Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Large Deviation Bounds for k-designs

Richard A. Low

TL;DR

The paper develops a framework to derandomize large deviation bounds on functions of unitaries by replacing Haar randomness with approximate unitary $k$-designs, enabling efficient sampling while preserving first-moment properties. It proves a general concentration theorem for degree-$K$ polynomials under ε-approximate $k$-designs and applies it to three domains: entropy of pseudo-random states, thermalization and canonical-state emergence, and the feasibility of measurement-based quantum computing with pseudo-random states. The results show that polynomial-size designs can reproduce many Haar-like phenomena, offering practical routes for derandomized quantum information tasks, albeit with limitations on certain exponential-tail bounds. The work highlights the connection between random circuit dynamics and $k$-designs and outlines potential extensions to broader derandomization problems.

Abstract

We present a technique for derandomising large deviation bounds of functions on the unitary group. We replace the Haar distribution with a pseudo-random distribution, a k-design. k-designs have the first k moments equal to those of the Haar distribution. The advantage of this is that (approximate) k-designs can be implemented efficiently, whereas Haar random unitaries cannot. We find large deviation bounds for unitaries chosen from a k-design and then illustrate this general technique with three applications. We first show that the von Neumann entropy of a pseudo-random state is almost maximal. Then we show that, if the dynamics of the universe produces a k-design, then suitably sized subsystems will be in the canonical state, as predicted by statistical mechanics. Finally we show that pseudo-random states are useless for measurement based quantum computation.

Large Deviation Bounds for k-designs

TL;DR

The paper develops a framework to derandomize large deviation bounds on functions of unitaries by replacing Haar randomness with approximate unitary -designs, enabling efficient sampling while preserving first-moment properties. It proves a general concentration theorem for degree- polynomials under ε-approximate -designs and applies it to three domains: entropy of pseudo-random states, thermalization and canonical-state emergence, and the feasibility of measurement-based quantum computing with pseudo-random states. The results show that polynomial-size designs can reproduce many Haar-like phenomena, offering practical routes for derandomized quantum information tasks, albeit with limitations on certain exponential-tail bounds. The work highlights the connection between random circuit dynamics and -designs and outlines potential extensions to broader derandomization problems.

Abstract

We present a technique for derandomising large deviation bounds of functions on the unitary group. We replace the Haar distribution with a pseudo-random distribution, a k-design. k-designs have the first k moments equal to those of the Haar distribution. The advantage of this is that (approximate) k-designs can be implemented efficiently, whereas Haar random unitaries cannot. We find large deviation bounds for unitaries chosen from a k-design and then illustrate this general technique with three applications. We first show that the von Neumann entropy of a pseudo-random state is almost maximal. Then we show that, if the dynamics of the universe produces a k-design, then suitably sized subsystems will be in the canonical state, as predicted by statistical mechanics. Finally we show that pseudo-random states are useless for measurement based quantum computation.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 17 sections, 19 theorems, 58 equations.

Key Result

Theorem 1.1

Let $d_E \ge d_S \ge 3$. Then for unitaries chosen from the Haar measure where $C = \frac{1}{8 \pi^2}$ and $\beta = \frac{1}{\ln 2} \frac{d_S}{d_E}$.

Theorems & Definitions (40)

  • Theorem 1.1: AspectsOfGenericEntanglement Theorem 3.3
  • Theorem 1.2
  • Theorem 1.3
  • Theorem 1.4
  • Theorem 1.5
  • proof
  • Corollary 1.6
  • proof
  • Definition 2.1
  • Definition 2.2
  • ...and 30 more