Increasing the power of the verifier in Quantum Zero Knowledge

In quantum zero knowledge, the assumption was made that the verifier is only using unitary operations. Under this assumption, many nice properties have been shown about quantum zero knowledge, including the fact that Honest-Verifier Quantum Statistical Zero Knowledge (HVQSZK) is equal to Cheating-Verifier Quantum Statistical Zero Knowledge (QSZK) (see [Wat02,Wat06]). In this paper, we study what happens when we allow an honest verifier to flip some coins in addition to using unitary operations. Flipping a coin is a non-unitary operation but doesn't seem at first to enhance the cheating possibilities of the verifier since a classical honest verifier can flip coins. In this setting, we show an unexpected result: any classical Interactive Proof has an Honest-Verifier Quantum Statistical Zero Knowledge proof with coins. Note that in the classical case, honest verifier SZK is no more powerful than SZK and hence it is not believed to contain even NP. On the other hand, in the case of cheating verifiers, we show that Quantum Statistical Zero Knowledge where the verifier applies any non-unitary operation is equal to Quantum Zero-Knowledge where the verifier uses only unitaries. One can think of our results in two complementary ways. If we would like to use the honest verifier model as a means to study the general model by taking advantage of their equivalence, then it is imperative to use the unitary definition without coins, since with the general one this equivalence is most probably not true. On the other hand, if we would like to use quantum zero knowledge protocols in a cryptographic scenario where the honest-but-curious model is sufficient, then adding the unitary constraint severely decreases the power of quantum zero knowledge protocols.Comment: 17 pages, 0 figures, to appear in FSTTCS'0

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

Perfect zero knowledge for quantum multiprover interactive proofs

In this work we consider the interplay between multiprover interactive proofs, quantum entanglement, and zero knowledge proofs - notions that are central pillars of complexity theory, quantum information and cryptography. In particular, we study the relationship between the complexity class MIP$^*$, the set of languages decidable by multiprover interactive proofs with quantumly entangled provers, and the class PZKMIP$^*$, which is the set of languages decidable by MIP$^*$ protocols that furthermore possess the perfect zero knowledge property. Our main result is that the two classes are equal, i.e., MIP$^* =$ PZKMIP$^*$. This result provides a quantum analogue of the celebrated result of Ben-Or, Goldwasser, Kilian, and Wigderson (STOC 1988) who show that MIP $=$ PZKMIP (in other words, all classical multiprover interactive protocols can be made zero knowledge). We prove our result by showing that every MIP$^*$ protocol can be efficiently transformed into an equivalent zero knowledge MIP$^*$ protocol in a manner that preserves the completeness-soundness gap. Combining our transformation with previous results by Slofstra (Forum of Mathematics, Pi 2019) and Fitzsimons, Ji, Vidick and Yuen (STOC 2019), we obtain the corollary that all co-recursively enumerable languages (which include undecidable problems as well as all decidable problems) have zero knowledge MIP$^*$ protocols with vanishing promise gap

Quantum money with nearly optimal error tolerance

We present a family of quantum money schemes with classical verification which display a number of benefits over previous proposals. Our schemes are based on hidden matching quantum retrieval games and they tolerate noise up to 23%, which we conjecture reaches 25% asymptotically as the dimension of the underlying hidden matching states is increased. Furthermore, we prove that 25% is the maximum tolerable noise for a wide class of quantum money schemes with classical verification, meaning our schemes are almost optimally noise tolerant. We use methods in semi-definite programming to prove security in a substantially different manner to previous proposals, leading to two main advantages: first, coin verification involves only a constant number of states (with respect to coin size), thereby allowing for smaller coins; second, the re-usability of coins within our scheme grows linearly with the size of the coin, which is known to be optimal. Lastly, we suggest methods by which the coins in our protocol could be implemented using weak coherent states and verified using existing experimental techniques, even in the presence of detector inefficiencies.Comment: 17 pages, 5 figure

Universal blind quantum computation

We present a protocol which allows a client to have a server carry out a quantum computation for her such that the client's inputs, outputs and computation remain perfectly private, and where she does not require any quantum computational power or memory. The client only needs to be able to prepare single qubits randomly chosen from a finite set and send them to the server, who has the balance of the required quantum computational resources. Our protocol is interactive: after the initial preparation of quantum states, the client and server use two-way classical communication which enables the client to drive the computation, giving single-qubit measurement instructions to the server, depending on previous measurement outcomes. Our protocol works for inputs and outputs that are either classical or quantum. We give an authentication protocol that allows the client to detect an interfering server; our scheme can also be made fault-tolerant. We also generalize our result to the setting of a purely classical client who communicates classically with two non-communicating entangled servers, in order to perform a blind quantum computation. By incorporating the authentication protocol, we show that any problem in BQP has an entangled two-prover interactive proof with a purely classical verifier. Our protocol is the first universal scheme which detects a cheating server, as well as the first protocol which does not require any quantum computation whatsoever on the client's side. The novelty of our approach is in using the unique features of measurement-based quantum computing which allows us to clearly distinguish between the quantum and classical aspects of a quantum computation.Comment: 20 pages, 7 figures. This version contains detailed proofs of authentication and fault tolerance. It also contains protocols for quantum inputs and outputs and appendices not available in the published versio