Implications of quantum automata for contextuality

We construct zero-error quantum finite automata (QFAs) for promise problems which cannot be solved by bounded-error probabilistic finite automata (PFAs). Here is a summary of our results: - There is a promise problem solvable by an exact two-way QFA in exponential expected time, but not by any bounded-error sublogarithmic space probabilistic Turing machine (PTM). - There is a promise problem solvable by an exact two-way QFA in quadratic expected time, but not by any bounded-error $o(\log \log n)$-space PTMs in polynomial expected time. The same problem can be solvable by a one-way Las Vegas (or exact two-way) QFA with quantum head in linear (expected) time. - There is a promise problem solvable by a Las Vegas realtime QFA, but not by any bounded-error realtime PFA. The same problem can be solvable by an exact two-way QFA in linear expected time but not by any exact two-way PFA. - There is a family of promise problems such that each promise problem can be solvable by a two-state exact realtime QFAs, but, there is no such bound on the number of states of realtime bounded-error PFAs solving the members this family. Our results imply that there exist zero-error quantum computational devices with a \emph{single qubit} of memory that cannot be simulated by any finite memory classical computational model. This provides a computational perspective on results regarding ontological theories of quantum mechanics \cite{Hardy04}, \cite{Montina08}. As a consequence we find that classical automata based simulation models \cite{Kleinmann11}, \cite{Blasiak13} are not sufficiently powerful to simulate quantum contextuality. We conclude by highlighting the interplay between results from automata models and their application to developing a general framework for quantum contextuality.Comment: 22 page

On the state complexity of semi-quantum finite automata

Some of the most interesting and important results concerning quantum finite automata are those showing that they can recognize certain languages with (much) less resources than corresponding classical finite automata \cite{Amb98,Amb09,AmYa11,Ber05,Fre09,Mer00,Mer01,Mer02,Yak10,ZhgQiu112,Zhg12}. This paper shows three results of such a type that are stronger in some sense than other ones because (a) they deal with models of quantum automata with very little quantumness (so-called semi-quantum one- and two-way automata with one qubit memory only); (b) differences, even comparing with probabilistic classical automata, are bigger than expected; (c) a trade-off between the number of classical and quantum basis states needed is demonstrated in one case and (d) languages (or the promise problem) used to show main results are very simple and often explored ones in automata theory or in communication complexity, with seemingly little structure that could be utilized.Comment: 19 pages. We improve (make stronger) the results in section

Unary probabilistic and quantum automata on promise problems

We continue the systematic investigation of probabilistic and quantum finite automata (PFAs and QFAs) on promise problems by focusing on unary languages. We show that bounded-error QFAs are more powerful than PFAs. But, in contrary to the binary problems, the computational powers of Las-Vegas QFAs and bounded-error PFAs are equivalent to deterministic finite automata (DFAs). Lastly, we present a new family of unary promise problems with two parameters such that when fixing one parameter QFAs can be exponentially more succinct than PFAs and when fixing the other parameter PFAs can be exponentially more succinct than DFAs.Comment: Minor correction