MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7110396286 · doi:10.4230/lipics.itcs.2025.33

Bosonic Quantum Computational Complexity

2025· article· en· W7110396286 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersInstitute for Quantum Information and Matter, California Institute of TechnologyAgence Nationale de la RechercheNational Science Foundation
KeywordsQuantum computerQuantum complexity theoryQuantum algorithmQuantumUpper and lower boundsAdiabatic quantum computationComplexity classQuantum informationObservableHilbert space

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In recent years, quantum computing involving physical systems with continuous degrees of freedom, such as the bosonic quantum states of light, has attracted significant interest. However, a well-defined quantum complexity theory for these bosonic computations over infinite-dimensional Hilbert spaces is missing. In this work, we lay the foundations for such a research program. We introduce natural complexity classes and problems based on bosonic generalizations of BQP, the local Hamiltonian problem, and QMA. We uncover several relationships and subtle differences between standard Boolean classical and discrete-variable quantum complexity classes, and identify outstanding open problems. Our main contributions include the following: 1) Bosonic computations. We show that the power of Gaussian computations up to logspace reductions is equivalent to bounded-error quantum logspace (BQL, characterized by the problem of inverting well-conditioned matrices). More generally, we define classes of continuous-variable quantum polynomial time computations with a bounded probability of error (CVBQP) based on gates generated by polynomial bosonic Hamiltonians and particle-number measurements. Due to the infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, it is not a priori clear whether a decidable upper bound can be obtained for these classes. We identify complete problems for these classes, and we demonstrate a BQP lower bound and an EXPSPACE upper bound by proving bounds on the average energy throughout the computation. We further show that the problem of computing expectation values of polynomial bosonic observables at the output of bosonic quantum circuits using Gaussian and cubic phase gates is in PSPACE. 2) Bosonic ground energy problems. We prove that the problem of deciding whether the spectrum of a bosonic Hamiltonian is bounded from below is co-NP-hard. Furthermore, we show that the problem of finding the minimum energy of a bosonic Hamiltonian critically depends on the non-Gaussian stellar rank of the family of energy-constrained states one optimizes over: for zero stellar rank, i.e., optimizing over Gaussian states, it is NP-complete; for polynomially-bounded stellar rank, it is in QMA; for unbounded stellar rank, it is RE-hard, i.e., undecidable.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDROPS (Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz Center for Informatics)Same topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207