64,743 research outputs found
Probabilistic Proof Systems
Various types of probabilistic proof systems have played a central role in the development of computer science in the last decade. In this exposition, we concentrate on three such proof systems -- interactive proofs, zero-knowledge proofs, and probabilistic checkable proofs -- stressing the essential role of randomness in each of them. This exposition is an expanded version of a survey written for the proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians (ICM94) held in Zurich in 1994. It is hope that this exposition may be accessible to a broad audience of computer scientists and mathematians
Quantum Proofs
Quantum information and computation provide a fascinating twist on the notion
of proofs in computational complexity theory. For instance, one may consider a
quantum computational analogue of the complexity class \class{NP}, known as
QMA, in which a quantum state plays the role of a proof (also called a
certificate or witness), and is checked by a polynomial-time quantum
computation. For some problems, the fact that a quantum proof state could be a
superposition over exponentially many classical states appears to offer
computational advantages over classical proof strings. In the interactive proof
system setting, one may consider a verifier and one or more provers that
exchange and process quantum information rather than classical information
during an interaction for a given input string, giving rise to quantum
complexity classes such as QIP, QSZK, and QMIP* that represent natural quantum
analogues of IP, SZK, and MIP. While quantum interactive proof systems inherit
some properties from their classical counterparts, they also possess distinct
and uniquely quantum features that lead to an interesting landscape of
complexity classes based on variants of this model.
In this survey we provide an overview of many of the known results concerning
quantum proofs, computational models based on this concept, and properties of
the complexity classes they define. In particular, we discuss non-interactive
proofs and the complexity class QMA, single-prover quantum interactive proof
systems and the complexity class QIP, statistical zero-knowledge quantum
interactive proof systems and the complexity class \class{QSZK}, and
multiprover interactive proof systems and the complexity classes QMIP, QMIP*,
and MIP*.Comment: Survey published by NOW publisher
Quantum Cryptography Beyond Quantum Key Distribution
Quantum cryptography is the art and science of exploiting quantum mechanical
effects in order to perform cryptographic tasks. While the most well-known
example of this discipline is quantum key distribution (QKD), there exist many
other applications such as quantum money, randomness generation, secure two-
and multi-party computation and delegated quantum computation. Quantum
cryptography also studies the limitations and challenges resulting from quantum
adversaries---including the impossibility of quantum bit commitment, the
difficulty of quantum rewinding and the definition of quantum security models
for classical primitives. In this review article, aimed primarily at
cryptographers unfamiliar with the quantum world, we survey the area of
theoretical quantum cryptography, with an emphasis on the constructions and
limitations beyond the realm of QKD.Comment: 45 pages, over 245 reference
Formal Verification of Security Protocol Implementations: A Survey
Automated formal verification of security protocols has been mostly focused on analyzing high-level abstract models which, however, are significantly different from real protocol implementations written in programming languages. Recently, some researchers have started investigating techniques that bring automated formal proofs closer to real implementations. This paper surveys these attempts, focusing on approaches that target the application code that implements protocol logic, rather than the libraries that implement cryptography. According to these approaches, libraries are assumed to correctly implement some models. The aim is to derive formal proofs that, under this assumption, give assurance about the application code that implements the protocol logic. The two main approaches of model extraction and code generation are presented, along with the main techniques adopted for each approac
QIP = PSPACE
We prove that the complexity class QIP, which consists of all problems having
quantum interactive proof systems, is contained in PSPACE. This containment is
proved by applying a parallelized form of the matrix multiplicative weights
update method to a class of semidefinite programs that captures the
computational power of quantum interactive proofs. As the containment of PSPACE
in QIP follows immediately from the well-known equality IP = PSPACE, the
equality QIP = PSPACE follows.Comment: 21 pages; v2 includes corrections and minor revision
- …