Skip to main content
Log in

An efficient superpostional quantum Johnson–Lindenstrauss lemma via unitary t-designs

  • Published:
Quantum Information Processing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The famous Johnson–Lindenstrauss lemma states that for any set of n vectors \(\{v_i\}_{i=1}^n \in \mathbb {C}^{d_1}\) and any \(\epsilon > 0\), there is a linear transformation \(T: \mathbb {C}^{d_1} \rightarrow \mathbb {C}^{d_2}\), \(d_2 = O(\epsilon ^{-2} \log n)\) such that \(\left\| { T(v_i) }\right\| _2 \in (1 \pm \epsilon ) \left\| { v_i }\right\| _2\) for all \(i \in [n]\). In fact, a Haar random \(d_1 \times d_1\) unitary transformation followed by projection onto the first \(d_2\) coordinates followed by a scaling of \(\sqrt{\frac{d_1}{d_2}}\) works as a valid transformation T with high probability. In this work, we show that the Haar random \(d_1 \times d_1\) unitary can be replaced by a uniformly random unitary chosen from a finite set called an approximate unitary t-design for \(t = O(d_2)\). Choosing a unitary from such a design requires only \(O(d_2 \log d_1)\) random bits as opposed to \(2^{\varOmega (d_1^2)}\) random bits required to choose a Haar random unitary with reasonable precision. Moreover, since such unitaries can be efficiently implemented in the superpositional setting, our result can be viewed as an efficient quantum Johnson–Lindenstrauss transform akin to efficient quantum Fourier transforms widely used in earlier work on quantum algorithms. We prove our result by leveraging a method of Low for showing concentration for approximate unitary t-designs. We discuss algorithmic advantages and limitations of our result and conclude with a toy application to private information retrieval.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ailon, N., Chazelle, B.: The fast Johnson–Lindenstrauss transform and approximate nearest neighbors. SIAM J. Comput. 39, 302–322 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, G., Guionnet, A., Zeitouni, O.: An Introduction to Random Matrices. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2009)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  3. Bellare, M., Rompel, J.: Randomness-efficient oblivious sampling. In: 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), pp. 276–287 (1994)

  4. Ben-Aroya, A., Schwartz, O., Ta-Shma, A.: Quantum expanders: motivation and construction. Theory Comput. 6, 47–79 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Bluhm, A., França, D.: Dimensionality reduction of SDPs through sketching. Linear Algebra Appl. 563(15), 461–475 (2019)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Brandão, F., Harrow, A., Horodecki, M.: Local random quantum circuits are approximate polynomial-designs. Commun. Math. Phys. 346, 397–434 (2016)

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Buhrman, H., Cleve, R., Watrous, J., de Wolf, R.: Quantum fingerprinting. Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 167902:1-167902:4 (2001)

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  8. Buhrman, H., Miltersen, P., Radhakrishnan, J., Venkatesh, S.: Are bitvectors optimal? SIAM J. Comput. 31, 1723–1744 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  9. Capalbo, M., Reingold, O., Vadhan, S., Wigderson, A.: Randomness conductors and constant-degree lossless expanders. In: 34th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 659–668 (2002)

  10. Cleve, R., Høyer, P., Toner, B., Watrous, J.: Consequences and limits of nonlocal strategies. In: 19th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC), pp. 236–249 (2004)

  11. Coppersmith, D.: An approximate Fourier transform useful in quantum factoring. IBM Research Report RC 19642 (1994). arXiv:1709.07268

  12. Fawzi, O., Hayden, P., Sen, P.: From low-distortion norm embeddings to explicit uncertainty relations and efficient information locking. J. ACM 60(44), 1–61 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1145/2518131

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Gavinsky, D., Kempe, J., de Wolf, R.: Strengths and weaknesses of quantum fingerprinting. In: 21st Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC), pp. 288–298 (2006)

  14. Harrow, A., Montanaro, A., Short, A.: Limitations on quantum dimensionality reduction. In: International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP), pp. 86–97 (2011). arXiv:1012.2262

  15. Hastings, M., Harrow, A.: Classical and quantum tensor product expanders. Quantum Inf. Comput. 9(3), 336–360 (2009)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Jain, R., Radhakrishnan, J., Sen, P.: A property of quantum relative entropy with an application to privacy in quantum communication. J. ACM 56, 33:1-33:32 (2009)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  17. Johnson, W., Lindenstrauss, J.: Extensions of Lipschitz mappings into a Hilbert space. Contemp. Math. 26, 189–206 (1984)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Low, R.: Large deviation bounds for \(k\)-designs. Proc. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 465, 3289–3308 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1098/rspa.2009.0232

    Article  ADS  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Mosca, M., Zalka, C.: Exact quantum Fourier transforms and discrete logarithm algorithms. Int. J. Quantum Inf. 2(1), 91–100 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Newman, I.: Private vs. common random bits in communication complexity. Inf. Process. Lett. 39(2), 67–71 (1991)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  21. Sen, P.: Efficient quantum tensor product expanders and unitary \(t\)-designs via the zigzag product (2018). arXiv:1808.10521

  22. Shor, P.: Polynomial-time algorithms for prime factorization and discrete logarithms on a quantum computer. SIAM J. Comput. 26, 1484–1509 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  23. Ta-Shma, A.: Storing information with extractors. Inf. Process. Lett. 83(5), 267–274 (2002)

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank Ashley Montanaro for pointing me to his work [14] on compression of quantum states and Johnson–Lindenstrauss lemma during a talk given on a preliminary version of this work at a workshop in CRM, Montréal, Canada, October 2011. I acknowledge Daniel Stilck França for informing me about his work in [5]. I acknowledge support of the Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India, under project no. 12-R&D-TFR-5.01-0500, for carrying out this research work. I thank the anonymous referees for their useful remarks and comments that have helped to improve the paper.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pranab Sen.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sen, P. An efficient superpostional quantum Johnson–Lindenstrauss lemma via unitary t-designs. Quantum Inf Process 20, 312 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-021-03238-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-021-03238-2

Keywords

Navigation