We analyze the quantum query complexity of sorting under partial information. In this problem, we are given a partially ordered set $P$ and are asked to identify a linear extension of $P$ using pairwise comparisons. For the standard sorting problem, in which $P$ is empty, it is known that the quantum query complexity is not asymptotically smaller than the classical information-theoretic lower bound. We prove that this holds for a wide class of partially ordered sets, thereby improving on a result from Yao (STOC'04).
We analyze the quantum query complexity of sorting under partial information. In this problem, we are given a partially ordered set P and are asked to identify a linear extension of P using pairwise comparisons. For the standard sorting problem, in which P is empty, it is known that the quantum query complexity is not asymptotically smaller than the classical information-theoretic lower bound. We prove that this holds for a wide class of partially ordered sets, thereby improving on a result from Yao (STOC'04).
Let P = (X, < P) be a partial order on a set of n elements X = x1, x2,..., xn. Define the quantum sorting problem QSORTP as: given n distinct numbers x1, x2,..., xn consistent with P, sort them by a quantum decision tree using comparisons of the form "xi: xj". Let Qε(P) be the minimum number of queries used by any quantum decision tree for solving QSORTP with error less than ε (where 0 < ε < 1/10 is fixed). It was proved by Hoyer, Neerbek and Shi (Algorithmica 34 (2002), 429--448) that, when P0 is the empty partial order, Qε(P0) ≥ Ω (n log n), i. e., the classical information lower bound holds for quantum decision trees when the input permutations are unrestricted.In this paper we show that the classical information lower bound holds, up to an additive linear term, for quantum decision trees for any partial order P. Precisely, we prove Qε(P) ≥ c log2 e(P)-c'n where c,c' > 0 are constants and e(P) is the number of linear orderings consistent with P. Our proof builds on an interesting connection between sorting and Korner's graph entropy that was first noted and developed by Kahn and Kim (JCSS 51(1995), 390--399).
We investigate the generalisation of quantum search of unstructured and totally ordered sets to search of partially ordered sets (posets). Two models for poset search are considered. In both models, we show that quantum algorithms can achieve at most a quadratic improvement in query complexity over classical algorithms, up to logarithmic factors; we also give quantum algorithms that almost achieve this optimal reduction in complexity. In one model, we give an improved quantum algorithm for searching forest-like posets; in the other, we give an optimal O(m)-query quantum algorithm for searching posets derived from m×m arrays sorted by rows and columns. This leads to a quantum algorithm that finds the intersection of two sorted lists of n integers in O(n) time, which is optimal.
Time and space (memory) are two of the most important measures of cost in computation, even more so for quantum computation. Yet, our tools for proving unconditional quantum tradeoffs between time and space are surprisingly limited.
The first quantum time-space tradeoff lower bounds were proven for sorting by Klauck, Špalek and de Wolf. Unfortunately, their method is limited to proving output-oblivious lower bounds (i.e. the lower bounds only apply to algorithms with a non-adaptive output schedule) and other methods have yielded nothing beyond output-oblivious lower bounds for sorting. Here, we prove the first fully general quantum time-space tradeoff lower bound for sorting.
We do so by introducing a novel method based on the noise operator to add to the analysis toolkit for proving quantum query and time-space tradeoff lower bounds. By combining our resulting quantum noise stability bound with quantum recording query methods, we prove an Ω(n4/3(loglogn)/(S1/3logn)) lower bound on the number of queries that a fully general quantum algorithm with at most S qubits of memory requires to sort n numbers from [n2]. Applying our noise operator argument involves purely classical reasoning, which makes it particularly simple to use.
We also use it to prove that, for any strongly universal (pairwise independent) hash function family H from n bits to m bits, almost all hash functions in H require any algorithm with at most S qubits of memory to make Ω(nm/S) quantum queries to input x in order to compute h(x), even with very small success probability. Previously, Mansour, Nisan, and Tiwari had shown a matching classical lower bound for computing h(x) with both h and x as inputs using their hash mixing lemma. Our noise operator method allows us to use a related property of hash functions to prove our quantum lower bounds.
We investigate the generalisation of quantum search of unstructured and totally ordered sets to search of partially ordered sets (posets). Two models for poset search are considered. In both models, we show that quantum algorithms can achieve at most a quadratic improvement in query complexity over classical algorithms, up to logarithmic factors; we also give quantum algorithms that almost achieve this optimal reduction in complexity. In one model, we give an improved quantum algorithm for searching forest-like posets; in the other, we give an optimal O(sqrt(m))-query quantum algorithm for searching posets derived from m*m arrays sorted by rows and columns. This leads to a quantum algorithm that finds the intersection of two sorted lists of n integers in O(sqrt(n)) time, which is optimal.
We consider the quantum complexities of searching an ordered list and sorting an un-ordered list. For searching an ordered list of N elements, we prove a lower bound of \\frac{1}{\\pi}(\\ln(N)-1) on the number of oracle queries that access the list elements. This improves the previously best lower bound of ({1/12}\\log_2(N) - O(1)) due to Ambainis. For sorting N numbers, we prove a lower bound of \\frac{N}{2\\pi}(\\ln(N)-1) on the number of binary comparisons. The previously best lower bound is \\Omega(N). Our proofs are based on a weighted all-pairs inner product argument, and our results generalize to bounded error quantum algorithms. Both results are proven in the so-called quantum black box model, a quantum analogue of classical decision trees. In addition to our lower bound results, we give an exact quantum algorithm for ordered searching using (\\log_3(N) + O(1)) queries, which is roughly 0.631 \\log_2(N). Although our algorithm is worse than that of Farhi, Goldstone, Gutmann and Sipser, which makes 0.526 \\log_2(N) queries, its philosophy is completely different. Our algorithm is a quantum version of the classical binary search algorithm, and it uses a quantum routine for traversing through a binary search tree faster than classically.
The last decade witnessed a great surge of fruitful studies in the new paradigm of quantum computing. Remarkable progress has been made in all the areas including quantum algorithms, quantum complexity theory, quantum error-correcting code, quantum information theory, quantum cryptography and physical implementations of quantum computers. However, quantum algorithm design, probably the most important task in quantum computing, did not make as much progress as people expected. This thesis aims at both designing new quantum algorithms and studying why efficient quantum algorithms are so hard to design by proving many lower bounds on quantum query complexity for various problems.
We first review (and generalize) known techniques for designing quantum algorithms and for proving quantum lower bounds. Using these techniques, we then study the quantum query complexity for many problems, including some specific problems such as Graph Matching and other natural graph properties, the general tuple search, and local search. We also study the lowest possible quantum query complexity for a class of functions as a whole, such as graph properties, circular functions, and functions invariant of a transitive permutation group, where tight results are given in all these cases.
Finally for the quantum lower bounds techniques themselves, we study the main two techniques and show that they are incomparable in power. For the most widely used one, which has a lot of parameters to choose, we show limitations for it in terms of certificate complexity. This implies that we cannot use the method to prove better lower bounds for almost all known open problems in this area.