TR19-136 Authors: Sourav Chakraborty, Arkadev Chattopadhyay, Nikhil Mande, Manaswi Paraashar

Publication: 6th October 2019 12:03

Downloads: 57

Keywords:

Buhrman, Cleve and Wigderson (STOC'98) observed that for every Boolean function $f : \{-1, 1\}^n \to \{-1, 1\}$ and $\bullet : \{-1, 1\}^2 \to \{-1, 1\}$ the two-party bounded-error quantum communication complexity of $(f \circ \bullet)$ is $O(Q(f) \log n)$, where $Q(f)$ is the bounded-error quantum query complexity of $f$. Note that the bounded-error randomized communication complexity of $(f \circ \bullet)$ is bounded by $O(R(f))$, where $R(f)$ denotes the bounded-error randomized query complexity of $f$. Thus, the BCW simulation has an extra $O(\log n)$ factor appearing that is absent in classical simulation. A natural question is if this factor can be avoided. H{\o}yer and de Wolf (STACS'02) showed that for the Set-Disjointness function, this can be reduced to $c^{\log^* n}$ for some constant $c$, and subsequently Aaronson and Ambainis (FOCS'03) showed that this factor can be made a constant. That is, the quantum communication complexity of the Set-Disjointness function (which is $NOR_n \circ \wedge$) is $O(Q(NOR_n))$.

Perhaps somewhat surprisingly, we show that when $ \bullet = \oplus$, then the extra $\log n$ factor in the BCW simulation is unavoidable. In other words, we exhibit a total function $F : \{-1, 1\}^n \to \{-1, 1\}$ such that $Q^{cc}(F \circ \oplus) = \Theta(Q(F) \log n)$.

To the best of our knowledge, it was not even known prior to this work whether there existed a total function $F$ and 2-bit function $\bullet$, such that $Q^{cc}(F \circ \bullet) = \omega(Q(F))$.