Scott Aaronson
Current Organizations / Institutes
The organizations/institutes from the scholar's latest article
Previous Organizations / Institutes
The organizations / institutes from the scholar's other articles in the past ten years
Research Subjects
Scott Aaronson has a total of 40 co-authors. Here are the top co-authors by number of shared publications:
- Robin Kothari
Google Quantum AI
3 shared publications - Ashwin Nayak
Department of Combinatorics and Optimization, and Institute for Quantum Computing University of Waterloo 200 University Ave. W. N2L 3G1 Waterloo ON Canada
2 shared publications - Avishay Tal
University of California at Berkeley
2 shared publications - Elad Hazan
Computer Science Department Princeton University
2 shared publications - Ruizhe Zhang
Department of Computer Science University of Texas at Austin
2 shared publications - Satyen Kale
Google research
2 shared publications
Latest Publications
- Open Access
A Qubit, a Coin, and an Advice String Walk Into a Relational Problem
Relational problems (those with many possible valid outputs) are different from decision problems, but it is easy to forget just how different. This paper initiates the study of FBQP/qpoly, the class of relational problems solvable in quantum polynomial-time with the help of polynomial-sized quantum advice, along with its analogues for deterministic and randomized computation (FP, FBPP) and advice (/poly, /rpoly). Our first result is that FBQP/qpoly != FBQP/poly, unconditionally, with no oracle -- a striking contrast with what we know about the analogous decision classes. The proof repurposes the separation between quantum and classical one-way communication complexities due to Bar-Yossef, Jayram, and Kerenidis. We discuss how this separation raises the prospect of near-term experiments to demonstrate "quantum information supremacy," a form of quantum supremacy that would not depend on unproved complexity assumptions. Our second result is that FBPP is not contained in FP/poly -- that is, Adleman's Theorem fails for relational problems -- unless PSPACE is contained in NP/poly. Our proof uses IP=PSPACE and time-bounded Kolmogorov complexity. On the other hand, we show that proving FBPP not in FP/poly will be hard, as it implies a superpolynomial circuit lower bound for PromiseBPEXP. We prove the following further results: * Unconditionally, FP != FBPP and FP/poly != FBPP/poly (even when these classes are carefully defined). * FBPP/poly = FBPP/rpoly (and likewise for FBQP). For sampling problems, by contrast, SampBPP/poly != SampBPP/rpoly (and likewise for SampBQP).
Open AccessA Qubit, a Coin, and an Advice String Walk Into a Relational Problem
Relational problems (those with many possible valid outputs) are different from decision problems, but it is easy to forget just how different. This paper initiates the study of FBQP/qpoly, the class of relational problems solvable in quantum polynomial-time with the help of polynomial-sized quantum advice, along with its analogues for deterministic and randomized computation (FP, FBPP) and advice (/poly, /rpoly). Our first result is that FBQP/qpoly != FBQP/poly, unconditionally, with no oracle -- a striking contrast with what we know about the analogous decision classes. The proof repurposes the separation between quantum and classical one-way communication complexities due to Bar-Yossef, Jayram, and Kerenidis. We discuss how this separation raises the prospect of near-term experiments to demonstrate "quantum information supremacy," a form of quantum supremacy that would not depend on unproved complexity assumptions. Our second result is that FBPP is not contained in FP/poly -- that is, Adleman's Theorem fails for relational problems -- unless PSPACE is contained in NP/poly. Our proof uses IP=PSPACE and time-bounded Kolmogorov complexity. On the other hand, we show that proving FBPP not in FP/poly will be hard, as it implies a superpolynomial circuit lower bound for PromiseBPEXP. We prove the following further results: * Unconditionally, FP != FBPP and FP/poly != FBPP/poly (even when these classes are carefully defined). * FBPP/poly = FBPP/rpoly (and likewise for FBQP). For sampling problems, by contrast, SampBPP/poly != SampBPP/rpoly (and likewise for SampBQP).
- Open Access
Quantum Pseudoentanglement
Entanglement is a quantum resource, in some ways analogous to randomness in classical computation. Inspired by recent work of Gheorghiu and Hoban, we define the notion of "pseudoentanglement'', a property exhibited by ensembles of efficiently constructible quantum states which are indistinguishable from quantum states with maximal entanglement. Our construction relies on the notion of quantum pseudorandom states -- first defined by Ji, Liu and Song -- which are efficiently constructible states indistinguishable from (maximally entangled) Haar-random states. Specifically, we give a construction of pseudoentangled states with entanglement entropy arbitrarily close to $\log n$ across every cut, a tight bound providing an exponential separation between computational vs information theoretic quantum pseudorandomness. We discuss applications of this result to Matrix Product State testing, entanglement distillation, and the complexity of the AdS/CFT correspondence. As compared with a previous version of this manuscript (arXiv:2211.00747v1) this version introduces a new pseudorandom state construction, has a simpler proof of correctness, and achieves a technically stronger result of low entanglement across all cuts simultaneously.Open AccessQuantum Pseudoentanglement
Entanglement is a quantum resource, in some ways analogous to randomness in classical computation. Inspired by recent work of Gheorghiu and Hoban, we define the notion of "pseudoentanglement'', a property exhibited by ensembles of efficiently constructible quantum states which are indistinguishable from quantum states with maximal entanglement. Our construction relies on the notion of quantum pseudorandom states -- first defined by Ji, Liu and Song -- which are efficiently constructible states indistinguishable from (maximally entangled) Haar-random states. Specifically, we give a construction of pseudoentangled states with entanglement entropy arbitrarily close to $\log n$ across every cut, a tight bound providing an exponential separation between computational vs information theoretic quantum pseudorandomness. We discuss applications of this result to Matrix Product State testing, entanglement distillation, and the complexity of the AdS/CFT correspondence. As compared with a previous version of this manuscript (arXiv:2211.00747v1) this version introduces a new pseudorandom state construction, has a simpler proof of correctness, and achieves a technically stronger result of low entanglement across all cuts simultaneously. - Open Access
Certified Randomness from Quantum Supremacy
We propose an application for near-term quantum devices: namely, generating cryptographically certified random bits, to use (for example) in proof-of-stake cryptocurrencies. Our protocol repurposes the existing "quantum supremacy" experiments, based on random circuit sampling, that Google and USTC have successfully carried out starting in 2019. We show that, whenever the outputs of these experiments pass the now-standard Linear Cross-Entropy Benchmark (LXEB), under plausible hardness assumptions they necessarily contain $Ω(n)$ min-entropy, where $n$ is the number of qubits. To achieve a net gain in randomness, we use a small random seed to produce pseudorandom challenge circuits. In response to the challenge circuits, the quantum computer generates output strings that, after verification, can then be fed into a randomness extractor to produce certified nearly-uniform bits -- thereby "bootstrapping" from pseudorandomness to genuine randomness. We prove our protocol sound in two senses: (i) under a hardness assumption called Long List Quantum Supremacy Verification, which we justify in the random oracle model, and (ii) unconditionally in the random oracle model against an eavesdropper who could share arbitrary entanglement with the device. (Note that our protocol's output is unpredictable even to a computationally unbounded adversary who can see the random oracle.) Currently, the central drawback of our protocol is the exponential cost of verification, which in practice will limit its implementation to at most $n\sim 60$ qubits, a regime where attacks are expensive but not impossible. Modulo that drawback, our protocol appears to be the only practical application of quantum computing that both requires a QC and is physically realizable today.Open AccessCertified Randomness from Quantum Supremacy
We propose an application for near-term quantum devices: namely, generating cryptographically certified random bits, to use (for example) in proof-of-stake cryptocurrencies. Our protocol repurposes the existing "quantum supremacy" experiments, based on random circuit sampling, that Google and USTC have successfully carried out starting in 2019. We show that, whenever the outputs of these experiments pass the now-standard Linear Cross-Entropy Benchmark (LXEB), under plausible hardness assumptions they necessarily contain $Ω(n)$ min-entropy, where $n$ is the number of qubits. To achieve a net gain in randomness, we use a small random seed to produce pseudorandom challenge circuits. In response to the challenge circuits, the quantum computer generates output strings that, after verification, can then be fed into a randomness extractor to produce certified nearly-uniform bits -- thereby "bootstrapping" from pseudorandomness to genuine randomness. We prove our protocol sound in two senses: (i) under a hardness assumption called Long List Quantum Supremacy Verification, which we justify in the random oracle model, and (ii) unconditionally in the random oracle model against an eavesdropper who could share arbitrary entanglement with the device. (Note that our protocol's output is unpredictable even to a computationally unbounded adversary who can see the random oracle.) Currently, the central drawback of our protocol is the exponential cost of verification, which in practice will limit its implementation to at most $n\sim 60$ qubits, a regime where attacks are expensive but not impossible. Modulo that drawback, our protocol appears to be the only practical application of quantum computing that both requires a QC and is physically realizable today. - Open Access
Efficient Tomography of Non-Interacting Fermion States
We give an efficient algorithm that learns a non-interacting fermion state, given copies of the state. For a system of $n$ non-interacting fermions and $m$ modes, we show that $O(m^3 n^2 \log(1/\delta) / \epsilon^4)$ copies of the input state and $O(m^4 n^2 \log(1/\delta)/ \epsilon^4)$ time are sufficient to learn the state to trace distance at most $\epsilon$ with probability at least $1 - \delta$. Our algorithm empirically estimates one-mode correlations in $O(m)$ different measurement bases and uses them to reconstruct a succinct description of the entire state efficiently.Open AccessEfficient Tomography of Non-Interacting Fermion States
We give an efficient algorithm that learns a non-interacting fermion state, given copies of the state. For a system of $n$ non-interacting fermions and $m$ modes, we show that $O(m^3 n^2 \log(1/\delta) / \epsilon^4)$ copies of the input state and $O(m^4 n^2 \log(1/\delta)/ \epsilon^4)$ time are sufficient to learn the state to trace distance at most $\epsilon$ with probability at least $1 - \delta$. Our algorithm empirically estimates one-mode correlations in $O(m)$ different measurement bases and uses them to reconstruct a succinct description of the entire state efficiently. - Open Access
Quantum Approximate Counting, Simplified
In 1998, Brassard, Hoyer, Mosca, and Tapp (BHMT) gave a quantum algorithm for approximate counting. Given a list of $N$ items, $K$ of them marked, their algorithm estimates $K$ to within relative error $\varepsilon$ by making only $O\left( \frac{1}{\varepsilon}\sqrt{\frac{N}{K}}\right) $ queries. Although this speedup is of "Grover" type, the BHMT algorithm has the curious feature of relying on the Quantum Fourier Transform (QFT), more commonly associated with Shor's algorithm. Is this necessary? This paper presents a simplified algorithm, which we prove achieves the same query complexity using Grover iterations only. We also generalize this to a QFT-free algorithm for amplitude estimation. Related approaches to approximate counting were sketched previously by Grover, Abrams and Williams, Suzuki et al., and Wie (the latter two as we were writing this paper), but in all cases without rigorous analysis.Open AccessQuantum Approximate Counting, Simplified
In 1998, Brassard, Hoyer, Mosca, and Tapp (BHMT) gave a quantum algorithm for approximate counting. Given a list of $N$ items, $K$ of them marked, their algorithm estimates $K$ to within relative error $\varepsilon$ by making only $O\left( \frac{1}{\varepsilon}\sqrt{\frac{N}{K}}\right) $ queries. Although this speedup is of "Grover" type, the BHMT algorithm has the curious feature of relying on the Quantum Fourier Transform (QFT), more commonly associated with Shor's algorithm. Is this necessary? This paper presents a simplified algorithm, which we prove achieves the same query complexity using Grover iterations only. We also generalize this to a QFT-free algorithm for amplitude estimation. Related approaches to approximate counting were sketched previously by Grover, Abrams and Williams, Suzuki et al., and Wie (the latter two as we were writing this paper), but in all cases without rigorous analysis. - Open Access
Degree vs. Approximate Degree and Quantum Implications of Huang's Sensitivity Theorem
Based on the recent breakthrough of Huang (2019), we show that for any total Boolean function $f$, $\bullet \quad \mathrm{deg}(f) = O(\widetilde{\mathrm{deg}}(f)^2)$: The degree of $f$ is at most quadratic in the approximate degree of $f$. This is optimal as witnessed by the OR function. $\bullet \quad \mathrm{D}(f) = O(\mathrm{Q}(f)^4)$: The deterministic query complexity of $f$ is at most quartic in the quantum query complexity of $f$. This matches the known separation (up to log factors) due to Ambainis, Balodis, Belovs, Lee, Santha, and Smotrovs (2017). We apply these results to resolve the quantum analogue of the Aanderaa--Karp--Rosenberg conjecture. We show that if $f$ is a nontrivial monotone graph property of an $n$-vertex graph specified by its adjacency matrix, then $\mathrm{Q}(f)=\Omega(n)$, which is also optimal. We also show that the approximate degree of any read-once formula on $n$ variables is $\Theta(\sqrt{n})$.Open AccessDegree vs. Approximate Degree and Quantum Implications of Huang's Sensitivity Theorem
Based on the recent breakthrough of Huang (2019), we show that for any total Boolean function $f$, $\bullet \quad \mathrm{deg}(f) = O(\widetilde{\mathrm{deg}}(f)^2)$: The degree of $f$ is at most quadratic in the approximate degree of $f$. This is optimal as witnessed by the OR function. $\bullet \quad \mathrm{D}(f) = O(\mathrm{Q}(f)^4)$: The deterministic query complexity of $f$ is at most quartic in the quantum query complexity of $f$. This matches the known separation (up to log factors) due to Ambainis, Balodis, Belovs, Lee, Santha, and Smotrovs (2017). We apply these results to resolve the quantum analogue of the Aanderaa--Karp--Rosenberg conjecture. We show that if $f$ is a nontrivial monotone graph property of an $n$-vertex graph specified by its adjacency matrix, then $\mathrm{Q}(f)=\Omega(n)$, which is also optimal. We also show that the approximate degree of any read-once formula on $n$ variables is $\Theta(\sqrt{n})$. - Open Access
New Approaches for Quantum Copy-Protection
Quantum copy protection uses the unclonability of quantum states to construct quantum software that provably cannot be pirated. Copy protection would be immensely useful, but unfortunately little is known about how to achieve it in general. In this work, we make progress on this goal, by giving the following results: - We show how to copy protect any program that cannot be learned from its input/output behavior, relative to a classical oracle. This improves on Aaronson [CCC'09], which achieves the same relative to a quantum oracle. By instantiating the oracle with post-quantum candidate obfuscation schemes, we obtain a heuristic construction of copy protection. -We show, roughly, that any program which can be watermarked can be copy detected, a weaker version of copy protection that does not prevent copying, but guarantees that any copying can be detected. Our scheme relies on the security of the assumed watermarking, plus the assumed existence of public key quantum money. Our construction is general, applicable to many recent watermarking schemes.
Open AccessNew Approaches for Quantum Copy-Protection
Quantum copy protection uses the unclonability of quantum states to construct quantum software that provably cannot be pirated. Copy protection would be immensely useful, but unfortunately little is known about how to achieve it in general. In this work, we make progress on this goal, by giving the following results: - We show how to copy protect any program that cannot be learned from its input/output behavior, relative to a classical oracle. This improves on Aaronson [CCC'09], which achieves the same relative to a quantum oracle. By instantiating the oracle with post-quantum candidate obfuscation schemes, we obtain a heuristic construction of copy protection. -We show, roughly, that any program which can be watermarked can be copy detected, a weaker version of copy protection that does not prevent copying, but guarantees that any copying can be detected. Our scheme relies on the security of the assumed watermarking, plus the assumed existence of public key quantum money. Our construction is general, applicable to many recent watermarking schemes.
- Open Access
Quantum Versus Classical Proofs and Advice
This paper studies whether quantum proofs are more powerful than classical proofs, or in complexity terms, whether QMA=QCMA. We prove three results about this question. First, we give a "quantum oracle separation" between QMA and QCMA. More concretely, we show that any quantum algorithm needs $\Omega(\sqrt{2^n/(m+1)})$ queries to find an $n$-qubit "marked state" $\lvert\psi\rangle$, even if given an $m$-bit classical description of $\lvert\psi\rangle$ together with a quantum black box that recognizes $\lvert\psi\rangle$. Second, we give an explicit QCMA protocol that nearly achieves this lower bound. Third, we show that, in the one previously-known case where quantum proofs seemed to provide an exponential advantage, classical proofs are basically just as powerful. In particular, Watrous gave a QMA protocol for verifying non-membership in finite groups. Under plausible group-theoretic assumptions, we give a QCMA protocol for the same problem. Even with no assumptions, our protocol makes only polynomially many queries to the group oracle. We end with some conjectures about quantum versus classical oracles, and about the possibility of a classical oracle separation between QMA and QCMA.Open AccessQuantum Versus Classical Proofs and Advice
This paper studies whether quantum proofs are more powerful than classical proofs, or in complexity terms, whether QMA=QCMA. We prove three results about this question. First, we give a "quantum oracle separation" between QMA and QCMA. More concretely, we show that any quantum algorithm needs $\Omega(\sqrt{2^n/(m+1)})$ queries to find an $n$-qubit "marked state" $\lvert\psi\rangle$, even if given an $m$-bit classical description of $\lvert\psi\rangle$ together with a quantum black box that recognizes $\lvert\psi\rangle$. Second, we give an explicit QCMA protocol that nearly achieves this lower bound. Third, we show that, in the one previously-known case where quantum proofs seemed to provide an exponential advantage, classical proofs are basically just as powerful. In particular, Watrous gave a QMA protocol for verifying non-membership in finite groups. Under plausible group-theoretic assumptions, we give a QCMA protocol for the same problem. Even with no assumptions, our protocol makes only polynomially many queries to the group oracle. We end with some conjectures about quantum versus classical oracles, and about the possibility of a classical oracle separation between QMA and QCMA. - Open Access
On the Quantum Complexity of Closest Pair and Related Problems
The closest pair problem is a fundamental problem of computational geometry: given a set of $n$ points in a $d$-dimensional space, find a pair with the smallest distance. A classical algorithm taught in introductory courses solves this problem in $O(n\log n)$ time in constant dimensions (i.e., when $d=O(1)$). This paper asks and answers the question of the problem's quantum time complexity. Specifically, we give an $\tilde{O}(n^{2/3})$ algorithm in constant dimensions, which is optimal up to a polylogarithmic factor by the lower bound on the quantum query complexity of element distinctness. The key to our algorithm is an efficient history-independent data structure that supports quantum interference. In $\mathrm{polylog}(n)$ dimensions, no known quantum algorithms perform better than brute force search, with a quadratic speedup provided by Grover's algorithm. To give evidence that the quadratic speedup is nearly optimal, we initiate the study of quantum fine-grained complexity and introduce the Quantum Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (QSETH), which is based on the assumption that Grover's algorithm is optimal for CNF-SAT when the clause width is large. We show that the na\"{i}ve Grover approach to closest pair in higher dimensions is optimal up to an $n^{o(1)}$ factor unless QSETH is false. We also study the bichromatic closest pair problem and the orthogonal vectors problem, with broadly similar results.Open AccessOn the Quantum Complexity of Closest Pair and Related Problems
The closest pair problem is a fundamental problem of computational geometry: given a set of $n$ points in a $d$-dimensional space, find a pair with the smallest distance. A classical algorithm taught in introductory courses solves this problem in $O(n\log n)$ time in constant dimensions (i.e., when $d=O(1)$). This paper asks and answers the question of the problem's quantum time complexity. Specifically, we give an $\tilde{O}(n^{2/3})$ algorithm in constant dimensions, which is optimal up to a polylogarithmic factor by the lower bound on the quantum query complexity of element distinctness. The key to our algorithm is an efficient history-independent data structure that supports quantum interference. In $\mathrm{polylog}(n)$ dimensions, no known quantum algorithms perform better than brute force search, with a quadratic speedup provided by Grover's algorithm. To give evidence that the quadratic speedup is nearly optimal, we initiate the study of quantum fine-grained complexity and introduce the Quantum Strong Exponential Time Hypothesis (QSETH), which is based on the assumption that Grover's algorithm is optimal for CNF-SAT when the clause width is large. We show that the na\"{i}ve Grover approach to closest pair in higher dimensions is optimal up to an $n^{o(1)}$ factor unless QSETH is false. We also study the bichromatic closest pair problem and the orthogonal vectors problem, with broadly similar results.