Quantum search-to-decision reductions and the state synthesis problem

It is a useful fact in classical computer science that many search problems are reducible to decision problems; this has led to decision problems being regarded as the de facto computational task to study in complexity theory. In this work, we explore search-to-decision reductions for quantum search problems, wherein a quantum algorithm makes queries to a classical decision oracle to output a desired quantum state. In particular, we focus on search-to-decision reductions for QMA, and show that there exists a quantum polynomial-time algorithm that can generate a witness for a QMA problem up to inverse polynomial precision by making one query to a PP decision oracle. We complement this result by showing that QMA-search does not reduce to QMA-decision in polynomial-time, relative to a quantum oracle. We also explore the more general state synthesis problem, in which the goal is to efficiently synthesize a target state by making queries to a classical oracle encoding the state. We prove that there exists a classical oracle with which any quantum state can be synthesized to inverse polynomial precision using only one oracle query and to inverse exponential precision using two oracle queries. This answers an open question of Aaronson [Aar16], who presented a state synthesis algorithm that makes O(n) queries to a classical oracle to prepare an n-qubit state, and asked if the query complexity could be made sublinear. *irani@ics.uci.edu †anandn@mit.edu ‡nirkhe@cs.berkeley.edu §sujit@mit.edu ¶hyuen@cs.columbia.edu

[1]  Debbie W. Leung,et al.  Quantum data hiding , 2002, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[2]  Bill Fefferman,et al.  The importance of the spectral gap in estimating ground-state energies , 2020, ArXiv.

[3]  Mikhail N. Vyalyi,et al.  Classical and Quantum Computation , 2002, Graduate studies in mathematics.

[4]  Henry Yuen,et al.  Interactive Proofs for Synthesizing Quantum States and Unitaries , 2021, ITCS.

[5]  Dorit Aharonov,et al.  The Pursuit For Uniqueness: Extending Valiant-Vazirani Theorem to the Probabilistic and Quantum Settings preliminary version , 2008 .

[6]  Bill Fefferman,et al.  Quantum Merlin Arthur with Exponentially Small Gap , 2016, ArXiv.

[7]  Chinmay Nirkhe,et al.  Approximate Low-Weight Check Codes and Circuit Lower Bounds for Noisy Ground States , 2018, ICALP.

[8]  D. Aharonov,et al.  Fast-forwarding of Hamiltonians and exponentially precise measurements , 2016, Nature Communications.

[9]  A. Jamiołkowski.  Linear transformations which preserve trace and positive semidefiniteness of operators , 1972 .

[10]  Ewout van den Berg.  A simple method for sampling random Clifford operators , 2021, QCE.

[11]  Patrick Rall.  Faster Coherent Quantum Algorithms for Phase, Energy, and Amplitude Estimation , 2021, Quantum.

[12]  S. Lloyd,et al.  Quantum Algorithm Providing Exponential Speed Increase for Finding Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors , 1998, quant-ph/9807070.

[13]  Man-Duen Choi.  Completely positive linear maps on complex matrices , 1975 .

[14]  Chris Marriott,et al.  Quantum Arthur–Merlin games , 2004, Proceedings. 19th IEEE Annual Conference on Computational Complexity, 2004..

[15]  Greg Kuperberg,et al.  Quantum versus Classical Proofs and Advice , 2006, Twenty-Second Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC'07).

[16]  S. Bobkov,et al.  One-dimensional empirical measures, order statistics, and Kantorovich transport distances , 2019, Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society.

[17]  Julia Kempe,et al.  The Complexity of the Local Hamiltonian Problem , 2004, FSTTCS.

[18]  F. Hiai,et al.  The semicircle law, free random variables, and entropy , 2006 .

[19]  Scott Aaronson,et al.  Open Problems Related to Quantum Query Complexity , 2021, ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing.

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