Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1309.7739

Communication complexity of promise problems and their applications to finite automata

Jozef Gruska·Daowen Qiu·Shenggen Zheng
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Equality and disjointness are two of the most studied problems in communication complexity. They have been studied for both classical and also quantum communication and for various models and modes of communication. Buhrman et al. [Buh98] proved that the exact quantum communication complexity for a promise version of the equality problem is ${\bf O}(\log {n})$ while the classical deterministic communication complexity is $n+1$ for two-way communication, which was the first impressively large (exponential) gap between quantum and classical (deterministic and probabilistic) communication complexity. If an error is tolerated, both quantum and probabilistic communication complexities for equality are ${\bf O}(\log {n})$. However, even if an error is tolerated, the gaps between quantum (probabilistic) and deterministic complexity are not larger than quadratic for the disjointness problem. It is therefore interesting to ask whether there are some promise versions of the disjointness problem for which bigger gaps can be shown. We give a positive answer to such a question. Namely, we prove that there exists an exponential gap between quantum (even probabilistic) communication complexity and classical deterministic communication complexity of some specific versions of the disjointness problem. Klauck [Kla00] proved, for any language, that the state complexity of exact quantum/classical finite automata, which is a general model of one-way quantum finite automata, is not less than the state complexity of an equivalent one-way deterministic finite automata (1DFA). In this paper we show, using a communication complexity result, that situation may be different for some promise problems. Namely, we show for certain promise problem that the gap between the state complexity of exact one-way quantum finite automata and 1DFA can be exponential.

Explore related subjects

cs.CCcs.FLquant-ph

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Jozef Gruska, Daowen Qiu, Shenggen Zheng. 2013-09-30. Communication complexity of promise problems and their applications to finite automata. https://arxiv.org/abs/1309.7739

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Computational Complexity of Holant Problems on 4-regular Graphs from the Stable Subgroup Sequence of $SL(2,\mathbb{C})$

The Holant framework provides a general setting for studying counting problems and includes graph homomorphisms (\#GH) and counting constraint satisfaction problems (\#CSP) as special cases. Over the past twenty years, a series of computational complexity dichotomies have been established for Holant problems, but the classification for complex-valued signatures is still open. The main obstacle is the case in which all signatures have even arity. In this paper, we establish a dichotomy for Holant problems with a complex-valued 4-ary signature, which is a key base case for the full classification of Holant problems. We present a new strategy by introducing Schur's theorem, the classification of finite subgroups of $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{C})$ and stable subgroup sequences into the proof. These new techniques are of independent interest.

cs.CC↗
arXiv2026

Topology inside NC$^1$

We show that ACC$^0$ is precisely what can be computed with constant-width circuits of polynomial size and polylogarithmic genus. This extends a characterization given by Hansen, showing that planar constant-width circuits also characterize ACC$^0$. Thus polylogarithmic genus provides no additional computational power in this model. We consider other generalizations of planarity, including crossing number and thickness. We show that constant-width circuits of polynomial size and thickness two already suffice to capture all of NC$^1$.

cs.CC↗