Analysis of Quantum Multi-Prover Zero-Knowledge Systems: Elimination of the Honest Condition and Computational Zero-Knowledge Systems for QMIP

Zero-knowledge and multi-prover systems are both central notions in classical and quantum complexity theory. There is, however, little research in quantum multi-prover zero-knowledge systems. This paper studies complexity-theoretical aspects of the quantum multi-prover zero-knowledge systems. This paper has two results: 1.QMIP* systems with honest zero-knowledge can be converted into general zero-knowledge systems without any assumptions. 2.QMIP* has computational quantum zero-knowledge systems if a natural computational conjecture holds. One of the main tools is a test (called the GHZ test) that uses GHZ states shared by the provers, which prevents the verifier's attack in the above two results. Another main tool is what we call the Local Hamiltonian based Interactive protocol (LHI protocol). The LHI protocol makes previous research for Local Hamiltonians applicable to check the history state of interactive proofs, and we then apply Broadbent et al.'s zero-knowledge protocol for QMA \cite{BJSW} to quantum multi-prover systems in order to obtain the second result.

[1]  S. Aaronson QMA/qpoly ⊆ PSPACE/poly: De-Merlinizing Quantum Protocols , 2006 .

[2]  Ivan Damgård,et al.  Quantum-Secure Coin-Flipping and Applications , 2009, ASIACRYPT.

[3]  Silvio Micali,et al.  The Knowledge Complexity of Interactive Proof Systems , 1989, SIAM J. Comput..

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

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

[6]  John Watrous Zero-Knowledge against Quantum Attacks , 2009, SIAM J. Comput..

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

[8]  Hirotada Kobayashi,et al.  General Properties of Quantum Zero-Knowledge Proofs , 2007, TCC.

[9]  Rafail Ostrovsky,et al.  One-way functions are essential for non-trivial zero-knowledge , 1993, [1993] The 2nd Israel Symposium on Theory and Computing Systems.

[10]  Silvio Micali,et al.  Proofs that yield nothing but their validity or all languages in NP have zero-knowledge proof systems , 1991, JACM.

[11]  R. Cleve,et al.  Consequences and limits of nonlocal strategies , 2004 .

[12]  Tsuyoshi Ito,et al.  A Multi-prover Interactive Proof for NEXP Sound against Entangled Provers , 2012, 2012 IEEE 53rd Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[13]  Oded Goldreich,et al.  Foundations of Cryptography: Volume 1, Basic Tools , 2001 .

[14]  Thomas Vidick,et al.  Quantum Proofs , 2016, Found. Trends Theor. Comput. Sci..

[15]  Zheng-Feng Ji,et al.  Compression of quantum multi-prover interactive proofs , 2016, STOC.

[16]  Umesh V. Vazirani,et al.  A classical leash for a quantum system: command of quantum systems via rigidity of CHSH games , 2012, ITCS '13.

[17]  Fang Song,et al.  Zero-Knowledge Proof Systems for QMA , 2016, 2016 IEEE 57th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[18]  John Watrous,et al.  Limits on the power of quantum statistical zero-knowledge , 2002, The 43rd Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, 2002. Proceedings..

[19]  Thierry Paul,et al.  Quantum computation and quantum information , 2007, Mathematical Structures in Computer Science.

[20]  Tom Gur,et al.  Spatial Isolation Implies Zero Knowledge Even in a Quantum World , 2018, 2018 IEEE 59th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS).

[21]  Umesh V. Vazirani,et al.  Classical command of quantum systems , 2013, Nature.

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

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

[24]  S. Goldwasser The Knowledge Complexity of Interactive Proof System , 1989 .

[25]  Thomas Vidick Three-Player Entangled XOR Games are NP-Hard to Approximate , 2016, SIAM J. Comput..

[26]  Joseph Fitzsimons,et al.  Quantum proof systems for iterated exponential time, and beyond , 2018, Electron. Colloquium Comput. Complex..

[27]  Anand Natarajan,et al.  Two-player entangled games are NP-hard , 2018, Computational Complexity Conference.

[28]  Mikhail N. Vyalyi,et al.  Classical and Quantum Computation , 2002, Graduate studies in mathematics.

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

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