Optimal Tradeoffs for Estimating Pauli Observables

We revisit the problem of Pauli shadow tomography: given copies of an unknown n-qubit quantum state$\rho$, estimate Tr$(P\rho)$for some set of Pauli operators$F$to within additive error$\epsilon$. This has been a popular testbed for exploring the advantage of protocols with quantum memory over those without: with enough memory to measure two copies at a time, one can use Bell sampling to estimate$\vert \text{Tr}(P\rho)$for all$P$using$O(n/\epsilon^{4})$copies, but with$k\leq n$qubits of memory,$\Omega(2^{(n-k)/3})$copies are needed. These results leave open several natural questions. How does this picture change in the physically relevant setting where one only needs to estimate a certain subset of Paulis? What is the optimal dependence on$\epsilon ?$What is the optimal tradeoff between quantum memory and sample complexity? We answer all of these questions: •For any subset$A$of Paulis and any family of measurement strategies, we completely characterize the optimal sample complexity, up to$\log\vert A\vert$factors. •We show any protocol that makes poly$(n)$-copy measure-ments must make$\Omega(1/\epsilon^{4})$measurements. •For any protocol that makes poly$(n)$-copy measurements and only has$k < n$qubits of memory, we show that$\tilde{\Theta}(\min\{2^{n}/\epsilon^{2},2^{n-k}/\epsilon^{4}\})$copies are necessary and sufficient. The protocols we propose can also estimate the actual values$\text{Tr}(P\rho)$, rather than just their absolute values as in prior work. Additionally, as a byproduct of our techniques, we establish tight bounds for the task of purity testing and show that it exhibits an intriguing phase transition not present in the memory-sample tradeoff for Pauli shadow tomography.