Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/2746539.2746582acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesstocConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Quantum Spectrum Testing

Published: 14 June 2015 Publication History

Abstract

In this work, we study the problem of testing properties of the spectrum of a mixed quantum state. Here one is given n copies of a mixed state ρ∈ Cd x d and the goal is to distinguish (with high probability) whether ρ's spectrum satisfies some property P or whether it is at least ε-far in l1-distance from satisfying P. This problem was promoted under the name of testing unitarily invariant properties of mixed states. It is the natural quantum analogue of the classical problem of testing symmetric properties of probability distributions.
Unlike property testing probability distributions---where one generally hopes for algorithms with sample complexity that is sublinear in the domain size---here the hope is for algorithms with subquadratic copy complexity in the dimension d. This is because the (frequently rediscovered) "empirical Young diagram (EYD) algorithm" [ARS88,KW01,HM02,CM06] can estimate the spectrum of any mixed state up to ε-accuracy using only O(d22) copies. In this work, we show that given a mixed state ρ ∈ Cd x d: Θ(d/ε2) copies are necessary and sufficient to test whether ρ is the maximally mixed state, i.e., has spectrum (1/d, ..., 1/d). This can be viewed as the quantum analogue of a result of Paninski [Pan08]. Θ(r2/ε) copies are necessary and sufficient to test with one-sided error whether ρ has rank r, i.e., has at most r nonzero eigenvalues. For two-sided error, a lower bound of Ω(r/ε) copies holds. Θ(r2) copies are necessary and sufficient to distinguish whether ρ is maximally mixed on an r-dimensional or an (r+1)-dimensional subspace. More generally, for r vs. r+Δ (with 1 ≤ Δ ≤ r), Θ(r2/Δ) copies are necessary and sufficient. The EYD algorithm requires Ω(d22) copies to estimate the spectrum of ρ up to ε-accuracy, nearly matching the known upper bound. Our techniques involve the asymptotic representation theory of the symmetric group; in particular Kerov's algebra of polynomial functions on Young diagrams.

References

[1]
Robert Alicki, Sławomir Rudnicki, and Sławomir Sadowski. Symmetry properties of product states for the system of N n-level atoms. Journal of mathematical physics, 29(5):1158--1162, 1988.
[2]
Tugkan Batu, Lance Fortnow, Ronitt Rubinfeld, Warren Smith, and Patrick White. Testing that distributions are close. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 259--269, 2000.
[3]
Tugkan Batu, Lance Fortnow, Ronitt Rubinfeld, Warren Smith, and Patrick White. Testing closeness of discrete distributions. Journal of the ACM, 60(1):4, 2013.
[4]
Philippe Biane. Approximate factorization and concentration for characters of symmetric groups. International Mathematics Research Notices, 2001(4):179--192, 2001.
[5]
Andrew Childs, Aram Harrow, and Paweł Wocjan. Weak Fourier-Schur sampling, the hidden subgroup problem, and the quantum collision problem. In 24th Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science, pages 598--609, 2007.
[6]
Matthias Christandl and Graeme Mitchison. The spectra of quantum states and the Kronecker coefficients of the symmetric group. Communications in mathematical physics, 261(3):789--797, 2006.
[7]
Ilias Diakonikolas. Beyond histograms: structure and distribution estimation. Found at http://www.iliasdiakonikolas.org/stoc14-workshop/diakonikolas.pdf, 2014.
[8]
Luc Devroye and Gábor Lugosi. Combinatorial methods in density estimation. Springer, 2001.
[9]
Steven Flammia, David Gross, Yi-Kai Liu, and Jens Eisert. Quantum tomography via compressed sensing: error bounds, sample complexity and efficient estimators. New Journal of Physics, 14(9):095022, 2012.
[10]
Oded Goldreich and Dana Ron. On testing expansion in bounded-degree graphs. In Studies in Complexity and Cryptography. Miscellanea on the Interplay between Randomness and Computation, pages 68--75. Springer, 2011.
[11]
Aram Harrow. Applications of coherent classical communication and the Schur transform to quantum information theory. PhD thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2005.
[12]
Masahito Hayashi and Keiji Matsumoto. Quantum universal variable-length source coding. Physical Review A, 66(2):022311, 2002.
[13]
Christian Houdré and Hua Xu. On the limiting shape of Young diagrams associated with inhomogeneous random words. In High Dimensional Probability VI, volume 66 of Progress in Probability, pages 277--302. Springer Basel, 2013.
[14]
Vladimir Ivanov and Sergei Kerov. The algebra of conjugacy classes in symmetric groups and partial permutations. Journal of Mathematical Sciences, 107(5):4212--4230, 2001.
[15]
Vladimir Ivanov and Grigori Olshanski. Kerov's central limit theorem for the Plancherel measure on Young diagrams. In Symmetric functions 2001: surveys of developments and perspectives, pages 93--151. Springer, 2002.
[16]
Alexander Its, Craig Tracy, and Harold Widom. Random words, Toeplitz determinants and integrable systems I. In Random Matrices and their Applications, pages 245--258. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
[17]
Kurt Johansson. Discrete orthogonal polynomial ensembles and the Plancherel measure. Annals of Mathematics, 153(1):259--296, 2001.
[18]
Sergei Kerov and Grigori Olshanski. Polynomial functions on the set of Young diagrams. Comptes Rendus de l'Académie des Sciences, Série 1, 319(2):121--126, 1994.
[19]
Greg Kuperberg. Random words, quantum statistics, central limits, random matrices. Methods and Applications of Analysis, 9(1):99--118, 2002.
[20]
Michael Keyl and Reinhard Werner. Estimating the spectrum of a density operator. Physical Review A, 64(5):052311, 2001.
[21]
Trevis Litherland. On the limiting shape of random young tableaux for Markovian words. PhD thesis, Georgia Institute of Technology, 2008.
[22]
Ashley Montanaro and Ronald de Wolf. A survey of quantum property testing. Technical report, arXiv:1310.2035, 2013.
[23]
Pierre-Loïc Méliot. Kerov's central limit theorem for Schur-Weyl measures of parameter 1/2. Technical report, arXiv:1009.4034, 2010.
[24]
Pierre-Loïc Méliot. Partitions aléatoires et théorie asymptotique des groupes symétriques, des algèbres d'Hecke et des groupes de Chevalley finis. PhD thesis, University Paris-Est Marne-la-Vallée, 2010.
[25]
Ashley Montanaro. Personal communication, 2014.
[26]
Andrei Okounkov and Grigori Olshanski. Shifted Schur functions. St. Petersburg Mathematical Journal, 9(2):239--300, 1998.
[27]
Liam Paninski. A coincidence-based test for uniformity given very sparsely sampled discrete data. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 54(10):4750--4755, 2008.
[28]
Ronitt Rubinfeld and Madhu Sudan. Self-testing polynomial functions efficiently and over rational domains. In Proceedings of the 3rd Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 23--32, 1992.
[29]
Ronitt Rubinfeld and Madhu Sudan. Robust characterizations of polynomials with applications to program testing. SIAM Journal on Computing, 25(2):252--271, 1996.
[30]
Victor Reiner, Dennis Stanton, and Dennis White. The cyclic sieving phenomenon. Journal of Combinatorial Theory. Series A, 108(1):17--50, 2004.
[31]
Craig Tracy and Harold Widom. On the distributions of the lengths of the longest monotone subsequences in random words. Probability Theory and Related Fields, 119(3):350--380, 2001.
[32]
Gregory Valiant and Paul Valiant. Estimating the unseen: an n/log(n)-sample estimator for entropy and support size, shown optimal via new CLTs. In Proceedings of the 43rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 685--694, 2011.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)An Optimal Tradeoff between Entanglement and Copy Complexity for State TomographyProceedings of the 56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing10.1145/3618260.3649704(1331-1342)Online publication date: 10-Jun-2024
  • (2024)A Quantum Algorithm Framework for Discrete Probability Distributions With Applications to Rényi Entropy EstimationIEEE Transactions on Information Theory10.1109/TIT.2024.338203770:5(3399-3426)Online publication date: May-2024
  • (2024)Linear Programming with Unitary-Equivariant ConstraintsCommunications in Mathematical Physics10.1007/s00220-024-05108-1405:12Online publication date: 6-Nov-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Quantum Spectrum Testing

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Information & Contributors

    Information

    Published In

    cover image ACM Conferences
    STOC '15: Proceedings of the forty-seventh annual ACM symposium on Theory of Computing
    June 2015
    916 pages
    ISBN:9781450335362
    DOI:10.1145/2746539
    Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

    Sponsors

    Publisher

    Association for Computing Machinery

    New York, NY, United States

    Publication History

    Published: 14 June 2015

    Permissions

    Request permissions for this article.

    Check for updates

    Author Tags

    1. mixed states
    2. property testing
    3. representation theory
    4. schur-weyl duality

    Qualifiers

    • Research-article

    Funding Sources

    • National Science Foundation
    • Marie Curie International Incoming Fellowship
    • Simons Foundation

    Conference

    STOC '15
    Sponsor:
    STOC '15: Symposium on Theory of Computing
    June 14 - 17, 2015
    Oregon, Portland, USA

    Acceptance Rates

    STOC '15 Paper Acceptance Rate 93 of 347 submissions, 27%;
    Overall Acceptance Rate 1,469 of 4,586 submissions, 32%

    Upcoming Conference

    STOC '25
    57th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC 2025)
    June 23 - 27, 2025
    Prague , Czech Republic

    Contributors

    Other Metrics

    Bibliometrics & Citations

    Bibliometrics

    Article Metrics

    • Downloads (Last 12 months)36
    • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)6
    Reflects downloads up to 01 Jan 2025

    Other Metrics

    Citations

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)An Optimal Tradeoff between Entanglement and Copy Complexity for State TomographyProceedings of the 56th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing10.1145/3618260.3649704(1331-1342)Online publication date: 10-Jun-2024
    • (2024)A Quantum Algorithm Framework for Discrete Probability Distributions With Applications to Rényi Entropy EstimationIEEE Transactions on Information Theory10.1109/TIT.2024.338203770:5(3399-3426)Online publication date: May-2024
    • (2024)Linear Programming with Unitary-Equivariant ConstraintsCommunications in Mathematical Physics10.1007/s00220-024-05108-1405:12Online publication date: 6-Nov-2024
    • (2023)Testing identity of collections of quantum states: sample complexity analysisQuantum10.22331/q-2023-09-11-11057(1105)Online publication date: 11-Sep-2023
    • (2023)Almost Tight Sample Complexity Analysis of Quantum Identity Testing by Pauli MeasurementsIEEE Transactions on Information Theory10.1109/TIT.2023.327120669:8(5060-5068)Online publication date: Aug-2023
    • (2023)Quantum Algorithm for Fidelity EstimationIEEE Transactions on Information Theory10.1109/TIT.2022.320398569:1(273-282)Online publication date: Jan-2023
    • (2023)When Does Adaptivity Help for Quantum State Learning?2023 IEEE 64th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS)10.1109/FOCS57990.2023.00029(391-404)Online publication date: 6-Nov-2023
    • (2023)Schur Polynomials Do Not Have Small Formulas If the Determinant does notComputational Complexity10.1007/s00037-023-00236-x32:1Online publication date: 13-May-2023
    • (2022)Quantum Proofs of ProximityQuantum10.22331/q-2022-10-13-8346(834)Online publication date: 13-Oct-2022
    • (2022)Tight Bounds for Quantum State Certification with Incoherent Measurements2022 IEEE 63rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS)10.1109/FOCS54457.2022.00118(1205-1213)Online publication date: Oct-2022
    • Show More Cited By

    View Options

    Login options

    View options

    PDF

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader

    Media

    Figures

    Other

    Tables

    Share

    Share

    Share this Publication link

    Share on social media