The quantum measurement problem and physical reality: a computation theoretic perspective

Is the universe computable? If yes, is it computationally a polynomial place? In standard quantum mechanics, which permits infinite parallelism and the infinitely precise specification of states, a negative answer to both questions is not ruled out. On the other hand, empirical evidence suggests that NP-complete problems are intractable in the physical world. Likewise, computational problems known to be algorithmically uncomputable do not seem to be computable by any physical means. We suggest that this close correspondence between the efficiency and power of abstract algorithms on the one hand, and physical computers on the other, finds a natural explanation if the universe is assumed to be algorithmic; that is, that physical reality is the product of discrete sub-physical information processing equivalent to the actions of a probabilistic Turing machine. This assumption can be reconciled with the observed exponentiality of quantum systems at microscopic scales, and the consequent possibility of implementing Shor's quantum polynomial time algorithm at that scale, provided the degree of superposition is intrinsically, finitely upper-bounded. If this bound is associated with the quantum-classical divide (the Heisenberg cut), a natural resolution to the quantum measurement problem arises. From this viewpoint, macroscopic classicality is an evidence that the universe is in BPP, and both questions raised above receive affirmative answers. A recently proposed computational model of quantum measurement, which relates the Heisenberg cut to the discreteness of Hilbert space, is briefly discussed. A connection to quantum gravity is noted. Our results are compatible with the philosophy that mathematical truths are independent of the laws of physics.Comment: Talk presented at "Quantum Computing: Back Action 2006", IIT Kanpur, India, March 200

A Coverage Criterion for Spaced Seeds and its Applications to Support Vector Machine String Kernels and k-Mer Distances

Spaced seeds have been recently shown to not only detect more alignments, but also to give a more accurate measure of phylogenetic distances (Boden et al., 2013, Horwege et al., 2014, Leimeister et al., 2014), and to provide a lower misclassification rate when used with Support Vector Machines (SVMs) (On-odera and Shibuya, 2013), We confirm by independent experiments these two results, and propose in this article to use a coverage criterion (Benson and Mak, 2008, Martin, 2013, Martin and No{\'e}, 2014), to measure the seed efficiency in both cases in order to design better seed patterns. We show first how this coverage criterion can be directly measured by a full automaton-based approach. We then illustrate how this criterion performs when compared with two other criteria frequently used, namely the single-hit and multiple-hit criteria, through correlation coefficients with the correct classification/the true distance. At the end, for alignment-free distances, we propose an extension by adopting the coverage criterion, show how it performs, and indicate how it can be efficiently computed.Comment: http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/cmb.2014.017

A Coverage Criterion for Spaced Seeds and its Applications to Support Vector Machine String Kernels and k-Mer Distances

Spaced seeds have been recently shown to not only detect more alignments, but also to give a more accurate measure of phylogenetic distances (Boden et al., 2013, Horwege et al., 2014, Leimeister et al., 2014), and to provide a lower misclassification rate when used with Support Vector Machines (SVMs) (On-odera and Shibuya, 2013), We confirm by independent experiments these two results, and propose in this article to use a coverage criterion (Benson and Mak, 2008, Martin, 2013, Martin and No{\'e}, 2014), to measure the seed efficiency in both cases in order to design better seed patterns. We show first how this coverage criterion can be directly measured by a full automaton-based approach. We then illustrate how this criterion performs when compared with two other criteria frequently used, namely the single-hit and multiple-hit criteria, through correlation coefficients with the correct classification/the true distance. At the end, for alignment-free distances, we propose an extension by adopting the coverage criterion, show how it performs, and indicate how it can be efficiently computed.Comment: http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/cmb.2014.017

The Average-Case Area of Heilbronn-Type Triangles

From among ${n \choose 3}$ triangles with vertices chosen from $n$ points in the unit square, let $T$ be the one with the smallest area, and let $A$ be the area of $T$. Heilbronn's triangle problem asks for the maximum value assumed by $A$ over all choices of $n$ points. We consider the average-case: If the $n$ points are chosen independently and at random (with a uniform distribution), then there exist positive constants $c$ and $C$ such that $c/n^3 < \mu_n < C/n^3$ for all large enough values of $n$, where $\mu_n$ is the expectation of $A$. Moreover, $c/n^3 < A < C/n^3$, with probability close to one. Our proof uses the incompressibility method based on Kolmogorov complexity; it actually determines the area of the smallest triangle for an arrangement in ``general position.''Comment: 13 pages, LaTeX, 1 figure,Popular treatment in D. Mackenzie, On a roll, {\em New Scientist}, November 6, 1999, 44--4

Oracles Are Subtle But Not Malicious

Theoretical computer scientists have been debating the role of oracles since the 1970's. This paper illustrates both that oracles can give us nontrivial insights about the barrier problems in circuit complexity, and that they need not prevent us from trying to solve those problems. First, we give an oracle relative to which PP has linear-sized circuits, by proving a new lower bound for perceptrons and low- degree threshold polynomials. This oracle settles a longstanding open question, and generalizes earlier results due to Beigel and to Buhrman, Fortnow, and Thierauf. More importantly, it implies the first nonrelativizing separation of "traditional" complexity classes, as opposed to interactive proof classes such as MIP and MA-EXP. For Vinodchandran showed, by a nonrelativizing argument, that PP does not have circuits of size n^k for any fixed k. We present an alternative proof of this fact, which shows that PP does not even have quantum circuits of size n^k with quantum advice. To our knowledge, this is the first nontrivial lower bound on quantum circuit size. Second, we study a beautiful algorithm of Bshouty et al. for learning Boolean circuits in ZPP^NP. We show that the NP queries in this algorithm cannot be parallelized by any relativizing technique, by giving an oracle relative to which ZPP^||NP and even BPP^||NP have linear-size circuits. On the other hand, we also show that the NP queries could be parallelized if P=NP. Thus, classes such as ZPP^||NP inhabit a "twilight zone," where we need to distinguish between relativizing and black-box techniques. Our results on this subject have implications for computational learning theory as well as for the circuit minimization problem.Comment: 20 pages, 1 figur