One time-travelling bit is as good as logarithmically many

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Closed Timelike Curves Make Quantum and Classical Computing Equivalent
Advertisements

Quantum Computing: Whats It Good For? Scott Aaronson Computer Science Department, UC Berkeley January 10,
A Theory of Isolatability Scott Aaronson Andrew Drucker MIT.
The Learnability of Quantum States Scott Aaronson University of Waterloo.
Are Quantum States Exponentially Long Vectors? Scott Aaronson (who did and will have an affiliation) (did: IASwill: Waterloo) Distributions over n-bit.
Quantum Software Copy-Protection Scott Aaronson (MIT) |
The Power of Quantum Advice Scott Aaronson Andrew Drucker.
Lower Bounds for Local Search by Quantum Arguments Scott Aaronson.
Quantum Computing and Dynamical Quantum Models ( quant-ph/ ) Scott Aaronson, UC Berkeley QC Seminar May 14, 2002.
Limitations of Quantum Advice and One-Way Communication Scott Aaronson UC Berkeley IAS Useful?
Quantum Double Feature Scott Aaronson (MIT) The Learnability of Quantum States Quantum Software Copy-Protection.
BQP/qpoly EXP/poly Scott Aaronson UC Berkeley. BQP/qpoly Class of languages recognized by a bounded-error polytime quantum algorithm, with a polysize.
A Full Characterization of Quantum Advice Scott Aaronson Andrew Drucker.
New Evidence That Quantum Mechanics Is Hard to Simulate on Classical Computers Scott Aaronson Parts based on joint work with Alex Arkhipov.
Pretty-Good Tomography Scott Aaronson MIT. Theres a problem… To do tomography on an entangled state of n qubits, we need exp(n) measurements Does this.
How to Solve Longstanding Open Problems In Quantum Computing Using Only Fourier Analysis Scott Aaronson (MIT) For those who hate quantum: The open problems.
Scott Aaronson BQP und PH A tale of two strong-willed complexity classes… A 16-year-old quest to find an oracle that separates them… A solution at lastbut.
Scott Aaronson Institut pour l'Étude Avançée Le Principe de la Postselection.
BQP PSPACE NP P PostBQP Limits on Efficient Computation in the Physical World Scott Aaronson MIT.
Computational Intractability As A Law of Physics
Oracles Are Subtle But Not Malicious Scott Aaronson University of Waterloo.
The Equivalence of Sampling and Searching Scott Aaronson MIT.
The Computational Complexity of Linear Optics Scott Aaronson and Alex Arkhipov MIT vs.
When Qubits Go Analog A Relatively Easy Problem in Quantum Information Theory Scott Aaronson (MIT)
Scott Aaronson (MIT) BQP and PH A tale of two strong-willed complexity classes… A 16-year-old quest to find an oracle that separates them… A solution at.
Quantum Computing with Noninteracting Bosons
Solving Hard Problems With Light Scott Aaronson (Assoc. Prof., EECS) Joint work with Alex Arkhipov vs.
Scott Aaronson (MIT) Based on joint work with John Watrous (U. Waterloo) BQP PSPACE Quantum Computing With Closed Timelike Curves.
Generating Random Spanning Trees Sourav Chatterji Sumit Gulwani EECS Department University of California, Berkeley.
Subspace Embeddings for the L1 norm with Applications Christian Sohler David Woodruff TU Dortmund IBM Almaden.
Pseudorandomness from Shrinkage David Zuckerman University of Texas at Austin Joint with Russell Impagliazzo and Raghu Meka.
Parallel Repetition of Two Prover Games Ran Raz Weizmann Institute and IAS.
Complexity Theory Lecture 6
University of Queensland
INHERENT LIMITATIONS OF COMPUTER PROGRAMS CSci 4011.
2 4 Theorem:Proof: What shall we do for an undirected graph?
Approximate List- Decoding and Hardness Amplification Valentine Kabanets (SFU) joint work with Russell Impagliazzo and Ragesh Jaiswal (UCSD)
THE QUANTUM COMPLEXITY OF TIME TRAVEL Scott Aaronson (MIT)
Phase Transitions of PP-Complete Satisfiability Problems D. Bailey, V. Dalmau, Ph.G. Kolaitis Computer Science Department UC Santa Cruz.
CS151 Complexity Theory Lecture 7 April 20, 2004.
Phase in Quantum Computing. Main concepts of computing illustrated with simple examples.
Submitted by : Estrella Eisenberg Yair Kaufman Ohad Lipsky Riva Gonen Shalom.
Complexity 19-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov More Probabilistic Algorithms.
Complexity ©D. Moshkovitz 1 And Randomized Computations The Polynomial Hierarchy.
The moment generating function of random variable X is given by Moment generating function.
1 Recap (I) n -qubit quantum state: 2 n -dimensional unit vector Unitary op: 2 n  2 n linear operation U such that U † U = I (where U † denotes the conjugate.
1 Quantum NP Dorit Aharonov & Tomer Naveh Presented by Alex Rapaport.
Quantum Computing MAS 725 Hartmut Klauck NTU
Ryan O’Donnell includes joint work with A. C. Cem Say for Manuel Blum, on his Magic77 th birthday.
1 Introduction to Quantum Information Processing CS 467 / CS 667 Phys 467 / Phys 767 C&O 481 / C&O 681 Richard Cleve DC 3524 Course.
1 Introduction to Quantum Information Processing CS 467 / CS 667 Phys 667 / Phys 767 C&O 481 / C&O 681 Richard Cleve DC 653 Lecture.
1 Introduction to Quantum Information Processing QIC 710 / CS 667 / PH 767 / CO 681 / AM 871 Richard Cleve DC 2117 Lectures
Scott Aaronson (UT Austin)
Complexity-Theoretic Foundations of Quantum Supremacy Experiments
Scott Aaronson (UT Austin)
New Characterizations in Turnstile Streams with Applications
Quantum Computing: What’s It Good For?
Scott Aaronson (UT Austin)
3rd Lecture: QMA & The local Hamiltonian problem (CNT’D)
Complexity-Theoretic Foundations of Quantum Supremacy Experiments
Quantum Computation and Information Chap 1 Intro and Overview: p 28-58
Classical Algorithms from Quantum and Arthur-Merlin Communication Protocols Lijie Chen MIT Ruosong Wang CMU.
Complexity-Theoretic Foundations of Quantum Supremacy Experiments
CS21 Decidability and Tractability
The Polynomial Hierarchy
Closed Timelike Curves Make Quantum and Classical Computing Equivalent
Oracle Separation of BQP and PH
On Derandomizing Algorithms that Err Extremely Rarely
Explicit near-Ramanujan graphs of every degree
Oracle Separation of BQP and PH
Presentation transcript:

One time-travelling bit is as good as logarithmically many Ryan O’Donnell A. C. Cem Say Carnegie Mellon University Boğaziçi University

Time Travel Apparently it’s possible! Apparently it’s not inconsistent with the laws of General Relativity. This was first proven by Kurt Gödel in 1949.

Time Travel Apparently it’s not inconsistent with the laws of General Relativity. David Deutsch: If it exists, could we use it for computational speedups? You need to define the model carefully! [Deu91,Bac04,Aar05,AW09]

x ∈ {0,1}n w-input (w+1)-output randomized circuit Closed Timelike Curve (CTC) x ∈ {0,1}n poly(n)-time algorithm w “CTC bits” output bit Cx w-input (w+1)-output randomized circuit w bits “wide”

Cx defines a 2w-state Markov Chain Closed Timelike Curve (CTC) x ∈ {0,1}n poly(n)-time algorithm output bit Cx Cx defines a 2w-state Markov Chain w-input (w+1)-output randomized circuit w bits “wide”

The Deutschian Model The CTC (time-travelling) bits are automagically set to the stationary distribution of the Markov Chain defined by circuit Cx.

Remark 1: We say “the” stationary distribution, though some annoying Markov Chains (“reducible” ones) don’t have a unique stationary distribution. Dealing with this annoyance is a major but boring technical component of paper. So let’s ignore it for the talk.

Remark 2: Deutsch et al. allowed quantum circuits and time-travelling qubits. Markov Chain Quantum Channel We only worry about classical, randomized computation.

“Time travel”-free summary Given access to a CTC of width w… On input x, algorithm writes a randomized circuit Cx implementing transitions of 2w-state Markov Chain. Then it freely gets one sample from the chain’s stationary distribution to help it decide if x ∈ L. output J∈[2w] ₹ ₹ Cx ₹ ₹ input i∈[2w]

Prior Work Aaronson & Watrous (2009) showed that w = poly(n) CTC bits are super-powerful: “Everything collapses to PSPACE.” BPP + poly(n) CTC bits = PSPACE = BQP + poly(n) CTC qubits

Prior Work Poly(n) time-travelling bits: how unrealistic!  Need to find a new wormhole whenever input length gets larger. [AW09] main open problem: Computational power of “narrow” CTCs? E.g.: What is BPP + 1 CTC bits? + 2 CTC bits? + 3 CTC bits?

Prior Work: an example fact [Bru03,Bac04,Aar05,AW09,SY12]: NP ⊆ BPP + 1 CTC bit I.e.: You can solve SAT if you can set up a 2-state Markov Chain and get a sample from its stationary distribution.

Stationary Distribution: NP ⊆ BPP + 1 CTC bit On input ϕ, a formula with n variables… Construct Cϕ implementing this 2-state chain: On input state i ∈ {0,1}… With probability 2–n2, output state J = 0. Else… Else output state J = i. Stationary Distribution: 100% on 0. 1 1−2–n2 2–n2

Stationary Distribution: NP ⊆ BPP + 1 CTC bit On input ϕ, a formula with n variables… Construct Cϕ implementing this 2-state chain: On input state i ∈ {0,1}… With probability 2–n2, output state J = 0. Else pick x∈{0,1}n randomly. If x satisfies ϕ, output state J = 1. Else output state J = i. Stationary Distribution: 100% on 0. 1 1 1−2–n2 2–n2

One sample from stationary dist. decides SAT whp. NP ⊆ BPP + 1 CTC bit Stationary Distribution: 100% on 0. 1 ϕ is unsatisfiable: 2–n2 ≳ 2–n Stationary Distribution: 99.99% on 1. 1 ϕ is satisfiable: 2–n2 One sample from stationary dist. decides SAT whp.

1 CTC bit ≡ Aaronson’s postselection. NP ⊆ BPP + 1 CTC bit coNP ⊆ BPP + 1 CTC bit Theorem [Say–Yakaryılmaz ’12]: 1 CTC bit ≡ Aaronson’s postselection. Hence: BQP + 1 CTC bit = “PostBQP” = PP [Aar05] & BPP + 1 CTC bit = “PostBPP” = BPPpath

What is BPPpath ?? 1. [HHT93]: L ∈ BPPpath ⇔ ∃ NTM M such that x∈L ⇒ #accM(x) ≥ 2#rejM(x) x∉L ⇒ #rejM(x) ≥ 2#accM(x) 2. [AFFKK01]: Paper about stock market. (Unaware of [HHT93].) Defined postselection, wrote CBPP (instead of PostBPP) for class BPP with 2-bit outputs R, S: answer is R, conditioned on S = 1. [BGM03] noticed CBPP = BPPpath (independently so did [Aar05]). 3. [YS13]: Equivalently, PostBPP = “RestartingBPP”. 4. [OS15]: BPPpath = P||ApproxCounting = P||ApproxCounting[2] 5. [SU05]: Standard derand. assumption ⇒ BPPpath = P||NP = PNP[log]

Prior Work Summary BPP + 1 CTC bit = BPPpath = P||NP (probably) BPP + 1 CTC bit = BPPpath = P||NP BPP + 2 CTC bits = ??? BPP + 3 CTC bits = ??? BPP + poly(n) CTC bits = PSPACE Maybe a hierarchy, like PNP[1] ⊊ PNP[2] ⊊ PNP[3] ⊊ …?

This Work Theorem [O–Say ’14]: BPP + w CTC bits = BPP + 1 CTC bit = BPPpath for all constant w, even up to w = O(log n). A sample from the stationary distribution of a (circuit-defined) 2-state Markov chain is as useful as one from a poly(n)-state chain.

3-Slide Proof Suffices / ~equivalent to show: ₹ output J∈[n] input i∈[n] output J∈[n] ₹ Given randomized circuit C of poly(n) size implementing transitions of n-state Markov chain M, you can sample from M’s stationary distribution in BPPpath. (Remark: When C is a black box, it’s a problem studied by Lovász–Winkler, Propp–Wilson, …)

Markov Chain Tree Theorem: 3-Slide Proof What is M’s stationary distribution? Markov Chain Tree Theorem: (“The most rediscovered result in probability theory” —Aldous) Let G be underlying digraph for M. Then stationary probability on state r is… ∑ arborescences Tr in G with root r ∏ arcs (i,j) in Tr PrM[i→j] ∑ rooted arborescences T in G ∏ arcs (i,j) in T PrM[i→j]

3-Slide Proof ∑ ∏ PrM[i→j] ∑ ∏ PrM[i→j] arborescences Tr in G with root r ∏ arcs (i,j) in Tr PrM[i→j] ∑ rooted arborescences T in G ∏ arcs (i,j) in T PrM[i→j] If you stare at it for a while, it’s kind of obvious that you can sample from this distribution in PostBPP = BPPpath. 

of implicitly given w-qubit quantum channel? An open problem What is the power of 1 CTC qubit? Or 2, 3, 4, … CTC qubits? Equivalently, what is the complexity of approximating the stationary density matrix of implicitly given w-qubit quantum channel?

of implicitly given w-qubit quantum channel? An open problem closed What is the power of 1 CTC qubit? Or 2, 3, 4, … CTC qubits? Equivalently, what is the complexity of approximating the stationary density matrix of implicitly given w-qubit quantum channel?

= BQP + 1 CTC classical bit An open problem closed Theorem [O–Say ’15]: BQP + w CTC qubits = BQP + 1 CTC classical bit = PostBQP = PP for all constant w, even up to w = O(log n).

Thanks! Any questions?