Perfect Parallel Repetition Theorem for Quantum Xor Proof Systems

Abstract.We consider a class of two-prover interactive proof systems where each prover returns a single bit to the verifier and the verifier’s verdict is a function of the XOR of the two bits received. We show that, when the provers are allowed to coordinate their behavior using a shared entangled quantum state, a perfect parallel repetition theorem holds in the following sense. The prover’s optimal success probability for simultaneously playing a collection of XOR proof systems is exactly the product of the individual optimal success probabilities. This property is remarkable in view of the fact that, in the classical case (where the provers can only utilize classical information), it does not hold. The theorem is proved by analyzing parities of XOR proof systems using semidefinite programming techniques, which we then relate to parallel repetitions of XOR games via Fourier analysis.

[1]  Uriel Feige,et al.  Approximating the value of two power proof systems, with applications to MAX 2SAT and MAX DICUT , 1995, Proceedings Third Israel Symposium on the Theory of Computing and Systems.

[2]  Stephanie Wehner,et al.  Entanglement in Interactive Proof Systems with Binary Answers , 2005, STACS.

[3]  Stephen P. Boyd,et al.  Semidefinite Programming , 1996, SIAM Rev..

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

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

[6]  László Lovász,et al.  Two-prover one-round proof systems: their power and their problems (extended abstract) , 1992, STOC '92.

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

[8]  L. Fortnow Complexity-Theoretic Aspects of Interactive Proof Systems , 1989 .

[9]  B. Tsirelson Quantum analogues of the Bell inequalities. The case of two spatially separated domains , 1987 .

[10]  Uriel Feige On the success probability of the two provers in one-round proof systems , 1991, [1991] Proceedings of the Sixth Annual Structure in Complexity Theory Conference.

[11]  Ran Raz,et al.  A parallel repetition theorem , 1995, STOC '95.

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

[13]  Mihir Bellare,et al.  Free bits, PCPs and non-approximability-towards tight results , 1995, Proceedings of IEEE 36th Annual Foundations of Computer Science.

[14]  Johan Håstad,et al.  Some optimal inapproximability results , 2001, JACM.

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

[16]  A. Shimony,et al.  Proposed Experiment to Test Local Hidden Variable Theories. , 1969 .

[17]  Adrian Kent,et al.  Quantum nonlocality, Bell inequalities, and the memory loophole , 2002 .

[18]  Keiji Matsumoto,et al.  Quantum multi-prover interactive proof systems with limited prior entanglement , 2003, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[19]  Thomas Holenstein,et al.  Parallel repetition: simplifications and the no-signaling case , 2007, STOC '07.

[20]  Stephen P. Boyd,et al.  Convex Optimization , 2004, Algorithms and Theory of Computation Handbook.

[21]  Mihir Bellare,et al.  Free Bits, PCPs, and Nonapproximability-Towards Tight Results , 1998, SIAM J. Comput..

[22]  B. S. Cirel'son Quantum generalizations of Bell's inequality , 1980 .

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

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

[25]  Ryan O'Donnell,et al.  Understanding Parallel Repetition Requires Understanding Foams , 2007, Twenty-Second Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC'07).