De Finetti theorems and PCP conjectures Aram Harrow (MIT) DAMTP, 26 Mar 2013 based on arXiv:1210.6367 + arXiv:13??.???? joint work with Fernando Brandão.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Power of Unentanglement
Advertisements

The Learnability of Quantum States Scott Aaronson University of Waterloo.
Quantum Versus Classical Proofs and Advice Scott Aaronson Waterloo MIT Greg Kuperberg UC Davis | x {0,1} n ?
The Future (and Past) of Quantum Lower Bounds by Polynomials Scott Aaronson UC Berkeley.
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.
Parallel Repetition of Two Prover Games Ran Raz Weizmann Institute and IAS.
Extracting Randomness From Few Independent Sources Boaz Barak, IAS Russell Impagliazzo, UCSD Avi Wigderson, IAS.
Local Hamiltonians in Quantum Computation Funding: Slovak Research and Development Agency, contract No. APVV , European Project QAP 2004-IST- FETPI-15848,
Limitations for Quantum PCPs Fernando G.S.L. Brandão University College London Based on joint work arXiv: with Aram Harrow MIT CEQIP 2014.
Gillat Kol joint work with Ran Raz Locally Testable Codes Analogues to the Unique Games Conjecture Do Not Exist.
On Combinatorial vs Algebraic Computational Problems Boaz Barak – MSR New England Based on joint works with Benny Applebaum, Guy Kindler, David Steurer,
AM With Multiple Merlins Scott Aaronson MIT Scott Aaronson (MIT) Dana Moshkovitz (MIT) Russell Impagliazzo (UCSD)
Separable states, unique games and monogamy Aram Harrow (MIT) TQC 2013 arXiv: based on work with Boaz Barak (Microsoft) Fernando Brandão (UCL)
Quantum Information Theory as a Proof Technique Fernando G.S.L. Brandão ETH Zürich With B. Barak (MSR), M. Christandl (ETH), A. Harrow (MIT), J. Kelner.
Monogamy of Quantum Entanglement Fernando G.S.L. Brandão ETH Zürich Princeton EE Department, March 2013.
The Unique Games Conjecture with Entangled Provers is False Julia Kempe Tel Aviv University Oded Regev Tel Aviv University Ben Toner CWI, Amsterdam.
Constraint Satisfaction over a Non-Boolean Domain Approximation Algorithms and Unique Games Hardness Venkatesan Guruswami Prasad Raghavendra University.
Quantum Data Hiding Challenges and Opportunities Fernando G.S.L. Brandão Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil Based on joint work with M. Christandl,
Tsuyoshi Ito (McGill U) Hirotada Kobayashi (NII & JST) Keiji Matsumoto (NII & JST) QIP 2009, January 12–16, 2009 arXiv:
Limitations for Quantum PCPs Fernando G.S.L. Brandão University College London Based on joint work arXiv: with Aram Harrow MIT Simons Institute,
Derandomized parallel repetition theorems for free games Ronen Shaltiel, University of Haifa.
Boris Altshuler Columbia University Anderson Localization against Adiabatic Quantum Computation Hari Krovi, Jérémie Roland NEC Laboratories America.
Product-State Approximations to Quantum Groundstates Fernando G.S.L. Brandão Imperial -> UCL Based on joint work with A. Harrow Paris, April 2013.
Product-state approximations to quantum ground states Fernando Brandão (UCL) Aram Harrow (MIT) arXiv:
Introduction to PCP and Hardness of Approximation Dana Moshkovitz Princeton University and The Institute for Advanced Study 1.
Gillat Kol joint work with Ran Raz Locally Testable Codes Analogues to the Unique Games Conjecture Do Not Exist.
Two Query PCP with Sub-constant Error Dana Moshkovitz Princeton University Ran Raz Weizmann Institute 1.
PCPs and Inapproximability Introduction. My T. Thai 2 Why Approximation Algorithms  Problems that we cannot find an optimal solution.
New Variants of the Quantum de Finetti Theorem with Applications Fernando G.S.L. Brandão ETH Zürich Based on joint work with Aram Harrow Arxiv:
Stronger Subadditivity Fernando G.S.L. Brandão University College London -> Microsoft Research Coogee 2015 based on arXiv: with Aram Harrow Jonathan.
Complexity 15-1 Complexity Andrei Bulatov Hierarchy Theorem.
Julia Kempe CNRS & LRI, Univ. of Paris-Sud Alexei Kitaev Caltech Oded Regev Tel-Aviv University FSTTCS, Chennai, December 18 th, 2004 The Complexity of.
1 Dorit Aharonov School of Computer Science and Engineering The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel Israel Quantum Hamiltonian Complexity Complexity What.
Computational Complexity, Physical Mapping III + Perl CIS 667 March 4, 2004.
CS151 Complexity Theory Lecture 13 May 11, CS151 Lecture 132 Outline Natural complete problems for PH and PSPACE proof systems interactive proofs.
CS151 Complexity Theory Lecture 15 May 18, CS151 Lecture 152 Outline IP = PSPACE Arthur-Merlin games –classes MA, AM Optimization, Approximation,
1 Quantum NP Dorit Aharonov & Tomer Naveh Presented by Alex Rapaport.
1 Slides by Asaf Shapira & Michael Lewin & Boaz Klartag & Oded Schwartz. Adapted from things beyond us.
Quantum Hamiltonian Complexity Fernando G.S.L. Brandão ETH Zürich Based on joint work with A. Harrow and M. Horodecki Quo Vadis Quantum Physics, Natal.
Quantum Information Theory in Quantum Hamiltonian Complexity Aram Harrow (MIT) Simons Institute 16 Jan 2014.
Dana Moshkovitz, MIT Joint work with Subhash Khot, NYU.
Information-Theoretic Techniques in Many-Body Physics Day 1 Fernando G.S.L. Brandão UCL Based on joint work with A. Harrow and M. Horodecki New Mathematical.
A Counterexample to Strong Parallel Repetition Ran Raz Weizmann Institute.
Correlation testing for affine invariant properties on Shachar Lovett Institute for Advanced Study Joint with Hamed Hatami (McGill)
Faithful Squashed Entanglement Fernando G.S.L. Brandão 1 Matthias Christandl 2 Jon Yard 3 1. Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Brazil 2. ETH Zürich,
Monogamy of non- signalling correlations Aram Harrow (MIT) Simons Institute, 27 Feb 2014 based on joint work with Fernando Brandão (UCL) arXiv:
Merlin-Arthur Games and Stoquastic Hamiltonians B.M. Terhal, IBM Research based on work with Bravyi, Bessen, DiVincenzo & Oliveira. quant-ph/ &
Quantum Information Theory: Present Status and Future Directions Julia Kempe CNRS & LRI, Univ. de Paris-Sud, Orsay, France Newton Institute, Cambridge,
Quantum Computing MAS 725 Hartmut Klauck NTU
Barriers in Hamiltonian Complexity Umesh V. Vazirani U.C. Berkeley.
Surya Bhupatiraju MIT PRIMES May 20 th, 2012 On the Complexity of the Marginal Consistency Problem.
The Complexity of Quantum Entanglement Fernando G.S.L. Brandão ETH Zürich Based on joint work with M. Christandl and J. Yard Journees Deferation de Reserche.
1/19 Minimizing weighted completion time with precedence constraints Nikhil Bansal (IBM) Subhash Khot (NYU)
A generalization of quantum Stein’s Lemma Fernando G.S.L. Brandão and Martin B. Plenio Tohoku University, 13/09/2008.
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.
SDP hierarchies and quantum states Aram Harrow (MIT)Simons Institute
Operator norms & covering nets Fernando Brandão (UCL/MSR) Aram Harrow (MIT) QIP arXiv:
1 2 Introduction In this lecture we’ll cover: Definition of PCP Prove some classical hardness of approximation results Review some recent ones.
Boaz Barak (MSR New England) Fernando G.S.L. Brandão (Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais) Aram W. Harrow (University of Washington) Jonathan Kelner (MIT)
A counterexample for the graph area law conjecture Dorit Aharonov Aram Harrow Zeph Landau Daniel Nagaj Mario Szegedy Umesh Vazirani arXiv:
Limitations on quantum PCPs Aram Harrow based on joint work with Fernando G.S.L. Brandão (ETHZ->Imperial)
Yuan Zhou Carnegie Mellon University Joint works with Boaz Barak, Fernando G.S.L. Brandão, Aram W. Harrow, Jonathan Kelner, Ryan O'Donnell and David Steurer.
Quantum information and the monogamy of entanglement Aram Harrow MIT (UCL until Jan 2015)
Quantum Approximate Markov Chains and the Locality of Entanglement Spectrum Fernando G.S.L. Brandão Caltech Seefeld 2016 based on joint work with Kohtaro.
Fernando G.S.L. Brandão and Martin B. Plenio
The complexity of the Separable Hamiltonian Problem
Quantum de Finetti theorems for local measurements
Introduction to PCP and Hardness of Approximation
Classical Algorithms from Quantum and Arthur-Merlin Communication Protocols Lijie Chen MIT Ruosong Wang CMU.
On The Quantitative Hardness of the Closest Vector Problem
Presentation transcript:

de Finetti theorems and PCP conjectures Aram Harrow (MIT) DAMTP, 26 Mar 2013 based on arXiv: arXiv:13??.???? joint work with Fernando Brandão (UCL)

Symmetric States is permutation symmetric in the B subsystems if for every permutation π, … B n-1 BnBn A B1B1 B2B2 B4B4 B3B3 BnBn A B1B1 B2B2 … B3B3 B4B4 =

Quantum de Finetti Theorem builds on work by [Størmer ’69], [Hudson, Moody ’76], [Raggio, Werner ’89] [Caves, Fuchs, Schack ‘01], [Koenig, Renner ‘05] Proof idea: Perform an informationally complete measurement of n-k B systems. Theorem [Christandl, Koenig, Mitchison, Renner ‘06] Given a state symmetric under exchange of B 1 …B n, there exists µ such that Applications: information theory: tomography, QKD, hypothesis testing algorithms: approximating separable states, mean-field theory

Quantum de Finetti Theorem as Monogamy of Entanglement separable = ∞-extendable 100-extendable all quantum states (= 1-extendable) 2-extendable Algorithms: Can search/optimize over n-extendable states in time d O(n). Question: How close are n-extendable states to separable states? Definition: ρ AB is n-extendable if there exists an extension with for each i.

Quantum de Finetti theorem Difficulty: 1. Parameters are, in many cases, too weak. 2. They are also essentially tight. Theorem [Christandl, Koenig, Mitchison, Renner ‘06] Given a state symmetric under exchange of B 1 …B n, there exists µ such that Way forward: 1. Change definitions (of error or i.i.d.) 2. Obtain better scaling

relaxed/improved versions Two examples known: 1. Exponential de Finetti Theorem: [Renner ’07] error term exp(-Ω(n-k)). Target state convex combination of “almost i.i.d.” states. 2. measure error in 1-LOCC norm [Brandão, Christandl, Yard ’10] For error ε and k=1, requires n ~ ε -2 log|A|. This talk improved de Finetti theorems for local measurements

main idea use information theory  I(A:B t |B 1 …B t-1 ) ≤ log(|A|)/n for some t≤n. repeatedly uses chain rule: I(A:BC) = I(A:B) + I(A:C|B) log |A| ≥ I(A:B 1 …B n ) = I(A:B 1 ) + I(A:B 2 |B 1 ) + … + I(A:B n |B 1 …B n-1 ) If B 1 …B n were classical, then we would have distribution on B 1 …B t-1 ≈product state (cf. Pinsker ineq.) Question: How to make B 1…n classical? ≈separable

Answer: measure! Fix a measurement M:B  Y. I(A:B t |B 1 …B t-1 ) ≤ εfor the measured state (id ⊗ M ⊗ n )(ρ). Then ρ AB is hard to distinguish from σ ∈ Sep if we first apply (id ⊗ M) || (id ⊗ M)(ρ-σ)|| ≤ small for some σ ∈ Sep. Cor: setting Λ=id recovers [Brandão, Christandl, Yard ’10] 1-LOCC result. Theorem Given a state symmetric under exchange of B 1 …B n, and {Λ r } a collection of operations from A  X,

the proof Friendly advice: You can find these equations in beware: X is quantum

advantages/extensions 1.Simpler proof and better constants 2.Bound depends on |X| instead of |A| (A can be ∞-dim) 3.Applies to general non-signalling distributions 4.There is a multipartite version (multiply error by k) 5.Efficient “rounding” (i.e. σ is explicit) 6.Symmetry isn’t required Theorem Given a state symmetric under exchange of B 1 …B n, and {Λ r } a collection of operations from A  X,

applications nonlocal games Adding symmetric provers “immunizes” against entanglement / non-signalling boxes. (Caveat: needs uncorrelated questions.) Conjectured improvement would yield NP-hardness for 4 players. BellQMA(poly) = QMA Proves Chen-Drucker SAT ∈ BellQMA log(n) (√n) protocol is optimal. pretty good tomography [Aaronson ’06] on permutation-symmetric states (instead of product states) convergence of Lasserre hierarchy for polynomial optimization see also for connections to small-set expansion

non-local games r x y q |Ãi|Ãi

r x y q |Ãi|Ãi Non-Local Game G(π, V): π(r, q): distribution on R x Q V(x, y|r, q): predicate on X x Y x R x Q Classical value: Quantum value: sup over measurements and |Ãi of unbounded dim

previous results [Bell ’64] There exist G with ω e (G) > ω c (G) PCP theorem [Arora et al ‘98 and Raz ’98] For any ε>0, it is NP-complete to determine whether ω c 1-ε(even for XOR games). [Cleve, Høyer, Toner, Watrous ’04] Poly-time algorithm to compute ω e for two-player XOR games. [Kempe, Kobayashi, Matsumoto, Toner, Vidick ’07] NP-hard to distinguish ω e (G) = 1 from ω e (G) < 1-1/poly(|G|) [Ito-Vidick ‘12 and Vidick ’13] NP-hard to distinguish ω e (G) > 1-ε from ω e (G) < ½ +ε for three-player XOR games

immunizing against entanglement r x y3y3 q |Ãi|Ãi y1y1 q y2y2 q y4y4 q

complexity of non-local games Cor: Let G(π,V) be a 2-player free game with questions in R×Q and answers in X×Y, where π=π R ⊗ π Q. Then there exists an (n+1)-player game G’(π’,V’) with questions in R×(Q 1 ×…×Q n ) and answers in X×(Y 1 ×…×Y n ), such that Implies: 1.an exp(log(|X|) log(|Y|)) algo for approximating ω c 2.ω e is hard to approximate for free games.

why free games? Theorem Given a state symmetric under exchange of B 1 …B n, and {Λ r } a collection of operations from A  X, ∃σ∃σ ∀q∀q for most r ρ and σ give similar answers Conjecture Given a state symmetric under exchange of B 1 …B n, and {Λ r } a collection of operations from A  X, Would give alternate proof of Vidick result. FALSE for non-signalling distributions.

QCC…C de Finetti Theorem If is permutation symmetric then for every k there exists µ s.t. Applications QMA = QMA with multiple provers and Bell measurements convergence of sum-of-squares hierarchy for polynomial optimization Aaronson’s pretty-good tomography with symmetric states

de Finetti without symmetry Theorem [Christandl, Koenig, Mitchison, Renner ‘05] Given a state, there exists µ such that Theorem For ρ a state on A 1 A 2 …A n and any t ≤ n-k, there exists m≤t such that where σ is the state resulting from measuring j 1,…,j m and obtaining outcomes a 1,…,a m.

PCP theorem Classical k-CSPs: Given constraints C={C i }, choose an assignment σ mapping n variables to an alphabet ∑ to minimize the fraction of unsatisfied constraints. UNSAT(C) = min σ Pr i [σ fails to satisfy C i ] Example: 3-SAT: NP-hard to determine if UNSAT(C)=0 or UNSAT(C) ≥ 1/n 3 PCP (probabilistically checkable proof) theorem: NP-hard to determine if UNSAT(C)=0 or UNSAT(C) ≥ 0.1

Local Hamiltonian problem LOCAL-HAM: k-local Hamiltonian ground-state energy estimation Let H = i H i, with each H i acting on k qubits, and ||H i ||≤1 i.e. H i = H i,1 ⊗ H i,2 ⊗ … ⊗ H i,n, with #{j : H i,j ≠I} ≤ k Goal: Estimate E 0 = min ψ hÃ|H|Ãi = min ½ tr Hρ Hardness Includes k-CSPs, so ±0.1 error is NP-hard by PCP theorem. QMA-complete with 1/poly(n) error [Kitaev ’99] QMA = quantum proof, bounded-error polytime quantum verifier Quantum PCP conjecture LOCAL-HAM is QMA-hard for some constant error ε>0. Can assume k=2 WLOG [Bravyi, DiVincenzo, Terhal, Loss ‘08]

high-degree in NP Idea: use product states E 0 ≈ min tr H(Ã 1 ­ … ­ Ã n ) – O(d/D 1/8 ) Theorem It is NP-complete to estimate E 0 for n qudits on a D-regular graph to additive error » d / D 1/8. By constrast 2-CSPs are NP-hard to approximate to error |§| ® /D ¯ for any ®,¯>0

intuition: mean-field theory 1-D 2-D 3-D ∞-D

Proof of PCP no-go theorem 1.Measure εn qudits and condition on outcomes. Incur error ε. 2.Most pairs of other qudits would have mutual information ≤ log(d) / εD if measured. 3.Thus their state is within distance d 3 (log(d) / εD) 1/2 of product. 4.Witness is a global product state. Total error is ε + d 3 (log(d) / εD) 1/2. Choose ε to balance these terms.

other applications PTAS for planar graphs Builds on [Bansal, Bravyi, Terhal ’07] PTAS for bounded-degree planar graphs PTAS for Dense k-local Hamiltonians improves on 1/d k-1 +εapproximation from [Gharibian-Kempe ’11] Algorithms for graphs with low threshold rank Extends result of [Barak, Raghavendra, Steurer ’11]. run-time for ε-approximation is exp(log(n) poly(d/ε) ⋅ #{eigs of adj. matrix ≥ poly(ε/d)})

open questions Is QMA(2) = QMA? Is SAT ∈ QMA √n (2) 1,1/2 optimal? (Would follow from replacing 1-LOCC with SEP-YES.)Is QMA(2) = QMA? Is SAT ∈ QMA √n (2) 1,1/2 optimal? (Would follow from replacing 1-LOCC with SEP-YES.) Can we reorder our quantifiers to get a dimension-independent bound for correlated local measurements?Can we reorder our quantifiers to get a dimension-independent bound for correlated local measurements? (Especially if your name is Graeme Mitchison) Representation theory results -> de Finetti theorems What about the other direction?(Especially if your name is Graeme Mitchison) Representation theory results -> de Finetti theorems What about the other direction? The usual de Finetti questions:The usual de Finetti questions: better counter-examplesbetter counter-examples how much does it help to add PPT constraints?how much does it help to add PPT constraints? The unique games conjecture is ≈equivalent to determining whether max {tr Mρ:ρ ∈ Sep} is ≥c 1 /d or ≤c 2 /d for c 1 ≫ c 2 ≫ 1 and M a LO measurement. Can we get an algorithm for this using de Finetti?The unique games conjecture is ≈equivalent to determining whether max {tr Mρ:ρ ∈ Sep} is ≥c 1 /d or ≤c 2 /d for c 1 ≫ c 2 ≫ 1 and M a LO measurement. Can we get an algorithm for this using de Finetti? Weak additivity? The Quantum PCP conjecture?Weak additivity? The Quantum PCP conjecture? arXiv: