Many properties of Boolean functions can be tested far more efficiently than the function itself can be learned. However, this dramatic advantage often disappears when testers are limited to random samples of f instead of adaptively chosen queries to f. In this work we investigate the quantum version of this restriction: quantum algorithms that test properties of a Boolean function f solely from copies of either the function state |f⟩∝ ∑_x|x,f(x)⟩ or the phase state |(-1)^f⟩∝ ∑_x (-1)^{f(x)}|x⟩. Quantum advantage in testing from data. For monotonicity, symmetry, and triangle-freeness, we show passive quantum testers are unboundedly or super-polynomially better than their classical passive testing counterparts. They are competitive with classic query-based testers in each case. Inadequacy of Fourier sampling. Our new testers use techniques beyond quantum Fourier sampling, and it turns out this is necessary: we show a certain class of bent functions can be tested from 𝒪(1) function states but has a sample complexity lower bound of 2^{Ω(n)} for any tester relying exclusively on Fourier and classical samples. Classical queries vs. quantum data. Our passive quantum testers are competitive with classical query-based testers, but this isn't universal: we exhibit a testing problem that can be solved from 𝒪(1) classical queries but requires Ω(2^{n/2}) function state copies. The Forrelation problem provides a separation of the same magnitude in the opposite direction, so we conclude that quantum data and classical queries are "maximally incomparable" resources for testing. Towards lower bounds. We also begin the study of lower bounds for testing from quantum data. For quantum monotonicity testing, we prove that the ensembles of [Goldreich et al., 2000; Black, 2024], which give exponential lower bounds for classical sample-based testing, do not yield any nontrivial lower bounds for testing from quantum data. New insights specific to quantum data will be required for proving copy complexity lower bounds for testing in this model.
Many properties of Boolean functions can be tested far more efficiently than the function itself can be learned. However, this dramatic advantage often disappears when testers are limited to random samples of f instead of adaptively chosen queries to f. In this work we investigate the quantum version of this restriction: quantum algorithms that test properties of a Boolean function f solely from copies of either the function state |f⟩∝ ∑_x|x,f(x)⟩ or the phase state |(-1)^f⟩∝ ∑_x (-1)^{f(x)}|x⟩. Quantum advantage in testing from data. For monotonicity, symmetry, and triangle-freeness, we show passive quantum testers are unboundedly or super-polynomially better than their classical passive testing counterparts. They are competitive with classic query-based testers in each case. Inadequacy of Fourier sampling. Our new testers use techniques beyond quantum Fourier sampling, and it turns out this is necessary: we show a certain class of bent functions can be tested from 𝒪(1) function states but has a sample complexity lower bound of 2^{Ω(n)} for any tester relying exclusively on Fourier and classical samples. Classical queries vs. quantum data. Our passive quantum testers are competitive with classical query-based testers, but this isn't universal: we exhibit a testing problem that can be solved from 𝒪(1) classical queries but requires Ω(2^{n/2}) function state copies. The Forrelation problem provides a separation of the same magnitude in the opposite direction, so we conclude that quantum data and classical queries are "maximally incomparable" resources for testing. Towards lower bounds. We also begin the study of lower bounds for testing from quantum data. For quantum monotonicity testing, we prove that the ensembles of [Goldreich et al., 2000; Black, 2024], which give exponential lower bounds for classical sample-based testing, do not yield any nontrivial lower bounds for testing from quantum data. New insights specific to quantum data will be required for proving copy complexity lower bounds for testing in this model.
We achieve essentially the largest possible separation between quantum and classical query complexities. We do so using a property-testing problem called Forrelation, where one needs to decide whether one Boolean function is highly correlated with the Fourier transform of a second function. This problem can be solved using 1 quantum query, yet we show that any randomized algorithm needs Ω(√(N)log(N)) queries (improving an Ω(N1/4) lower bound of Aaronson). Conversely, we show that this 1 versus Ω(√(N)) separation is optimal: indeed, any t-query quantum algorithm whatsoever can be simulated by an O(N1-1/2t)-query randomized algorithm. Thus, resolving an open question of Buhrman et al. from 2002, there is no partial Boolean function whose quantum query complexity is constant and whose randomized query complexity is linear. We conjecture that a natural generalization of Forrelation achieves the optimal t versus Ω(N1-1/2t) separation for all t. As a bonus, we show that this generalization is BQP-complete. This yields what's arguably the simplest BQP-complete problem yet known, and gives a second sense in which Forrelation "captures the maximum power of quantum computation."
Abstract The problem of learning Boolean linear functions from quantum examples w.r.t. the uniform distribution can be solved on a quantum computer using the Bernstein–Vazirani algorithm (Bernstein and Vazirani, in: Kosaraju (ed) Proceedings of the twenty-fifth annual ACM symposium on theory of computing, ACM, New York, 1993. 10.1145/167088.167097 ). A similar strategy can be applied in the case of noisy quantum training data, as was observed in Grilo et al. (Learning with errors is easy with quantum samples, 2017). However, extensions of these learning algorithms beyond the uniform distribution have not yet been studied. We employ the biased quantum Fourier transform introduced in Kanade et al. (Learning dnfs under product distributions via μ μ -biased quantum Fourier sampling, 2018) to develop efficient quantum algorithms for learning Boolean linear functions on n bits from quantum examples w.r.t. a biased product distribution. Our first procedure is applicable to any (except full) bias and requires O(ln(n)) O(ln(n)) quantum examples. The number of quantum examples used by our second algorithm is independent of n, but the strategy is applicable only for small bias. Moreover, we show that the second procedure is stable w.r.t. noisy training data and w.r.t. faulty quantum gates. This also enables us to solve a version of the learning problem in which the underlying distribution is not known in advance. Finally, we prove lower bounds on the classical and quantum sample complexities of the learning problem. Whereas classically, Ω(n) Ω(n) examples are necessary independently of the bias, we are able to establish a quantum sample complexity lower bound of Ω(ln(n)) Ω(ln(n)) only under an assumption of large bias. Nevertheless, this allows for a discussion of the performance of our suggested learning algorithms w.r.t. sample complexity. With our analysis, we contribute to a more quantitative understanding of the power and limitations of quantum training data for learning classical functions.
We study the query complexity of testing quantum juntas. Given an unknown n-qubit unitary or quantum channel, the goal is to decide whether it acts nontrivially on at most k qubits or is ε-far from every such operation. For unitaries, we consider the forward-only model, where the tester has access to U, but not to U† or controlled-U. We give tight bounds for both unitary and channel junta testing. For sufficiently large k, n≥2k, and a broad range of ε, both problems have query complexity Θ(k/(ε2logk)). Our upper bounds are achieved by simple nonadaptive testers using product inputs and single-qubit measurements. For junta channels, this closes the gap by Bao and Yao (COLT 23, TPAMI 2025) between an O(k) upper bound and a Ω(k) lower bound at constant ε, establishing the optimal Θ(k/logk) query complexity. At the heart of both bounds is a strong connection between quantum junta testing and classical support-size testing. For the upper bounds, we reduce quantum junta testing to a generalized support-size problem for distributions over random subsets, and develop a new tester with improved sample complexity. For the lower bounds, we proceed in the reverse direction, reducing classical support-size testing to quantum junta testing through a phase-masked hard ensemble and showing that forward quantum queries can be exactly classicalized on average. Together, these reductions identify support-size testing as the classical core of quantum junta testing and yield matching lower bounds. At constant ε, they also give a separation between Θ(k/logk) forward queries and O(k) queries with inverse access.
A boolean function f has Fourier dimension k if its nonzero Fourier coefficients span a subspace of dimension k. We consider the property testing task of determining whether a function has Fourier dimension at most k, or is ε-far from being so. We show that there is a O(k/ε)-query quantum property tester for this problem, which we show to be almost optimal. Combined with Gopalan et al.'s classical lower bound of Ω(2k/2), this demonstrates an exponential quantum advantage for this task \cite{DBLP:journals/siamcomp/GopalanOSSW11}. We complement this result with a O~(2k/2/ε) classical tester, giving a quadratic improvement over the previous best tester, and essentially settling the classical query complexity.
We present several new examples of speed-ups obtainable by quantum algorithms in the context of property testing. First, motivated by sampling algorithms, we consider probability distributions given in the form of an oracle f:[n]→[m]. Here the probability $\PP_f(j)$ of an outcome j∈[m] is the fraction of its domain that f maps to j. We give quantum algorithms for testing whether two such distributions are identical or ε-far in L1-norm. Recently, Bravyi, Hassidim, and Harrow \cite{BHH10} showed that if $\PP_f$ and $\PP_g$ are both unknown (i.e., given by oracles f and g), then this testing can be done in roughly m quantum queries to the functions. We consider the case where the second distribution is known, and show that testing can be done with roughly m1/3 quantum queries, which we prove to be essentially optimal. In contrast, it is known that classical testing algorithms need about m2/3 queries in the unknown-unknown case and about m queries in the known-unknown case. Based on this result, we also reduce the query complexity of graph isomorphism testers with quantum oracle access. While those examples provide polynomial quantum speed-ups, our third example gives a much larger improvement (constant quantum queries vs polynomial classical queries) for the problem of testing periodicity, based on Shor's algorithm and a modification of a classical lower bound by Lachish and Newman \cite{lachish&newman:periodicity}. This provides an alternative to a recent constant-vs-polynomial speed-up due to Aaronson \cite{aaronson:bqpph}.
We present several new examples of speed-ups obtainable by quantum algorithms in the context of property testing. First, motivated by sampling algorithms, we consider probability distributions given in the form of an oracle f:[n]→[m]. Here the probability Pf(j) of an outcome j in [m] is the fraction of its domain that f maps to j. We give quantum algorithms for testing whether two such distributions are identical or epsilon-far in L1-norm. Recently, Bravyi, Hassidim, and Harrow showed that if Pf and Pg are both unknown (i.e., given by oracles f and g), then this testing can be done in roughly sqrtm quantum queries to the functions. We consider the case where the second distribution is known, and show that testing can be done with roughly m1/3 quantum queries, which we prove to be essentially optimal. In contrast, it is known that classical testing algorithms need about m2/3 queries in the unknown-unknown case and about sqrtm queries in the known-unknown case. Based on this result, we also reduce the query complexity of graph isomorphism testers with quantum oracle access. While those examples provide polynomial quantum speed-ups, our third example gives a much larger improvement (constant quantum queries vs polynomial classical queries) for the problem of testing periodicity, based on Shor's algorithm and a modification of a classical lower bound by Lachish and Newman. This provides an alternative to a recent constant-vs-polynomial speed-up due to Aaronson.