Dual field theories of quantum computation

  • Vitaly Vanchurin
Open Access
Regular Article - Theoretical Physics


Given two quantum states of N q-bits we are interested to find the shortest quantum circuit consisting of only one- and two- q-bit gates that would transfer one state into another. We call it the quantum maze problem for the reasons described in the paper. We argue that in a large N limit the quantum maze problem is equivalent to the problem of finding a semiclassical trajectory of some lattice field theory (the dual theory) on an N +1 dimensional space-time with geometrically flat, but topologically compact spatial slices. The spatial fundamental domain is an N dimensional hyper-rhombohedron, and the temporal direction describes transitions from an arbitrary initial state to an arbitrary target state and so the initial and final dual field theory conditions are described by these two quantum computational states. We first consider a complex Klein-Gordon field theory and argue that it can only be used to study the shortest quantum circuits which do not involve generators composed of tensor products of multiple Pauli Z matrices. Since such situation is not generic we call it the Z-problem. On the dual field theory side the Z-problem corresponds to massless excitations of the phase (Goldstone modes) that we attempt to fix using Higgs mechanism. The simplest dual theory which does not suffer from the massless excitation (or from the Z-problem) is the Abelian-Higgs model which we argue can be used for finding the shortest quantum circuits. Since every trajectory of the field theory is mapped directly to a quantum circuit, the shortest quantum circuits are identified with semiclassical trajectories. We also discuss the complexity of an actual algorithm that uses a dual theory prospective for solving the quantum maze problem and compare it with a geometric approach. We argue that it might be possible to solve the problem in sub-exponential time in 2 N , but for that we must consider the Klein-Gordon theory on curved spatial geometry and/or more complicated (than N -torus) topology.


Field Theories in Higher Dimensions Lattice Quantum Field Theory 


Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.


  1. [1]
    M. Nielsen and I. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, Cambridge University Press (2010).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    A.R. Brown, D.A. Roberts, L. Susskind, B. Swingle and Y. Zhao, Holographic Complexity Equals Bulk Action?, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 191301 [arXiv:1509.07876] [INSPIRE].ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    D. Harlow and P. Hayden, Quantum Computation vs. Firewalls, JHEP 06 (2013) 085 [arXiv:1301.4504] [INSPIRE].
  4. [4]
    L. Susskind, Computational complexity and black hole horizons, Fortsch. Phys. 64 (2016) 24 [arXiv:1403.5695] [INSPIRE].MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    L. Susskind, Addendum to computational complexity and black hole horizons, Fortsch. Phys. 64 (2016) 44 [INSPIRE].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. Almheiri, D. Marolf, J. Polchinski and J. Sully, Black Holes: Complementarity or Firewalls?, JHEP 02 (2013) 062 [arXiv:1207.3123] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    B. Swingle, Entanglement Renormalization and Holography, Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 065007 [arXiv:0905.1317] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    A. Almheiri, X. Dong and D. Harlow, Bulk Locality and Quantum Error Correction in AdS/CFT, JHEP 04 (2015) 163 [arXiv:1411.7041] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    F. Pastawski, B. Yoshida, D. Harlow and J. Preskill, Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence, JHEP 06 (2015) 149 [arXiv:1503.06237] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    B. Czech, L. Lamprou, S. McCandlish and J. Sully, Integral Geometry and Holography, JHEP 10 (2015) 175 [arXiv:1505.05515] [INSPIRE].ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    A.R. Brown, D.A. Roberts, L. Susskind, B. Swingle and Y. Zhao, Complexity, action and black holes, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 086006 [arXiv:1512.04993] [INSPIRE].ADSGoogle Scholar
  12. [12]
    M.R. Dowling and M.A. Nielsen, The geometry of quantum computation, quant-ph/0701004.
  13. [13]
    M.A. Nielsen, M.R. Dowling, M. Gu and A.C. Doherty, Quantum Computation as Geometry, Science 311 (2006) 1133 [quant-ph/0603161].
  14. [14]
    M.A. Nielsen, M.R. Dowling, M. Gu and A.C. Doherty, Optimal control, geometry, and quantum computing, Phys. Rev. A 73 (2006) 062323 [quant-ph/0603160].

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physics and AstronomyUniversity of MinnesotaDuluthU.S.A.

Personalised recommendations