just dive in, um, part of our workflow is that we take the email and we output it to a PDF and then that gets put into ever known, um, for whatever reason, I think it's when may, yeah. So when mail renders the PDF, it will use, um, color quoted text for multi-level discussions. The problem is the default choice, uh, for one of the colors, uh, at least on my display looks, uh, look, it's very hard to read. It's like a green, a light green against white and it's just hard to read. So the tip there is change your color quoted text if you're going to output to a PDF. And where do we do that? Uh, we do that in mail preferences, fonts and colors. Cool. Awesome. Yeah, that's a good, yeah. Yeah. So now I, so purple and teal are my two colors.


Hey everyone. Thanks for checking out this video. Just a quick background. I had the opportunity to go to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame and visit the awesome The Beatles Get Back to Let It Be exhibit that they just launched, which was great, which I heard about from my friend Gary Astridge, who is joining us today. So Gary, welcome on to this cool little video we got here today. Thank you, Bart. Nice to see you again. Why don't you explain to folks your involvement with The Beatles and with Ringo, I should say, and then we'll talk a little bit about getting these iconic drums to the Rock Hall. All right. I guess in short, it's always hard for me to describe. It's always different projects and things, but I would say I'm curator for his Beatles era drum kits and historian. There's been times where Ringo would ask me to dig up a little history and things for him. And I work on just a number of projects, both confidential and public. And your website is ringosbeetlekits.com. And it's just, I mean, if you're ever curious about anything, it is on there and it's very, very detailed. There's another video interview and there's another episode. There's two episodes with Gary on the podcast, which I'll put in the description of this video. But all right, for starters, Gary, let's maybe talk about what the process was like from point A to point B, point B being the Rock Hall of getting this drum set there. Okay. Once the deal was made and approval, there's so many little details that come into place. One mainly is insurance, who's going to cover from the time it leaves the vault in LA till the time it comes back a year later. So that had to be set up. And then it's very, very detailed where we set up a program that's almost like you'd see in the military. Even though the drum's in there, the drum kits are all in a vault, highly secured. They'll still go through everything and then just make sure that everything is there. We retake photos of the kit and close the road cases up. They get locked and I get the key. So then they get shipped overnighted to the Rock Hall. The people there are absolutely great. I'm going to say this time and time again. But so when the drum kits arrived, they were crated. So we had to uncrate them, roll the road cases into this room where they log everything in and then they do a condition report of every single item. So it's just a repetition of things. And it's funny because I guess there was this magical moment in time where all of Ringo's Beatle kits are now historic artifacts. Yeah. So there's a lot of reverence there. And you can see that. I'm kind of used to it. But when you see the people at the Rock Hall, it's like you're expecting them just to drop to their knees and start bowing. But when we went into this, when I first got there, they gave me gloves and walked into this room. I had no idea what it was. We're just a large room with a table and there's laid out all of the clothing that you see on display. And George's Rocky guitar, Lenin's Epiphone Casino. And I turned into a little kid because it's like right there. Yeah.   It's like you're not impervious to the excitement of that. Oh, yeah. It still makes your heart beat. And it's interesting because the other thing that I noticed this a long time ago, I mean, I've seen people at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in the past when I set up Ringo's Oyster Black Pearl super classic kit. I did that after hours on one specific evening the following day, the exhibit opened. So I went back. I just wanted to see people's response. And it was interesting because here comes a group of young guys, like four guys and they were in a band and the drummer does bow down and whatever. But then you saw people coming over and they're just like touching the plexiglass standing there looking at the kit, you know, some just staring at it in amazement, some crying. And I'm off in the corner, nobody knows me and I'm watching this and I start crying thinking, I cannot believe the effect that this has on people.  You see the emotion and it's like, oh my god, I have a chance to actually see this stuff. And that is like one level, but it's a whole other level when you don't have the plexiglass and they're right there and you're the guy handling them. You know, that is, that's where the reverence comes in. That's where the soberness comes in of being responsible, you know, or having Ringo allow you to be responsible. It makes me think of that, that, you know, everyone's done that where you're turned around and you turn your back and you bump into the ride stand and it falls into the base drum or something. But you're obviously not doing that, you're very careful, but oh, you could see a nightmare situation where something like that happens with one of these unbelievable artifacts, which thankfully you're in charge and that will never happen.  The little wing nut, like one more time. I did hear from the press, a couple press people, which again, I had a press pass, which always feels weird to me because I'm just a guy, you know, and but the podcast, people like it, but fortunately I could get a press pass, but these were like news people from like cleveland.com and stuff.  One guy in particular was like, oh, he was so cool. He was so nice to everyone. So you've got a good reputation in Cleveland. Yeah, that's nice to know.  You know, he said that there was two guys that helped me, you know, that once I had it on, they built the plexiglass security around it. And one of the guys name was Frank. And he said, you don't know what that meant to him.  I just lucked out to have a really cool job. But yeah. Well, yeah, he'll remember that the rest of his life. I mean, absolutely. I mean, these experiences of, I remember touching Gene Krupa's bass drum that Don McCauley had at the Chicago show in 2019 that Charlie Watts had purchased and just, I'll never forget that, that experience of just being close to that drum. But you've got it set up then. And then, I mean, when they encased it in, I'm sure it's like, all right, everything better be right here. Because we're putting the glass up and you're not really tweaking anymore. Yeah, actually, it was interesting when I got there, they had the platform and then they have plexiglass on the front already on one of the sides and on the top. So there was just the one fiberglass panel on the right if you're inside, if you're on the drum looking out at the area. But when I set the kid up, I'm going like, hey, guys, there's no room for the drums tool. It wasn't built deep enough. So it's like, and thank God, there was enough space to put on the bass pedal. But yeah, but it was tight. So anyone will notice that. Yeah, which age old drummer problem, not having room to fit into your area. But as people will hopefully go back and check out your episode about get back in particular, the throne and all that stuff is very detailed. I mean, there's a lot of information in detail that you can go into about that. But I think maybe now, can you give a kind of a brief rundown of the drum set? And again, for people listening, there is a lot more information in the two previous episodes where Gary goes full Beatles, you know, for the Beatles nuts out there who will like that, but maybe describe the drum set that we're talking about. Yeah, so it's a 1967 Ludwig Hollywood model, through a gloss kit, you know, but you know, some people call it maple. So you have Ringo's snare, right? The jazz festival. And as far as the kit, you know, you have a 8x12 Tom 13x9 16x16 and a 22x14 bass drum. One thing I wanted to mention, talking about the bass drum or the kit actually, you know, Ringo at one point had all of the drum city logo stickers that you see a lot of people could question, you know, what is that? What's on it? And for people watching this, here's something for you. If you're looking at the bass drum, squat down, look up, and you'll see one of the stickers is in the bass drum that was put there on the inside. So you get a good idea to see what the original looks like. Yeah, because they're not, and I'm looking at a picture over here, they're not on the drum set anymore, but you can very clearly tell where they were just by the nature of a sticker. What's the little blue? I believe it was a number, like a printable, like a label. What is that? Twice. There was blue labels and then there was black as well. They might be removed, but at some point, somebody was cataloging all of the drum pieces, but we couldn't find any book, any record, nothing. Seems bold to print a label and stick it onto the artifact itself. I think this was done way, you know, like, yeah. So the point is, who knew then, right? I mean, how this was going to get.  So that about covers it. And there was calfskin heads on the kit. We actually have the original from the bass drum. It's not on it. But we thought we'd put those on because that's how the kit came with calfskin. Yeah. But they're newer. They're not the original, they're newer. Do you know who made the calfskin heads just out of curiosity? Well, they would have been Ludwig. I mean, on the newer ones that you guys got. The newer ones? I think it was Sterling. Okay. Yeah. It was a company that we obtained those from. Cool. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely. Those will last forever. That's what you always hear is those things will. But I'm sure there is that little case that the two guitars and the drum set is in. I'm sure that's like humidity controlled and everything in there is very... I know that the Plexiglas is like UV protected. Yeah. And I think that the museum is set at a temperature and humidity throughout the facility. Yeah. Yeah. And one thing I wanted to mention that people might not know, this is going back to their clothing. A, Ringo's red raincoat, the one that he was wearing and that's on display. That was actually Ringo's wife, Maureen. That was her coat that he was wearing. Wow. And there's also a black and gray shirt of Paul McCartney's that's on display. And what's interesting about that one is if you go back in history and start going through photos, Paul was wearing that way back at the beginning of the Beatles and it keeps showing up. I just think that was kind of amazing. Yeah. So we're not alone though. We're like, I put on a shirt that I have had since high school and my wife is like, get rid of the shirt. Paul's doing it. He's got his shirt. It's a little different though. And then we also have John Lennon's jean jacket there and then George Harrison's iconic pink pinstripe suit, which boy, out of these four items, George and Ringo, that coat are very, those are very iconic. And it looks like we have Ringo's pants as well. Yeah, there's a pair of pants there too. I don't know if he wore that on the roof. I'm assuming he did. I didn't get involved in that other than being told that that was coming and it would be in the road case. Yeah. Super cool. And I was mentioning to Gary before we started that when you go in these things and you're filming and you have a press pass, you're in a different mindset. It's like if you work an event, it's not as fun as just attending the event. Not to say this wasn't extremely fun to do, but I actually would love to go back at some point because it's here for a year, I believe, and just really soak it in or even look at my own photos and videos a lot. But I highly recommend that people make the trek to see it. And like I said, it's a relatively, it's not going to take you all day to get through it, but there's so much other stuff at the rock hall you could spend the entire day there. And because there are outside of the exhibit, there's also another wall of Beatles stuff. Exactly. So for people that want to go there, for the Beatles experience, when you add those two, there is quite a bit. Yeah. Were you involved with any of that stuff? Because I saw there was a drum stick and some other gear. Did you do anything with that other wall over the years? Yeah, that was the wall. But at one point, I think it was from 2015 into 2016. Ringo had his 1964 Oyster Black Pearl. So I set it up and took that down. And that was, yeah, because I set it up in March or April of 15. And that was right around the time when they were prepping things for Ringo's induction into the Rocker Roll Hall of Fame as an individual. Sure. Oh, man, so cool.  Yeah. And then hopefully, I have to mention that the people in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, you know how you're going to have people that work at Disney World, Disneyland.  I feel like a kid every day. And at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, that's how every single employee is. Not only are they quality people, great personalities. I don't know what their hiring process is, but everybody there loves what they do. And there's such a deep passion.  And they genuinely wanted to just make sure that they were there to do whatever they could to help you. They're just great people. I can't say enough. And the other thing is that hopefully during this year, I might be invited there to do a talk. So yeah, because they're looking at doing a lot of beadley events during the course of the year while they have this exhibit. That's great. Yeah. I mean, I got to go in an hour early, which was super cool. But then at 10 a.m. when it opened, I mean, people were like, it was on. I mean, it was a steady flow of people. And actually, while we're talking about the staff, I want to thank Shauna Wilson, who helped set up the media stuff with me, which was just awesome.  And and Mandy Smith, who's been on the show, who does the education great person director. And so on that note, after we wrap up with Gary and this video is kind of ending at the end of this, stick around because I'm going to put in a video of the garage, which is the cool area where you can go up. I forget what floor it was on. But you could go up and play instruments and Mandy's really did you check that out? Absolutely phenomenal. Yeah, I loved it. Yeah, I know she's done a ton of work, all of them. And I met the folks there and they were it's very cool. It teaches you there's a video screen and all that stuff. But anyway, anything you want to mention as we kind of wrap up your Gary? No, we're good. Yeah, all right. I mean, this is actually mentioned this, but but I'm heading out to the to Liverpool on Thursday. Yeah, yeah, that's awesome to the UK drum show. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Looking forward to that. Cool. Well, hopefully this will be out in time for that. And anyone who's over there and around can can check it out. And you'll be seeing our friend Andy Dwyer and all that good stuff. Gary, thank you so much for taking the time to come back on and being such a good friend of the podcast and the show. So I hope you have a great trip and someday we'll meet in person. Yeah, someday. Thanks, Gary. Thanks, Bart. Okay.


I think the results of this survey are quite encouraging. What we had seen over the turn of the year was a sharp fall in confidence and some damage to orders and activity through October, November, December and January. What this latest survey is showing that I think manufacturers are regaining some of their poise. They picked up their level of optimism and they're suggesting that after modest growth in output in the first quarter we're likely to see a pick up in orders and output as we go through the spring into the second quarter. I think the risks to manufacturing going forward lie in terms of some of the uncertainty around global conditions. In particular the Eurozone is still a very uncertain place and financial markets are still very volatile. So it is possible that were the Eurozone to blow up again as it did late last autumn we would see a repeat of that sharp fall in confidence and in particular the postponement of orders and investment decisions that we saw then. But for the time being it does appear that some of the measures taken by the Eurozone authorities particularly the ECB interventions have actually calmed sentiment amongst UK exporters.