Pseudorandom unitaries are neither real nor sparse nor noise-robust
June 20, 2023 Β· Declared Dead Β· π Quantum
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Tobias Haug, Kishor Bharti, Dax Enshan Koh
arXiv ID
2306.11677
Category
quant-ph: Quantum Computing
Cross-listed
cs.CC,
cs.CR
Citations
39
Venue
Quantum
Last Checked
2 months ago
Abstract
Pseudorandom quantum states (PRSs) and pseudorandom unitaries (PRUs) possess the dual nature of being efficiently constructible while appearing completely random to any efficient quantum algorithm. In this study, we establish fundamental bounds on pseudorandomness. We show that PRSs and PRUs exist only when the probability that an error occurs is negligible, ruling out their generation on noisy intermediate-scale and early fault-tolerant quantum computers. Further, we show that PRUs need imaginarity while PRS do not have this restriction. This implies that quantum randomness requires in general a complex-valued formalism of quantum mechanics, while for random quantum states real numbers suffice. Additionally, we derive lower bounds on the coherence of PRSs and PRUs, ruling out the existence of sparse PRUs and PRSs. We also show that the notions of PRS, PRUs and pseudorandom scramblers (PRSSs) are distinct in terms of resource requirements. We introduce the concept of pseudoresources, where states which contain a low amount of a given resource masquerade as high-resource states. We define pseudocoherence, pseudopurity and pseudoimaginarity, and identify three distinct types of pseudoresources in terms of their masquerading capabilities. Our work also establishes rigorous bounds on the efficiency of property testing, demonstrating the exponential complexity in distinguishing real quantum states from imaginary ones, in contrast to the efficient measurability of unitary imaginarity. Further, we show an exponential advantage in imaginarity testing when having access to the complex conjugate of the state. Lastly, we show that the transformation from a complex to a real model of quantum computation is inefficient, in contrast to the reverse process, which is efficient. Our results establish fundamental limits on property testing and provide valuable insights into quantum pseudorandomness.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Quantum Computing
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
The power of quantum neural networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Power of data in quantum machine learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Quantum machine learning: a classical perspective
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Noise-Adaptive Compiler Mappings for Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum Computers
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
ProjectQ: An Open Source Software Framework for Quantum Computing
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High-Performance Deep Learning Library
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
XGBoost: A Scalable Tree Boosting System
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted