Paper detail

Sampling and the complexity of nature

Randomness is an intrinsic feature of quantum theory. The outcome of any quantum measurement will be random, sampled from a probability distribution that is defined by the measured quantum state. The task of sampling from a prescribed probability distribution is therefore a natural technological application of quantum devices. In the research presented in this thesis, I investigate the complexity-theoretic and physical foundations of quantum sampling algorithms. I assess the computational power of natural quantum simulators and close loopholes in the complexity-theoretic argument for the classical intractability of quantum samplers (Part I). I shed light on how and under which conditions quantum sampling devices can be tested or verified in regimes that are not simulable on classical computers (Part II). Finally, I explore the computational boundary between classical and quantum computing devices (Part III). In particular, I develop efficiently computable measures of the infamous Monte Carlo sign problem and assess those measures both in terms of their practicability as a tool for alleviating or easing the sign problem and the computational complexity of this task. An overarching theme of the thesis is the quantum sign problem which arises due to destructive interference between paths -- an intrinsically quantum effect. The (non-)existence of a sign problem takes on the role as a criterion which delineates the boundary between classical and quantum computing devices. I begin the thesis by identifying the quantum sign problem as a root of the computational intractability of quantum output probabilities. It turns out that the intricate structure of the probability distributions the sign problem gives rise to, prohibits their verification from few samples. In an ironic twist, I show that assessing the intrinsic sign problem of a quantum system is again an intractable problem.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.