Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Uniformity testing when you have the source code
arXiv
Authors: Clément L. Canonne, Robin Kothari, Ryan O'Donnell
Year
2024
Paper ID
37033
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
112
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We study quantum algorithms for verifying properties of the output probability distribution of a classical or quantum circuit, given access to the source code that generates the distribution. We consider the basic task of uniformity testing, which is to decide if the output distribution is uniform on [d] or ε-far from uniform in total variation distance. More generally, we consider identity testing, which is the task of deciding if the output distribution equals a known hypothesis distribution, or is ε-far from it. For both problems, the previous best known upper bound was O\(min\{d1/3/ε2,d1/2/ε\}\). Here we improve the upper bound to O\(min\{d1/3/ε4/3, d1/2/ε\}\), which we conjecture is optimal.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2024 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We study quantum algorithms for verifying properties of the output probability distribution of a classical or quantum circuit, given access to the source code that generates...
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.