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

Generalized Quantum Arthur-Merlin Games

This paper investigates the role of interaction and coins in public-coin quantum interactive proof systems (also called quantum Arthur-Merlin games). While prior works focused on classical public coins even in the quantum setting, the present work introduces a generalized version of quantum Arthur-Merlin games where the public coins can be quantum as well: the verifier can send not only random bits, but also halves of EPR pairs. First, it is proved that the class of two-turn quantum Arthur-Merlin games with quantum public coins, denoted qq-QAM in this paper, does not change by adding a constant number of turns of classical interactions prior to the communications of the qq-QAM proof systems. This can be viewed as a quantum analogue of the celebrated collapse theorem for AM due to Babai. To prove this collapse theorem, this paper provides a natural complete problem for qq-QAM: deciding whether the output of a given quantum circuit is close to a totally mixed state. This complete problem is on the very line of the previous studies investigating the hardness of checking the properties related to quantum circuits, and is of independent interest. It is further proved that the class qq-QAM_1 of two-turn quantum-public-coin quantum Arthur-Merlin proof systems with perfect completeness gives new bounds for standard well-studied classes of two-turn interactive proof systems. Finally, the collapse theorem above is extended to comprehensively classify the role of interaction and public coins in quantum Arthur-Merlin games: it is proved that, for any constant m>1, the class of problems having an m-turn quantum Arthur-Merlin proof system is either equal to PSPACE or equal to the class of problems having a two-turn quantum Arthur-Merlin game of a specific type, which provides a complete set of quantum analogues of Babai's collapse theorem.Comment: 31 pages + cover page, the proof of Lemma 27 (Lemma 24 in v1) is corrected, and a new completeness result is adde

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

Quantum interactive proofs and the complexity of separability testing

We identify a formal connection between physical problems related to the detection of separable (unentangled) quantum states and complexity classes in theoretical computer science. In particular, we show that to nearly every quantum interactive proof complexity class (including BQP, QMA, QMA(2), and QSZK), there corresponds a natural separability testing problem that is complete for that class. Of particular interest is the fact that the problem of determining whether an isometry can be made to produce a separable state is either QMA-complete or QMA(2)-complete, depending upon whether the distance between quantum states is measured by the one-way LOCC norm or the trace norm. We obtain strong hardness results by proving that for each n-qubit maximally entangled state there exists a fixed one-way LOCC measurement that distinguishes it from any separable state with error probability that decays exponentially in n.Comment: v2: 43 pages, 5 figures, completely rewritten and in Theory of Computing (ToC) journal forma

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 interactive proofs with short messages

This paper considers three variants of quantum interactive proof systems in which short (meaning logarithmic-length) messages are exchanged between the prover and verifier. The first variant is one in which the verifier sends a short message to the prover, and the prover responds with an ordinary, or polynomial-length, message; the second variant is one in which any number of messages can be exchanged, but where the combined length of all the messages is logarithmic; and the third variant is one in which the verifier sends polynomially many random bits to the prover, who responds with a short quantum message. We prove that in all of these cases the short messages can be eliminated without changing the power of the model, so the first variant has the expressive power of QMA and the second and third variants have the expressive power of BQP. These facts are proved through the use of quantum state tomography, along with the finite quantum de Finetti theorem for the first variant.Comment: 15 pages, published versio

Entangled Games Are Hard to Approximate

We establish the first hardness results for the problem of computing the value of one-round games played by a verifier and a team of provers who can share quantum entanglement. In particular, we show that it is NP-hard to approximate within an inverse polynomial the value of a one-round game with (i) a quantum verifier and two entangled provers or (ii) a classical verifier and three entangled provers. Previously it was not even known if computing the value exactly is NP-hard. We also describe a mathematical conjecture, which, if true, would imply hardness of approximation of entangled-prover games to within a constant. Using our techniques we also show that every language in PSPACE has a two-prover one-round interactive proof system with perfect completeness and soundness 1-1/poly even against entangled provers. We start our proof by describing two ways to modify classical multiprover games to make them resistant to entangled provers. We then show that a strategy for the modified game that uses entanglement can be “rounded” to one that does not. The results then follow from classical inapproximability bounds. Our work implies that, unless P=NP, the values of entangled-prover games cannot be computed by semidefinite programs that are polynomial in the size of the verifier's system, a method that has been successful for more restricted quantum games

Quantum Multi-Prover Interactive Proof Systems with Limited Prior Entanglement

This paper gives the first formal treatment of a quantum analogue of multi-prover interactive proof systems. It is proved that the class of languages having quantum multi-prover interactive proof systems is necessarily contained in NEXP, under the assumption that provers are allowed to share at most polynomially many prior-entangled qubits. This implies that, in particular, if provers do not share any prior entanglement with each other, the class of languages having quantum multi-prover interactive proof systems is equal to NEXP. Related to these, it is shown that, in the case a prover does not have his private qubits, the class of languages having quantum single-prover interactive proof systems is also equal to NEXP.Comment: LaTeX2e, 19 pages, 2 figures, title changed, some of the sections are fully revised, journal version in Journal of Computer and System Science