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

Fine-grained Complexity Meets IP = PSPACE

In this paper we study the fine-grained complexity of finding exact and approximate solutions to problems in P. Our main contribution is showing reductions from exact to approximate solution for a host of such problems. As one (notable) example, we show that the Closest-LCS-Pair problem (Given two sets of strings $A$ and $B$, compute exactly the maximum $\textsf{LCS}(a, b)$ with $(a, b) \in A \times B$) is equivalent to its approximation version (under near-linear time reductions, and with a constant approximation factor). More generally, we identify a class of problems, which we call BP-Pair-Class, comprising both exact and approximate solutions, and show that they are all equivalent under near-linear time reductions. Exploring this class and its properties, we also show: $\bullet$ Under the NC-SETH assumption (a significantly more relaxed assumption than SETH), solving any of the problems in this class requires essentially quadratic time. $\bullet$ Modest improvements on the running time of known algorithms (shaving log factors) would imply that NEXP is not in non-uniform $\textsf{NC}^1$. $\bullet$ Finally, we leverage our techniques to show new barriers for deterministic approximation algorithms for LCS. At the heart of these new results is a deep connection between interactive proof systems for bounded-space computations and the fine-grained complexity of exact and approximate solutions to problems in P. In particular, our results build on the proof techniques from the classical IP = PSPACE result

The subpower membership problem for semigroups

Fix a finite semigroup $S$ and let $a_1,\ldots,a_k, b$ be tuples in a direct power $S^n$. The subpower membership problem (SMP) asks whether $b$ can be generated by $a_1,\ldots,a_k$. If $S$ is a finite group, then there is a folklore algorithm that decides this problem in time polynomial in $nk$. For semigroups this problem always lies in PSPACE. We show that the SMP for a full transformation semigroup on 3 letters or more is actually PSPACE-complete, while on 2 letters it is in P. For commutative semigroups, we provide a dichotomy result: if a commutative semigroup $S$ embeds into a direct product of a Clifford semigroup and a nilpotent semigroup, then SMP(S) is in P; otherwise it is NP-complete