Conflict persists and has been resolved regarding Microsoft's 2020 quantum research paper, revealing ongoing disputes within the scientific community.
The journal Science has replaced an Expression of Concern (EoC) on a five-year-old Microsoft quantum computing paper with a correction. The change comes after investigations revealed that the concerns were related to incomplete explanations of device tuning and partial data disclosure, not scientific misconduct.
The disputed article, "Flux-induced topological superconductivity in full-shell nanowires," published on March 27, 2020, had been under an EoC since July 30, 2021. The correction focuses on enhancing methodological transparency regarding device tuning and data reporting.
Charles Marcus, professor of physics at the University of Washington and one of the paper's authors, is delighted by the decision but wants the four years lost due to the dispute back. He contends that Sergey Frolov, professor of experimental physics at the University of Pittsburgh, has been conducting a harassment campaign against his work. Frolov and Mourik, who initially raised concerns about the paper, have been investigating issues in Microsoft's research on Majorana for over five years and have resulted in two Nature retractions, several corrections, and two expressions of concern.
Majoranas are elementary particles that researchers believe can be used for quantum computing. Microsoft's technology described in the paper is a precursor to their Majorana 1 quantum chip, a technology that has also faced challenges in validity. Despite criticism and concerns, Microsoft continues to publish Majorana-related research.
The correction will say that the researchers didn't present a full description of how they tuned the relevant devices and didn't present a full catalog of the data measured. This update clarifies these reporting deficiencies but affirms the scientific validity of the research, as no misconduct was found.
Henry Legg is negotiating with Nature to publish concerns about recent Microsoft research. He claims that Microsoft has repeatedly failed to learn the lesson of not cherry-picking data, a problem he and Mourik flagged in two retracted Nature papers. Marcus believes that Microsoft deserves credit for throwing resources at a very hard scientific problem, calling it a gutsy thing to try to do a really end run on quantum error correction.
Discourse and skepticism are all part of the scientific process, and Microsoft is committed to continued open discussion and engagement on their research. However, some critics remain unsatisfied and have called for a retraction, highlighting ongoing debate over the reliability of claims involving Majorana particles essential for topological quantum computing.
Interestingly, another group from Austria worked with the same wires from the same chip and saw similar phenomena but did not see Majorana. Science and Nature both published data from these non-confirmatory experiments.
Marcus believes that Frolov seems to have made this into his profession and is not publishing many papers anymore, focusing instead on social media critiques and attacks on anyone associated with Microsoft. This has reportedly chilled researcher enthusiasm in the field, with no one wanting to get attacked.
In summary, the editorial expression of concern was replaced because the concerns were resolved by clarifying reporting details, resulting in a formal correction rather than a retraction or finding of misconduct. The correction focuses on enhancing methodological transparency regarding device tuning and data reporting. The debate over the reliability of Majorana-related claims continues, underscoring the importance of rigorous scientific scrutiny in the field of quantum computing.
Sources: 1. Science removes expression of concern from Microsoft quantum paper 2. Microsoft quantum paper: Science removes expression of concern 3. Microsoft Quantum Paper: Expression of Concern Removed by Science
- The journal Science has revised an Expression of Concern (EoC) on a five-year-old Microsoft quantum computing paper to a correction, following investigations that revealed the issues were not related to scientific misconduct but incomplete explanations of device tuning and partial data disclosure.
- The paper, "Flux-induced topological superconductivity in full-shell nanowires," published on March 27, 2020, was under an EoC since July 30, 2021, and the correction aims to improve methodological transparency regarding device tuning and data reporting.
- One of the paper's authors, Charles Marcus, a physics professor at the University of Washington, is pleased with the decision but regrets the four years lost due to the dispute and accuses Sergey Frolov, a professor at the University of Pittsburgh, of conducting a harassment campaign against his work.
- Majoranas, elementary particles believed to be useful for quantum computing, are the focus of Microsoft's technology described in the paper, a precursor to their Majorana 1 quantum chip, which has also faced validity challenges.
- Despite criticism and concerns, Microsoft continues to publish Majorana-related research, and Henry Legg is currently negotiating with Nature to publish concerns about recent Microsoft research.
- Legg claims that Microsoft has repeatedly failed to address issues such as cherry-picking data, a concern he and Mourik previously flagged in two retracted Nature papers.
- The debate over the reliability of Majorana-related claims continues, as evidenced by the ongoing debate and skepticism in the field of quantum computing.
- Interestingly, another group from Austria worked with the same wires from the same chip and did not observe Majorana, findings that were published by both Science and Nature.
- The disagreement and criticism have reportedly affected researcher enthusiasm in the field, with some critics even calling for a retraction, and Marcus accuses Frolov of focusing more on social media critiques and attacks on anyone associated with Microsoft, rather than publishing his own research.
