Quantum Certificate Complexity

Given a Boolean function f, we study two natural generalizations of the certificate complexity C(f): the randomized certificate complexity RC(f) and the quantum certificate complexity QC(f). Using Ambainis' adversary method, we exactly characterize QC(f) as the square root of RC(f). We then use this result to prove the new relation R0(f) = O(Q2(f)^2 Q0(f) log n) for total f, where R0, Q2, and Q0 are zero-error randomized, bounded-error quantum, and zero-error quantum query complexities respectively. Finally we give asymptotic gaps between the measures, including a total f for which C(f) is superquadratic in QC(f), and a symmetric partial f for which QC(f) = O(1) yet Q2(f) = Omega(n/log n).Comment: 9 page

Quantum Weakly Nondeterministic Communication Complexity

We study the weakest model of quantum nondeterminism in which a classical proof has to be checked with probability one by a quantum protocol. We show the first separation between classical nondeterministic communication complexity and this model of quantum nondeterministic communication complexity for a total function. This separation is quadratic.Comment: 12 pages. v3: minor correction

Sculpting Quantum Speedups

Given a problem which is intractable for both quantum and classical algorithms, can we find a sub-problem for which quantum algorithms provide an exponential advantage? We refer to this problem as the "sculpting problem." In this work, we give a full characterization of sculptable functions in the query complexity setting. We show that a total function f can be restricted to a promise P such that Q(f|_P)=O(polylog(N)) and R(f|_P)=N^{Omega(1)}, if and only if f has a large number of inputs with large certificate complexity. The proof uses some interesting techniques: for one direction, we introduce new relationships between randomized and quantum query complexity in various settings, and for the other direction, we use a recent result from communication complexity due to Klartag and Regev. We also characterize sculpting for other query complexity measures, such as R(f) vs. R_0(f) and R_0(f) vs. D(f). Along the way, we prove some new relationships for quantum query complexity: for example, a nearly quadratic relationship between Q(f) and D(f) whenever the promise of f is small. This contrasts with the recent super-quadratic query complexity separations, showing that the maximum gap between classical and quantum query complexities is indeed quadratic in various settings - just not for total functions! Lastly, we investigate sculpting in the Turing machine model. We show that if there is any BPP-bi-immune language in BQP, then every language outside BPP can be restricted to a promise which places it in PromiseBQP but not in PromiseBPP. Under a weaker assumption, that some problem in BQP is hard on average for P/poly, we show that every paddable language outside BPP is sculptable in this way.Comment: 30 page

Quantum Distinguishing Complexity, Zero-Error Algorithms, and Statistical Zero Knowledge

We define a new query measure we call quantum distinguishing complexity, denoted QD(f) for a Boolean function f. Unlike a quantum query algorithm, which must output a state close to |0> on a 0-input and a state close to |1> on a 1-input, a "quantum distinguishing algorithm" can output any state, as long as the output states for any 0-input and 1-input are distinguishable. Using this measure, we establish a new relationship in query complexity: For all total functions f, Q_0(f)=O~(Q(f)^5), where Q_0(f) and Q(f) denote the zero-error and bounded-error quantum query complexity of f respectively, improving on the previously known sixth power relationship. We also define a query measure based on quantum statistical zero-knowledge proofs, QSZK(f), which is at most Q(f). We show that QD(f) in fact lower bounds QSZK(f) and not just Q(f). QD(f) also upper bounds the (positive-weights) adversary bound, which yields the following relationships for all f: Q(f) >= QSZK(f) >= QD(f) = Omega(Adv(f)). This sheds some light on why the adversary bound proves suboptimal bounds for problems like Collision and Set Equality, which have low QSZK complexity. Lastly, we show implications for lifting theorems in communication complexity. We show that a general lifting theorem for either zero-error quantum query complexity or for QSZK would imply a general lifting theorem for bounded-error quantum query complexity

Quadratically Tight Relations for Randomized Query Complexity

Let $f:\{0,1\}^n \rightarrow \{0,1\}$ be a Boolean function. The certificate complexity $C(f)$ is a complexity measure that is quadratically tight for the zero-error randomized query complexity $R_0(f)$: $C(f) \leq R_0(f) \leq C(f)^2$. In this paper we study a new complexity measure that we call expectational certificate complexity $EC(f)$, which is also a quadratically tight bound on $R_0(f)$: $EC(f) \leq R_0(f) = O(EC(f)^2)$. We prove that $EC(f) \leq C(f) \leq EC(f)^2$ and show that there is a quadratic separation between the two, thus $EC(f)$ gives a tighter upper bound for $R_0(f)$. The measure is also related to the fractional certificate complexity $FC(f)$ as follows: $FC(f) \leq EC(f) = O(FC(f)^{3/2})$. This also connects to an open question by Aaronson whether $FC(f)$ is a quadratically tight bound for $R_0(f)$, as $EC(f)$ is in fact a relaxation of $FC(f)$. In the second part of the work, we upper bound the distributed query complexity $D^\mu_\epsilon(f)$ for product distributions $\mu$ by the square of the query corruption bound ($\mathrm{corr}_\epsilon(f)$) which improves upon a result of Harsha, Jain and Radhakrishnan [2015]. A similar statement for communication complexity is open.Comment: 14 page