×

Quantum SDP solvers: large speed-ups, optimality, and applications to quantum learning. (English) Zbl 07561520

Baier, Christel (ed.) et al., 46th international colloquium on automata, languages, and programming, ICALP 2019, Patras, Greece, July 9–12, 2019. Proceedings. Wadern: Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. LIPIcs – Leibniz Int. Proc. Inform. 132, Article 27, 14 p. (2019).
Summary: We give two new quantum algorithms for solving semidefinite programs (SDPs) providing quantum speed-ups. We consider SDP instances with m constraint matrices, each of dimension \(n\), rank at most \(r\), and sparsity \(s\). The first algorithm assumes an input model where one is given access to an oracle to the entries of the matrices at unit cost. We show that it has run time \(\widetilde{O}(s^2 (\sqrt{m}\varepsilon^{-10}+\sqrt{n}\varepsilon^{-12}))\), with \(\varepsilon\) the error of the solution. This gives an optimal dependence in terms of \(m\), \(n\) and quadratic improvement over previous quantum algorithms (when \(m\approx n)\). The second algorithm assumes a fully quantum input model in which the input matrices are given as quantum states. We show that its run time is \(\widetilde{O}(\sqrt{m}+\text{poly}(r))\cdot\text{poly}(\log m,\log n,B,\varepsilon^{-1})\), with \(B\) an upper bound on the trace-norm of all input matrices. In particular the complexity depends only polylogarithmically in \(n\) and polynomially in \(r\).
We apply the second SDP solver to learn a good description of a quantum state with respect to a set of measurements: Given \(m\) measurements and a supply of copies of an unknown state \(\rho\) with rank at most \(r\), we show we can find in time \(\sqrt{m}\cdot\text{poly}(\log m\log n,r,\varepsilon^{-1})\) a description of the state as a quantum circuit preparing a density matrix which has the same expectation values as \(\rho\) on the \(m\) measurements, up to error \(\varepsilon\). The density matrix obtained is an approximation to the maximum entropy state consistent with the measurement data considered in Jaynes’ principle from statistical mechanics.
As in previous work, we obtain our algorithm by “quantizing” classical SDP solvers based on the matrix multiplicative weight update method. One of our main technical contributions is a quantum Gibbs state sampler for low-rank Hamiltonians, given quantum states encoding these Hamiltonians, with a poly-logarithmic dependence on its dimension, which is based on ideas developed in quantum principal component analysis. We also develop a “fast” quantum OR lemma with a quadratic improvement in gate complexity over the construction by A. W. Harrow et al. [in: Proceedings of the 28th annual ACM-SIAM symposium on discrete algorithms, SODA 2017, Barcelona, Spain, January 16–19, 2017. Philadelphia, PA: Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics (SIAM); New York, NY: Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). 1598–1611 (2017; Zbl 1410.68133)]. We believe both techniques might be of independent interest.
For the entire collection see [Zbl 1414.68003].

MSC:

68Nxx Theory of software
68Qxx Theory of computing

Citations:

Zbl 1410.68133

References:

[1] Scott Aaronson. The learnability of quantum states. Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 463(2088):3089-3114, 2007. arXiv: quant-ph/0608142. · Zbl 1140.81317
[2] Scott Aaronson. Shadow Tomography of Quantum States. In Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, 2018. arXiv:1711.01053. · Zbl 1427.81018
[3] Scott Aaronson, Xinyi Chen, Elad Hazan, and Ashwin Nayak. Online Learning of Quantum states, 2018. arXiv:1802.09025. · Zbl 1459.81006
[4] Joran van Apeldoorn and András Gilyén. Improvements in Quantum SDP-solving with Applications, 2018. arXiv:1804.05058.
[5] Joran van Apeldoorn, András Gilyén, Sander Gribling, and Ronald de Wolf. Quantum SDP-Solvers: Better upper and lower bounds. In 58th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, 2017. arXiv:1705.01843.
[6] Sanjeev Arora, Elad Hazan, and Satyen Kale. The Multiplicative Weights Update Method: a Meta-Algorithm and Applications. Theory of Computing, 8(6):121-164, 2012. doi:10.4086/ toc.2012.v008a006. · Zbl 1283.68414 · doi:10.4086/toc.2012.v008a006
[7] Sanjeev Arora and Satyen Kale. A combinatorial, primal-dual approach to semidefinite programs. In Proceedings of the Thirty-ninth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 227-236. ACM, 2007. · Zbl 1232.68177
[8] Fernando G. S. L. Brandão and Krysta Svore. Quantum speed-ups for semidefinite program-ming. In 58th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. IEEE, 2017. arXiv:1609.05537.
[9] Nai-Hui Chia, Tongyang Li, Han-Hsuan Lin, and Chunhao Wang. Quantum-inspired clas-sical sublinear-time algorithm for solving low-rank semidefinite programming via sampling approaches, 2019. arXiv:1901.03254.
[10] Anirban Narayan Chowdhury and Rolando D. Somma. Quantum algorithms for Gibbs sampling and hitting-time estimation. Quantum Information & Computation, 17(LA-UR-16-21218), 2017. arXiv:1603.02940.
[11] Gus Gutoski and Xiaodi Wu. Parallel approximation of min-max problems with applications to classical and quantum zero-sum games. In Proceedings of the Twenty-seventh Annual IEEE Symposium on Computational Complexity (CCC), pages 21-31. IEEE, 2012.
[12] Jeongwan Haah, Aram W. Harrow, Zhengfeng Ji, Xiaodi Wu, and Nengkun Yu. Sample-optimal Tomography of Quantum States. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 913-925. ACM, 2016. arXiv:1508.01797. · Zbl 1373.68227
[13] Aram W. Harrow, Cedric Yen-Yu Lin, and Ashley Montanaro. Sequential measurements, disturbance and property testing. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 1598-1611. SIAM, 2017. arXiv:1607.03236. · Zbl 1410.68133
[14] Elad Hazan. Efficient algorithms for online convex optimization and their applications. PhD thesis, Princeton University, 2006. · Zbl 1143.90371
[15] Rahul Jain, Zhengfeng Ji, Sarvagya Upadhyay, and John Watrous. QIP=PSPACE. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 58(6):30, 2011. arXiv:0907.4737. · Zbl 1281.68117
[16] Edwin T. Jaynes. Information theory and statistical mechanics. Physical Review, 106(4):620, 1957. · Zbl 0084.43701
[17] Shelby Kimmel, Cedric Yen-Yu Lin, Guang Hao Low, Maris Ozols, and Theodore J. Yoder. Hamiltonian simulation with optimal sample complexity. npj Quantum Information, 3(1):13, 2017. arXiv:1608.00281.
[18] James R. Lee, Prasad Raghavendra, and David Steurer. Lower Bounds on the Size of Semidefinite Programming Relaxations. In Proceedings of the Forty-seventh Annual ACM 27:14 Quantum SDP Solver: Speed-Up, Optimality, Applications Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 567-576, New York, NY, USA, 2015. ACM. doi:10.1145/2746539.2746599. · Zbl 1321.90099 · doi:10.1145/2746539.2746599
[19] Yin Tat Lee, Aaron Sidford, and Sam Chiu-wai Wong. A faster cutting plane method and its implications for combinatorial and convex optimization. In Proceedings of the Fifty-sixth Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 1049-1065. IEEE, 2015. arXiv:1508.04874.
[20] Seth Lloyd, Masoud Mohseni, and Patrick Rebentrost. Quantum principal component analysis. Nature Physics, 10(9):631, 2014. arXiv:1307.0401.
[21] Daniel Nagaj, Pawel Wocjan, and Yong Zhang. Fast amplification of QMA, 2009. arXiv: 0904.1549. · Zbl 1183.81040
[22] Ryan O’Donnell and John Wright. Efficient Quantum Tomography. In Proceedings of the 48th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 899-912. ACM, 2016. arXiv:1508.01907. · Zbl 1373.68229
[23] David Poulin and Pawel Wocjan. Sampling from the thermal quantum Gibbs state and evalu-ating partition functions with a quantum computer. Physical Review Letters, 103(22):220502, 2009. arXiv:0905.2199.
[24] Ewin Tang. A quantum-inspired classical algorithm for recommendation systems. In Proceedings of the 51st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing. ACM, 2019. arXiv:1807.04271. · Zbl 1433.68436
[25] Ronald de Wolf. Personal communication, 2017.
[26] Xiaodi Wu. Parallelized Solution to Semidefinite Programmings in Quantum Complexity Theory, 2010. arXiv:1009.2211.
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.