Papers for

quantum complexity analysts

Papers whose findings have a practical use for this group, as judged from the abstract. Open a paper to read what it means in practice.

Quantum SAT difficulty depends on constraint balance and degree

Degree Balance as a Fine-Grained Complexity Boundary for Quantum SAT

Abstract: The local Hamiltonian problem is the canonical $\mathsf{QMA}$-complete problem, and $O(2^n)$ time classical algorithms and $O(2^{n/2})$ time quantum algorithms are known to solve the problem in the worst case. It is not clear how to improve these brute force strategies for a broad class of the problem because ground states are highly entangled in general, and we cannot directly apply known strategies for classical CSPs. In this work, we present exponentially faster classical and quantum algorithms under two mild assumptions: (1) the Hamiltonian is frustration-free on YES instances, and (2) it is approximately regular, meaning that every qubit is acted upon by approximately the same number of constraints. We complement these upper bounds by showing that, assuming (Q)SETH, quantum 5-SAT admits no non-trivial worst-case speedup. Our lower bound further demonstrates that the dependence of our algorithms on regularity is in some sense nearly optimal. Specifically, quantum 5-SAT remains (Q)SETH-hard even for Hamiltonians in which all but $O(\sqrt{n})$ qubits participate in only constantly many constraints, while the remaining $O(\sqrt{n})$ qubits each participate in $O(\sqrt{n})$ constraints. By contrast, if either the size of this high-degree subset or the degrees of its qubits is reduced by a factor of $n^δ$, for any $δ>0$, our algorithm solves the problem in time $O(2^{(1- \varepsilon)n})$ for some $\varepsilon>0$. Together, our upper and lower bounds establish a fine-grained complexity dichotomy for quantum satisfiability.

Tue 29 SeptComputational ComplexityData Structures and Algorithms
The gist
Quantum SAT is a hard problem about finding solutions to quantum systems, and usually takes a very long time to solve. The authors show that if the problem has certain regularity—meaning each quantum bit is involved in about the same number of constraints—then new algorithms can solve it faster. They also prove that if this balance condition is only slightly broken, the problem remains just as hard as before. This work draws a clear line showing when quantum SAT can be solved more quickly and when it cannot.
Open → 2609.36464v1

QMA quantum proofs can always be made perfectly complete

QMA has perfect completeness

Abstract: We prove $\mathsf{QMA} = \mathsf{QMA_1}$, i.e., every quantum Merlin-Arthur proof system can be made perfectly complete. Our construction uses only Hadamard, Toffoli, and $X$ gates, yielding a universal gate set for $\mathsf{QMA_1}$. As a consequence, quantum $3$-SAT is $\mathsf{QMA}$-complete. The construction relativizes to classical oracles, so known classical-oracle separations of $\mathsf{QMA}$ from $\mathsf{QCMA}$ extend to $\mathsf{QMA_1}$.

Fri 11 SeptComputational Complexity
The gist
Some computer problems can be checked using quantum proofs, but these checks sometimes have a small chance of rejecting a correct proof. The authors show that it is possible to design these quantum proof systems so that if the proof is correct, it will always be accepted. They achieve this using a specific set of basic quantum operations. This result also confirms that an important quantum logic problem remains one of the hardest in quantum computation.
Open → 2609.13032v1