Dense Quantum Coding and a Lower Bound for 1-way Quantum Automata

We consider the possibility of encoding m classical bits into much fewer n quantum bits so that an arbitrary bit from the original m bits can be recovered with a good probability, and we show that non-trivial quantum encodings exist that have no classical counterparts. On the other hand, we show that quantum encodings cannot be much more succint as compared to classical encodings, and we provide a lower bound on such quantum encodings. Finally, using this lower bound, we prove an exponential lower bound on the size of 1-way quantum finite automata for a family of languages accepted by linear sized deterministic finite automata.Comment: 12 pages, 3 figures. Defines random access codes, gives upper and lower bounds for the number of bits required for such (possibly quantum) codes. Derives the size lower bound for quantum finite automata of the earlier version of the paper using these result

On computational power of classical and quantum Branching programs

We present a classical stochastic simulation technique of quantum Branching programs. This technique allows to prove the following relations among complexity classes: PrQP-BP ⊆ PP-BP and BQP-BP ⊆ PP-BP. Here BPP-BP and PP-BP stands for the classes of functions computable with bounded error and unbounded error respectively by stochastic branching program of polynomial size. BQP-BP and PrQP-BP stands the classes of functions computable with bounded error and unbounded error respectively by quantum branching program of polynomial size. Second. We present two different types. of complexity lower bounds for quantum nonuniform automata (OBDDs). We call them "metric" and "entropic" lower bounds in according to proof technique used. We present explicit Boolean functions that show that these lower bounds are tight enough. We show that when considering "almost all Boolean functions" on n variables our entropic lower bounds gives exponential (2c(δ)(n-logn)) lower bound for the width of quantum OBDDs depending on the error δ allowed

Optimal lower bounds for quantum automata and random access codes

Consider the finite regular language L_n = {w0 : w \in {0,1}^*, |w| \le n}. It was shown by Ambainis, Nayak, Ta-Shma and Vazirani that while this language is accepted by a deterministic finite automaton of size O(n), any one-way quantum finite automaton (QFA) for it has size 2^{Omega(n/log n)}. This was based on the fact that the evolution of a QFA is required to be reversible. When arbitrary intermediate measurements are allowed, this intuition breaks down. Nonetheless, we show a 2^{Omega(n)} lower bound for such QFA for L_n, thus also improving the previous bound. The improved bound is obtained by simple entropy arguments based on Holevo's theorem. This method also allows us to obtain an asymptotically optimal (1-H(p))n bound for the dense quantum codes (random access codes) introduced by Ambainis et al. We then turn to Holevo's theorem, and show that in typical situations, it may be replaced by a tighter and more transparent in-probability bound.Comment: 8 pages, 1 figure, Latex2e. Extensive modifications have been made to increase clarity. To appear in FOCS'9

From Quantum Query Complexity to State Complexity

State complexity of quantum finite automata is one of the interesting topics in studying the power of quantum finite automata. It is therefore of importance to develop general methods how to show state succinctness results for quantum finite automata. One such method is presented and demonstrated in this paper. In particular, we show that state succinctness results can be derived out of query complexity results.Comment: Some typos in references were fixed. To appear in Gruska Festschrift (2014). Comments are welcome. arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1402.7254, arXiv:1309.773

On Computational Power of Quantum Read-Once Branching Programs

In this paper we review our current results concerning the computational power of quantum read-once branching programs. First of all, based on the circuit presentation of quantum branching programs and our variant of quantum fingerprinting technique, we show that any Boolean function with linear polynomial presentation can be computed by a quantum read-once branching program using a relatively small (usually logarithmic in the size of input) number of qubits. Then we show that the described class of Boolean functions is closed under the polynomial projections.Comment: In Proceedings HPC 2010, arXiv:1103.226

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