Random Measurement Bases, Quantum State Distinction and Applications to the Hidden Subgroup Problem
- First Online:
- 133 Downloads
We show that measuring any two low rank quantum states in a random orthonormal basis gives, with high probability, two probability distributions having total variation distance at least a universal constant times the Frobenius distance between the two states. This implies that for any finite ensemble of quantum states there is a single POVM that distinguishes between every pair of states from the ensemble by at least a constant times their Frobenius distance; in fact, with high probability a random POVM, under a suitable definition of randomness, suffices. There are examples of ensembles with constant pairwise trace distance where a single POVM cannot distinguish pairs of states by much better than their Frobenius distance, including the important ensemble of coset states of hidden subgroups of the symmetric group (Moore et al., Proceedings of the 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2005).
We next consider the random Fourier method for the hidden subgroup problem (HSP) which consists of Fourier sampling the coset state of the hidden subgroup using random orthonormal bases for the group representations. In cases where every representation of the group has polynomially bounded rank when averaged over the hidden subgroup, the random Fourier method gives a POVM for the HSP operating on one coset state at a time and using totally a polynomial number of coset states. In particular, we get such POVMs whenever the group and the hidden subgroup form a Gel’fand pair, e.g., Abelian, dihedral and Heisenberg groups. This gives a positive counterpart to earlier negative results about random Fourier sampling when the above rank is exponentially large (Grigni et al., Combinatorica 24(1):137–154, 2004), which happens for example in the HSP in the symmetric group.
KeywordsRandom orthonormal measurement bases Ensemble quantum state distinction Hidden subgroup problem Frobenius distance Quantum Fourier transforms Gel’fand pairs Quantum algorithms
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Ambainis, A., Emerson, J.: Quantum t-designs: t-wise independence in the quantum world. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pp. 129–140 (2007). Also preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0701126
- 2.Arora, S., Kannan, R.: Learning mixtures of arbitrary Gaussians. In: Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 247–257 (2001) Google Scholar
- 3.Aharonov, D., Kitaev, A., Nisan, N.: Quantum circuits with mixed states. In: Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, pp. 20–30 (1998) Google Scholar
- 4.Bacon, D., Childs, A., van Dam, W.: From optimal measurement to efficient quantum algorithms for the hidden subgroup problem over semidirect product groups. In: Proceedings of the 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 469–478 (2005). Also preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0504083
- 5.Bacon, D., Childs, A., van Dam, W.: Optimal measurements for the dihedral hidden subgroup problem. Chic. J. Theor. Comput. Sci. 2 (2006). Also preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0501044
- 8.Ettinger, M., Høyer, P., Knill, E.: Hidden subgroup states are almost orthogonal. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9901034 (1999)
- 11.Gutoski, G., Watrous, J.: Quantum interactive proofs with competing provers. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Symposium on Theoretical Aspects of Computer Science. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3404, pp. 605–616. Springer, Berlin (2005). Also preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/cs.CC/0412102 Google Scholar
- 14.Harrow, A., Winter, A.: How many copies are needed for state discrimination? Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0606131 (2006)
- 15.Jain, R.: Distinguishing sets of quantum states. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0506205 (2005)
- 19.Moore, C., Russell, A.: For distinguishing conjugate hidden subgroups, the pretty good measurement is as good as it gets. Preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0501177 (2005)
- 20.Moore, C., Rockmore, D., Russell, A., Schulman, L.: The power of basis selection in Fourier sampling: hidden subgroup problems in affine groups. In: Proceedings of the 15th Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pp. 1113–1122 (2004). Journal version in preparation, preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0503095
- 21.Moore, C., Russell, A., Schulman, L.: The symmetric group defies strong Fourier sampling. In: Proceedings of the 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pp. 479–488 (2005). Also preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0501056
- 23.Radhakrishnan, J., Rötteler, M., Sen, P.: On the power of random bases in Fourier sampling: hidden subgroup problem in the Heisenberg group. In: Proceedings of the 32nd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3580, pp. 1399–1411. Springer, Berlin (2005). Also preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0503114 Google Scholar
- 24.Sen, P.: Random measurement bases, quantum state distinction and applications to the hidden subgroup problem. In: Proceedings of the 21st Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pp. 274–287 (2006). Also preprint at http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0512085
- 28.Tsirelson, B.: Gaussian measures and Gaussian processes. Lecture 3 of course notes available at http://www.tau.ac.il/~tsirel/Courses/Gaussian/syllabus.html (2005)