The class QMA(k), introduced by , consists of all languages that can be verified using k unentangled quantum proofs. Many of the simplest questions about this class have remained embarrassingly open: for example, can we give any evidence that k quantum proofs are more powerful than one? Does QMA(k)=QMA(2) for k>=2? Can QMA(k) protocols be amplified to exponentially small error? In this paper, we make progress on all of the above questions. First, we give a protocol by which a verifier can be convinced that a 3SAT formula of size n is satisfiable, with constant soundness, given O(sqrt(n)) unentangled quantum witnesses with O(log n) qubits each. Our protocol relies on the existence of very short PCPs. Second, we show that assuming a weak version of the Additivity Conjecture from quantum information theory, any QMA(2) protocol can be amplified to exponentially small error, and QMA(k)=QMA(2) for all k>=2. Third, we prove the nonexistence of "perfect disentanglers" for simulating multiple Merlins with one.
The class @math , or Quantum Merlin-Arthur, consists of all languages that admit a proof protocol in which Merlin sends Arthur a polynomial-size quantum state @math , and then Arthur decides whether to accept or reject in quantum polynomial time. This class was introduced by Knill @cite_9 , Kitaev @cite_24 , and Watrous @cite_23 as a quantum analogue of @math . By now we know a reasonable amount about @math : for example, it allows amplification of success probabilities, is contained in @math , and has natural complete promise problems. (See Aharonov and Naveh @cite_19 for a survey.)
@cite_24 @cite_19 @cite_9 @cite_23
2951054288 2096390054 2085180799 2006290558
This paper introduces quantum multiple-Merlin''-Arthur proof systems in which Arthur receives multiple quantum proofs that are unentangled with each other. Although classical multi-proof systems are obviously equivalent to classical single-proof systems (i.e., usual Merlin-Arthur proof systems), it is unclear whether or not quantum multi-proof systems collapse to quantum single-proof systems (i.e., usual quantum Merlin-Arthur proof systems). This paper presents a necessary and sufficient condition under which the number of quantum proofs is reducible to two. It is also proved that, in the case of perfect soundness, using multiple quantum proofs does not increase the power of quantum Merlin-Arthur proof systems. In a previous paper [BS] we proved, using the elements of the theory of nilpotent groups , that some of the fundamental computational problems in matriz groups belong to NP . These problems were also shown to belong to coNP , assuming an unproven hypothesis concerning finite simple groups . The aim of this paper is to replace most of the (proven and unproven) group theory of [BS] by elementary combinatorial arguments. The result we prove is that relative to a random oracle B , the mentioned matrix group problems belong to ( NP∩coNP ) B . The problems we consider are membership in and order of a matrix group given by a list of generators. These problems can be viewed as multidimensional versions of a close relative of the discrete logarithm problem. Hence NP∩coNP might be the lowest natural complexity class they may fit in. We remark that the results remain valid for black box groups where group operations are performed by an oracle. The tools we introduce seem interesting in their own right. We define a new hierarchy of complexity classes AM ( k ) “just above NP ”, introducing Arthur vs. Merlin games , the bounded-away version of Papdimitriou's Games against Nature . We prove that in spite of their analogy with the polynomial time hierarchy, the finite levels of this hierarchy collapse to AM=AM (2). Using a combinatorial lemma on finite groups [BE], we construct a game by which the nondeterministic player (Merlin) is able to convince the random player (Arthur) about the relation [ G ]= N provided Arthur trusts conclusions based on statistical evidence (such as a Slowly-Strassen type “proof” of primality). One can prove that AM consists precisely of those languages which belong to NP B for almost every oracle B . Our hierarchy has an interesting, still unclarified relation to another hierarchy, obtained by removing the central ingredient from the User vs. Expert games of Goldwasser, Micali and Rackoff. It is well known that probabilistic boolean decision trees cannot be much more powerful than deterministic ones (N. Nisan, SIAM J. Comput.20, No. 6 (1991), 999?1007). Motivated by a question if randomization can significantly speed up a nondeterministic computation via a boolean decision tree, we address structural properties of Arthur?Merlin games in this model and prove some lower bounds. We consider two cases of interest, the first when the length of communication between the players is limited and the second, if it is not. While in the first case we can carry over the relations between the corresponding Turing complexity classes, in the second case we observe in contrast with Turing complexity that a one-round Merlin?Arthur protocol is as powerful as a general interactive proof system and, in particular, can simulate a one-round Arthur?Merlin protocol. Moreover, we show that sometimes a Merlin?Arthur protocol can be more efficient than an Arthur?Merlin protocol and than a Merlin?Arthur protocol with limited communication. This is the case for a boolean function whose set of zeroes is a code with high minimum distance and a natural uniformity condition. Such functions provide an example when the Merlin?Arthur complexity is 1 with one-sided error ??(23, 1), but at the same time the nondeterministic decision tree complexity is ?(n). The latter should be contrasted with another fact we prove. Namely, if a function has Merlin?Arthur complexity 1 with one-sided error probability ??(0, 23, then its nondeterministic complexity is bounded by a constant. Other results of the paper include connections with the block sensitivity and related combinatorial properties of a boolean function. Recently a great deal of attention has been focused on quantum computation following a sequence of results [Bernstein and Vazirani, in Proc. 25th Annual ACM Symposium Theory Comput., 1993, pp. 11--20, SIAM J. Comput., 26 (1997), pp. 1277--1339], [Simon, in Proc. 35th Annual IEEE Symposium Foundations Comput. Sci., 1994, pp. 116--123, SIAM J. Comput., 26 (1997), pp. 1340--1349], [Shor, in Proc. 35th Annual IEEE Symposium Foundations Comput. Sci., 1994, pp. 124--134] suggesting that quantum computers are more powerful than classical probabilistic computers. Following Shor's result that factoring and the extraction of discrete logarithms are both solvable in quantum polynomial time, it is natural to ask whether all of @math can be efficiently solved in quantum polynomial time. In this paper, we address this question by proving that relative to an oracle chosen uniformly at random with probability 1 the class @math cannot be solved on a quantum Turing machine (QTM) in time @math . We also show that relative to a permutation oracle chosen uniformly at random with probability 1 the class @math cannot be solved on a QTM in time @math . The former bound is tight since recent work of Grover [in Proc. @math th Annual ACM Symposium Theory Comput. , 1996] shows how to accept the class @math relative to any oracle on a quantum computer in time @math .