Interactive proofs for verifying (quantum) learning and testing

We study stabilizer state testing and learning with limited coherent quantum memory. Here an algorithm sequentially receives copies of an unknown $n$-qubit state, but may keep only $k$ qubits of coherent quantum memory between measurements. With unrestricted memory, seminal work of Gross, Nezami and Walter showed how to test $n$-qubit stabilizer states using $6$ copies, which is dimension independent, unlike the learning complexity of $Θ(n)$. We show that this testing-vs-learning separation is lost under memory constraints. More concretely we show that (1) The sample complexity of testing stabilizer states in the $k$-qubit memory framework is $Θ(n-k)$. Our upper bound goes via a novel connection to the hidden shift problem and the lower bound is proven using a novel approach to average case bounds on likelihood ratios via combinatorics of the stochastic orthogonal group. (2) The sample complexity of learning stabilizer states with $k$ qubits of memory, in the non-adaptive framework, is $Θ(n^2/k)$. As a further application of our techniques, we prove an exponential lower bound for purity testing even when the memory may be left coherent throughout the protocol. Our main results identify coherent quantum memory as the resource enabling the usual separation between stabilizer testing and learning. In particular, even with $k=0.99n$ qubits of memory, there is no constant-copy stabilizer tester; furthermore for $k=cn$ qubits of memory (for $0< c < 1$), stabilizer testing is as hard as learning, with both requiring $Θ(n)$ copies.

We study the power of quantum examples, as compared to classical examples, in the PAC learning framework. Here, we have two learning algorithms, both with access to quantum computation, but one gets quantum examples, whereas the other gets classical examples. It was previously unknown whether there were learning tasks that can be efficiently performed but not by the latter. Our primary result is to show that relative to an oracle, there are distributions that can be efficiently generated by a quantum learner with access to quantum examples, but not by a quantum learner with access to only classical examples, making progress to answering this question in the affirmative.

Given that quantum computers are naturally suited to simulate the behavior of quantum many-body systems, an immediate question arises: can one formulate physically motivated quantum machine learning (QML) tasks that exhibit learning separations? We address this problem by studying the learnability of quantum many-body dynamics from the perspective of probably approximately correct (PAC)-learning. Concretely, we devise a supervised learning problem where the training set consists of specifications of randomized stabilizer probe states, evolution times sampled uniformly from a polynomially large time interval $[0,T]$, coupled with expectation values of certain observables evaluated on the resulting time-evolved state under an unknown Hamiltonian. For this learning task, we provide an efficient quantum procedure whose training phase learns the underlying Hamiltonian from short-time training samples, and whose deployment phase combines Hamiltonian simulation with the classical shadows protocol to perform inference on a newly given data point. By contrast, the existence of $O(\mathsf{poly}(n))$-time instances ensures classical hardness: by embedding a $\mathsf{BQP}$-complete computation into the polynomially long time-dynamics of a low-intersection variant of the Feynman-Kitaev clock Hamiltonian construction, we show that, for a certain family of input distributions, no randomized classical polynomial-time algorithm can fulfill our learning condition, unless $\mathsf{BQP}\subseteq\mathsf{P/poly}$. Furthermore, we show that the classically hard instance maintains quantum learnability. We also give an interpretation of our results in learning-assisted certified quantum simulation. Taken together, our results demonstrate a rigorous learning separation for a natural ML task based on Hamiltonian evolution, while building connections between quantum learning theory, quantum simulation, and QML.