Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Machine Learning
Towards Optimal Separations between Quantum and Randomized Query Complexities
arXiv
Authors: Avishay Tal
Year
2019
Paper ID
39539
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
218
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The query model offers a concrete setting where quantum algorithms are provably superior to randomized algorithms. Beautiful results by Bernstein-Vazirani, Simon, Aaronson, and others presented partial Boolean functions that can be computed by quantum algorithms making much fewer queries compared to their randomized analogs. To date, separations of O(1) vs. sqrt{N} between quantum and randomized query complexities remain the state-of-the-art (where N is the input length), leaving open the question of whether O(1) vs. N1/2+Ω(1) separations are possible? We answer this question in the affirmative. Our separating problem is a variant of the Aaronson-Ambainis k-fold Forrelation problem. We show that our variant: (1) Can be solved by a quantum algorithm making 2O(k) queries to the inputs. (2) Requires at least Ω\(N2(k-1\)/(3k-1)) queries for any randomized algorithm. For any constant varepsilon>0, this gives a O(1) vs. N2/3-varepsilon separation between the quantum and randomized query complexities of partial Boolean functions. Our proof is Fourier analytical and uses new bounds on the Fourier spectrum of classical decision trees, which could be of independent interest. Looking forward, we conjecture that the Fourier bounds could be further improved in a precise manner, and show that such conjectured bounds imply optimal O(1) vs. N1-varepsilon separations between the quantum and randomized query complexities of partial Boolean functions.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Machine Learning research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2019 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The query model offers a concrete setting where quantum algorithms are provably superior to randomized algorithms.
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.