Using quantum algorithms, we obtain, for accuracy [Formula: see text] and confidence [Formula: see text] a new sample complexity upper bound of [Formula: see text] as [Formula: see text] for a general agnostic learning model, provided the hypothesis class is of finite cardinality. This greatly improves upon a corresponding sample complexity of asymptotic order [Formula: see text] known in the literature to be attainable by means of classical (non-quantum) algorithms for an agnostic learning problem also with hypothesis class of finite cardinality (see, for example, [S. Arunachalam and R. de Wolf, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 19 (2018) 1] and the classical statistical learning theory references cited there). Thus, for general agnostic learning, the quantum speedup in the rate of learning that we achieve with respect to these results is quadratic in [Formula: see text].
Using quantum algorithms, we obtain, for accuracy [Formula: see text] and confidence [Formula: see text] a new sample complexity upper bound of [Formula: see text] as [Formula: see text] for a general agnostic learning model, provided the hypothesis class is of finite cardinality. This greatly improves upon a corresponding sample complexity of asymptotic order [Formula: see text] known in the literature to be attainable by means of classical (non-quantum) algorithms for an agnostic learning problem also with hypothesis class of finite cardinality (see, for example, [S. Arunachalam and R. de Wolf, J. Mach. Learn. Res. 19 (2018) 1] and the classical statistical learning theory references cited there). Thus, for general agnostic learning, the quantum speedup in the rate of learning that we achieve with respect to these results is quadratic in [Formula: see text].
$ \newcommand{\eps}{\varepsilon} $In learning theory, the VC dimension of a concept class C is the most common way to measure its "richness." In the PAC model $$ Θ\Big(\frac{d}{\eps} + \frac{\log(1/δ)}{\eps}\Big) $$ examples are necessary and sufficient for a learner to output, with probability 1−δ, a hypothesis h that is $\eps$-close to the target concept c. In the related agnostic model, where the samples need not come from a c∈C, we know that $$ Θ\Big(\frac{d}{\eps^2} + \frac{\log(1/δ)}{\eps^2}\Big) $$ examples are necessary and sufficient to output an hypothesis h∈C whose error is at most $\eps$ worse than the best concept in C. Here we analyze quantum sample complexity, where each example is a coherent quantum state. This model was introduced by Bshouty and Jackson, who showed that quantum examples are more powerful than classical examples in some fixed-distribution settings. However, Atici and Servedio, improved by Zhang, showed that in the PAC setting, quantum examples cannot be much more powerful: the required number of quantum examples is $$ Ω\Big(\frac{d^{1-η}}{\eps} + d + \frac{\log(1/δ)}{\eps}\Big)\mbox{ for all }η> 0. $$ Our main result is that quantum and classical sample complexity are in fact equal up to constant factors in both the PAC and agnostic models. We give two approaches. The first is a fairly simple information-theoretic argument that yields the above two classical bounds and yields the same bounds for quantum sample complexity up to a $\log(d/\eps)$ factor. We then give a second approach that avoids the log-factor loss, based on analyzing the behavior of the "Pretty Good Measurement" on the quantum state identification problems that correspond to learning. This shows classical and quantum sample complexity are equal up to constant factors.
In learning theory, the VC dimension of a concept class C is the most common way to measure its “richness.” A fundamental result says that the number of examples needed to learn an unknown target concept c∈C under an unknown distribution D, is tightly determined by the VC dimension d of the concept class C. Specifically, in the PAC model
Θ(dϵ+log(1/δ)ϵ)
examples are necessary and sufficient for a learner to output, with probability 1−δ, a hypothesis h that is ϵ-close to the target concept c (measured under D). In the related agnostic model, where the samples need not come from a c∈C, we know that
Θ(dϵ2+log(1/δ)ϵ2)
examples are necessary and sufficient to output an hypothesis h∈C whose error is at most ϵ worse than the error of the best concept in C. Here we analyze quantum sample complexity, where each example is a coherent quantum state. This model was introduced by Bshouty and Jackson (1999), who showed that quantum examples are more powerful than classical examples in some fixed-distribution settings. However, Atici and Servedio (2005), improved by Zhang (2010), showed that in the PAC setting (where the learner has to succeed for every distribution), quantum examples cannot be much more powerful: the required number of quantum examples is
Ω(d1−ηϵ+d+log(1/δ)ϵ) for arbitrarily small constant η>0.
Our main result is that quantum and classical sample complexity are in fact equal up to constant factors in both the PAC and agnostic models. We give two proof approaches. The first is a fairly simple information-theoretic argument that yields the above two classical bounds and yields the same bounds for quantum sample complexity up to a log(d/ϵ) factor. We then give a second approach that avoids the log-factor loss, based on analyzing the behavior of the “Pretty Good Measurement” on the quantum state-identification problems that correspond to learning. This shows classical and quantum sample complexity are equal up to constant factors for every concept class C.
Arunachalam and de Wolf (2018) \cite{arunachalam2018optimal} showed that the sample complexity of quantum batch learning of boolean functions, in the realizable and agnostic settings, has the same form and order as the corresponding classical sample complexities. In this paper, we extend this, ostensibly surprising, message to batch multiclass learning, online boolean learning, and online multiclass learning. For our online learning results, we first consider an adaptive adversary variant of the classical model of Dawid and Tewari (2022) \cite{dawid2022learnability}. Then, we introduce the first (to the best of our knowledge) model of online learning with quantum examples.
We study the number of uniform quantum examples needed to exactly learn a Boolean function with at most k nonzero Fourier coefficients. We give a learner with near-optimal O(k) sample complexity independent of the input length n. The learner uses only separate measurements of individual examples. This improves the previous O(k3/2log2k) upper bound (Arunachalam, Chakraborty, Lee, Paraashar, and de Wolf, 2021). The main ingredient is a candidate set formed by symmetric differences of subsets from independent groups of Fourier samples. A multilinear majority polynomial combines unbiased random approximations into an accurate witness whose Fourier support lies in this set. Granularity then forces the set to contain the entire Fourier support, including subsets never directly sampled. For comparison, we derive the tight classical sample complexity Θ(nk) by combining known sparse-recovery and lower-bound results.
Abstract In classical statistical learning theory, one of the most well-studied problems is that of binary classification. The information-theoretic sample complexity of this task is tightly characterized by the Vapnik-Chervonenkis (VC) dimension. A quantum analog of this task, with training data given as a quantum state has also been intensely studied and is now known to have the same sample complexity as its classical counterpart. We propose a novel quantum version of the classical binary classification task by considering maps with classical input and quantum output and corresponding classical-quantum training data. We discuss learning strategies for the agnostic and for the realizable case and study their performance to obtain sample complexity upper bounds. Moreover, we provide sample complexity lower bounds which show that our upper bounds are essentially tight for pure output states. In particular, we see that the sample complexity is the same as in the classical binary classification task w.r.t. its dependence on accuracy, confidence and the VC-dimension.
Whether quantum computation can reduce the amount of data required for conventional machine learning is a central problem in quantum machine learning. In probably approximately correct (PAC) learning, a learner receives training examples sampled from an unknown probability distribution. Quantum PAC learning extends this framework by allowing access to quantum examples, which are quantum states that coherently encode this distribution, or to unitaries that prepare quantum examples, with or without inverse access. When only copies of quantum examples are available, the optimal worst-case sample complexity asymptotically matches that of classical learning. In contrast, access to both a preparation unitary and its inverse can improve the accuracy dependence of query complexity. However, it has remained open whether access to the preparation unitary alone suffices for this improvement.
In this work, we resolve this question by determining the optimal query complexity with forward-only access, taking the worst case over compatible preparation unitaries and their dimensions. In both realizable and agnostic PAC learning, this complexity matches, up to constant factors, the optimal sample complexity achievable with classical examples or copies of quantum examples. To prove these results, we construct, for any algorithm with forward-only access, a simulator that approximates the algorithm's Haar-averaged output state using as many copies of the prepared state as the algorithm makes queries. These results show that inverse access is essential for the known improvement in accuracy dependence in this worst-case setting. Beyond PAC learning, our reduction provides a general tool for transferring lower bounds for state copies to query lower bounds for forward-only access to the corresponding preparation unitaries.