Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Algorithms
Conjugate queries can help
arXiv
Authors: Ewin Tang, John Wright, Mark Zhandry
Year
2025
Paper ID
51565
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
219
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We give a natural problem over input quantum oracles U which cannot be solved with exponentially many black-box queries to U and Udagger, but which can be solved with constant many queries to U and U^*, or U and UT. We also demonstrate a quantum commitment scheme that is secure against adversaries that query only U and Udagger, but is insecure if the adversary can query U^*. These results show that conjugate and transpose queries do give more power to quantum algorithms, lending credence to the idea put forth by Zhandry that cryptographic primitives should prove security against these forms of queries. Our key lemma is that any circuit using q forward and inverse queries to a state preparation unitary for a state σ can be simulated to varepsilon error with n = mathcal{O}\(q2/varepsilon\) copies of σ. Consequently, for decision tasks, algorithms using (forward and inverse) state preparation queries only ever perform quadratically better than sample access. These results follow from straightforward combinations of existing techniques; our contribution is to state their consequences in their strongest, most counter-intuitive form. In doing so, we identify a motif where generically strengthening a quantum resource can be possible if the output is allowed to be random, bypassing no-go theorems for deterministic algorithms. We call this the acorn trick.
Why This Paper Matters
- It adds a 2025 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We give a natural problem over input quantum oracles U which cannot be solved with exponentially many black-box queries to U and U^dagger, but which can be solved with constant...
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.