Document Open Access Logo

Quantum Polynomial Hierarchies: Karp-Lipton, Error Reduction, and Lower Bounds

Authors Avantika Agarwal, Sevag Gharibian , Venkata Koppula, Dorian Rudolph

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.MFCS.2024.7.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.76 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Avantika Agarwal
  • David R. Cheriton School of Computer Science and Institute for Quantum Computing, University of Waterloo, Canada
Sevag Gharibian
  • Department of Computer Science and Institute for Photonic Quantum Systems (PhoQS), Paderborn University, Germany
Venkata Koppula
  • Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Delhi, India
Dorian Rudolph
  • Department of Computer Science and Institute for Photonic Quantum Systems (PhoQS), Paderborn University, Germany

Funding

  • Gharibian, Sevag: Supported by the DFG under grant numbers 450041824 and 432788384, the BMBF within the funding program "Quantum Technologies - from Basic Research to Market" via project PhoQuant (grant number 13N16103), and the project "PhoQC" from the programme "Profilbildung 2020", an initiative of the Ministry of Culture and Science of the State of Northrhine Westphalia.
  • Koppula, Venkata: Supported by the Pankaj Gupta Fellowship at IIT Delhi.

Acknowledgements

We thank Chirag Falor, Shu Ge, Anand Natarajan, Sabee Grewal, and Justin Yirka for the pleasure of productive discussions during the concurrent development of our works. This work was completed in part while Avantika Agarwal was a student at Indian Institute of Technology Delhi and in part while visiting Paderborn University.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Avantika Agarwal, Sevag Gharibian, Venkata Koppula, and Dorian Rudolph. Quantum Polynomial Hierarchies: Karp-Lipton, Error Reduction, and Lower Bounds. In 49th International Symposium on Mathematical Foundations of Computer Science (MFCS 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 306, pp. 7:1-7:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.MFCS.2024.7

Abstract

The Polynomial-Time Hierarchy (PH) is a staple of classical complexity theory, with applications spanning randomized computation to circuit lower bounds to "quantum advantage" analyses for near-term quantum computers. Quantumly, however, despite the fact that at least four definitions of quantum PH exist, it has been challenging to prove analogues for these of even basic facts from PH. This work studies three quantum-verifier based generalizations of PH, two of which are from [Gharibian, Santha, Sikora, Sundaram, Yirka, 2022] and use classical strings (QCPH) and quantum mixed states (QPH) as proofs, and one of which is new to this work, utilizing quantum pure states (QPHpure) as proofs. We first resolve several open problems from [GSSSY22], including a collapse theorem and a Karp-Lipton theorem for QCPH. Then, for our new class QPHpure, we show one-sided error reduction QPHpure, as well as the first bounds relating these quantum variants of PH, namely QCPH ⊆ QPHpure ⊆ EXP^PP.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Quantum complexity theory
  • Theory of computation → Quantum complexity theory
Keywords
  • Quantum complexity
  • polynomial hierarchy

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads
    0
    Metadata Views

Related Versions

References

  1. Scott Aaronson and Alex Arkhipov. The Computational Complexity of Linear Optics. In Forty-Third Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '11, pages 333-342, New York, NY, USA, 2011. ACM. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1993636.1993682.
  2. Scott Aaronson, Alexandru Cojocaru, Alexandru Gheorghiu, and Elham Kashefi. On the implausibility of classical client blind quantum computing. CoRR, abs/1704.08482, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1704.08482.
  3. Scott Aaronson and Andrew Drucker. A full characterization of quantum advice. SIAM J. Comput., 43(3):1131-1183, 2014. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/110856939.
  4. Scott Aaronson, DeVon Ingram, and William Kretschmer. The Acrobatics of BQP. In Shachar Lovett, editor, 37th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2022), volume 234 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 20:1-20:17, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2022. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2022.20.
  5. Avantika Agarwal, Sevag Gharibian, Venkata Koppula, and Dorian Rudolph. Quantum polynomial hierarchies: Karp-lipton, error reduction, and lower bounds, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.01633.
  6. Dorit Aharonov, Michael Ben-Or, Fernando G.S.L. Brandão, and Or Sattath. The Pursuit of Uniqueness: Extending Valiant-Vazirani Theorem to the Probabilistic and Quantum Settings. Quantum, 6:668, March 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2022-03-17-668.
  7. Lennart Bittel, Sevag Gharibian, and Martin Kliesch. The Optimal Depth of Variational Quantum Algorithms Is QCMA-Hard to Approximate. In Amnon Ta-Shma, editor, 38th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2023), volume 264 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 34:1-34:24, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2023. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2023.34.
  8. Adam Bouland, Bill Fefferman, Chinmay Nirkhe, and Umesh Vazirani. On the complexity and verification of quantum random circuit sampling. Nature Physics, 15(2):159-163, February 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41567-018-0318-2.
  9. Michael J. Bremner, Richard Jozsa, and Dan J. Shepherd. Classical simulation of commuting quantum computations implies collapse of the polynomial hierarchy. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 467(2126):459-472, August 2010. URL: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2010.0301.
  10. Chirag Falor, Shu Ge, and Anand Natarajan. A collapsible polynomial hierarchy for promise problems. CoRR, abs/2311.12228, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2311.12228.
  11. Merrick Furst, James B. Saxe, and Michael Sipser. Parity, circuits, and the polynomial-time hierarchy. Mathematical systems theory, 17(1):13-27, December 1984. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01744431.
  12. Sevag Gharibian and Julia Kempe. Hardness of Approximation for Quantum Problems. In Artur Czumaj, Kurt Mehlhorn, Andrew Pitts, and Roger Wattenhofer, editors, Automata, Languages, and Programming, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 387-398, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2012. Springer. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31594-7_33.
  13. Sevag Gharibian, Miklos Santha, Jamie Sikora, Aarthi Sundaram, and Justin Yirka. Quantum generalizations of the polynomial hierarchy with applications to QMA(2). computational complexity, 31(2):13, September 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00037-022-00231-8.
  14. Oded Goldreich. On Promise Problems: A Survey. In Oded Goldreich, Arnold L. Rosenberg, and Alan L. Selman, editors, Theoretical Computer Science: Essays in Memory of Shimon Even, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 254-290. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/11685654_12.
  15. Sabee Grewal and Justin Yirka. The entangled quantum polynomial hierarchy collapses, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2401.01453.
  16. Aram W. Harrow and Ashley Montanaro. Testing Product States, Quantum Merlin-Arthur Games and Tensor Optimization. Journal of the ACM, 60(1):3:1-3:43, February 2013. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/2432622.2432625.
  17. Sandy Irani, Anand Natarajan, Chinmay Nirkhe, Sujit Rao, and Henry Yuen. Quantum Search-To-Decision Reductions and the State Synthesis Problem. In Shachar Lovett, editor, 37th Computational Complexity Conference (CCC 2022), volume 234 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 5:1-5:19, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2022. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.CCC.2022.5.
  18. J. Lockhart and C. E. González-Guillén. Quantum State Isomorphism. arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.09622, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1709.09622.
  19. Rahul Jain and John Watrous. Parallel Approximation of Non-interactive Zero-sum Quantum Games. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, CCC 2009, Paris, France, 15-18 July 2009, pages 243-253. IEEE Computer Society, 2009. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/CCC.2009.26.
  20. Richard M. Karp and Richard J. Lipton. Some Connections Between Nonuniform and Uniform Complexity Classes. In Twelfth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '80, pages 302-309, New York, NY, USA, 1980. ACM. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/800141.804678.
  21. Hirotada Kobayashi, Keiji Matsumoto, and Tomoyuki Yamakami. Quantum Certificate Verification: Single versus Multiple Quantum Certificates, October 2001. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0110006.
  22. Hirotada Kobayashi, Keiji Matsumoto, and Tomoyuki Yamakami. Quantum merlin-arthur proof systems: Are multiple merlins more helpful to arthur? Chic. J. Theor. Comput. Sci., 2009, 2009. URL: http://cjtcs.cs.uchicago.edu/articles/2009/3/contents.html.
  23. Clemens Lautemann. BPP and the polynomial hierarchy. Information Processing Letters, 17(4):215-217, November 1983. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0020-0190(83)90044-3.
  24. Florian Mintert, Marek Kuś, and Andreas Buchleitner. Concurrence of Mixed Multipartite Quantum States. Physical Review Letters, 95(26):260502, December 2005. URL: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.260502.
  25. Harumichi Nishimura and Tomoyuki Yamakami. Polynomial time quantum computation with advice. Information Processing Letters, 90(4):195-204, May 2004. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipl.2004.02.005.
  26. Michael Sipser. A complexity theoretic approach to randomness. In Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, STOC '83, pages 330-335, New York, NY, USA, December 1983. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/800061.808762.
  27. Mehdi Soleimanifar and John Wright. Testing matrix product states, January 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.01824.
  28. Larry J. Stockmeyer. The polynomial-time hierarchy. Theoretical Computer Science, 3(1):1-22, 1976. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3975(76)90061-X.
  29. Seinosuke Toda. PP is as Hard as the Polynomial-Time Hierarchy. SIAM Journal on Computing, 20(5):865-877, October 1991. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/0220053.
  30. L. G. Valiant and V. V. Vazirani. NP is as easy as detecting unique solutions. Theoretical Computer Science, 47:85-93, January 1986. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-3975(86)90135-0.
  31. Tomoyuki Yamakami. Quantum NP and a Quantum Hierarchy. In Ricardo Baeza-Yates, Ugo Montanari, and Nicola Santoro, editors, Foundations of Information Technology in the Era of Network and Mobile Computing: IFIP 17th World Computer Congress emdash TC1 Stream / 2nd IFIP International Conference on Theoretical Computer Science (TCS 2002) August 25endash 30, 2002, Montréal, Québec, Canada, IFIP emdash The International Federation for Information Processing, pages 323-336. Springer US, Boston, MA, 2002. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-35608-2_27.
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Imprint Privacy Contact