When Does Adaptivity Help for Quantum State Learning?
Sitan Chen, Brice Huang, Jerry Li, Allen Liu, Mark Sellke
摘要
We consider the classic question of state tomography: given copies of an unknown quantum state , output which is close to in some sense, e.g. trace distance or fidelity. When one is allowed to make coherent measurements entangled across all copies, copies are necessary and sufficient to get trace distance [18], [29]. Unfortunately, the protocols achieving this rate incur large quantum memory overheads that preclude implementation on near-term devices. On the other hand, the best known protocol using incoherent (single-copy) measurements uses copies [24], and multiple papers have posed it as an open question to understand whether or not this rate is tight [6], [18]. In this work, we fully resolve this question, by showing that any protocol using incoherent measurements, even if they are chosen adaptively, requires copies, matching the upper bound of [24]. We do so by a new proof technique which directly bounds the “tilt” of the posterior distribution after measurements, which yields a surprisingly short proof of our lower bound, and which we believe may be of independent interest. While this implies that adaptivity does not help for tomography with respect to trace distance, we show that it actually does help for tomography with respect to infidelity. We give an adaptive algorithm that outputs a state which is -close in infidelity to using only copies, which is optimal for incoherent measurements. In contrast, it is known [18] that any nonadaptive algorithm requires copies. While it is folklore that in 2 dimensions, one can achieve a scaling of , to the best of our knowledge, our algorithm is the first to achieve the optimal rate in all dimensions.
问问这篇 Paper
智能体会读完全文。
Lune 把这篇 Paper 索引到了每一个公式,引用它的顶会 Paper 也一样。你提问,回答直接引用原文。
引用它的顶会 Paper9
- Quantum tomography using state-preparation unitariesJoran van Apeldoorn, Arjan Cornelissen, András Gilyén, Giacomo NanniciniSODA 2023 · 被引用 34 次
- The Debiased Keyl's Algorithm: A New Unbiased Estimator for Full State TomographyAngelos Pelecanos, Jack Spilecki, John WrightSTOC 2026 · 被引用 22 次
- Optimal Tradeoffs for Estimating Pauli ObservablesSitan Chen, Weiyuan Gong, Qi YeFOCS 2024 · 被引用 13 次
- An Optimal Tradeoff between Entanglement and Copy Complexity for State TomographySitan Chen, Jerry Li, Allen LiuSTOC 2024 · 被引用 9 次
- Online Learning of Pure States is as Hard as Mixed StatesMaxime Meyer, Soumik Adhikary, Naixu Guo, Patrick RebentrostNeurIPS 2025 · 被引用 3 次
它引用的顶会 Paper4
- Exponential Separations Between Learning With and Without Quantum MemorySitan Chen, Jordan Cotler, Hsin-Yuan Huang, Jerry LiFOCS 2021 · 被引用 79 次
- Quantum tomography using state-preparation unitariesJoran van Apeldoorn, Arjan Cornelissen, András Gilyén, Giacomo NanniciniSODA 2023 · 被引用 34 次
- Entanglement is Necessary for Optimal Quantum Property TestingSébastien Bubeck, Sitan Chen, Jerry LiFOCS 2020 · 被引用 33 次
- Tight Bounds for Quantum State Certification with Incoherent MeasurementsSitan Chen, Jerry Li, Brice Huang, Allen LiuFOCS 2022 · 被引用 19 次
相关 Paper
- Pauli Measurements Are Not Optimal for Single-Copy TomographyJayadev Acharya, Abhilash Dharmavarapu, Yuhan Liu, Nengkun YuSTOC 2025 · 被引用 1 次
- Instance-Optimal Quantum State Certification with Entangled MeasurementsRyan O'Donnell, Chirag WadhwaSTOC 2026 · 被引用 14 次
- Beating full state tomography for unentangled spectrum estimationAngelos Pelecanos, Xinyu Tan, Ewin Tang, John WrightSODA 2026
- Query-optimal estimation of unitary channels in diamond distanceJeongwan Haah, Robin Kothari, Ryan O'Donnell, Ewin TangFOCS 2023 · 被引用 21 次
- Few Single-Qubit Measurements Suffice to Certify Any Quantum StateMeghal Gupta, William He, Ryan O'DonnellSTOC 2026 · 被引用 21 次
