Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 cited by

Revisiting dequantization and quantum advantage in learning tasks

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2112.00811 v2 pith:DGDSN5ZP submitted 2021-12-01 quant-ph cs.ITcs.LGmath.IT

classification quant-phcs.ITcs.LGmath.IT
keywords quantumalgorithmsaccessclassicalstateinputsadvantagelearning
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

0 comments
abstract

It has been shown that the apparent advantage of some quantum machine learning algorithms may be efficiently replicated using classical algorithms with suitable data access -- a process known as dequantization. Existing works on dequantization compare quantum algorithms which take copies of an n-qubit quantum state $|x\rangle = \sum_{i} x_i |i\rangle$ as input to classical algorithms which have sample and query (SQ) access to the vector $x$. In this note, we prove that classical algorithms with SQ access can accomplish some learning tasks exponentially faster than quantum algorithms with quantum state inputs. Because classical algorithms are a subset of quantum algorithms, this demonstrates that SQ access can sometimes be significantly more powerful than quantum state inputs. Our findings suggest that the absence of exponential quantum advantage in some learning tasks may be due to SQ access being too powerful relative to quantum state inputs. If we compare quantum algorithms with quantum state inputs to classical algorithms with access to measurement data on quantum states, the landscape of quantum advantage can be dramatically different. We remark that when the quantum states are constructed from exponential-size classical data, comparing SQ access and quantum state inputs is appropriate since both require exponential time to prepare.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 5 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. High-rate qLDPC processors

    quant-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    Non-abelian "mitten" qLDPC codes achieve 20% encoding rate with distances 10-24 on 150-975 qubits, and simulations indicate fault-tolerant processors sustaining ~10^10 logical operations at 0.1% physical error rate.

  2. Optimal complex conjugation of unknown isometry channels

    quant-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    The optimal n-use fidelity for complex conjugating an unknown isometry C^d→C^D is derived in closed form, with parallel protocols proven optimal among all general quantum superchannels.

  3. Quantum Computer Benchmarking: An Explorative Systematic Literature Review

    quant-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A systematic review of 329 quantum benchmarking studies yields a stack-aligned taxonomy and definitions for hardware-, software-, and application-focused benchmarks.

  4. Quantum reinforcement learning of classical rare dynamics: Enhancement by intrinsic Fourier features

    quant-ph 2025-04 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Quantum reinforcement learning agents with one- and two-qubit parameterized circuits learn to generate random walk bridges in a toy rare-event task and can match or beat small neural-network agents with fewer parameters.

  5. A brief history of quantum vs classical computational advantage

    quant-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 2.0 of 10

    A single-author review of all quantum computational advantage claims to date, their classical refutations, and the progress of quantum error correction.

Pith tools