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.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Computation, Quantum Theory, and You Scott Aaronson, UC Berkeley Qualifying Exam May 13, 2002.
Advertisements

The Polynomial Method In Quantum and Classical Computing Scott Aaronson (MIT) OPEN PROBLEM.
Quantum Lower Bounds You probably Havent Seen Before (which doesnt imply that you dont know OF them) Scott Aaronson, UC Berkeley 9/24/2002.
Quantum Lower Bound for the Collision Problem Scott Aaronson 1/10/2002 quant-ph/ I was born at the Big Bang. Cool! We have the same birthday.
Quantum Lower Bounds The Polynomial and Adversary Methods Scott Aaronson September 14, 2001 Prelim Exam Talk.
How Much Information Is In Entangled Quantum States? Scott Aaronson MIT |
The Learnability of Quantum States Scott Aaronson University of Waterloo.
Quantum t-designs: t-wise independence in the quantum world Andris Ambainis, Joseph Emerson IQC, University of Waterloo.
Quantum Versus Classical Proofs and Advice Scott Aaronson Waterloo MIT Greg Kuperberg UC Davis | x {0,1} n ?
Quantum Software Copy-Protection Scott Aaronson (MIT) |
Hawking Quantum Wares at the Classical Complexity Bazaar Scott Aaronson (MIT)
The Future (and Past) of Quantum Lower Bounds by Polynomials Scott Aaronson UC Berkeley.
)New Evidence That Quantum Mechanics Is Hard to Simulate on Classical Computers( סקוט אהרונסון )Scott Aaronson( MIT עדויות חדשות שקשה לדמות את מכניקת הקוונטים
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?
How Much Information Is In A Quantum State? Scott Aaronson MIT |
Quantum Double Feature Scott Aaronson (MIT) The Learnability of Quantum States Quantum Software Copy-Protection.
Lower Bounds for Local Search by Quantum Arguments Scott Aaronson (UC Berkeley) August 14, 2003.
An Invitation to Quantum Complexity Theory The Study of What We Cant Do With Computers We Dont Have Scott Aaronson (MIT) QIP08, New Delhi BQP NP- complete.
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 Institut pour l'Étude Avançée Le Principe de la Postselection.
Arthur, Merlin, and Black-Box Groups in Quantum Computing Scott Aaronson (MIT) Or, How Laci Did Quantum Stuff Without Knowing It.
QMA/qpoly PSPACE/poly: De-Merlinizing Quantum Protocols Scott Aaronson University of Waterloo.
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.
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.
New Evidence That Quantum Mechanics Is Hard to Simulate on Classical Computers Scott Aaronson Parts based on joint work with Alex Arkhipov.
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.
Subspace Embeddings for the L1 norm with Applications Christian Sohler David Woodruff TU Dortmund IBM Almaden.
Analysis of Algorithms
How to Factor Quadratics of the Form
Truthful Mechanisms for Combinatorial Auctions with Subadditive Bidders Speaker: Shahar Dobzinski Based on joint works with Noam Nisan & Michael Schapira.
Reductions Complexity ©D.Moshkovitz.
Short seed extractors against quantum storage Amnon Ta-Shma Tel-Aviv University 1.
1 P, NP, and NP-Complete Dr. Ying Lu RAIK 283 Data Structures & Algorithms.
Complexity ©D.Moshkovits 1 Where Can We Draw The Line? On the Hardness of Satisfiability Problems.
Approximate List- Decoding and Hardness Amplification Valentine Kabanets (SFU) joint work with Russell Impagliazzo and Ragesh Jaiswal (UCSD)
1 Complexity ©D.Moshkovitz Cryptography Where Complexity Finally Comes In Handy…
One time-travelling bit is as good as logarithmically many
Foundations of Cryptography Lecture 10 Lecturer: Moni Naor.
Lecture 16: Relativization Umans Complexity Theory Lecturess.
Scott Aaronson (MIT) Forrelation A problem admitting enormous quantum speedup, which I and others have studied under various names over the years, which.
Department of Computer Science & Engineering University of Washington
Scott Aaronson (MIT) Andris Ambainis (U. of Latvia) Forrelation: A Problem that Optimally Separates Quantum from Classical Computing H H H H H H f |0 
CSCI 4325 / 6339 Theory of Computation Zhixiang Chen.
Approximation Algorithms Pages ADVANCED TOPICS IN COMPLEXITY THEORY.
Optimal Proof Systems and Sparse Sets Harry Buhrman, CWI Steve Fenner, South Carolina Lance Fortnow, NEC/Chicago Dieter van Melkebeek, DIMACS/Chicago.
Week 10Complexity of Algorithms1 Hard Computational Problems Some computational problems are hard Despite a numerous attempts we do not know any efficient.
Quantum Computing MAS 725 Hartmut Klauck NTU
Quantum algorithms vs. polynomials and the maximum quantum-classical gap in the query model.
Scott Aaronson (MIT) ThinkQ conference, IBM, Dec. 2, 2015 The Largest Possible Quantum Speedups H H H H H H f |0  g H H H.
Umans Complexity Theory Lectures Lecture 17: Natural Proofs.
Forrelation: A Problem that Optimally Separates Quantum from Classical Computing.
Verification of BosonSampling Devices Scott Aaronson (MIT) Talk at Simons Institute, February 28, 2014.
Comparing Notions of Full Derandomization Lance Fortnow NEC Research Institute With thanks to Dieter van Melkebeek.
1 Introduction to Quantum Information Processing QIC 710 / CS 667 / PH 767 / CO 681 / AM 871 Richard Cleve DC 2117 Lectures
Complexity Theory and Explicit Constructions of Ramsey Graphs Rahul Santhanam University of Edinburgh.
Complexity-Theoretic Foundations of Quantum Supremacy Experiments
Scott Aaronson (MIT) QIP08, New Delhi
Tight Fourier Tails for AC0 Circuits
Introduction to Oracles in Complexity Theory
The Polynomial Hierarchy Enumeration Problems 7.3.3
Oracle Separation of BQP and PH
Stronger Connections Between Circuit Analysis and Circuit Lower Bounds, via PCPs of Proximity Lijie Chen Ryan Williams.
Oracle Separation of BQP and PH
Presentation transcript:

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 only for relational problems… The beast guarding the inner sanctum unmasked: the Generalized Linial-Nisan Conjecture… Where others flee in terror, a Braver Man attacks… A $200 bounty for slaughtering the wounded beast… 1

Quantum Computing: Where Does It Fit? PH P BPP AM NP PP P #P BQP 2 Factoring, discrete log, etc.: In BQP Not known to be in BPP But in NP coNP Could there be a problem in BQP\PH?

First question: can we at least find an oracle A such that BQP A PH A ? Essentially the same as finding a problem in quantum logarithmic time, but not AC 0 Why? Standard correspondence between relativized PH and AC 0 : replace s by OR gates, s by AND gates, and the oracle string by an input of size 2 n Relativization is just the obvious way to address the BQP vs. PH question, not some woo-woo thing People who claim they dont like oracle results really just dont understand them 3

BQP vs. PH: A Timeline Bernstein and Vazirani define BQP They construct an oracle problem, R ECURSIVE F OURIER S AMPLING, that has quantum query complexity n but classical query complexity n (log n) First example where quantum is superpolynomially better! A simple extension yields RFS MA Natural conjecture: RFS PH Alas, we cant even prove RFS AM!

Why do we care whether BQP PH? Does simulating quantum mechanics reduce to search or approximate counting? What other candidates for exponential quantum speedups are therebesides NP-intermediate problems like factoring? Could quantum computers provide exponential speedups even if P=NP? Would a fast quantum algorithm for NP-complete problems collapse the polynomial hierarchy? 5

This Talk 1.We achieve an oracle separation between the relational versions of BQP and PH (FBQP and FBPP PH ) 2.We study a new oracle problemF OURIER C HECKING thats in BQP, but not in BPP, MA, BPP path, SZK... 3.We conjecture that F OURIER C HECKING is not in PH, and prove that this would follow from the Generalized Linial- Nisan Conjecture Original Linial-Nisan Conjecture was proved by Braverman 2009, after being open for 20 years 6

Relational Problems FBPP: Class of relations, R {0,1}* {0,1}*, for which there exists a BPP machine that, given any x, outputs a y such that If we compared FBQP to FP PH, a separation would be trivial! Output an n-bit string with Kolmogorov complexity n/2 FBQP: Same but with quantum Well produce separations where the FBQP machine succeeds with probability 1-1/exp(n), while the FBPP PH machine succeeds with probability at most (say) 99% Note: Amplification not obvious; constant could actually matter! 7

Fourier Sampling Problem Given oracle access to a random Boolean function The Task: Output strings z 1,…,z n, at least 75% of which satisfy and at least 25% of which satisfy where 8

F OURIER S AMPLING Is In BQP Algorithm: H H H H H H f |0 Repeat n times; output whatever you see Distribution over Fourier coefficients Distribution over Fourier coefficients output by quantum algorithm 9

F OURIER S AMPLING Is Not In PH Key Idea: Show that, if we had a constant-depth 2 poly(n) -size circuit C for F OURIER S AMPLING, then we could violate a known AC 0 lower bound, by sneaking a M AJORITY problem into the estimation of some random Fourier coefficient Obvious problem: How do we know C will output the particular s were interested in, thereby revealing anything about ? We dont! (Indeed, theres only a ~1/2 n chance it will) But we have a long time to wait, since our reduction can be nondeterministic! That just adds more layers to the AC 0 circuit 10

Suppose each bit of an N-bit string is 1 with independent probability p. Then any depth-d circuit to decide whether p=½ or p=½+ (with constant bias) must have size If youre here, you can prove this Starting Point for Reduction 11 Well take a circuit that outputs slightly-larger-than-average Fourier coefficients of f, and get a circuit for detecting bias

Alice: Chooses s {0,1} n and b {0,1} uniformly at random 12 The Fourier Guessing Game For each x {0,1} n, sets Bob: Must output a z such that Sends truth table of f to Bob Keeps s,b secret Key Theorem: Regardless of Bobs strategy, In other words, if >1.1, Bob outputs the true s with probability noticeably more than 1/2 n … even if he tries to avoid it!

Finishing the Proof Let A be a random oracle View A as encoding a random Boolean function f n :{0,1} n {-1,1} for each n Let R be the relational problem where, on input 0 n, youre asked to output z 1,…,z n, at least 75% of which satisfy and at least 25% of which satisfy Clearly 13 On the other hand, standard diagonalization tricks imply

Decision Version: F OURIER C HECKING Given oracle access to two Boolean functions Decide whether (i) f,g are drawn from the uniform distribution U, or (ii) f,g are drawn from the following forrelated distribution F: pick a random unit vector then let 14

F OURIER C HECKING Is In BQP H H H H H H f |0 g H H H Probability of observing |0 n : 15

Intuition: F OURIER C HECKING Shouldnt Be In PH Why? For any individual s, computing the Fourier coefficient is a #P-complete problem f and g being forrelated is an extremely global property: conditioning on a polynomial number of f(x) and g(y) values should reveal almost nothing about it But how to formalize and prove that? 16

Crucial Definition: A distribution D is -almost k-wise independent if for all k-terms C, Theorem: For all k, the forrelated distribution F is O(k 2 /2 n/2 )-almost k-wise independent Proof: A few pages of Gaussian integrals, then a discretization step A k-term is a product of k literals of the form x i or 1-x i A distribution D over {0,1} N is k-wise independent if for all k-terms C, 17 Approximation is multiplicative, not additive … thats important!

Bazzi07 proved the depth-2 case 18 Linial-Nisan Conjecture (1990) with weaker parameters that suffice for us : Let f:{0,1} n {0,1} be computed by a circuit of size and depth O(1). Then for all n (1) -wise independent distributions D, Generalized Linial-Nisan Conjecture: Let f be computed by a circuit of size and depth O(1). Then for all 1/n (1) -almost n (1) -wise independent distributions D, Razborov08 dramatically simplified Bazzis proofFinally, Braverman09 proved the whole thingAlas, we need the…

Low-Fat Sandwich Conjecture: Let f:{0,1} n {0,1} be computed by a circuit of size and depth O(1). Then there exist polynomials p l,p u :R n R, of degree n o(1), such that 19 Theorem (Bazzi): Low-Fat Sandwich Conjecture Generalized Linial-Nisan Conjecture (Without the low-fat condition,Sandwich Conjecture Linial-Nisan Conjecture) (i) Sandwiching. (ii) Approximation. (iii) Low-Fat. p l,p u can be written as where

We know how to prove constant-depth lower bounds! So why is BQP A PH A so much harder than (say) PP A PH A ? Because known techniques for showing a function f has no small constant-depth circuits, also involve (directly or indirectly) showing that f isnt approximated by a low-degree polynomial And this is a problem because… Lemma (Beals et al. 1998): Every Boolean function f that has a T-query quantum algorithm, also has a degree-2T real polynomial p such that |p(x)-f(x)| for all x {0,1} n Example: The following degree-4 polynomial distinguishes the uniform distribution over f,g from the forrelated one: 20

But this polynomial solves F OURIER C HECKING only by exploiting massive cancellations between positive and negative terms (Not coincidentally, the central feature of quantum algorithms!) You might conjecture that if f AC 0, then f is approximated not merely by a low-degree polynomial, but by a reasonable, classical-looking onewith some bound on the coefficients that prevents massive cancellations And thats exactly what the Low-Fat Sandwich Conjecture says! Such a low-fat approximation of AC 0 circuits would be useful for independent reasons in learning theory 21

Open Problems Prove the Generalized Linial-Nisan Conjecture! Yields an oracle A such that BQP A PH A Prove Generalized L-N even for the special case of DNFs. Yields an oracle A such that BQP A AM A Is there a Boolean function f:{0,1} n {-1,1} thats well- approximated in L 2 -norm by a low-degree real polynomial, but not by a low-degree low-fat polynomial? Can we instantiate F OURIER C HECKING by an explicit (unrelativized) problem? More generally, evidence for/against BQP PH in the real world? 22 $100$200