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 @math , the set of languages decidable by multiprover interactive proofs with quantumly entangled provers, and the class PZKMIP @math , which is the set of languages decidable by MIP @math protocols that furthermore possess the perfect zero knowledge property. Our main result is that the two classes are equal, i.e., MIP @math PZKMIP @math . This result provides a quantum analogue of the celebrated result of Ben-Or, Goldwasser, Kilian, and Wigderson (STOC 1988) who show that MIP @math PZKMIP (in other words, all classical multiprover interactive protocols can be made zero knowledge). We prove our result by showing that every MIP @math protocol can be efficiently transformed into an equivalent zero knowledge MIP @math 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 @math protocols with vanishing promise gap.
In the multiprover setting, Chiesa, Forbes, Gur and Spooner @cite_6 showed that all problems in @math (and thus @math ) are in @math . Their approach is considerably different of ours. They achieve their result by showing that model of interactive proofs called An interactive PCP is a protocol where the verifier and a single prover first commit to an oracle, which the verifier can query a bounded number of times. Then, the verifier and prover engage in an interactive proof. An interactive PCP is one where the committed oracle has a desired algebraic structure. We refer to @cite_6 for an in-depth discussion of these models. can be lifted to the entangled provers setting in a way that preserves zero knowledge, and then showing that languages in @math have zero knowledge algebraic interactive PCPs.
@cite_6
2416431186 2023675273 1984976620 2100780780
The celebrated IP=PSPACE Theorem of Lund et-al. (J.ACM 1992) and Shamir (J.ACM 1992), allows an all-powerful but untrusted prover to convince a polynomial-time verifier of the validity of extremely complicated statements (as long as they can be evaluated using polynomial space). The interactive proof system designed for this purpose requires a polynomial number of communication rounds and an exponential-time (polynomial-space complete) prover. In this paper, we study the power of more efficient interactive proof systems. Our main result is that for every statement that can be evaluated in polynomial time and bounded-polynomial space there exists an interactive proof that satisfies the following strict efficiency requirements: (1) the honest prover runs in polynomial time, (2) the verifier is almost linear time (and under some conditions even sub linear), and (3) the interaction consists of only a constant number of communication rounds. Prior to this work, very little was known about the power of efficient, constant-round interactive proofs (rather than arguments). This result represents significant progress on the round complexity of interactive proofs (even if we ignore the running time of the honest prover), and on the expressive power of interactive proofs with polynomial-time honest prover (even if we ignore the round complexity). This result has several applications, and in particular it can be used for verifiable delegation of computation. Our construction leverages several new notions of interactive proofs, which may be of independent interest. One of these notions is that of unambiguous interactive proofs where the prover has a unique successful strategy. Another notion is that of probabilistically checkable interactive proofs (PCIPs) where the verifier only reads a few bits of the transcript in checking the proof (this could be viewed as an interactive extension of PCPs). We construct a 1-round delegation scheme (i.e., argument system) for every language computable in time t = t(n), where the running time of the prover is poly(t) and the running time of the verifier is n · polylog(t). In particular, for every language in P we obtain a delegation scheme with almost linear time verification. Our construction relies on the existence of a computational sub-exponentially secure private information retrieval (PIR) scheme. The proof exploits a curious connection between the problem of computation delegation and the model of multi-prover interactive proofs that are sound against no-signaling (cheating) strategies, a model that was studied in the context of multi-prover interactive proofs with provers that share quantum entanglement, and is motivated by the physical principle that information cannot travel faster than light. For any language computable in time t = t(n), we construct a multi-prover interactive proof (MIP) that is sound against no-signaling strategies, where the running time of the provers is poly(t), the number of provers is polylog(t), and the running time of the verifier is n · polylog(t). In particular, this shows that the class of languages that have polynomial-time MIPs that are sound against no-signaling strategies, is exactly EXP. Previously, this class was only known to contain PSPACE. To convert our MIP into a 1-round delegation scheme, we use the method suggested by (ICALP, 2000). This method relies on the existence of a sub-exponentially secure PIR scheme, and was proved secure by (STOC, 2013) assuming the underlying MIP is secure against no-signaling provers. An interactive proof system is a method by which one party of unlimited resources, called the prover, can convince a party of limited resources, call the verifier, of the truth of a proposition. The verifier may toss coins, ask repeated questions of the prover, and run efficient tests upon the prover's responses before deciding whether to be convinced. This extends the familiar proof system implicit in the notion of NP in that there the verifier may not toss coins or speak, but only listen and verify. Interactive proof systems may not yield proof in the strict mathematical sense: the "proofs" are probabilistic with an exponentially small, though non-zero chance of error. We consider two notions of interactive proof system. One, defined by Goldwasser, Micali, and Rackoff [GMR] permits the verifier a coin that can be tossed in private, i.e., a secret source of randomness. The Permission to copy without ice all or part of this material is granted provided that the copies are not made or distributed for direct commercial advantage, the ACM copyright notice and the title of the publication and its date appear, and notice is given that copying is by permission of the Association for Computing Machinery. To copy otherwise, or to republish, requires a fee and or specific permission. © 1986 ACM 0-89791-193-8 86 0500 0059 $00.75 second, due to Babai, [B] requires that the outcome of the verifier's coin tosses be public and thus accessible to the prover. Our main result is that these two systems are equivalent in power with respect to language recognition. The notion of interactive proof system may be seen to yield a probabilistic analog to NP much as BPP is the probabilistic analog to P. We define the probabilistic, nondeterministic, polynomial time Turing machine and show that it is also equivalent in power to these systems. We introduce the notion of covering complexity of a verifier for probabilistically checkable proofs (PCPs). Such a verifier is given an input, a claimed theorem, and an oracle, representing a purported proof of the theorem. The verifier is also given a random string and decides whether to accept the proof or not, based on the given random string. We define the covering complexity of such a verifier, on a given input, to be the minimum number of proofs needed to "satisfy" the verifier on every random string; i.e., on every random string, at least one of the given proofs must be accepted by the verifier. The covering complexity of PCP verifiers offers a promising route to getting stronger inapproximability results for some minimization problems and, in particular, (hyper)graph coloring problems. We present a PCP verifier for NP statements that queries only four bits and yet has a covering complexity of one for true statements and a superconstant covering complexity for statements not in the language. Moreover, the acceptance predicate of this verifier is a simple not-all-equal check on the four bits it reads. This enables us to prove that, for any constant c, it is NP-hard to color a 2-colorable 4-uniform hypergraph using just c colors and also yields a superconstant inapproximability result under a stronger hardness assumption.