We consider quantum interpolation of polynomials. We imagine a quantum computer with black-box access to input/output pairs (x_i, f(x_i)), where f is a degree-d polynomial, and we wish to compute f(0). We give asymptotically tight quantum lower bounds for this problem, even in the case where 0 is among the possible values of x_i.
Can a quantum computer efficiently interpolate polynomials? We consider black-box algorithms that seek to learn information about a polynomial f from input/output pairs (xi,f(xi)). We define a more general class of \emph{(d,S)-independent} function properties, where, outside of a set S of exceptions, knowing d input values does not help one predict the answer. There are essentially two strategies to computing such a function: query d+1 random input values, or search for one of the ∣S∣ exceptions. We show that, up to constant factors, we cannot beat these two approaches.
Can a quantum computer efficiently interpolate polynomials? We consider black-boxalgorithms that seek to learn information about a polynomial f from input/output pairs(xi, f(xi)). We define a more general class of (d, S)-independent function properties,where, outside of a set S of exceptions, knowing d input values does not help one predictthe answer. There are essentially two strategies to computing such a function: queryd + 1 random input values, or search for one of the |S| exceptions. We show that, up toconstant factors, we cannot beat these two approaches.
We examine the number of queries to input variables that a quantum algorithm requires to compute Boolean functions on {0,1} N in the black-box model. We show that the exponential quantum speed-up obtained for partial functions (i.e., problems involving a promise on the input) by Deutsch and Jozsa, Simon, and Shor cannot be obtained for any total function: if a quantum algorithm computes some total Boolean function f with small error probability using T black-box queries, then there is a classical deterministic algorithm that computes f exactly with O ( Ts 6 ) queries. We also give asymptotically tight characterizations of T for all symmetric f in the exact, zero-error, and bounded-error settings. Finally, we give new precise bounds for AND, OR, and PARITY. Our results are a quantum extension of the so-called polynomial method, which has been successfully applied in classical complexity theory, and also a quantum extension of results by Nisan about a polynomial relationship between randomized and deterministic decision tree complexity.
We examine the number T of queries that a quantum network requires to compute several Boolean functions on {0,1}^N in the black-box model. We show that, in the black-box model, the exponential quantum speed-up obtained for partial functions (i.e. problems involving a promise on the input) by Deutsch and Jozsa and by Simon cannot be obtained for any total function: if a quantum algorithm computes some total Boolean function f with bounded-error using T black-box queries then there is a classical deterministic algorithm that computes f exactly with O(T^6) queries. We also give asymptotically tight characterizations of T for all symmetric f in the exact, zero-error, and bounded-error settings. Finally, we give new precise bounds for AND, OR, and PARITY. Our results are a quantum extension of the so-called polynomial method, which has been successfully applied in classical complexity theory, and also a quantum extension of results by Nisan about a polynomial relationship between randomized and deterministic decision tree complexity.
We examine the number T of queries that a quantum network requires to compute several Boolean functions on {0,1}/sup N/ in the black-box model. We show that, in the black-box model, the exponential quantum speed-up obtained for partial functions (i.e. problems involving a promise on the input) by Deutsch and Jozsa and by Simon cannot be obtained for any total function: if a quantum algorithm computes some total Boolean function f with bounded-error using T black-box queries then there is a classical deterministic algorithm that computes f exactly with O(T/sup 6/) queries. We also give asymptotically tight characterizations of T for all symmetric f in the exact, zero-error, and bounded-error settings. Finally, we give new precise bounds for AND, OR, and PARITY. Our results are a quantum extension of the so-called polynomial method, which has been successfully applied in classical complexity theory, and also a quantum extension of results by Nisan about a polynomial relationship between randomized and deterministic decision tree complexity.
We have seen in the previous chapters that quantum computers seem to be more powerful than classical computers for certain problems. There are limits on the power of quantum computers, however. Since a classical computer can simulate a quantum computer, a quantum computer can only compute the same set of functions that a classical computer can. The advantage of using a quantum computer is that the amount of resources needed by a quantum algorithm might be much less than what is needed by the best classical algorithm. In Section 9.1 we briefly define some classical and quantum complexity classes and give some relationships between them. Most of the interesting questions relating classical and quantum complexity classes remain open. For example, we do not yet know if a quantum computer is capable of efficiently solving an NP-complete problem (defined later). One can prove upper bounds on the difficulty of a problem by providing an algorithm that solves that problem, and proving that it will work within in a given running time. But how does one prove a lower bound on the computational complexity of a problem? For example, if we wish to find the product of two n-bit numbers, computing the answer requires outputting roughly 2n bits and that requires Ω(n) steps (in any computing model with finite-sized gates). The best-known upper bound for integer multiplication is O(n log n log log n) steps. It has proved extremely difficult to derive non-trivial lower bounds on the computational complexity of a problem. Most of the known non-trivial lower bounds are in the ‘black-box’ model (for both classical and quantum computing), where we only query the input via a ‘black-box’ of a specific form. We discuss the black-box model in more detail in Section 9.2. We then sketch several approaches for proving black-box lower bounds. The first technique has been called the ‘hybrid method’ and was used to prove that quantum searching requires Ω(√n) queries to succeed with constant probability. The second technique is called the ‘polynomial method’. We then describe a technique based on ‘block sensitivity’, and conclude with a technique known as the ‘adversary method’.