← Atlas

Algorithms · Quantum query algorithm

Testing commutativity of a black-box group

Given a list of k generators for a group G together with black-box access to group multiplication, decide whether G is commutative using as few queries to that black box as possible.

Attested & literatureUpdated

View frozen graph

  • Record typeLiterature reference
  • Speedup class (secondary source)Polynomial
  • Primary source on the speedupNot checked against the primary source yet
  • Reported costO(k^(2/3)) for a black-box group given by k generators, with a lower bound of Ω(k^(2/3)) obtained by reduction from a special case of Element Distinctness; the Zoo records the resulting quantum query complexity as Θ̃(k^(2/3)). The classical baseline is Pak's randomized algorithm involving O(k) group operations, which the same paper states it proves optimal for the randomized model.
  • Papers1

The paper considers the commutativity of a black-box group specified by its k generators, a problem whose complexity in terms of k was first considered by Pak, whose randomized algorithm involves O(k) group operations. Magniez and Nayak construct a quantum algorithm for this problem whose complexity is in O(k^(2/3)), and the paper states that the algorithm uses and highlights the power of the quantization method of Szegedy. For the lower bound of Ω(k^(2/3)) the paper gives a reduction from a special case of Element Distinctness to the commutativity problem, and it describes its own construction, in the abstract's own wording, as a quite optimal one. The authors also report that along the way they prove the optimality of Pak's algorithm for the randomized model, while the Zoo describes Pak's O(k) algorithm as the best known classical one. This record's speedup class, "Polynomial", is a secondary source's classification of the oracular algorithms it files this under — not a claim its primary paper makes. Not checked against the primary source yet. Reported cost: O(k^(2/3)) for a black-box group given by k generators, with a lower bound of Ω(k^(2/3)) obtained by reduction from a special case of Element Distinctness; the Zoo records the resulting quantum query complexity as Θ̃(k^(2/3)). The classical baseline is Pak's randomized algorithm involving O(k) group operations, which the same paper states it proves optimal for the randomized model..

References

  • Quantum Complexity of Testing Group Commutativity

    Frederic Magniez, Ashwin Nayak · 2005

    Primary source: it constructs the quantum algorithm whose complexity is in O(k^(2/3)) for a black-box group given by k generators, credits the construction to the quantization method of Szegedy, derives the Ω(k^(2/3)) lower bound by reduction from a special case of Element Distinctness, and reports a proof that Pak's O(k) randomized algorithm is optimal for the randomized model. Consult it for the black-box group model it assumes and for the special case of Element Distinctness the reduction uses.

Attested & literature
  • Peer-reviewed paper
Method
Curation only. The problem statement was recorded from the literature; the speedup class is not yet checked against the record's own primary paper; the primary reference's title, authors and submission year were read from its arXiv abs page; the complexity claim was taken from a clause of that paper's abstract (abstract of arXiv:quant-ph/0506265, quoted as it is written there: "We construct a quite optimal quantum algorithm for this problem whose complexity is in O (k^{2/3})", "For the lower bound of Omega(k^{2/3}), we give a reduction from a special case of Element Distinctness to our problem", and, for the classical side, "who gave a randomized algorithm involving O(k) group operations" together with "we prove the optimality of the algorithm of Pak for the randomized model"; Quantum Algorithm Zoo entry "Group Commutativity" (LaTeX rendered into Unicode): "Magniez and Nayak have shown that the quantum query complexity of this task is Θ̃(k^(2/3))". The Zoo's tilde absorbs logarithmic factors that the abstract's "O (k^{2/3})" does not display.). No circuit was constructed, simulated or run.
Result
Pass · the record's problem, speedup class and primary reference agree with the two sources named above.
Caveat
This is a literature record: no group was represented, no multiplication black box was implemented, and no circuit was built, compiled, simulated or run. The counts are queries to that black box — group operations — so they bound neither gate count nor circuit depth, and the cost of realizing group multiplication for a concrete G on hardware is outside this record. The two sources state the bound in two notations that are not identical: the Zoo writes Θ̃(k^(2/3)), whose tilde absorbs logarithmic factors, while the abstract's clause carries no tilde and calls the algorithm quite optimal rather than optimal; this record does not resolve the gap those two hedges leave. Everything above is measured in k, the number of generators supplied, and not in the order of G or the length of its element encodings, so nothing here bounds cost as a function of group size. The Ω(k^(2/3)) lower bound is recorded as the paper's, by reduction from a special case of Element Distinctness that is not characterized here, and the proof of optimality for Pak's randomized algorithm is likewise reported rather than re-derived.
Quantum Complexity of Testing Group Commutativity ↗
Kind
curated reference
Reviewed by
Leona Quantum curation pass
License
Citation metadata only; source publication terms apply
group commutativityblack-box groupelement distinctnessquery complexityszegedy quantization

Atlas stars stay in the public catalog. Saving this entry to your workspace starts an unstarred private copy.