Toward Instance-Optimal State Certification With Incoherent Measurements

We revisit the basic problem of quantum state certification: given copies of unknown mixed state ρ ∈ Cd×d and the description of a mixed state σ, decide whether σ = ρ or ‖σ − ρ‖tr ≥ ε. When σ is maximally mixed, this is mixedness testing, and it is known that Ω(d/ε) copies are necessary, where the exact exponent depends on the type of measurements the learner can make [OW15, BCL20], and in many of these settings there is a matching upper bound [OW15, BOW19, BCL20]. Can one avoid this d dependence for certain kinds of mixed states σ, e.g. ones which are approximately low rank? More ambitiously, does there exist a simple functional f : Cd×d → R≥0 for which one can show that Θ(f(σ)/ε) copies are necessary and sufficient for state certification with respect to any σ? Such instance-optimal bounds are known in the context of classical distribution testing, e.g. [VV17]. Here we give the first bounds of this nature for the quantum setting, showing (up to log factors) that the copy complexity for state certification using nonadaptive incoherent measurements is essentially given by the copy complexity for mixedness testing times the fidelity between σ and the maximally mixed state. Surprisingly, our bound differs substantially from instance optimal bounds for the classical problem, demonstrating a qualitative difference between the two settings. This work was supported in part by NSF Award 2103300, NSF CAREER Award CCF-1453261, NSF Large CCF-1565235, and Ankur Moitra’s ONR Young Investigator Award. Some of this work was done while the author was working at Microsoft Quantum. Supported by NSF grant FET1909310 and ARO grant W911NF2110001. This material is based upon work supported by the National Science Foundation under grant numbers listed above. Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation (NSF). ar X iv :2 10 2. 13 09 8v 2 [ qu an tph ] 1 0 N ov 2 02 1

[1]  Yi-Kai Liu,et al.  Direct fidelity estimation from few Pauli measurements. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[2]  Minimax Estimation of the $L_1$ Distance , 2017, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[3]  Yanjun Han,et al.  Minimax estimation of the L1 distance , 2016, 2016 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT).

[4]  Hsin-Yuan Huang,et al.  Exponential Separations Between Learning With and Without Quantum Memory , 2021, 2021 IEEE 62nd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[5]  R. Kueng,et al.  Models of Quantum Complexity Growth , 2019, PRX Quantum.

[6]  Stephen Becker,et al.  Quantum state tomography via compressed sensing. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[7]  Ryan O'Donnell,et al.  Efficient quantum tomography , 2015, STOC.

[8]  J. Eisert,et al.  Reliable quantum certification of photonic state preparations , 2014, Nature Communications.

[9]  Oded Goldreich,et al.  Introduction to Property Testing , 2017 .

[10]  Vladislav Voroninski Quantum Tomography From Few Full-Rank Observables , 2013, ArXiv.

[11]  C. Tracy,et al.  Introduction to Random Matrices , 1992, hep-th/9210073.

[12]  Alon Orlitsky,et al.  25th Annual Conference on Learning Theory Competitive Classification and Closeness Testing , 2022 .

[13]  Ronald de Wolf,et al.  A Survey of Quantum Property Testing , 2013, Theory Comput..

[14]  John Preskill,et al.  Information-theoretic bounds on quantum advantage in machine learning , 2021, Physical review letters.

[15]  Sample-optimal tomography of quantum states , 2016, STOC.

[16]  Ryan O'Donnell,et al.  Efficient quantum tomography II , 2015, STOC.

[17]  Alon Orlitsky,et al.  Competitive Closeness Testing , 2011, COLT.

[18]  Ryan O'Donnell,et al.  Quantum state certification , 2017, STOC.

[19]  D. Gross,et al.  Quantum homeopathy works: Efficient unitary designs with a system-size independent number of non-Clifford gates , 2020, 2002.09524.

[20]  A. Montanaro Weak Multiplicativity for Random Quantum Channels , 2011, Communications in Mathematical Physics.

[21]  Daniel M. Kane,et al.  A New Approach for Testing Properties of Discrete Distributions , 2016, 2016 IEEE 57th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[22]  Clément L. Canonne,et al.  A Survey on Distribution Testing: Your Data is Big. But is it Blue? , 2020, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[23]  Holger Rauhut,et al.  Low rank matrix recovery from rank one measurements , 2014, ArXiv.

[24]  C. Pouet Nonparametric Goodness-of-Fit Testing Under Gaussian Models , 2004 .

[25]  Sebastien Bubeck,et al.  Entanglement is Necessary for Optimal Quantum Property Testing , 2020, 2020 IEEE 61st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[26]  Clément L. Canonne,et al.  Distribution Testing Lower Bounds via Reductions from Communication Complexity , 2017, Computational Complexity Conference.

[27]  M. Meckes,et al.  Spectral measures of powers of random matrices , 2012, 1210.2681.

[28]  Steven T. Flammia,et al.  Quantum tomography via compressed sensing: error bounds, sample complexity and efficient estimators , 2012, 1205.2300.

[29]  M. Nussbaum,et al.  Asymptotic Error Rates in Quantum Hypothesis Testing , 2007, Communications in Mathematical Physics.

[30]  Jordan S. Cotler,et al.  Quantum algorithmic measurement , 2021, Nature Communications.

[31]  Gregory Valiant,et al.  An Automatic Inequality Prover and Instance Optimal Identity Testing , 2014, 2014 IEEE 55th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[32]  S. Barnett,et al.  Quantum state discrimination , 2008, 0810.1970.

[33]  David Poulin,et al.  Practical characterization of quantum devices without tomography. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[34]  Liam Paninski,et al.  A Coincidence-Based Test for Uniformity Given Very Sparsely Sampled Discrete Data , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[35]  Joonwoo Bae,et al.  Quantum state discrimination and its applications , 2015, 1707.02571.

[36]  Fuzhen Zhang The Schur complement and its applications , 2005 .

[37]  Xiaodi Wu,et al.  Sample-Optimal Tomography of Quantum States , 2015, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[38]  Ryan O'Donnell,et al.  Quantum Spectrum Testing , 2015, Communications in Mathematical Physics.

[39]  B. Collins,et al.  Integration with Respect to the Haar Measure on Unitary, Orthogonal and Symplectic Group , 2004, math-ph/0402073.