Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Beyond Bell sampling: stabilizer state learning and quantum pseudorandomness lower bounds on qudits

Jonathan Allcock, Joao F. Doriguello, Gábor Ivanyos, Miklos Santha

TL;DR

Bell sampling provides limited information for qudits with $d>2$, so this work develops a formal framework to study qudit Bell difference sampling and its limitations. It introduces an involuted Weyl distribution and proves that stabiliser information concentrates on a subspace $\mathscr{M}+J(\mathscr{M})$, not the full stabiliser group, highlighting why Bell-based learning fails on qudits. The authors then present two stabiliser-state learning strategies: (i) Bell sampling with conjugates to efficiently identify the stabiliser with $O(n)$ copies and $O(n^3)$–$O(n^4)$ time, and (ii) a quadratic-function method that recovers $\mathbf{V},\mathbf{W}$ and phases from $O(n)$ copies in $O(n^3\operatorname{rank}(\mathbf{W}))$ time. They also develop a Haar-vs-stabiliser-distinguishing algorithm using a stabiliser tester to prove pseudorandomness lower bounds for doped Clifford circuits on qudits, with corollaries extending to general dimension and tight bounds on non-Clifford resources. Together, these results advance understanding of stabiliser-state learning and pseudorandomness on qudits, showing how to overcome Bell-based limitations and exposing fundamental limits for Clifford-based pseudorandomness with limited non-Clifford resources.

Abstract

Bell sampling is a simple yet powerful measurement primitive that has recently attracted a lot of attention, and has proven to be a valuable tool in studying stabiliser states. Unfortunately, however, it is known that Bell sampling fails when used on qu\emph{d}its of dimension $d>2$. In this paper, we explore and quantify the limitations of Bell sampling on qudits, and propose new quantum algorithms to circumvent the use of Bell sampling in solving two important problems: learning stabiliser states and providing pseudorandomness lower bounds on qudits. More specifically, as our first result, we characterise the output distribution corresponding to Bell sampling on copies of a stabiliser state and show that the output can be uniformly random, and hence reveal no information. As our second result, for $d=p$ prime we devise a quantum algorithm to identify an unknown stabiliser state in $(\mathbb{C}^p)^{\otimes n}$ that uses $O(n)$ copies of the input state and runs in time $O(n^4)$. As our third result, we provide a quantum algorithm that efficiently distinguishes a Haar-random state from a state with non-negligible stabiliser fidelity. As a corollary, any Clifford circuit on qudits of dimension $d$ using $O(\log{n}/\log{d})$ auxiliary non-Clifford single-qudit gates cannot prepare computationally pseudorandom quantum states.

Beyond Bell sampling: stabilizer state learning and quantum pseudorandomness lower bounds on qudits

TL;DR

Bell sampling provides limited information for qudits with , so this work develops a formal framework to study qudit Bell difference sampling and its limitations. It introduces an involuted Weyl distribution and proves that stabiliser information concentrates on a subspace , not the full stabiliser group, highlighting why Bell-based learning fails on qudits. The authors then present two stabiliser-state learning strategies: (i) Bell sampling with conjugates to efficiently identify the stabiliser with copies and time, and (ii) a quadratic-function method that recovers and phases from copies in time. They also develop a Haar-vs-stabiliser-distinguishing algorithm using a stabiliser tester to prove pseudorandomness lower bounds for doped Clifford circuits on qudits, with corollaries extending to general dimension and tight bounds on non-Clifford resources. Together, these results advance understanding of stabiliser-state learning and pseudorandomness on qudits, showing how to overcome Bell-based limitations and exposing fundamental limits for Clifford-based pseudorandomness with limited non-Clifford resources.

Abstract

Bell sampling is a simple yet powerful measurement primitive that has recently attracted a lot of attention, and has proven to be a valuable tool in studying stabiliser states. Unfortunately, however, it is known that Bell sampling fails when used on qu\emph{d}its of dimension . In this paper, we explore and quantify the limitations of Bell sampling on qudits, and propose new quantum algorithms to circumvent the use of Bell sampling in solving two important problems: learning stabiliser states and providing pseudorandomness lower bounds on qudits. More specifically, as our first result, we characterise the output distribution corresponding to Bell sampling on copies of a stabiliser state and show that the output can be uniformly random, and hence reveal no information. As our second result, for prime we devise a quantum algorithm to identify an unknown stabiliser state in that uses copies of the input state and runs in time . As our third result, we provide a quantum algorithm that efficiently distinguishes a Haar-random state from a state with non-negligible stabiliser fidelity. As a corollary, any Clifford circuit on qudits of dimension using auxiliary non-Clifford single-qudit gates cannot prepare computationally pseudorandom quantum states.
Paper Structure (20 sections, 37 theorems, 96 equations, 3 algorithms)

This paper contains 20 sections, 37 theorems, 96 equations, 3 algorithms.

Key Result

Lemma 6

Let $J:\mathbb{F}_p^{2n}\to\mathbb{F}_p^{2n}$ be the involution. For any $\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}\in\mathbb{F}_p^{2n}$ and subspace $\mathscr{X}\subseteq\mathbb{F}_p^{2n}$, it holds that $J(J(\mathbf{x})) = \mathbf{x}$, $[J(\mathbf{x}),J(\mathbf{y})] = -[\mathbf{x},\mathbf{y}]$, and $J(\mathscr{X}^{\m

Theorems & Definitions (81)

  • Definition 1: ji2018pseudorandom
  • Definition 3
  • Definition 5: Involution
  • Lemma 6
  • Lemma 7
  • Definition 8
  • Lemma 9: Parseval's identity
  • proof
  • Definition 10: Convolution
  • Lemma 11
  • ...and 71 more