We show that the NP-complete problems max cut and independent set can be formulated as the 2-local Hamiltonian problem as defined by Kitaev. The 5-local Hamiltonian problem was the first problem to be shown to be complete for the quantum complexity class QMA — the quantum analog of NP. Subsequently, it was shown that 3-locality is already sufficient for QMA-completeness. It is still not known whether the 2-local Hamiltonian problem is QMA-complete. Therefore it is interesting to determine what problems can be reduced to the 2-local Hamiltonian problem. Kitaev showed that 3-SAT can be formulated as a 3-local Hamiltonian problem. We extend his result by showing that 2-locality is sufficient in order to encompass NP.We show that the NP-complete problems max cut and independent set can be formulated as the 2-local Hamiltonian problem as defined by Kitaev. The 5-local Hamiltonian problem was the first problem to be shown to be complete for the quantum complexity class QMA — the quantum analog of NP. Subsequently, it was shown that 3-locality is already sufficient for QMA-completeness. It is still not known whether the 2-local Hamiltonian problem is QMA-complete. Therefore it is interesting to determine what problems can be reduced to the 2-local Hamiltonian problem. Kitaev showed that 3-SAT can be formulated as a 3-local Hamiltonian problem. We extend his result by showing that 2-locality is sufficient in order to encompass NP.

arXiv:quant-ph/0301087International Journal of Quantum InformationSep 1, 200316 citations

The complexity of the separable hamiltonian problem

André Chailloux, Or Sattath

In this paper, we study variants of the canonical Local-Hamiltonian problem where, in addition, the witness is promised to be separable. We define two variants of the Local-Hamiltonian problem. The input for the Separable-Local-Hamiltonian problem is the same as the Local-Hamiltonian problem, i.e. a local Hamiltonian and two energies a and b, but the question is somewhat different: the answer is YES if there is a separable quantum state with energy at most a, and the answer is NO if all separable quantum states have energy at least b. The Separable-Sparse-Hamiltonian problem is defined similarly, but the Hamiltonian is not necessarily local, but rather sparse. We show that the Separable-Sparse-Hamiltonian problem is QMA(2)-Complete, while Separable-Local-Hamiltonian is in QMA. This should be compared to the Local-Hamiltonian problem, and the Sparse-Hamiltonian problem which are both QMA-Complete. To the best of our knowledge, Separable-SPARSE-Hamiltonian is the first non-trivial problem shown to be QMA(2)-Complete.In this paper, we study variants of the canonical Local-Hamiltonian problem where, in addition, the witness is promised to be separable. We define two variants of the Local-Hamiltonian problem. The input for the Separable-Local-Hamiltonian problem is the same as the Local-Hamiltonian problem, i.e. a local Hamiltonian and two energies a and b, but the question is somewhat different: the answer is YES if there is a separable quantum state with energy at most a, and the answer is NO if all separable quantum states have energy at least b. The Separable-Sparse-Hamiltonian problem is defined similarly, but the Hamiltonian is not necessarily local, but rather sparse. We show that the Separable-Sparse-Hamiltonian problem is QMA(2)-Complete, while Separable-Local-Hamiltonian is in QMA. This should be compared to the Local-Hamiltonian problem, and the Sparse-Hamiltonian problem which are both QMA-Complete. To the best of our knowledge, Separable-SPARSE-Hamiltonian is the first non-trivial problem shown to be QMA(2)-Complete.

Jan 1, 201214 citations

On locality effects

Mihaela Moreno Perdomo, Carolina Petersen

Jan 1, 20160 citations

The Commuting Local Hamiltonian Problem: Relativized Evidence Against BQP-Hardness

Itay Shalit, Mark Zhandry

The commuting local-Hamiltonian (CLH) problem is a restriction of the local-Hamiltonian problem, in which the terms of the Hamiltonian are required to pairwise commute. A long line of work has shown that the problem lies in $\mathsf{NP}$ for certain families of commuting local Hamiltonians. Nevertheless, there has been no formal evidence against the possibility that the general CLH problem is $\mathsf{QMA}$ -complete. CLH is complete for the complexity class $\mathsf{QIMA}$ , defined through quantum verifiers whose local gates commute. Therefore, CLH is $\mathsf{QMA}$ -complete if and only if $\mathsf{QIMA}=\mathsf{QMA}$ . In this work, we introduce a classical-oracle analogue $\mathsf{QIMA}^{\mathcal{O}}$ and construct a classical oracle $\mathcal{O}$ such that $\mathsf{BQP}^{\mathcal{O}}\not\subseteq\mathsf{QIMA}^{\mathcal{O}}$ . Since $\mathsf{BQP}^{\mathcal{O}}\subseteq\mathsf{QMA}^{\mathcal{O}}$ for any classical oracle $\mathcal{O}$ , this implies $\mathsf{QIMA}^{\mathcal{O}}\neq\mathsf{QMA}^{\mathcal{O}}$ for our constructed oracle. Thus, our result provides relativized evidence against the possibility that the general commuting local-Hamiltonian problem is $\mathsf{BQP}$ -hard, and hence also against the possibility that it is $\mathsf{QMA}$ -complete.The commuting local-Hamiltonian (CLH) problem is a restriction of the local-Hamiltonian problem, in which the terms of the Hamiltonian are required to pairwise commute. A long line of work has shown that the problem lies in $\mathsf{NP}$ for certain families of commuting local Hamiltonians. Nevertheless, there has been no formal evidence against the possibility that the general CLH problem is $\mathsf{QMA}$-complete. CLH is complete for the complexity class $\mathsf{QIMA}$, defined through quantum verifiers whose local gates commute. Therefore, CLH is $\mathsf{QMA}$-complete if and only if $\mathsf{QIMA}=\mathsf{QMA}$. In this work, we introduce a classical-oracle analogue $\mathsf{QIMA}^{\mathcal{O}}$ and construct a classical oracle $\mathcal{O}$ such that $\mathsf{BQP}^{\mathcal{O}}\not\subseteq\mathsf{QIMA}^{\mathcal{O}}$. Since $\mathsf{BQP}^{\mathcal{O}}\subseteq\mathsf{QMA}^{\mathcal{O}}$ for any classical oracle $\mathcal{O}$, this implies $\mathsf{QIMA}^{\mathcal{O}}\neq\mathsf{QMA}^{\mathcal{O}}$ for our constructed oracle. Thus, our result provides relativized evidence against the possibility that the general commuting local-Hamiltonian problem is $\mathsf{BQP}$-hard, and hence also against the possibility that it is $\mathsf{QMA}$-complete.

quant-pharXiv:2609.38957Oct 1, 20260 citations

Non-locality

WORLD SCIENTIFIC eBooksMar 1, 20250 citations

\mathsf{NP}

for certain families of commuting local Hamiltonians. Nevertheless, there has been no formal evidence against the possibility that the general CLH problem is

\mathsf{QMA}

-complete. CLH is complete for the complexity class

\mathsf{QIMA}

, defined through quantum verifiers whose local gates commute. Therefore, CLH is

\mathsf{QMA}

-complete if and only if

\mathsf{QIMA}=\mathsf{QMA}

. In this work, we introduce a classical-oracle analogue

\mathsf{QIMA}^{\mathcal{O}}

and construct a classical oracle

\mathcal{O}

such that

\mathsf{BQP}^{\mathcal{O}}\not\subseteq\mathsf{QIMA}^{\mathcal{O}}

. Since

\mathsf{BQP}^{\mathcal{O}}\subseteq\mathsf{QMA}^{\mathcal{O}}

for any classical oracle

\mathcal{O}

, this implies

\mathsf{QIMA}^{\mathcal{O}}\neq\mathsf{QMA}^{\mathcal{O}}

for our constructed oracle. Thus, our result provides relativized evidence against the possibility that the general commuting local-Hamiltonian problem is

\mathsf{BQP}

-hard, and hence also against the possibility that it is

\mathsf{QMA}

-complete.