aiqbench analysis
This research establishes a fundamental lower bound for quantum state distinguishing under forward-only oracle access, proving that the standard quadratic query complexity persists even when both states are known. The authors counter this limitation by presenting a dimension-independent algorithm for a continuous-time variant that achieves linear scaling through quantum Zeno dynamics. These findings clarify the precise resource trade-offs between unitary reversibility and physical evolution time in quantum information protocols.
On State Distinguishing Without Inverse Queries
arXiv:2610.05389v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In the quantum state distinguishing problem, an algorithm is given copies of a state $|\psi\rangle$ or $|\phi\rangle$ separated by trace distance $\varepsilon$, and tasked with deciding which is the case. It is a standard result that $\Theta(\varepsilon^{-2})$ copies are required, while having access to a unitary state preparation oracle and its inverse improves this to $\Theta(\varepsilon^{-1})$ queries. We study the intermediate case with forward-only access, capturing scenarios where the oracle is a physical process that cannot be reversed. Tang and Wright recently showed that distinguishing a known state from an \emph{unknown} close state requires $\Omega(\varepsilon^{-2})$ forward queries in high dimension; we strengthen this result by proving the same bound even when both states are known, as in the state distinguishing setting. Moreover, our lower bound uses a direct hybrid argument, avoiding advanced compressed oracle techniques used in the prior work. In contrast, we give a dimension-independent algorithm solving a continuous-time variant of state distinguishing with only $O(\varepsilon^{-1})$ total forward evolution time. The algorithm uses quantum Zeno dynamics to confine evolution to a known two-dimensional subspace. Thus, a quadratic advantage survives without inverse access for a natural continuous-time analogue of state distinguishing.
Abstract:In the quantum state distinguishing problem, an algorithm is given copies of a state $|\psi\rangle$ or $|\phi\rangle$ separated by trace distance $\varepsilon$, and tasked with deciding which is the case. It is a standard result that $\Theta(\varepsilon^{-2})$ copies are required, while having access to a unitary state preparation oracle and its inverse improves this to $\Theta(\varepsilon^{-1})$ queries. We study the intermediate case with forward-only access, capturing scenarios where the oracle is a physical process that cannot be reversed. Tang and Wright recently showed that distinguishing a known state from an \emph{unknown} close state requires $\Omega(\varepsilon^{-2})$ forward queries in high dimension; we strengthen this result by proving the same bound even when both states are known, as in the state distinguishing setting. Moreover, our lower bound uses a direct hybrid argument, avoiding advanced compressed oracle techniques used in the prior work. In contrast, we give a dimension-independent algorithm solving a continuous-time variant of state distinguishing with only $O(\varepsilon^{-1})$ total forward evolution time. The algorithm uses quantum Zeno dynamics to confine evolution to a known two-dimensional subspace. Thus, a quadratic advantage survives without inverse access for a natural continuous-time analogue of state distinguishing.
arXiv:2610.05389 [quant-ph]
(or arXiv:2610.05389v1 [quant-ph] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.05389 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 282 words
Related coverage

Why do models task game?
AI Alignment Forum · Aug 6, 2026

Frontier AI Risk Report (February–March 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026

Frontier Risk Report (February to March 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026

Informe de riesgos de la IA de frontera (febrero–marzo de 2026)
METR · May 19, 2026