2,435 research outputs found

    Quantum superiority for verifying NP-complete problems with linear optics

    Full text link
    Demonstrating quantum superiority for some computational task will be a milestone for quantum technologies and would show that computational advantages are possible not only with a universal quantum computer but with simpler physical devices. Linear optics is such a simpler but powerful platform where classically-hard information processing tasks, such as Boson Sampling, can be in principle implemented. In this work, we study a fundamentally different type of computational task to achieve quantum superiority using linear optics, namely the task of verifying NP-complete problems. We focus on a protocol by Aaronson et al. (2008) that uses quantum proofs for verification. We show that the proof states can be implemented in terms of a single photon in an equal superposition over many optical modes. Similarly, the tests can be performed using linear-optical transformations consisting of a few operations: a global permutation of all modes, simple interferometers acting on at most four modes, and measurement using single-photon detectors. We also show that the protocol can tolerate experimental imperfections.Comment: 10 pages, 6 figures, minor corrections, results unchange

    The Power of Unentanglement

    Get PDF
    The class QMA(k). introduced by Kobayashi et al., consists of all languages that can be verified using k unentangled quantum proofs. Many of the simplest questions about this class have remained embarrassingly open: for example, can we give any evidence that k quantum proofs are more powerful than one? Does QMA(k) = QMA(2) for k ≥ 2? Can QMA(k) protocols be amplified to exponentially small error? In this paper, we make progress on all of the above questions. * We give a protocol by which a verifier can be convinced that a 3SAT formula of size m is satisfiable, with constant soundness, given Õ (√m) unentangled quantum witnesses with O(log m) qubits each. Our protocol relies on the existence of very short PCPs. * We show that assuming a weak version of the Additivity Conjecture from quantum information theory, any QMA(2) protocol can be amplified to exponentially small error, and QMA(k) = QMA(2) for all k ≥ 2. * We prove the nonexistence of "perfect disentanglers" for simulating multiple Merlins with one

    On Perfect Completeness for QMA

    Get PDF
    Whether the class QMA (Quantum Merlin Arthur) is equal to QMA1, or QMA with one-sided error, has been an open problem for years. This note helps to explain why the problem is difficult, by using ideas from real analysis to give a "quantum oracle" relative to which they are different. As a byproduct, we find that there are facts about quantum complexity classes that are classically relativizing but not quantumly relativizing, among them such "trivial" containments as BQP in ZQEXP.Comment: 9 pages. To appear in Quantum Information & Computatio

    Quantum Information and the PCP Theorem

    Full text link
    We show how to encode 2n2^n (classical) bits a1,...,a2na_1,...,a_{2^n} by a single quantum state Ψ>|\Psi> of size O(n) qubits, such that: for any constant kk and any i1,...,ik{1,...,2n}i_1,...,i_k \in \{1,...,2^n\}, the values of the bits ai1,...,aika_{i_1},...,a_{i_k} can be retrieved from Ψ>|\Psi> by a one-round Arthur-Merlin interactive protocol of size polynomial in nn. This shows how to go around Holevo-Nayak's Theorem, using Arthur-Merlin proofs. We use the new representation to prove the following results: 1) Interactive proofs with quantum advice: We show that the class QIP/qpolyQIP/qpoly contains ALL languages. That is, for any language LL (even non-recursive), the membership xLx \in L (for xx of length nn) can be proved by a polynomial-size quantum interactive proof, where the verifier is a polynomial-size quantum circuit with working space initiated with some quantum state ΨL,n>|\Psi_{L,n} > (depending only on LL and nn). Moreover, the interactive proof that we give is of only one round, and the messages communicated are classical. 2) PCP with only one query: We show that the membership xSATx \in SAT (for xx of length nn) can be proved by a logarithmic-size quantum state Ψ>|\Psi >, together with a polynomial-size classical proof consisting of blocks of length polylog(n)polylog(n) bits each, such that after measuring the state Ψ>|\Psi > the verifier only needs to read {\bf one} block of the classical proof. While the first result is a straight forward consequence of the new representation, the second requires an additional machinery of quantum low-degree-test that may be interesting in its own right.Comment: 30 page

    Generalized Quantum Arthur-Merlin Games

    Get PDF
    This paper investigates the role of interaction and coins in public-coin quantum interactive proof systems (also called quantum Arthur-Merlin games). While prior works focused on classical public coins even in the quantum setting, the present work introduces a generalized version of quantum Arthur-Merlin games where the public coins can be quantum as well: the verifier can send not only random bits, but also halves of EPR pairs. First, it is proved that the class of two-turn quantum Arthur-Merlin games with quantum public coins, denoted qq-QAM in this paper, does not change by adding a constant number of turns of classical interactions prior to the communications of the qq-QAM proof systems. This can be viewed as a quantum analogue of the celebrated collapse theorem for AM due to Babai. To prove this collapse theorem, this paper provides a natural complete problem for qq-QAM: deciding whether the output of a given quantum circuit is close to a totally mixed state. This complete problem is on the very line of the previous studies investigating the hardness of checking the properties related to quantum circuits, and is of independent interest. It is further proved that the class qq-QAM_1 of two-turn quantum-public-coin quantum Arthur-Merlin proof systems with perfect completeness gives new bounds for standard well-studied classes of two-turn interactive proof systems. Finally, the collapse theorem above is extended to comprehensively classify the role of interaction and public coins in quantum Arthur-Merlin games: it is proved that, for any constant m>1, the class of problems having an m-turn quantum Arthur-Merlin proof system is either equal to PSPACE or equal to the class of problems having a two-turn quantum Arthur-Merlin game of a specific type, which provides a complete set of quantum analogues of Babai's collapse theorem.Comment: 31 pages + cover page, the proof of Lemma 27 (Lemma 24 in v1) is corrected, and a new completeness result is adde

    Direct certification of a class of quantum simulations

    Get PDF
    One of the main challenges in the field of quantum simulation and computation is to identify ways to certify the correct functioning of a device when a classical efficient simulation is not available. Important cases are situations in which one cannot classically calculate local expectation values of state preparations efficiently. In this work, we develop weak-membership formulations of the certification of ground state preparations. We provide a non-interactive protocol for certifying ground states of frustration-free Hamiltonians based on simple energy measurements of local Hamiltonian terms. This certification protocol can be applied to classically intractable analog quantum simulations: For example, using Feynman-Kitaev Hamiltonians, one can encode universal quantum computation in such ground states. Moreover, our certification protocol is applicable to ground states encodings of IQP circuits demonstration of quantum supremacy. These can be certified efficiently when the error is polynomially bounded.Comment: 10 pages, corrected a small error in Eqs. (2) and (5

    Why Philosophers Should Care About Computational Complexity

    Get PDF
    One might think that, once we know something is computable, how efficiently it can be computed is a practical question with little further philosophical importance. In this essay, I offer a detailed case that one would be wrong. In particular, I argue that computational complexity theory---the field that studies the resources (such as time, space, and randomness) needed to solve computational problems---leads to new perspectives on the nature of mathematical knowledge, the strong AI debate, computationalism, the problem of logical omniscience, Hume's problem of induction, Goodman's grue riddle, the foundations of quantum mechanics, economic rationality, closed timelike curves, and several other topics of philosophical interest. I end by discussing aspects of complexity theory itself that could benefit from philosophical analysis.Comment: 58 pages, to appear in "Computability: G\"odel, Turing, Church, and beyond," MIT Press, 2012. Some minor clarifications and corrections; new references adde
    corecore