Abstract
Rejection sampling is a well-known method to sample from a target distribution, given the ability to sample from a given distribution. The method has been first formalized by von Neumann [1951] and has many applications in classical computing. We define a quantum analogue of rejection sampling: given a black box producing a coherent superposition of (possibly unknown) quantum states with some amplitudes, the problem is to prepare a coherent superposition of the same states, albeit with different target amplitudes. The main result of this article is a tight characterization of the query complexity of this quantum state generation problem. We exhibit an algorithm, which we call quantum rejection sampling, and analyze its cost using semidefinite programming. Our proof of a matching lower bound is based on the automorphism principle that allows to symmetrize any algorithm over the automorphism group of the problem. Our main technical innovation is an extension of the automorphism principle to continuous groups that arise for quantum state generation problems where the oracle encodes unknown quantum states, instead of just classical data. Furthermore, we illustrate how quantum rejection sampling may be used as a primitive in designing quantum algorithms, by providing three different applications. We first show that it was implicitly used in the quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations by Harrow et al. [2009]. Second we show that it can be used to speed up the main step in the quantum Metropolis sampling algorithm by Temme et al. [2011]. Finally, we derive a new quantum algorithm for the hidden shift problem of an arbitrary Boolean function and relate its query complexity to “water-filling” of the Fourier spectrum.
- Aaronson, S. 2009. Quantum copy-protection and quantum money. In Proceedings of the 24th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC'09). IEEE Computer Society, 229--242. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CCC.2009.42. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Aaronson, S. and Drucker, A. 2010. A full characterization of quantum advice. In Proceedings of the 42nd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'10). ACM, 131--140. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1806689.1806710. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Aharonov, D. and Regev, O. 2005. Lattice problems in NP ∩ coNP. J. ACM 52, 5, 749--765. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1089023.1089025. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Aharonov, D. and Ta-Shma, A. 2003. Adiabatic quantum state generation and statistical zero knowledge. In Proceedings of the 35th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'03). ACM, 20--29. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/780542.780546. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ambainis, A. 2000. Quantum lower bounds by quantum arguments. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'00). ACM, 636--643. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/335305.335394. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ambainis, A. 2010. Variable time amplitude amplification and a faster quantum algorithm for solving systems of linear equations. arxiv:1010.4458.Google Scholar
- Ambainis, A., Magnin, L., Roetteler, M., and Roland, J. 2011. Symmetry-assisted adversaries for quantum state generation. In Proceedings of the 26th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC'11). IEEE Computer Society, 167--177. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CCC.2011.24. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Bennett, C. H., Bernstein, E., Brassard, G., and Vazirani, U. 1997. Strengths and Weaknesses of Quantum Computing. SIAM J. Comput. 26, 5, 1510--1523. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/S0097539796300933. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Berry, D. W., Ahokas, G., Cleve, R., and Sanders, B. C. 2005. Efficient quantum algorithms for simulating sparse Hamiltonians. Comm. Math. Phys. 270, 2, 9. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-006-0150-x.Google Scholar
- Boixo, S., Knill, E., and Somma, R. D. 2009. Eigenpath traversal by phase randomization. Quant. Inf. Comput. 9, 9&10, 833--855. http://www.rintonpress.com/journals/qiconline.html##v9n910. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Boyer, M., Brassard, G., Høyer, P., and Tapp, A. 1998. Tight bounds on quantum searching. Fortschritte der Physik 46, 4--5, 493--505. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1521-3978(199806)46:⅘<493::AID-PROP493>3.0.CO;2-P.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Brassard, G., Høyer, P., Mosca, M., and Tapp, A. 2002. Quantum amplitude amplification and estimation. In Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: A Millennium Volume, 53--74.Google Scholar
- Buhrman, H., Cleve, R., Watrous, J., and de Wolf, R. 2001. Quantum fingerprinting. Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 16, 167902. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.167902.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Buhrman, H. and de Wolf, R. 2002. Complexity measures and decision tree complexity: A survey. Theoret. Comput. Sci. 288, 1, 21--43. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0304-3975(01)00144-X. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Childs, A. M. 2008. On the relationship between continuous- and discrete-time quantum walk. Comm. Math. Phys. 294, 2, 22. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00220-009-0930-1.Google Scholar
- Childs, A. M. and Kothari, R. 2011. Simulating sparse Hamiltonians with star decompositions. In Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication, and Cryptography (TQC'10). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6519, Springer, Berlin, 11. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-18073-6. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Cleve, R., Ekert, A., Macchiavello, C., and Mosca, M. 1997. Quantum algorithms revisited. Proc. Roy. Soci. A. Math., Phys. Engi. Sci. 454, 1969, 18. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspa.1998.0164.Google Scholar
- de Wolf, R. 2008. A brief introduction to Fourier analysis on the Boolean cube. Theory of Computing Library -- Graduate Surveys 1, 1--20. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4086/toc.gs.2008.001.Google Scholar
- Devroye, L. 1986. Non-Uniform Random Variate Generation. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
- Farhi, E., Gosset, D., Hassidim, A., Lutomirski, A., and Shor, P. 2012. Quantum money from knots. In Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science (ITCS'12) Conference. 276--289. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2090236.2090260. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Friedl, K., Ivanyos, G., Magniez, F., Santha, M., and Sen, P. 2002. Hidden translation and orbit coset in quantum computing. In Proceedings of the 35fth Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'03). ACM, 1--9. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/780542.780544. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Grover, L. K. 1996. A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'96). ACM, New York, 212--219. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/237814.237866. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Grover, L. K. 2000. Synthesis of quantum superpositions by quantum computation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 6, 1334--1337. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.1334.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Grover, L. K. and Rudolph, T. 2002. Creating superpositions that correspond to efficiently integrable probability distributions. arXiv:quant-ph/0208112.Google Scholar
- Harrow, A. W., Hassidim, A., and Lloyd, S. 2009. Quantum algorithm for linear systems of equations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 15, 150502. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.150502.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Høyer, P., Lee, T., and Špalek, R. 2007. Negative weights make adversaries stronger. In Proceedings of the 39th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'07). ACM, 526--535. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1250790.1250867. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Høyer, P., Mosca, M., and de Wolf, R. 2003. Quantum search on bounded-error inputs. In Proceedings of the 30th International Colloquium on Automata, Languages and Programming (ICALP'03). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2719, Springer, 291--299. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45061-0_25. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ivanyos, G. 2008. On solving systems of random linear disequations. Quant. Inf. Comput. 8, 6&7, 579--594. DOI: http://www.rintonpress.com/journals/qiconline.html##v8n67. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Kempe, J., Kitaev, A., and Regev, O. 2006. The complexity of the local Hamiltonian problem. SIAM J. Comput. 35, 5, 1070--1097. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/S0097539704445226. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Kitaev, A. 1995. Quantum measurements and the Abelian stabilizer problem. arXiv:quant-ph/9511026.Google Scholar
- Kitaev, A. and Webb, W. A. 2008. Wavefunction preparation and resampling using a quantum computer. arXiv:0801.0342.Google Scholar
- Köbler, J., Schöning, U., and Toran, J. 1993. The Graph Isomorphism Problem: Its Structural Complexity. Birkhäuser, Boston. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Lee, T., Mittal, R., Reichardt, B. W., Špalek, R., and Szegedy, M. 2011. Quantum query complexity of state conversion. In Proceedings of the 52nd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'11). 344--353. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2011.75. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Letac, G. 1975. On building random variables of a given distribution. Ann. Probab. 3, 2, 298--306. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1214/aop/1176996400.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Marriott, C. and Watrous, J. 2005. Quantum Arthur--Merlin games. Computat. Complex. 14, 2, 122--152. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00037-005-0194-x. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Metropolis, N., Rosenbluth, A. W., Rosenbluth, M. N., Teller, A. H., and Teller, E. 1953. Equation of state calculations by fast computing machines. J. Chem. Phys. 21, 6, 1087. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.1699114.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Nagaj, D., Wocjan, P., and Zhang, Y. 2009. Fast amplification of QMA. Quant. Inf. Computat. 9, 11&12, 1053--1068. DOI: http://www.rintonpress.com/journals/qiconline.html##v9n1112. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Regev, O. 2004. Quantum computation and lattice problems. SIAM J. Comput. 33, 2, 738--760. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/S0097539703440678. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Reichardt, B. W. 2009. Span programs and quantum query complexity: The general adversary bound is nearly tight for every boolean function. In Proceedings of the 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'09). IEEE Computer Society Press, 544--551. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2009.55. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Reichardt, B. W. 2011. Reflections for quantum query algorithms. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA'11). 560--569. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Rötteler, M. 2010. Quantum algorithms for highly non-linear Boolean functions. In Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA'10). 448--457. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Schwarz, M., Temme, K., and Verstraete, F. 2012. Preparing projected entangled pair states on a quantum computer. Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 110502. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.110502.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Sheridan, L., Maslov, D., and Mosca, M. 2009. Approximating fractional time quantum evolution. J. Phys. A 42, 18, 185302. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1088/1751-8113/42/18/185302.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Somma, R. D., Boixo, S. B., Barnum, H., and Knill, E. 2008. Quantum simulations of classical annealing processes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 130504. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.130504.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Temme, K., Osborne, T. J., Vollbrecht, K. G. H., Poulin, D., and Verstraete, F. 2011. Quantum metropolis sampling. Nature 471, 7336, 87--90. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature09770.Google Scholar
- van Dam, W., Hallgren, S., and Ip, L. 2006. Quantum algorithms for some hidden shift problems. SIAM J. Comput. 36, 3, 763--778. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/S009753970343141X. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Vandenberghe, L. and Boyd, S. 1996. Semidefinite programming. SIAM Rev. 38, 1, 49--95. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1137/1038003. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Vazirani, U. 1998. On the power of quantum computation. Philos. Trans. Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 356, 1743, 1759--1768. DOI: http://www.jstor.org/stable/55010.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- van Neumann, J. 1951. Various techniques used in connection with random digits. Nati. Bureau Stand. Applied Math Series 12, 36--38.Google Scholar
- Watrous, J. 2000. Succinct quantum proofs for properties of finite groups. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'00). IEEE Computer Society, 537--546. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.2000.892141. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Watrous, J. 2001. Quantum algorithms for solvable groups. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC'01). ACM, 60--67. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/380752.380759. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Yung, M.-H. and Aspuru-Guzik, A. 2011. A quantum-quantum Metropolis algorithm. Nat. Acad. Sci. 109, 3, 754--759. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1111758109.Google Scholar
Cross Ref
Index Terms
Quantum rejection sampling
Recommendations
Quantum rejection sampling
ITCS '12: Proceedings of the 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science ConferenceRejection sampling is a well-known method to sample from a target distribution, given the ability to sample from a given distribution. The method has been first formalized by von Neumann (1951) and has many applications in classical computing. We define ...
Visualization of the Quantum Fourier Transform Using a Quantum Computer Simulator
The quantum Fourier transform (QFT) is a key subroutine of quantum algorithms for factoring and simulation and is the heart of the hidden-subgroup problem, the solution of which is expected to lead to the development of new quantum algorithms. The QFT ...
Quantum walks: a comprehensive review
Quantum walks, the quantum mechanical counterpart of classical random walks, is an advanced tool for building quantum algorithms that has been recently shown to constitute a universal model of quantum computation. Quantum walks is now a solid field of ...






Comments