On the Complexity of Zero Gap MIP*

The class $\mathsf{MIP}^*$ is the set of languages decidable by multiprover interactive proofs with quantum entangled provers. It was recently shown by Ji, Natarajan, Vidick, Wright and Yuen that $\mathsf{MIP}^*$ is equal to $\mathsf{RE}$, the set of recursively enumerable languages. In particular this shows that the complexity of approximating the quantum value of a non-local game $G$ is equivalent to the complexity of the Halting problem. In this paper we investigate the complexity of deciding whether the quantum value of a non-local game $G$ is exactly $1$. This problem corresponds to a complexity class that we call zero gap $\mathsf{MIP}^*$, denoted by $\mathsf{MIP}^*_0$, where there is no promise gap between the verifier's acceptance probabilities in the YES and NO cases. We prove that $\mathsf{MIP}^*_0$ extends beyond the first level of the arithmetical hierarchy (which includes $\mathsf{RE}$ and its complement $\mathsf{coRE}$), and in fact is equal to $\Pi_2^0$, the class of languages that can be decided by quantified formulas of the form $\forall y \, \exists z \, R(x,y,z)$. Combined with the previously known result that $\mathsf{MIP}^{co}_0$ (the commuting operator variant of $\mathsf{MIP}^*_0$) is equal to $\mathsf{coRE}$, our result further highlights the fascinating connection between various models of quantum multiprover interactive proofs and different classes in computability theory.Comment: Fixed typos and edited protocol to more smoothly follow from reference

Complexity Lower Bounds for Computing the Approximately-Commuting Operator Value of Non-Local Games to High Precision

We study the problem of approximating the commuting-operator value of a two-player non-local game. It is well-known that it is NP-complete to decide whether the classical value of a non-local game is 1 or 1- epsilon, promised that one of the two is the case. Furthermore, as long as epsilon is small enough, this result does not depend on the gap epsilon. In contrast, a recent result of Fitzsimons, Ji, Vidick, and Yuen shows that the complexity of computing the quantum value grows without bound as the gap epsilon decreases. In this paper, we show that this also holds for the commuting-operator value of a game. Specifically, in the language of multi-prover interactive proofs, we show that the power of MIP^{co}(2,1,1,s) (proofs with two provers, one round, completeness probability 1, soundness probability s, and commuting-operator strategies) can increase without bound as the gap 1-s gets arbitrarily small. Our results also extend naturally in two ways, to perfect zero-knowledge protocols, and to lower bounds on the complexity of computing the approximately-commuting value of a game. Thus we get lower bounds on the complexity class PZK-MIP^{co}_{delta}(2,1,1,s) of perfect zero-knowledge multi-prover proofs with approximately-commuting operator strategies, as the gap 1-s gets arbitrarily small. While we do not know any computable time upper bound on the class MIP^{co}, a result of the first author and Vidick shows that for s = 1-1/poly(f(n)) and delta = 1/poly(f(n)), the class MIP^{co}_delta(2,1,1,s), with constant communication from the provers, is contained in TIME(exp(poly(f(n)))). We give a lower bound of coNTIME(f(n)) (ignoring constants inside the function) for this class, which is tight up to polynomial factors assuming the exponential time hypothesis

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

Optimization for L1-Norm Error Fitting via Data Aggregation

We propose a data aggregation-based algorithm with monotonic convergence to a global optimum for a generalized version of the L1-norm error fitting model with an assumption of the fitting function. The proposed algorithm generalizes the recent algorithm in the literature, aggregate and iterative disaggregate (AID), which selectively solves three specific L1-norm error fitting problems. With the proposed algorithm, any L1-norm error fitting model can be solved optimally if it follows the form of the L1-norm error fitting problem and if the fitting function satisfies the assumption. The proposed algorithm can also solve multi-dimensional fitting problems with arbitrary constraints on the fitting coefficients matrix. The generalized problem includes popular models such as regression and the orthogonal Procrustes problem. The results of the computational experiment show that the proposed algorithms are faster than the state-of-the-art benchmarks for L1-norm regression subset selection and L1-norm regression over a sphere. Further, the relative performance of the proposed algorithm improves as data size increases

Rational Proofs with Multiple Provers

Interactive proofs (IP) model a world where a verifier delegates computation to an untrustworthy prover, verifying the prover's claims before accepting them. IP protocols have applications in areas such as verifiable computation outsourcing, computation delegation, cloud computing. In these applications, the verifier may pay the prover based on the quality of his work. Rational interactive proofs (RIP), introduced by Azar and Micali (2012), are an interactive-proof system with payments, in which the prover is rational rather than untrustworthy---he may lie, but only to increase his payment. Rational proofs leverage the provers' rationality to obtain simple and efficient protocols. Azar and Micali show that RIP=IP(=PSAPCE). They leave the question of whether multiple provers are more powerful than a single prover for rational and classical proofs as an open problem. In this paper, we introduce multi-prover rational interactive proofs (MRIP). Here, a verifier cross-checks the provers' answers with each other and pays them according to the messages exchanged. The provers are cooperative and maximize their total expected payment if and only if the verifier learns the correct answer to the problem. We further refine the model of MRIP to incorporate utility gap, which is the loss in payment suffered by provers who mislead the verifier to the wrong answer. We define the class of MRIP protocols with constant, noticeable and negligible utility gaps. We give tight characterization for all three MRIP classes. We show that under standard complexity-theoretic assumptions, MRIP is more powerful than both RIP and MIP ; and this is true even the utility gap is required to be constant. Furthermore the full power of each MRIP class can be achieved using only two provers and three rounds. (A preliminary version of this paper appeared at ITCS 2016. This is the full version that contains new results.)Comment: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Conference on Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science. ACM, 201

Non-Cooperative Rational Interactive Proofs

Interactive-proof games model the scenario where an honest party interacts with powerful but strategic provers, to elicit from them the correct answer to a computational question. Interactive proofs are increasingly used as a framework to design protocols for computation outsourcing. Existing interactive-proof games largely fall into two categories: either as games of cooperation such as multi-prover interactive proofs and cooperative rational proofs, where the provers work together as a team; or as games of conflict such as refereed games, where the provers directly compete with each other in a zero-sum game. Neither of these extremes truly capture the strategic nature of service providers in outsourcing applications. How to design and analyze non-cooperative interactive proofs is an important open problem. In this paper, we introduce a mechanism-design approach to define a multi-prover interactive-proof model in which the provers are rational and non-cooperative - they act to maximize their expected utility given others\u27 strategies. We define a strong notion of backwards induction as our solution concept to analyze the resulting extensive-form game with imperfect information. We fully characterize the complexity of our proof system under different utility gap guarantees. (At a high level, a utility gap of u means that the protocol is robust against provers that may not care about a utility loss of 1/u.) We show, for example, that the power of non-cooperative rational interactive proofs with a polynomial utility gap is exactly equal to the complexity class P^{NEXP}

The Quantum PCP Conjecture

The classical PCP theorem is arguably the most important achievement of classical complexity theory in the past quarter century. In recent years, researchers in quantum computational complexity have tried to identify approaches and develop tools that address the question: does a quantum version of the PCP theorem hold? The story of this study starts with classical complexity and takes unexpected turns providing fascinating vistas on the foundations of quantum mechanics, the global nature of entanglement and its topological properties, quantum error correction, information theory, and much more; it raises questions that touch upon some of the most fundamental issues at the heart of our understanding of quantum mechanics. At this point, the jury is still out as to whether or not such a theorem holds. This survey aims to provide a snapshot of the status in this ongoing story, tailored to a general theory-of-CS audience.Comment: 45 pages, 4 figures, an enhanced version of the SIGACT guest column from Volume 44 Issue 2, June 201

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