On quantum and classical space-bounded processes with algebraic transition amplitudes

We define a class of stochastic processes based on evolutions and measurements of quantum systems, and consider the complexity of predicting their long term behavior. It is shown that a very general class of decision problems regarding these stochastic processes can be efficiently solved classically in the space-bounded case. The following corollaries are implied by our main result for any space-constructible space bound s satisfying s(n)=/spl Omega/(log n): (i) any space O(s) uniform family of quantum circuit acting on s qubits and consisting of unitary gates and measurement gates defined in a typical way by matrices of algebraic numbers can be simulated by an unbounded error space O(s) ordinary (i.e., fair-coin flipping) probabilistic Turing machine, and hence by space O(s) uniform classical (deterministic) circuits of depth O(s/sup 2/) and size 2/sup 0/(s); (2) any quantum Turing machine running in space s, having arbitrary algebraic transition amplitudes, allowing unrestricted measurements during its computation, and having no restrictions on running time can be simulated by a space O(s) ordinary probabilistic Turing machine in the unbounded error setting. We also obtain the following classical result: any unbounded error probabilistic Turing machine running in space s that allows algebraic probabilities and algebraic cut-point can be simulated by a space O(s) ordinarily probabilistic Turing machine with cut-point 1/2. Our technique for handling algebraic numbers in the above simulations may be of independent interest. It is shown that any real algebraic number can be accurately approximated by a ratio of GapL functions.

[1]  Lance Fortnow,et al.  Complexity limitations on quantum computation , 1999, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[2]  Lov K. Grover,et al.  Quantum computation , 1999, Proceedings Twelfth International Conference on VLSI Design. (Cat. No.PR00013).

[3]  D. DiVincenzo,et al.  Problem of equilibration and the computation of correlation functions on a quantum computer , 1998, quant-ph/9810063.

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

[5]  Michael E. Saks,et al.  Randomization and derandomization in space-bounded computation , 1996, Proceedings of Computational Complexity (Formerly Structure in Complexity Theory).

[6]  Hermann Jung.  On Probabilistic Time and Space , 1985, ICALP.

[7]  D. Bruß,et al.  Optimal universal and state-dependent quantum cloning , 1997, quant-ph/9705038.

[8]  Alexander Graham,et al.  Kronecker Products and Matrix Calculus: With Applications , 1981 .

[9]  I. Isaacs.  Algebra, a graduate course , 1994 .

[10]  Umesh V. Vazirani,et al.  Quantum complexity theory , 1993, STOC.

[11]  C. A. Rogers.  LECTURES ON DIOPHANTINE APPROXIMATIONS , 1964 .

[12]  L. Fortnow.  Counting complexity , 1998 .

[13]  Masaki Nakanishi,et al.  Ordered Quantum Branching Programs Are More Powerful than Ordered Probabilistic Branching Programs under a Bounded-Width Restriction , 2000, COCOON.

[14]  Andrew Chi-Chih Yao,et al.  Quantum Circuit Complexity , 1993, FOCS.

[15]  M. Nielsen,et al.  Reversible quantum operations and their application to teleportation , 1996, quant-ph/9608001.

[16]  Stephen A. Fenner,et al.  Determining acceptance possibility for a quantum computation is hard for the polynomial hierarchy , 1998, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences.

[17]  Martin Sauerhoff,et al.  Complexity theoretical results for randomized branching programs , 1999 .

[18]  A. Kitaev.  Quantum computations: algorithms and error correction , 1997 .

[19]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Quantum circuits with mixed states , 1998, STOC '98.

[20]  Leslie G. Valiant,et al.  The Complexity of Computing the Permanent , 1979, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[21]  Marek Karpinski,et al.  On Computational Power of Quantum Branching Programs , 2001, FCT.

[22]  Allan Borodin,et al.  Parallel Computation for Well-Endowed Rings and Space-Bounded Probabilistic Machines , 1984, Inf. Control..

[23]  Eric Allender,et al.  Relationships Among PL, #L, and the Determinant , 1996, RAIRO Theor. Informatics Appl..

[24]  Eric Allender,et al.  Relationships among PL, #L, and the determinant , 1994, Proceedings of IEEE 9th Annual Conference on Structure in Complexity Theory.

[25]  Christoph Meinel,et al.  Modified Branching Programs and Their Computational Power , 1989, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[26]  Peter W. Shor,et al.  Polynomial-Time Algorithms for Prime Factorization and Discrete Logarithms on a Quantum Computer , 1995, SIAM Rev..

[27]  Carme Àlvarez,et al.  A Very Hard log-Space Counting Class , 1993, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[28]  Charles R. Johnson,et al.  Matrix analysis , 1985, Statistical Inference for Engineers and Data Scientists.