Run-times of quantum algorithms are often studied via an asymptotic, worst-case analysis. Whilst useful, such a comparison can often fall short: it is not uncommon for algorithms with a large worst-case run-time to end up performing well on instances of practical interest. To remedy this it is necessary to resort to run-time analyses of a more empirical nature, which for sufficiently small input sizes can be performed on a quantum device or a simulation thereof. For larger input sizes, alternative approaches are required.In this paper we consider an approach that combines classical emulation with detailed complexity bounds that include all constants. We simulate quantum algorithms by running classical versions of the sub-routines, whilst simultaneously collecting information about what the run-time of the quantum routine would have been if it were run instead. To do this accurately and efficiently for very large input sizes, we describe an estimation procedure and prove that it obtains upper bounds on the true expected complexity of the quantum algorithms.We apply our method to some simple quantum speedups of classical heuristic algorithms for solving the well-studied MAX- k -SAT optimization problem. This requires rigorous bounds (including all constants) on the expected- and worst-case complexities of two important quantum sub-routines: Grover search with an unknown number of marked items, and quantum maximum-finding. These improve upon existing results and might be of broader interest.Amongst other results, we found that the classical heuristic algorithms we studied did not offer significant quantum speedups despite the existence of a theoretical per-step speedup. This suggests that an empirical analysis such as the one we implement in this paper already yields insights beyond those that can be seen by an asymptotic analysis alone.
Run-times of quantum algorithms are often studied via an asymptotic, worst-case analysis. Whilst useful, such a comparison can often fall short: it is not uncommon for algorithms with a large worst-case run-time to end up performing well on instances of practical interest. To remedy this it is necessary to resort to run-time analyses of a more empirical nature, which for sufficiently small input sizes can be performed on a quantum device or a simulation thereof. For larger input sizes, alternative approaches are required.In this paper we consider an approach that combines classical emulation with detailed complexity bounds that include all constants. We simulate quantum algorithms by running classical versions of the sub-routines, whilst simultaneously collecting information about what the run-time of the quantum routine would have been if it were run instead. To do this accurately and efficiently for very large input sizes, we describe an estimation procedure and prove that it obtains upper bounds on the true expected complexity of the quantum algorithms.We apply our method to some simple quantum speedups of classical heuristic algorithms for solving the well-studied MAX- k -SAT optimization problem. This requires rigorous bounds (including all constants) on the expected- and worst-case complexities of two important quantum sub-routines: Grover search with an unknown number of marked items, and quantum maximum-finding. These improve upon existing results and might be of broader interest.Amongst other results, we found that the classical heuristic algorithms we studied did not offer significant quantum speedups despite the existence of a theoretical per-step speedup. This suggests that an empirical analysis such as the one we implement in this paper already yields insights beyond those that can be seen by an asymptotic analysis alone.
We apply recent work [9] on empirical estimates of quantum speedups to the practical task of community detection in complex networks. We design several quantum variants of a popular classical algorithm – the Louvain algorithm for community detection – and first study their complexities in the usual way, before analysing their complexities empirically across a variety of artificial and real inputs. We find that this analysis yields insights not available to us via the asymptotic analysis, further emphasising the utility in such an empirical approach. In particular, we observe that a complicated quantum algorithm with a large asymptotic speedup might not be the fastest algorithm in practice, and that a simple quantum algorithm with a modest speedup might in fact be the one that performs best. Moreover, we repeatedly find that overheads such as those arising from the need to amplify the success probabilities of quantum sub-routines such as Grover search can nullify any speedup that might have been suggested by a theoretical worst- or expected-case analysis.
In recent years, strong expectations have been raised for the possible power of quantum computing for solving difficult optimization problems, based on theoretical, asymptotic worst-case bounds. Can we expect this to have consequences for Linear and Integer Programming when solving instances of practically relevant size, a fundamental goal of Mathematical Programming, Operations Research and Algorithm Engineering? Answering this question faces a crucial impediment: The lack of sufficiently large quantum platforms prevents performing real-world tests for comparison with classical methods. In this paper, we present a quantum analog for classical runtime analysis when solving real-world instances of important optimization problems. To this end, we measure the expected practical performance of quantum computers by analyzing the expected gate complexity of a quantum algorithm. The lack of practical quantum platforms for experimental comparison is addressed by hybrid benchmarking, in which the algorithm is performed on a classical system, logging the expected cost of the various subroutines that are employed by the quantum versions. In particular, we provide an analysis of quantum methods for Linear Programming, for which recent work has provided asymptotic speedup through quantum subroutines for the Simplex method. We show that a practical quantum advantage for realistic problem sizes would require quantum gate operation times that are considerably below current physical limitations.
We apply recent work~\cite{ourotherpaper} on empirical estimates of quantum speedups to the practical task of community detection in complex networks. We design several quantum variants of a popular classical algorithm -- the \textit{Louvain algorithm} for community detection -- and first study their complexities in the usual way, before analysing their complexities empirically across a variety of artificial and real inputs. We find that this analysis yields insights not available to us via the asymptotic analysis, further emphasising the utility in such an empirical approach. In particular, we observe that a complicated quantum algorithm with a large asymptotic speedup might not be the fastest algorithm in practice, and that a simple quantum algorithm with a modest speedup might in fact be the one that performs best. Moreover, we repeatedly find that overheads such as those arising from the need to amplify the success probabilities of quantum sub-routines such as Grover search can nullify any speedup that might have been suggested by a theoretical worst- or expected-case analysis.
Smoothed analysis is a central framework in classical algorithms for explaining the performance of algorithms beyond the worst case, often explaining why algorithms perform well in practice. We initiate a systematic study of its quantum counterpart and show the following results. (1) We show that there is a total function whose smoothed quantum query complexity is exponentially smaller than its classical query complexity. (2) We give near-tight characterizations of smoothed randomized and quantum query complexities for symmetric Boolean functions, unifying the worst-case complexity results of [Beals et al, FOCS'98] and average-case complexity results of [Ambainis and de Wolf, STACS'00]. (3) We study string problems such as pattern matching and edit distance and, in various regimes, give polynomial to superpolynomial quantum speedups. Our main technical ingredients include a near-tight quantum algorithm for ε-approximating the number of collisions between two non-repetitive strings, improving the result of Le Gall and Ng [QIC'22]. Together, our results show that smoothing can reveal larger quantum speedups than worst-case analysis suggests, opening a path towards quantum advantage on more realistic inputs.
We apply our recent work on empirical estimates of quantum speedups to the practical task of community detection in complex networks. We design several quantum variants of a popular classical algorithm -- the Louvain algorithm for community detection -- and first study their complexities in the usual way, before analysing their complexities empirically across a variety of artificial and real inputs. We find that this analysis yields insights not available to us via the asymptotic analysis, further emphasising the utility in such an empirical approach. In particular, we observe that a complicated quantum algorithm with a large asymptotic speedup might not be the fastest algorithm in practice, and that a simple quantum algorithm with a modest speedup might in fact be the one that performs best. Moreover, we repeatedly find that overheads such as those arising from the need to amplify the success probabilities of quantum sub-routines such as Grover search can nullify any speedup that might have been suggested by a theoretical worst- or expected-case analysis.
Grover’s algorithm is one of the primary algorithms offered as evidence that quantum computers can provide an advantage over classical computers. It involves an “oracle” (external quantum subroutine), which must be specified for a given application and whose internal structure is not part of the formal scaling of the quadratic quantum speedup guaranteed by the algorithm. Grover’s algorithm also requires exponentially many calls to the quantum oracle (approximately 2 n calls where n is the number of qubits) to succeed, raising the question of its implementation on both noisy and error-corrected quantum computers. In this work, we construct a quantum-inspired algorithm executable on a classical computer that performs Grover’s task in a linear number of calls to (simulations of) the oracle—an exponentially smaller number than Grover’s algorithm—and demonstrate this algorithm explicitly for Boolean satisfiability problems. The complexity of our algorithm depends on the cost to simulate the oracle once, which may or may not be exponential, depending on its internal structure. Indeed, Grover’s algorithm does not have an quantum speedup as soon as one is given access to the “source code” of the oracle, which may reveal an internal structure of the problem. Our findings illustrate this point explicitly, as our algorithm exploits the structure of the quantum circuit used to program the quantum computer to speed up the search. There are still problems where Grover’s algorithm would provide an asymptotic speedup if it could be run accurately for large enough sizes. Our quantum-inspired algorithm provides lower bounds, in terms of the quantum-circuit complexity, for the quantum hardware to beat classical approaches for these problems. These estimates, combined with the unfavorable scaling of the success probability of Grover’s algorithm, which in the presence of noise decays as the exponential of the exponential of the number of qubits, makes a practical speedup unrealistic even under extremely optimistic assumptions of the evolution of both hardware quality and availability. Published by the American Physical Society 2024