We consider a problem we call StateIsomorphism: given two quantum states of n qubits, can one be obtained from the other by rearranging the qubit subsystems? Our main goal is to study the complexity of this problem, which is a natural quantum generalisation of the problem StringIsomorphism. We show that StateIsomorphism is at least as hard as GraphIsomorphism, and show that these problems have a similar structure by presenting evidence to suggest that StateIsomorphism is an intermediate problem for QCMA. In particular, we show that the complement of the problem, StateNonIsomorphism, has a two message quantum interactive proof system, and that this proof system can be made statistical zero-knowledge. We consider also StabilizerStateIsomorphism (SSI) and MixedStateIsomorphism (MSI), showing that the complement of SSI has a quantum interactive proof system that uses classical communication only, and that MSI is QSZK-hard.
We consider a problem we call StateIsomorphism: given two quantum states of n qubits, can one be obtained from the other by rearranging the qubit subsystems? Our main goal is to study the complexity of this problem, which is a natural quantum generalisation of the problem StringIsomorphism. We show that StateIsomorphism is at least as hard as GraphIsomorphism, and show that these problems have a similar structure by presenting evidence to suggest that StateIsomorphism is an intermediate problem for QCMA. In particular, we show that the complement of the problem, StateNonIsomorphism, has a two message quantum interactive proof system, and that this proof system can be made statistical zero-knowledge. We consider also StabilizerStateIsomorphism (SSI) and MixedStateIsomorphism (MSI), showing that the complement of SSI has a quantum interactive proof system that uses classical communication only, and that MSI is QSZK-hard.
This work is an exploration of how graphs and permutations can be applied in the context of quantum information processing. In Chapter 2 we consider problems about the permutations of the subsystems of a quantum system. Explicitly, we attempt to understand the problem of determining if two quantum states of N qubits are isomorphic: if one can be obtained from the other by permuting its subsystems. We show that the well known graph isomorphism problem is a special case of state isomorphism. We also show that the complement of state isomorphism, the problem of determining if two states are not isomorphic, can be verified by a quantum interactive proof system, and that this proof system can be made statistical zero knowledge. We also consider the complexity of isomorphism problems for stabilizer states, and mixed states. In Chapter 3 we work with a special class of quantum states called grid states, in an effort to develop a toy model for mixed state entanglement. The key idea with grid states is that they can be represented by what we call a grid-labelled graph, literally, a graph forced to have vertices on a two dimensional grid. We show that whether or not a grid state is entangled can sometimes be determined solely from the structural properties of its corresponding grid-labelled graph. We use the grid state framework to build families of bound entangled states, suggesting that even in this restricted setting detecting entanglement is non-trivial and will require more than a single entanglement criterion.
We study the computational complexity of quantum state isomorphism problems under group actions: given two quantum circuits that prepare pure or mixed states, decide whether the two states are related by a group action. This can be seen as a quantum state version of the Hidden Shift Problem, in much the same way that the State Hidden Subgroup Problem is a quantum version of the ordinary Hidden Subgroup Problem.
We prove several results for this computational problem:
- For the pure-state version, we show that the problem is BQP-hard for all nontrivial groups, and contained in QCMA ∩ QCSZK. We further obtain refined results for specific groups of interest: for abelian groups we show that the problem reduces to the state hidden subgroup problem over the generalized dihedral group; for the Clifford group, the problem is at least as hard as Graph Isomorphism under polynomial-time reductions; for the Pauli group it is BQP-complete.
- For the mixed-state version, for nontrivial, finite and efficiently representable groups, the problem is QSZK-complete.
- We also study a variant of this problem over an infinite group, in particular, the bosonic linear optical unitaries. We show that in the setting where the classical description of the quantum state is given in a suitable wave function representation known as the stellar representation, the problem is at least as hard as Graph Isomorphism, and is contained in NP ∩ SZK.
Prior to our work, state isomorphism problems had only been studied for the symmetric group [LG17]. As a consequence of our results, we resolve an open question posed in [HEC25] about the existence of a quantum algorithm for the abelian state hidden subgroup problem on mixed states. We show that this problem is QSZK-hard in the worst case, thereby ruling out an efficient quantum algorithm unless QSZK = BQP.
Suppose that a polynomial-time mixed-state quantum circuit, described as a sequence of local unitary interactions followed by a partial trace, generates a quantum state shared between two parties. One might then wonder, does this quantum circuit produce a state that is separable or entangled? Here, we give evidence that it is computationally hard to decide the answer to this question, even if one has access to the power of quantum computation. We begin by exhibiting a two-message quantum interactive proof system that can decide the answer to a promise version of the question. We then prove that the promise problem is hard for the class of promise problems with "quantum statistical zero knowledge" QSZK proof systems by demonstrating a polynomial-time Karp reduction from the QSZK-complete promise problem "quantum state distinguishability" to our quantum separability problem. By exploiting Knill's efficient encoding of a matrix description of a state into a description of a circuit to generate the state, we can show that our promise problem is NP-hard with respect to Cook reductions. Thus, the quantum separability problem (as phrased above) constitutes the first nontrivial promise problem decidable by a two-message quantum interactive proof system while being hard for both NP and QSZK. We also consider a variant of the problem, in which a given polynomial-time mixed-state quantum circuit accepts a quantum state as input, and the question is to decide if there is an input to this circuit which makes its output separable across some bipartite cut. We prove that this problem is a complete promise problem for the class QIP of problems decidable by quantum interactive proof systems. Finally, we show that a two-message quantum interactive proof system can also decide a multipartite generalization of the quantum separability problem.
Suppose that a polynomial-time mixed-state quantum circuit, described as a sequence of local unitary interactions followed by a partial trace, generates a quantum state shared between two parties. One might then wonder, does this quantum circuit produce a state that is separable or entangled? Here, we give evidence that it is computationally hard to decide the answer to this question, even if one has access to the power of quantum computation. We begin by exhibiting a two-message quantum interactive proof system that can decide the answer to a promise version of the question. We then prove that the promise problem is hard for the class of promise problems with "quantum statistical zero knowledge" (QSZK) proof systems by demonstrating a polynomial-time Karp reduction from the QSZK-complete promise problem "quantum state distinguish ability" to our quantum separability problem. By exploiting Knill's efficient encoding of a matrix description of a state into a description of a circuit to generate the state, we can show that our promise problem is NP-hard with respect to Cook reductions. Thus, the quantum separability problem (as phrased above) constitutes the first nontrivial promise problem decidable by a two-message quantum interactive proof system while being hard for both NP and QSZK. We also consider a variant of the problem, in which a given polynomial-time mixed-state quantum circuit accepts a quantum state as input, and the question is to decide if there is an input to this circuit which makes its output separable across some bipartite cut. We prove that this problem is a complete promise problem for the class QIP of problems decidable by quantum interactive proof systems. Finally, we show that a two-message quantum interactive proof system can also decide a multipartite generalization of the quantum separability problem.
Quantum information and computation provide a fascinating twist on the notion of proofs in computational complexity theory. For instance, one may consider a quantum computational analogue of the complexity class NP, known as QMA, in which a quantum state plays the role of a proof (also called a certificate or witness), and is checked by a polynomial-time quantum computation. For some problems, the fact that a quantum proof state could be a superposition over exponentially many classical states appears to offer computational advantages over classical proof strings. In the interactive proof system setting, one may consider a verifier and one or more provers that exchange and process quantum information rather than classical information during an interaction for a given input string, giving rise to quantum complexity classes such as QIP, QSZK, and QMIP* that represent natural quantum analogues of IP, SZK, and MIP. While quantum interactive proof systems inherit some properties from their classical counterparts, they also possess distinct and uniquely quantum features that lead to an interesting landscape of complexity classes based on variants of this model. In this survey we provide an overview of many of the known results concerning quantum proofs, computational models based on this concept, and properties of the complexity classes they define. In particular, we discuss non-interactive proofs and the complexity class QMA, single-prover quantum interactive proof systems and the complexity class QIP, statistical zero-knowledge quantum interactive proof systems and the complexity class QSZK, and multiprover interactive proof systems and the complexity classes QMIP, QMIP*, and MIP*.