15
talks
6
committee roles
0
leadership roles
2012–2026
years active
Contributions
QIP QCrypt TQC presenter award · △program ◇steering ○organising □local · filled = chair
Talks
| Title | Conference | Type | Co-authors |
|---|---|---|---|
| An Exponential Separation Between Quantum Query Complexity and the Polynomial Degree | QIP 2024 | regular | ▸Andris Ambainis |
| An Exponential Separation Between Quantum Query Complexity and the Polynomial Degree | QIP 2024 | plenary_short | ▸Andris Ambainis |
| On the quantum time complexity of divide and conquer | QIP 2024 | regular | ▸Jonathan Allcock, Jinge Bao, Troy Lee, Miklos Santha |
| Taming Quantum Time Complexity | TQC 2024 | regular ▸ presenter | Stacey Jeffery, Duyal Yolcu |
Quantum query complexity has several nice properties with respect to composition. First, bounded-error quantum query algorithms can be composed without incurring log factors through error reduction (emphexactness). Second, through careful accounting (emphthriftiness), the total query complexity is smaller if subroutines are mostly run on cheaper inputs – a property that is much less obvious in quantum algorithms than in their classical counterparts. While these properties were previously seen through the model of span programs (alternatively, the dual adversary bound), a recent work by two of the authors (Belovs, Yolcu 2023) showed how to achieve these benefits without converting to span programs, by defining emphquantum Las Vegas query complexity. Independently, recent works, including by one of the authors (Jeffery 2022), have worked towards bringing thriftiness to the more practically significant setting of quantum emphtime complexity. In this work, we show how to achieve both exactness and thriftiness in the setting of time complexity. We generalize the quantum subroutine composition results of Jeffery 2022 so that, in particular, no error reduction is needed. We give a time complexity version of the well-known result in quantum query complexity, Q(fcirc g)=ØO(Q(f)cdot Q(g)), without log factors. We achieve this by employing a novel approach to the design of quantum algorithms based on what we call emphtransducers, and which we think is of large independent interest. While a span program is a completely different computational model, a transducer is a direct generalisation of a quantum algorithm, which allows for much greater transparency and control. Transducers naturally characterize general state conversion, rather than only decision problems; provide a very simple treatment of other quantum primitives such as quantum walks; and lend themselves well to time complexity analysis. |
|||
| A Direct Reduction from the Polynomial to the Adversary Method | TQC 2024 | regular ▸ presenter | — |
The polynomial and the adversary methods are the two main tools for proving lower bounds on query complexity of quantum algorithms. Both methods have found a large number of applications, some problems more suitable for one method, some for the other. It is known though that the adversary method, in its general negative-weighted version, is tight for bounded-error quantum algorithms, whereas the polynomial method is not. By the tightness of the former, for any polynomial lower bound, there ought to exist a corresponding adversary lower bound. However, direct reduction was not known. In this paper, we give a simple and direct reduction from the polynomial method (in the form of a dual polynomial) to the adversary method. This shows that any lower bound in the form of a dual polynomial is actually an adversary lower bound of a specific form. |
|||
| One-Way Ticket to Las Vegas and the Quantum Adversary | QIP 2023 | plenary_short ▸ presenter | Duyal Yolcu |
| Tight Quantum Lower Bound for Approximate Counting with Quantum States | TQC 2020 | regular | Ansis Rosmanis |
| Quantum Coupon Collector | TQC 2020 | regular | Srinivasan Arunachalam, Andrew Childs, Robin Kothari, Ansis Rosmanis, Ronald de Wolf |
| Provably secure key establishment against quantum adversaries | QCRYPT 2017 | regular | Gilles Brassard, Peter Hoyer, Marc Kaplan, Sophie Laplante, Louis Salvail |
| Separations in communication complexity using cheat sheets and information complexity | QIP 2017 | regular | ▸Anurag Anshu, Shalev Ben-David, Mika Goos, Rahul Jain, Robin Kothari, Troy Lee, Miklos Santha |
| Separations in Query Complexity Based on Pointer Functions | QIP 2016 | plenary | ▸Andris Ambainis, Kaspars Balodis, Troy Lee, Juris Smotrovs, Miklos Santha |
| Efficient Quantum Algorithms for (Gapped) Group Testing and Junta Testing | QIP 2016 | regular | ▸Andris Ambainis, Oded Regev, Ronald de Wolf |
|
“Learning-Graph-Based Quantum Algorithm for k-distinctness.” ↗
|
QIP 2013 | regular | — |
|
“Adversary Lower Bound for the k-sum Problem.” ↗
|
QIP 2013 | invited | Robert Spalek |
|
Span Programs for Functions with Constant-Sized 1-certificates ↗
|
QIP 2012 | plenary | — |
Committee service
| Conference | Committee | Position | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| QIP 2026 | PC | member | — |
| QIP 2026 | Local | member | — |
| TQC 2025 | PC | member | — |
| QIP 2020 | PC | member | — |
| TQC 2018 | PC | member | — |
| QIP 2015 | PC | member | — |
Collaborators
| Co-author | Joint talks |
|---|---|
| Andris Ambainis | 4 |
| Miklos Santha | 3 |
| Troy Lee | 3 |
| Ansis Rosmanis | 2 |
| Duyal Yolcu | 2 |
| Robin Kothari | 2 |
| Ronald de Wolf | 2 |
| Andrew Childs | 1 |
| Anurag Anshu | 1 |
| Gilles Brassard | 1 |
| Jinge Bao | 1 |
| Jonathan Allcock | 1 |
| Juris Smotrovs | 1 |
| Kaspars Balodis | 1 |
| Louis Salvail | 1 |
| Marc Kaplan | 1 |
| Mika Goos | 1 |
| Oded Regev | 1 |
| Peter Hoyer | 1 |
| Rahul Jain | 1 |