Abstract Learning problems involve settings in which an algorithm has to make decisions based on data, and possibly side information such as expert knowledge. This study has two main goals. First, it reviews and generalizes different results on the data and model complexity of quantum learning, where the data and/or the algorithm can be quantum, focusing on information‐theoretic techniques. Second, it introduces the notion of copy complexity, which quantifies the number of copies of a quantum state required to achieve a target accuracy level. Copy complexity arises from the destructive nature of quantum measurements, which irreversibly alter the state to be processed, limiting the information that can be extracted about quantum data. As a result, empirical risk minimization is generally inapplicable. The paper presents novel results on the copy complexity for both training and testing. To make the paper self‐contained and approachable by different research communities, an extensive background material is provided on classical results from statistical learning theory, as well as on the distinguishability of quantum states. Throughout, the differences between quantum and classical learning are highlighted by addressing both supervised and unsupervised learning, and extensive pointers are provided to the literature.
Abstract Learning problems involve settings in which an algorithm has to make decisions based on data, and possibly side information such as expert knowledge. This study has two main goals. First, it reviews and generalizes different results on the data and model complexity of quantum learning, where the data and/or the algorithm can be quantum, focusing on information‐theoretic techniques. Second, it introduces the notion of copy complexity, which quantifies the number of copies of a quantum state required to achieve a target accuracy level. Copy complexity arises from the destructive nature of quantum measurements, which irreversibly alter the state to be processed, limiting the information that can be extracted about quantum data. As a result, empirical risk minimization is generally inapplicable. The paper presents novel results on the copy complexity for both training and testing. To make the paper self‐contained and approachable by different research communities, an extensive background material is provided on classical results from statistical learning theory, as well as on the distinguishability of quantum states. Throughout, the differences between quantum and classical learning are highlighted by addressing both supervised and unsupervised learning, and extensive pointers are provided to the literature.
Statistical learning theory provides the mathematical foundations for understanding generalization from finite data. As quantum computing and quantum machine learning continue to develop, there is increasing interest in whether analogous principles can be formulated for learning settings involving quantum data, quantum models, or quantum computation. This paper offers an introductory perspective on quantum statistical learning theory. We begin by recalling the basic ideas of classical statistical learning theory, including empirical risk minimization, hypothesis classes, generalization, and sample complexity, and then discuss how these concepts must be adapted in the quantum setting. In particular, we distinguish between learning with classical data using quantum algorithms, learning with quantum models, and learning directly from quantum data. We then outline the central learning-theoretic objects in the quantum setting, including quantum hypotheses, measurement-based predictions, population and empirical risk, shot complexity, and information-extraction limitations. A simple illustrative example is used to highlight how finite measurements and quantum uncertainty affect learning performance. We conclude with a discussion of open problems and directions toward a more unified theory of generalization and learnability in quantum learning.
This paper reviews recent advances in quantum learning theory for continuous-variable (CV) systems. Quantum learning theory investigates how to extract classical information from quantum systems as efficiently as possible. CV systems are ubiquitous in nature and in quantum technologies, as they describe bosonic and quantum-optical systems. While quantum learning theory for finite-dimensional systems has been extensively studied, the corresponding theory for CV systems has only recently begun to develop; here we provide a concise review. We focus on the following questions: what is the minimum number of copies (the sample complexity) required to learn a non-Gaussian state, possibly under energy constraints? What is the sample complexity for learning Gaussian states? How does the performance of CV state learning depend on non-Gaussianity? How can one test whether a state is Gaussian or far from the set of Gaussian states? And how can Gaussian processes be learned efficiently? Central to these topics, we also review several bounds on the trace distance between CV states in terms of their covariance matrices, which may be of independent interest. Overall, this work summarises selected developments in tomography of CV systems and highlights a selection of open problems.
Within the framework of statistical learning theory it is possible to bound the minimum number of samples required by a learner to reach a target accuracy. We show that if the bound on the accuracy is taken into account, quantum machine learning algorithms for supervised learning---for which statistical guarantees are available---cannot achieve polylogarithmic runtimes in the input dimension. We conclude that, when no further assumptions on the problem are made, quantum machine learning algorithms for supervised learning can have at most polynomial speedups over efficient classical algorithms, even in cases where quantum access to the data is naturally available.
The ability to extract general laws from a few known examples depends on the complexity of the problem and on the amount of training data. In the quantum setting, the learner's generalization performance is further challenged by the destructive nature of quantum measurements that, together with the no-cloning theorem, limits the amount of information that can be extracted from each training sample. In this paper we focus on hybrid quantum learning techniques where classical machine-learning methods are paired with quantum algorithms and show that, in some settings, the uncertainty coming from a few measurement shots can be the dominant source of errors. We identify an instance of this possibly general issue by focusing on the classification of maximally entangled vs. separable states, showing that this toy problem becomes challenging for learners unaware of entanglement theory. Finally, we introduce an estimator based on classical shadows that performs better in the big data, few copy regime. Our results show that the naive application of classical machine-learning methods to the quantum setting is problematic, and that a better theoretical foundation of quantum learning is required.
In supervised learning, an inductive learning algorithm extracts general rules from observed training instances, then the rules are applied to test instances. We show that this splitting of training and application arises naturally, in the classical setting, from a simple independence requirement with a physical interpretation of being nonsignaling. Thus, two seemingly different definitions of inductive learning happen to coincide. This follows from the properties of classical information that break down in the quantum setup. We prove a quantum de Finetti theorem for quantum channels, which shows that in the quantum case, the equivalence holds in the asymptotic setting, that is, for large numbers of test instances. This reveals a natural analogy between classical learning protocols and their quantum counterparts, justifying a similar treatment, and allowing us to inquire about standard elements in computational learning theory, such as structural risk minimization and sample complexity.
In supervised learning, an inductive learning algorithm extracts general rules from observed training instances, then the rules are applied to test instances. We show that this splitting of training and application arises naturally, in the classical setting, from a simple independence requirement with a physical interpretation of being non-signalling. Thus, two seemingly different definitions of inductive learning happen to coincide. This follows from very specific properties of classical information, which break down in the quantum setup. We prove a quantum de Finetti theorem for quantum channels, which shows that in the quantum case, the equivalence holds in the asymptotic setting (for large number of test instances). This reveals a natural analogy between classical learning protocols and their quantum counterparts, thus allowing to naturally enquire about standard elements in computational learning theory, such as structural risk minimization, model and sample complexity.