Eliminating Intermediate Measurements Using Pseudorandom Generators

Authors Uma Girish, Ran Raz

Thumbnail PDF


  • Filesize: 0.71 MB
  • 18 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Uma Girish
  • Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA
Ran Raz
  • Princeton University, Princeton, NJ, USA


We thank anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and for pointing out the simulation of intermediate measurements using reset operations.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Uma Girish and Ran Raz. Eliminating Intermediate Measurements Using Pseudorandom Generators. In 13th Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference (ITCS 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 215, pp. 76:1-76:18, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)


We show that quantum algorithms of time T and space S ≥ log T with unitary operations and intermediate measurements can be simulated by quantum algorithms of time T ⋅ poly (S) and space {O}(S⋅ log T) with unitary operations and without intermediate measurements. The best results prior to this work required either Ω(T) space (by the deferred measurement principle) or poly(2^S) time [Bill Fefferman and Zachary Remscrim, 2021; Uma Girish et al., 2021]. Our result is thus a time-efficient and space-efficient simulation of algorithms with unitary operations and intermediate measurements by algorithms with unitary operations and without intermediate measurements. To prove our result, we study pseudorandom generators for quantum space-bounded algorithms. We show that (an instance of) the INW pseudorandom generator for classical space-bounded algorithms [Russell Impagliazzo et al., 1994] also fools quantum space-bounded algorithms. More precisely, we show that for quantum space-bounded algorithms that have access to a read-once tape consisting of random bits, the final state of the algorithm when the random bits are drawn from the uniform distribution is nearly identical to the final state when the random bits are drawn using the INW pseudorandom generator. This result applies to general quantum algorithms which can apply unitary operations, perform intermediate measurements and reset qubits.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Pseudorandomness and derandomization
  • Theory of computation → Quantum complexity theory
  • quantum algorithms
  • intermediate measurements
  • deferred measurement
  • pseudorandom generator
  • INW generator


  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    PDF Downloads


  1. Noga Alon, Oded Goldreich, Johan Håstad, and René Peralta. Simple constructions of almost k-wise independent random variables. In FOCS, 1990. Google Scholar
  2. László Babai, Noam Nisan, and Mario Szegedy. Multiparty protocols and logspace-hard pseudorandom sequences (extended abstract). In STOC, 1989. Google Scholar
  3. Charles H. Bennett. Time/space trade-offs for reversible computation. SIAM J. Comput., 18(4), 1989. Google Scholar
  4. Mark Braverman, Anup Rao, Ran Raz, and Amir Yehudayoff. Pseudorandom generators for regular branching programs. In FOCS, 2010. Google Scholar
  5. Bill Fefferman and Zachary Remscrim. Eliminating intermediate measurements in space-bounded quantum computation. In STOC, 2021. Google Scholar
  6. Serge Fehr and Christian Schaffner. Randomness extraction via delta -biased masking in the presence of a quantum attacker. In TCC, 2008. Google Scholar
  7. Anat Ganor and Ran Raz. Space pseudorandom generators by communication complexity lower bounds. In APPROX/RANDOM, 2014. Google Scholar
  8. Uma Girish, Ran Raz, and Wei Zhan. Quantum logspace algorithm for powering matrices with bounded norm. In ICALP, 2021. Google Scholar
  9. Russell Impagliazzo, Noam Nisan, and Avi Wigderson. Pseudorandomness for network algorithms. In STOC, 1994. Google Scholar
  10. Rolf Landauer. Irreversibility and heat generation in the computing process. IBM J. Res. Dev., 1961. Google Scholar
  11. Robert Y. Levine and Alan T. Sherman. A note on bennett’s time-space tradeoff for reversible computation. Technical report, University of Maryland at College Park, USA, 1990. Google Scholar
  12. Rudolf Lidl and Harald Niederreiter. Introduction to Finite Fields and their Applications. Cambridge University Press, 2 edition, 1994. Google Scholar
  13. Raghu Meka, Omer Reingold, and Avishay Tal. Pseudorandom generators for width-3 branching programs. In STOC, 2019. Google Scholar
  14. Joseph Naor and Moni Naor. Small-bias probability spaces: Efficient constructions and applications. In STOC, 1990. Google Scholar
  15. Noam Nisan. Psuedorandom generators for space-bounded computation. In STOC, 1990. Google Scholar
  16. Noam Nisan and David Zuckerman. Randomness is linear in space. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 1996. Google Scholar
  17. Nicholas Pippenger. On simultaneous resource bounds (preliminary version). In FOCS, 1979. Google Scholar
  18. Ran Raz and Omer Reingold. On recycling the randomness of states in space bounded computation. In STOC, 1999. Google Scholar
  19. Omer Reingold, Thomas Steinke, and Salil P. Vadhan. Pseudorandomness for regular branching programs via fourier analysis. In APPROX/RANDOM, 2013. Google Scholar
  20. Renato Renner. Security of Quantum Key Distribution. PhD thesis, ETH Zurich, September 2005. Available at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0512258. Google Scholar
  21. Yaoyun Shi. Both toffoli and controlled-not need little help to do universal quantum computing. Quantum Info. Comput., 2003. Google Scholar
  22. Joachim von zur Gathen and Jürgen Gerhard. Modern Computer Algebra (3. ed.). Cambridge University Press, 2013. Google Scholar
  23. John Watrous. Space-bounded quantum complexity. J. Comput. Syst. Sci., 59, 1999. Google Scholar
  24. Andrew Chi-Chih Yao. Quantum circuit complexity. In FOCS, 1993. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail