The number of qubits used by a quantum algorithm will be a crucial computational resource for the foreseeable future. We show how to obtain the classical query complexity for continuous problems. We then establish a simple formula for a lower bound on the qubit complexity in terms of the classical query complexity
Query complexity is a model of computation in which we have to compute a function f(x1,…,xN) of variables xi which can be accessed via queries. The complexity of an algorithm is measured by the number of queries that it makes. Query complexity is widely used for studying quantum algorithms, for two reasons. First, it includes many of the known quantum algorithms (including Grover's quantum search and a key subroutine of Shor's factoring algorithm). Second, one can prove lower bounds on the query complexity, bounding the possible quantum advantage. In the last few years, there have been major advances on several longstanding problems in the query complexity. In this talk, we survey these results and related work, including: - the biggest quantum-vs-classical gap for partial functions (a problem solvable with 1 query quantumly but requiring Ω(N) queries classically); - the biggest quantum-vs-determistic and quantum-vs-probabilistic gaps for total functions (for example, a problem solvable with M queries quantumly but requiring Ω~(M2.5) queries probabilistically); - the biggest probabilistic-vs-deterministic gap for total functions (a problem solvable with M queries probabilistically but requiring Ω~(M2) queries deterministically); - the bounds on the gap that can be achieved for subclasses of functions (for example, symmetric functions); - the connections between query algorithms and approximations by low-degree polynomials.
We reformulate quantum query complexity in terms of inequalities and equations for a set of positive semidefinite matrices. Using the new formulation we: 1) show that the workspace of a quantum computer can be limited to at most n+k qubits (where n and k are the number of input and output bits respectively) without reducing the computational power of the model; 2) give an algorithm that on input the truth table of a partial Boolean function and an integer t runs in time polynomial in the size of the truth table and estimates, to any desired accuracy, the minimum probability of error that can be attained by a quantum query algorithm attempts to evaluate f in t queries; 3) use semidefinite programming duality to formulate a dual SDP P/spl circ/(f, t, /spl epsi/) that is feasible if and only if f cannot be evaluated within error /spl epsi/ by a t-step quantum query algorithm. Using this SDP, we derive a general lower bound for quantum query complexity that encompasses a lower bound method of Ambainis and its generalizations; 4) give an interpretation of a generalized form of branching in quantum computation.
We obtain the strongest separation between quantum and classical query complexity known to date -- specifically, we define a black-box problem that requires exponentially many queries in the classical bounded-error case, but can be solved exactly in the quantum case with a single query (and a polynomial number of auxiliary operations). The problem is simple to define and the quantum algorithm solving it is also simple when described in terms of certain quantum Fourier transforms (QFTs) that have natural properties with respect to the algebraic structures of finite fields. These QFTs may be of independent interest, and we also investigate generalizations of them to noncommutative finite rings.
We have seen in the previous chapters that quantum computers seem to be more powerful than classical computers for certain problems. There are limits on the power of quantum computers, however. Since a classical computer can simulate a quantum computer, a quantum computer can only compute the same set of functions that a classical computer can. The advantage of using a quantum computer is that the amount of resources needed by a quantum algorithm might be much less than what is needed by the best classical algorithm. In Section 9.1 we briefly define some classical and quantum complexity classes and give some relationships between them. Most of the interesting questions relating classical and quantum complexity classes remain open. For example, we do not yet know if a quantum computer is capable of efficiently solving an NP-complete problem (defined later). One can prove upper bounds on the difficulty of a problem by providing an algorithm that solves that problem, and proving that it will work within in a given running time. But how does one prove a lower bound on the computational complexity of a problem? For example, if we wish to find the product of two n-bit numbers, computing the answer requires outputting roughly 2n bits and that requires Ω(n) steps (in any computing model with finite-sized gates). The best-known upper bound for integer multiplication is O(n log n log log n) steps. It has proved extremely difficult to derive non-trivial lower bounds on the computational complexity of a problem. Most of the known non-trivial lower bounds are in the ‘black-box’ model (for both classical and quantum computing), where we only query the input via a ‘black-box’ of a specific form. We discuss the black-box model in more detail in Section 9.2. We then sketch several approaches for proving black-box lower bounds. The first technique has been called the ‘hybrid method’ and was used to prove that quantum searching requires Ω(√n) queries to succeed with constant probability. The second technique is called the ‘polynomial method’. We then describe a technique based on ‘block sensitivity’, and conclude with a technique known as the ‘adversary method’.
We study quantum query complexity under several models of imperfect oracle access, and develop lower bounds through a common framework based on fractional block sensitivity (fbs).
For a negligent oracle that applies the correct query with probability 1−p, we prove a lower bound in terms of fbs(f,0n). We also show, perhaps surprisingly, that negligence need not destroy quantum speedups: any function f can be transformed into a partial function f′ whose negligent query complexity essentially preserves the quantum query complexity of f. This gives partial functions with exponential quantum speedups even under negligent queries, and in particular rules out a general lower bound in terms of fbs(f) for partial functions in this model.
For two other models, we obtain general lower bounds in terms of fbs(f) for all Boolean functions. For hybrid algorithms using Q coherent and C classical queries, we prove the tradeoff C+Q2=Ω(fbs(f)). For an IID dephasing noisy model where each query dephases the query-index register at rate p independently, we prove Ω(pfbs(f)) queries are necessary.
Finally, we introduce a broader family of time-varying dephasing models and identify a variational resource that is always lower bounded by fbs(f). Computing this resource reduces to a convex optimization problem, providing a simple way to derive lower bounds for new noise schedules. As applications, we recover the hybrid and IID dephasing bounds and determine the query complexity of unstructured search when the dephasing rate grows over time.
We study the complexity of quantum query algorithms that make p queries in parallel in each timestep. This model is in part motivated by the fact that decoherence times of qubits are typically small, so it makes sense to parallelize quantum algorithms as much as possible. We show tight bounds for a number of problems, specifically Theta((n/p)^{2/3}) p-parallel queries for element distinctness and Theta((n/p)^{k/(k+1)} for k-sum. Our upper bounds are obtained by parallelized quantum walk algorithms, and our lower bounds are based on a relatively small modification of the adversary lower bound method, combined with recent results of Belovs et al. on learning graphs. We also prove some general bounds, in particular that quantum and classical p-parallel complexity are polynomially related for all total functions f when p is small compared to f's block sensitivity.