Fine-grained quantum supremacy is a study of proving (nearly) tight time lower bounds for classical simulations of quantum computing under "fine-grained complexity" assumptions. We show that under conjectures on Orthogonal Vectors (OV), 3-SUM, All-Pairs Shortest Paths (APSP) and their variants, strong and weak classical simulations of quantum computing are impossible in certain exponential time with respect to the number of qubits. Those conjectures are widely used in classical fine-grained complexity theory in which polynomial time hardness is conjectured. All previous results of fine-grained quantum supremacy are based on ETH, SETH, or their variants that are conjectures for SAT in which exponential time hardness is conjectured. We show that there exist quantum circuits which cannot be classically simulated in certain exponential time with respect to the number of qubits first by considering a Quantum Random Access Memory (QRAM) based quantum computing model and next by considering a non-QRAM model quantum computation. In the case of the QRAM model, the size of quantum circuits is linear with respect to the number of qubits and in the case of the non-QRAM model, the size of the quantum circuits is exponential with respect to the number of qubits but the results are still non-trivial.
Fine-grained quantum supremacy is a study of proving (nearly) tight time lower bounds for classical simulations of quantum computing under "fine-grained complexity" assumptions. We show that under conjectures on Orthogonal Vectors (OV), 3-SUM, All-Pairs Shortest Paths (APSP) and their variants, strong and weak classical simulations of quantum computing are impossible in certain exponential time with respect to the number of qubits. Those conjectures are widely used in classical fine-grained complexity theory in which polynomial time hardness is conjectured. All previous results of fine-grained quantum supremacy are based on ETH, SETH, or their variants that are conjectures for SAT in which exponential time hardness is conjectured. We show that there exist quantum circuits which cannot be classically simulated in certain exponential time with respect to the number of qubits first by considering a Quantum Random Access Memory (QRAM) based quantum computing model and next by considering a non-QRAM model quantum computation. In the case of the QRAM model, the size of quantum circuits is linear with respect to the number of qubits and in the case of the non-QRAM model, the size of the quantum circuits is exponential with respect to the number of qubits but the results are still non-trivial.
The local Hamiltonian (LH) problem is the canonical QMA-complete problem introduced by Kitaev. In this paper, we show its hardness in a very strong sense: we show that the 3-local Hamiltonian problem on n qubits cannot be solved classically in time O(2(1−ε)n) for any ε>0 under the Strong Exponential-Time Hypothesis (SETH), and cannot be solved quantumly in time O(2(1−ε)n/2) for any ε>0 under the Quantum Strong Exponential-Time Hypothesis (QSETH). These lower bounds give evidence that the currently known classical and quantum algorithms for LH cannot be significantly improved.
Furthermore, we are able to demonstrate fine-grained complexity lower bounds for approximating the quantum partition function (QPF) with an arbitrary constant relative error. Approximating QPF with relative error is known to be equivalent to approximately counting the dimension of the solution subspace of QMA problems. We show the SETH and QSETH hardness to estimate QPF with constant relative error. We then provide a quantum algorithm that runs in O(2n) time for an arbitrary 1/poly(n) relative error, matching our lower bounds and improving the state-of-the-art algorithm by Bravyi, Chowdhury, Gosset, and Wocjan (Nature Physics 2022) in the low-temperature regime.
To prove our fine-grained lower bounds, we introduce the first size-preserving circuit-to-Hamiltonian construction that encodes the computation of a T-time quantum circuit acting on N qubits into a (d+1)-local Hamiltonian acting on N+O(T1/d) qubits. This improves the standard construction based on the unary clock, which uses N+O(T) qubits.
It is known that several sub-universal quantum computing models, such as the IQP model, the Boson sampling model, the one-clean qubit model, and the random circuit model, cannot be classically simulated in polynomial time under certain conjectures in classical complexity theory. Recently, these results have been improved to ``fine-grained" versions where even exponential-time classical simulations are excluded assuming certain classical fine-grained complexity conjectures. All these fine-grained results are, however, about the hardness of strong simulations or multiplicative-error sampling. It was open whether any fine-grained quantum supremacy result can be shown for a more realistic setup, namely, additive-error sampling. In this paper, we show the additive-error fine-grained quantum supremacy (under certain complexity assumptions). As examples, we consider the IQP model, a mixture of the IQP model and log-depth Boolean circuits, and Clifford+ T circuits. Similar results should hold for other sub-universal models.
Quantum computational supremacy arguments, which describe a way for a quantum computer to perform a task that cannot also be done by a classical computer, typically require some sort of computational assumption related to the limitations of classical computation. One common assumption is that the polynomial hierarchy ( P H ) does not collapse, a stronger version of the statement that P ≠ N P , which leads to the conclusion that any classical simulation of certain families of quantum circuits requires time scaling worse than any polynomial in the size of the circuits. However, the asymptotic nature of this conclusion prevents us from calculating exactly how many qubits these quantum circuits must have for their classical simulation to be intractable on modern classical supercomputers. We refine these quantum computational supremacy arguments and perform such a calculation by imposing fine-grained versions of the non-collapse conjecture. Our first two conjectures poly3-NSETH( a ) and per-int-NSETH( b ) take specific classical counting problems related to the number of zeros of a degree-3 polynomial in n variables over F 2 or the permanent of an n × n integer-valued matrix, and assert that any non-deterministic algorithm that solves them requires 2 c n time steps, where c ∈ { a , b } . A third conjecture poly3-ave-SBSETH( a ′ ) asserts a similar statement about average-case algorithms living in the exponential-time version of the complexity class S B P . We analyze evidence for these conjectures and argue that they are plausible when a = 1 / 2 , b = 0.999 and a ′ = 1 / 2 .Imposing poly3-NSETH(1/2) and per-int-NSETH(0.999), and assuming that the runtime of a hypothetical quantum circuit simulation algorithm would scale linearly with the number of gates/constraints/optical elements, we conclude that Instantaneous Quantum Polynomial-Time (IQP) circuits with 208 qubits and 500 gates, Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) circuits with 420 qubits and 500 constraints and boson sampling circuits (i.e. linear optical networks) with 98 photons and 500 optical elements are large enough for the task of producing samples from their output distributions up to constant multiplicative error to be intractable on current technology. Imposing poly3-ave-SBSETH(1/2), we additionally rule out simulations with constant additive error for IQP and QAOA circuits of the same size. Without the assumption of linearly increasing simulation time, we can make analogous statements for circuits with slightly fewer qubits but requiring 10 4 to 10 7 gates.
(pp1089-1115) Tomoyuki Morimae and Suguru Tamaki doi: https://doi.org/10.26421/QIC19.13-14-2 Abstracts: Output probability distributions of several sub-universal quantum computing models cannot be classically efficiently sampled unless some unlikely consequences occur in classical complexity theory, such as the collapse of the polynomial-time hierarchy. These results, so called quantum supremacy, however, do not rule out possibilities of super-polynomial-time classical simulations. In this paper, we study ``fine-grained" version of quantum supremacy that excludes some exponential-time classical simulations. First, we focus on two sub-universal models, namely, the one-clean-qubit model (or the DQC1 model) and the HC1Q model. Assuming certain conjectures in fine-grained complexity theory, we show that for any a>0 output probability distributions of these models cannot be classically sampled within a constant multiplicative error and in 2^{(1-a)N+o(N)} time, where N is the number of qubits. Next, we consider universal quantum computing. For example, we consider quantum computing over Clifford and T gates, and show that under another fine-grained complexity conjecture, output probability distributions of Clifford-T quantum computing cannot be classically sampled in 2^{o(t)} time within a constant multiplicative error, where t is the number of T gates.
The local Hamiltonian problem is the canonical QMA-complete problem, and O(2n) time classical algorithms and O(2n/2) time quantum algorithms are known to solve the problem in the worst case. It is not clear how to improve these brute force strategies for a broad class of the problem because ground states are highly entangled in general, and we cannot directly apply known strategies for classical CSPs.
In this work, we present exponentially faster classical and quantum algorithms under two mild assumptions: (1) the Hamiltonian is frustration-free on YES instances, and (2) it is approximately regular, meaning that every qubit is acted upon by approximately the same number of constraints.
We complement these upper bounds by showing that, assuming (Q)SETH, quantum 5-SAT admits no non-trivial worst-case speedup. Our lower bound further demonstrates that the dependence of our algorithms on regularity is in some sense nearly optimal. Specifically, quantum 5-SAT remains (Q)SETH-hard even for Hamiltonians in which all but O(n) qubits participate in only constantly many constraints, while the remaining O(n) qubits each participate in O(n) constraints. By contrast, if either the size of this high-degree subset or the degrees of its qubits is reduced by a factor of nδ, for any δ>0, our algorithm solves the problem in time O(2(1−ε)n) for some ε>0.
Together, our upper and lower bounds establish a fine-grained complexity dichotomy for quantum satisfiability.