Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 49 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 53 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 19 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 16 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 103 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 172 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 472 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 39 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Quantum and Probabilistic Computers Rigorously Powerful than Traditional Computers, and Derandomization (2308.09549v6)

Published 18 Aug 2023 in cs.CC and math.PR

Abstract: In this paper, we extend the techniques used in our previous work to show that there exists a probabilistic Turing machine running within time $O(nk)$ for all $k\in\mathbb{N}_1$ accepting a language $L_d$ that is different from any language in $\mathcal{P}$, and then further to prove that $L_d\in\mathcal{BPP}$, thus separating the complexity class $\mathcal{BPP}$ from the class $\mathcal{P}$ (i.e., $\mathcal{P}\subsetneqq\mathcal{BPP}$). Since the complexity class $\mathcal{BQP}$ of {\em bounded error quantum polynomial-time} contains the complexity class $\mathcal{BPP}$ (i.e., $\mathcal{BPP}\subseteq\mathcal{BQP}$), we thus confirm the widespread-belief conjecture that quantum computers are {\em rigorously more powerful} than traditional computers (i.e., $\mathcal{P}\subsetneqq\mathcal{BQP}$). We further show that (1): $\mathcal{P}\subsetneqq\mathcal{RP}$; (2): $\mathcal{P}\subsetneqq{\rm co-}\mathcal{RP}$; (3): $\mathcal{P}\subsetneqq\mathcal{ZPP}$. Previously, whether the above relations hold or not were long-standing open questions in complexity theory. Meanwhile, the result of $\mathcal{P}\subsetneqq\mathcal{BPP}$ shows that {\em randomness} plays an essential role in probabilistic algorithm design. In particular, we go further to show that (1): The number of random bits used by any probabilistic algorithm that accepts the language $L_d$ can not be reduced to $O(\log n)$; (2): There exists no efficient (complexity-theoretic) {\em pseudorandom generator} (PRG). $$ G:{0,1}{O(\log n)}\rightarrow {0,1}n; $$ (3): There exists no quick HSG $H:k(n)\rightarrow n$ such that $k(n)=O(\log n)$.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Lightbulb On Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Authors (1)