Quantum Coordination Advantages in AI State-Tracking Tasks: Semantic Compilation and Latent Memory
A theoretical result maps AI state-tracking tasks to semantic interfaces where quantum memory can beat classical boundary states.
Excerpt
We prove inference-time quantum coordination advantages for specified AI state-tracking tasks. A solver compresses semantic history into a future-accessible boundary state and later answers a query. We count communication $B$, persistent instance-dependent memory $M$, and local work $D$; classical recurrence, caches, tools, and recomputation are allowed and charged. The central result is a boundary-preserving semantic-compilation theorem. It maps a finite one-way, streaming, or adaptive causal task into a semantic AI interface while preserving event order and access to past input. Classical boundary-state lower bounds and quantum-memory upper bounds transfer up to explicit compiler overhead, independently of the finite-precision recurrent architecture. Two applications have classical semantics. Matched-entity synopsis QA inherits the hidden-matching separation between $O(\log N)$ qubits and $Ω(\sqrt{N})$ classical boundary bits. Continual requirements auditing inherits a Max-$k$SAT streaming separation: a recurrent solver uses $O(\log^5 n\log(1/δ))$ qubits and polylogarithmic classical workspace to obtain a $0.7172$-approximation, whereas every classical one-pass finite-information solver attaining that ratio requires $Ω(\sqrt{n})$ coordination width. As a quantum-native compiler test, a stabilizer latent-state dialogue uses $n$ qubits, while every exact finite-state classical causal online realization satisfies $B+M \ge \frac{1}{2}n^2+(\frac{3}{2}-\log_2 3)n+O(1)$. The sourc
Read at source: https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.11066v1