QMIP = MIP*

The way entanglement influences the power of quantum and classical multi-prover interactive proof systems is a long-standing open question. We show that the class of languages recognized by quantum multi-prover interactive proof systems, QMIP, is equal to MIP∗, the class of languages recognized by classical multi-prover interactive proof systems where the provers share entanglement. After the recent result by Jain, Ji, Upadhyay and Watrous showing that QIP = IP, our work completes the picture from the verifier’s perspective by showing that also in the setting of multiple provers with shared entanglement, a quantum verifier is no more powerful than a classical one: QMIP = MIP∗. Our techniques are based on the adaptation of universal blind quantum computation (a protocol recently introduced by us) to the context of interactive proof systems. We show that in the multi-prover scenario, shared entanglement has a positive effect in removing the need for a quantum verifier. As a consequence, our results show that the entire power of quantum information in multi-prover interactive proof systems is captured by the shared entanglement and not by the quantum communication. Institute for Quantum Computing, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. Department of Materials, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom. School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom. ∗Email: albroadb@iqc.ca, joe.fitzsimons@materials.ox.ac.uk, ekashefi@inf.ed.ac.uk ar X iv :1 00 4. 11 30 v1 [ qu an tph ] 7 A pr 2 01 0

[1]  László Babai,et al.  Trading group theory for randomness , 1985, STOC '85.

[2]  Silvio Micali,et al.  The knowledge complexity of interactive proof-systems , 1985, STOC '85.

[3]  Avi Wigderson,et al.  Multi-prover interactive proofs: how to remove intractability assumptions , 2019, STOC '88.

[4]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Proof verification and hardness of approximation problems , 1992, Proceedings., 33rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[5]  Adi Shamir,et al.  IP = PSPACE , 1992, JACM.

[6]  Charles H. Bennett,et al.  Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen channels. , 1993, Physical review letters.

[7]  Lance Fortnow,et al.  On the Power of Multi-Prover Interactive Protocols , 1994, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[8]  László Lovász,et al.  Interactive proofs and the hardness of approximating cliques , 1996, JACM.

[9]  Sanjeev Arora,et al.  Probabilistic checking of proofs: a new characterization of NP , 1998, JACM.

[10]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Quantum circuits with mixed states , 1998, STOC '98.

[11]  John Watrous,et al.  PSPACE has constant-round quantum interactive proof systems , 1999, 40th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No.99CB37039).

[12]  Alexei Y. Kitaev,et al.  Parallelization, amplification, and exponential time simulation of quantum interactive proof systems , 2000, STOC '00.

[13]  R Raussendorf,et al.  A one-way quantum computer. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[14]  Keiji Matsumoto,et al.  Quantum multi-prover interactive proof systems with limited prior entanglement , 2001, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[15]  Adam D. Smith,et al.  Authentication of quantum messages , 2001, The 43rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2002. Proceedings..

[16]  H. Briegel,et al.  Measurement-based quantum computation on cluster states , 2003, quant-ph/0301052.

[17]  Peter Høyer,et al.  Consequences and limits of nonlocal strategies , 2004, Proceedings. 19th IEEE Annual Conference on Computational Complexity, 2004..

[18]  Carsten Lund,et al.  Non-deterministic exponential time has two-prover interactive protocols , 2005, computational complexity.

[19]  Thomas Vidick,et al.  On the Power of Entangled Quantum Provers , 2006, quant-ph/0612063.

[20]  E. Kashefi,et al.  Determinism in the one-way model , 2005, quant-ph/0506062.

[21]  Elham Kashefi,et al.  The measurement calculus , 2004, JACM.

[22]  Keiji Matsumoto,et al.  Using Entanglement in Quantum Multi-Prover Interactive Proofs , 2007, 2008 23rd Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity.

[23]  Rahul Jain,et al.  Two-Message Quantum Interactive Proofs Are in PSPACE , 2009, 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[24]  Elham Kashefi,et al.  Universal Blind Quantum Computation , 2008, 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[25]  Rahul Jain,et al.  QIP = PSPACE , 2010, STOC '10.

[26]  Elad Eban,et al.  Interactive Proofs For Quantum Computations , 2017, 1704.04487.

[27]  Rahul Jain,et al.  QIP = PSPACE , 2011, JACM.