Quantum State Complexity of Formal Languages

In this extended abstract, our notion of state complexity concerns the minimal amount of descriptive information necessary for a finite automaton to determine whether given fixed-length strings belong to a target language. This serves as a descriptional complexity measure for languages with respect to input length. In particular, we study the minimal number of inner states of quantum finite automata, whose tape heads may move freely in all directions and which conduct a projective measurement at every step, to recognize given languages. Such a complexity measure is referred to as the quantum state complexity of languages. We demonstrate upper and lower bounds on the quantum state complexity of languages on various types of quantum finite automata. By inventing a notion of timed crossing sequence, we also establish a general lower-bound on quantum state complexity in terms of approximate matrix rank. As a consequence, we show that bounded-error 2qfa’s running in expected subexponential time cannot, in general, simulate logarithmic-space deterministic Turing machines.

[1]  John Watrous,et al.  Space-Bounded Quantum Complexity , 1999, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[2]  A. C. Cem Say,et al.  Succinctness of two-way probabilistic and quantum finite automata , 2009, Discret. Math. Theor. Comput. Sci..

[3]  Harumichi Nishimura,et al.  An application of quantum finite automata to interactive proof systems , 2009, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[4]  John Watrous,et al.  On the power of quantum finite state automata , 1997, Proceedings 38th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[5]  Troy Lee,et al.  Lower Bounds in Communication Complexity , 2009, Found. Trends Theor. Comput. Sci..

[6]  James P. Crutchfield,et al.  Quantum automata and quantum grammars , 2000, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[7]  Andris Ambainis,et al.  Dense quantum coding and quantum finite automata , 2002, JACM.

[8]  Harumichi Nishimura,et al.  Polynomial time quantum computation with advice , 2003, Inf. Process. Lett..

[9]  Andris Ambainis,et al.  On the Class of Languages Recognizable by 1-Way Quantum Finite Automata , 2001, STACS.

[10]  Rusins Freivalds,et al.  Amount of nonconstructivity in deterministic finite automata , 2010, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[11]  John E. Mayfield Minimal history, a theory of plausible explanation , 2007, Complex..

[12]  Andris Ambainis,et al.  1-way quantum finite automata: strengths, weaknesses and generalizations , 1998, Proceedings 39th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No.98CB36280).

[13]  Maris Ozols,et al.  Improved constructions of mixed state quantum automata , 2009, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[14]  Alex Brodsky,et al.  Characterizations of 1-Way Quantum Finite Automata , 2002, SIAM J. Comput..

[15]  Carlo Mereghetti,et al.  Note on the Succinctness of Deterministic, Nondeterministic, Probabilistic and Quantum Finite Automata , 2001, RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl..

[16]  Tomoyuki Yamakami,et al.  One-way reversible and quantum finite automata with advice , 2012, Inf. Comput..

[17]  Ilya Dumer Covering Spheres with Spheres , 2007, Discret. Comput. Geom..

[18]  John Watrous,et al.  On the complexity of simulating space-bounded quantum computations , 2004, computational complexity.

[19]  Markus Holzer,et al.  Automata That Take Advice , 1995, MFCS.

[20]  Matthias Krause Geometric Arguments Yield Better Bounds for Threshold Circuits and Distributed Computing , 1996, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[21]  Shenggen Zheng,et al.  On the state complexity of semi-quantum finite automata , 2014, RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl..