{"title":"On the Need for Large Quantum Depth","authors":"Nai-Hui Chia, Kai-Min Chung, C. Lai","doi":"10.1145/3570637","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Near-term quantum computers are likely to have small depths due to short coherence time and noisy gates. A natural approach to leverage these quantum computers is interleaving them with classical computers. Understanding the capabilities and limits of this hybrid approach is an essential topic in quantum computation. Most notably, the quantum Fourier transform can be implemented by a hybrid of logarithmic-depth quantum circuits and a classical polynomial-time algorithm. Therefore, it seems possible that quantum polylogarithmic depth is as powerful as quantum polynomial depth in the presence of classical computation. Indeed, Jozsa conjectured that “Any quantum polynomial-time algorithm can be implemented with only O(log n) quantum depth interspersed with polynomial-time classical computations.” This can be formalized as asserting the equivalence of BQP and “BQNCBPP.” However, Aaronson conjectured that “there exists an oracle separation between BQP and BPPBQNC.” BQNCBPP and BPPBQNC are two natural and seemingly incomparable ways of hybrid classical-quantum computation. In this work, we manage to prove Aaronson’s conjecture and in the meantime prove that Jozsa’s conjecture, relative to an oracle, is false. In fact, we prove a stronger statement that for any depth parameter d, there exists an oracle that separates quantum depth d and 2d+1 in the presence of classical computation. Thus, our results show that relative to oracles, doubling the quantum circuit depth does make the hybrid model more powerful, and this cannot be traded by classical computation.","PeriodicalId":50022,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the ACM","volume":"282 1","pages":"1 - 38"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the ACM","FirstCategoryId":"94","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3570637","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"计算机科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMPUTER SCIENCE, HARDWARE & ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Near-term quantum computers are likely to have small depths due to short coherence time and noisy gates. A natural approach to leverage these quantum computers is interleaving them with classical computers. Understanding the capabilities and limits of this hybrid approach is an essential topic in quantum computation. Most notably, the quantum Fourier transform can be implemented by a hybrid of logarithmic-depth quantum circuits and a classical polynomial-time algorithm. Therefore, it seems possible that quantum polylogarithmic depth is as powerful as quantum polynomial depth in the presence of classical computation. Indeed, Jozsa conjectured that “Any quantum polynomial-time algorithm can be implemented with only O(log n) quantum depth interspersed with polynomial-time classical computations.” This can be formalized as asserting the equivalence of BQP and “BQNCBPP.” However, Aaronson conjectured that “there exists an oracle separation between BQP and BPPBQNC.” BQNCBPP and BPPBQNC are two natural and seemingly incomparable ways of hybrid classical-quantum computation. In this work, we manage to prove Aaronson’s conjecture and in the meantime prove that Jozsa’s conjecture, relative to an oracle, is false. In fact, we prove a stronger statement that for any depth parameter d, there exists an oracle that separates quantum depth d and 2d+1 in the presence of classical computation. Thus, our results show that relative to oracles, doubling the quantum circuit depth does make the hybrid model more powerful, and this cannot be traded by classical computation.
期刊介绍:
The best indicator of the scope of the journal is provided by the areas covered by its Editorial Board. These areas change from time to time, as the field evolves. The following areas are currently covered by a member of the Editorial Board: Algorithms and Combinatorial Optimization; Algorithms and Data Structures; Algorithms, Combinatorial Optimization, and Games; Artificial Intelligence; Complexity Theory; Computational Biology; Computational Geometry; Computer Graphics and Computer Vision; Computer-Aided Verification; Cryptography and Security; Cyber-Physical, Embedded, and Real-Time Systems; Database Systems and Theory; Distributed Computing; Economics and Computation; Information Theory; Logic and Computation; Logic, Algorithms, and Complexity; Machine Learning and Computational Learning Theory; Networking; Parallel Computing and Architecture; Programming Languages; Quantum Computing; Randomized Algorithms and Probabilistic Analysis of Algorithms; Scientific Computing and High Performance Computing; Software Engineering; Web Algorithms and Data Mining