Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0806.3982

Quantum Multi Prover Interactive Proofs with Communicating Provers

Michael Ben-Or, Avinatan Hassidim, Haran Pilpel

Published Jun 24, 2008• 8 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Multi Prover Interactive Proof systems (MIPs)were first presented in a cryptographic context, but ever since they were used in various fields. Understanding the power of MIPs in the quantum context raises many open problems, as there are several interesting models to consider. For example, one can study the question when the provers share entanglement or not, and the communication between the verifier and the provers is quantum or classical. While there are several partial results on the subject, so far no one presented an efficient scheme for recognizing NEXP (or NP with logarithmic communication), except for [KM03], in the case there is no entanglement (and of course no communication between the provers). We introduce another variant of Quantum MIP, where the provers do not share entanglement, the communication between the verifier and the provers is quantum, but the provers are unlimited in the classical communication between them. At first, this model may seem very weak, as provers who exchange information seem to be equivalent in power to a simple prover. This in fact is not the case - we show that any language in NEXP can be recognized in this model efficiently, with just two provers and two rounds of communication, with a constant completeness-soundness gap.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.0806.3982

Related papers

Quantum Multi Prover Interactive Proofs with Communicating Provers

Michael Ben Or, Avinatan Hassidim, Haran Pilpel

We introduce another variant of quantum MIP, where the provers do not share entanglement, the communication between the verifier and the provers is quantum, but the provers are unlimited in the classical communication between them. At first, this model may seem very weak, as provers who exchange information seem to be equivalent in power to a simple prover. This in fact is not the case-we show that any language in NEXP can be recognized in this model efficiently, with just two provers and two rounds of communication, with a constant completeness-soundness gap. Similar ideas and techniques may help help with other models of quantum MIP, including the dual question, of non communicating provers with unlimited entanglement.

Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science•Oct 1, 2008•11 citations

Quantum Multiprover Interactive Proofs with Communicating Provers

Michael Ben-Or, Avinatan Hassidim, Haran Pilpel

We introduce a new variant of quantum multiprover interactive proofs (QMIP) where the provers and the verifier are quantum. The verifier can exchange quantum messages with the provers. The provers cannot communicate quantumly between themselves and do not share entanglement, but are unlimited in the classical communication between them, even after receiving messages from the verifier. We show that any language in nondeterministic exponential time (NEXP) can be recognized in this model efficiently, with just two provers and two rounds of communication, and with a constant completeness/soundness gap. This is in contrast to the result of [R. Jain et al., Comm. ACM, 53 (2010), pp. 102--109], which shows that QIP = PSPACE, or equivalently that the set of languages that can be recognized by a quantum verifier communicating with a single quantum prover is equal to PSPACE. To analyze the cheating power of the provers, we give them more power and allow them to perform any separable operation. We then show a unique two-phase protocol in which the provers first commit to a superposition of correct answers to all possible questions, and then in the second phase the verifier opens up the committed answer and checks for correctness and consistency.

SIAM Journal on Computing•Jan 1, 2014•4 citations

QMIP = MIP*

Anne Broadbent, Joseph F. Fitzsimons, Elham Kashefi

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.

arXiv:1004.1130•Apr 7, 2010•4 citations

A Multi-prover Interactive Proof for NEXP Sound against Entangled Provers

Tsuyoshi Ito, Thomas Vidick

We prove a strong limitation on the ability of entangled provers to collude in a multiplayer game. Our main result is the first nontrivial lower bound on the class MIP* of languages having multi-prover interactive proofs with entangled provers, namely MIP* contains NEXP, the class of languages decidable in non-deterministic exponential time. While Babai, Fort now, and Lund (Computational Complexity 1991) proved the celebrated equality MIP = NEXP in the absence of entanglement, ever since the introduction of the class MIP* it was open whether shared entanglement between the provers could weaken or strengthen the computational power of multi-prover interactive proofs. Our result shows that it does not weaken their computational power: MIP* contains MIP. At the heart of our result is a proof that Babai, Fort now, and Lund's multilinearity test is sound even in the presence of entanglement between the provers, and our analysis of this test could be of independent interest. As a byproduct we show that the correlations produced by any entangled strategy which succeeds in the multilinearity test with high probability can always be closely approximated using shared randomness alone.

arXiv:1207.0550•Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science•Oct 1, 2012•81 citations

Multi-Prover Interactive Proof Systems with Leakage

Vahid R. Asadi, Atsuya Hasegawa, François Le Gall

It is known that there exist multi-prover interactive protocols ($\mathsf{MIP}$ protocols) for the complexity class $\mathsf{NEXP}$, succinct $\mathsf{MIP}$ protocols for $\mathsf{NP}$ and multi-prover interactive protocols with shared entanglement ($\mathsf{MIP}^\ast$ protocols) for $\mathsf{RE}$. This extraordinary power of multi-prover interactive proof systems comes from the assumption that provers do not communicate with each other during the protocols. If they are allowed to communicate freely, the setting is the same as in the single-prover case, and the computational power of the system becomes significantly weaker. In this paper, we investigate for the first time the setting where communication (i.e., leakage of information) between provers is allowed but bounded. We introduce two techniques to approach this question and show that multi-prover interactive proof systems are robust against some amount of leakage. Our first technique is based on parallel repetition theorems. We apply it to show that for any polynomial $p$, we can construct two-prover one-round $\mathsf{MIP}$ and $\mathsf{MIP}^\ast$ protocols for $\mathsf{NEXP}$ and $\mathsf{RE}$, respectively, that are robust against $p(n)$ bits of leakage. We further derive our second technique to convert any low-soundness PCP construction to a two-prover one-round $\mathsf{MIP}$ protocol for $\mathsf{NP}$ robust against leakage. We also discuss the relation between robustness against leakage in multi-prover interactive proof systems and the Sliding Scale Conjecture in the PCP literature.

quant-pharXiv:2605.09872•Leibniz international proceedings in informatics•May 12, 2026•0 citations

Using Entanglement in Quantum Multi-prover Interactive Proofs

Julia Kempe, Hirotada Kobayashi, Keiji Matsumoto +1 more

The central question in quantum multi-prover interactive proof systems is whether or not entanglement shared among provers affects the verification power of the proof system. We study for the first time positive aspects of prior entanglement and show how it can be used to parallelize any multi- prover quantum interactive proof system to a one-round system with perfect completeness, soundness bounded away from 1 by an inverse polynomial in the input size, and one extra proven Alternatively, we can also parallelize to a three-turn system with the same number of provers, where the verifier only broadcasts the outcome of a coin flip. This "public-coin" property is somewhat surprising, since in the classical case public-coin multi-prover interactive proofs are equivalent to single prover ones.

IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC)•Jun 1, 2008•26 citations
Multi Prover Interactive Proof systems (MIPs)were first presented in a cryptographic context, but ever since they were used in various fields. Understanding the power of MIPs in the quantum context raises many open problems, as there are several interesting models to consider. For example, one can study the question when the provers share entanglement or not, and the communication between the verifier and the provers is quantum or classical. While there are several partial results on the subject, so far no one presented an efficient scheme for recognizing NEXP (or NP with logarithmic communication), except for [KM03], in the case there is no entanglement (and of course no communication between the provers). We introduce another variant of Quantum MIP, where the provers do not share entanglement, the communication between the verifier and the provers is quantum, but the provers are unlimited in the classical communication between them. At first, this model may seem very weak, as provers who exchange information seem to be equivalent in power to a simple prover. This in fact is not the case - we show that any language in NEXP can be recognized in this model efficiently, with just two provers and two rounds of communication, with a constant completeness-soundness gap.
We introduce another variant of quantum MIP, where the provers do not share entanglement, the communication between the verifier and the provers is quantum, but the provers are unlimited in the classical communication between them. At first, this model may seem very weak, as provers who exchange information seem to be equivalent in power to a simple prover. This in fact is not the case-we show that any language in NEXP can be recognized in this model efficiently, with just two provers and two rounds of communication, with a constant completeness-soundness gap. Similar ideas and techniques may help help with other models of quantum MIP, including the dual question, of non communicating provers with unlimited entanglement.
We introduce a new variant of quantum multiprover interactive proofs (QMIP) where the provers and the verifier are quantum. The verifier can exchange quantum messages with the provers. The provers cannot communicate quantumly between themselves and do not share entanglement, but are unlimited in the classical communication between them, even after receiving messages from the verifier. We show that any language in nondeterministic exponential time (NEXP) can be recognized in this model efficiently, with just two provers and two rounds of communication, and with a constant completeness/soundness gap. This is in contrast to the result of [R. Jain et al., Comm. ACM, 53 (2010), pp. 102--109], which shows that QIP = PSPACE, or equivalently that the set of languages that can be recognized by a quantum verifier communicating with a single quantum prover is equal to PSPACE. To analyze the cheating power of the provers, we give them more power and allow them to perform any separable operation. We then show a unique two-phase protocol in which the provers first commit to a superposition of correct answers to all possible questions, and then in the second phase the verifier opens up the committed answer and checks for correctness and consistency.
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.
We prove a strong limitation on the ability of entangled provers to collude in a multiplayer game. Our main result is the first nontrivial lower bound on the class MIP* of languages having multi-prover interactive proofs with entangled provers, namely MIP* contains NEXP, the class of languages decidable in non-deterministic exponential time. While Babai, Fort now, and Lund (Computational Complexity 1991) proved the celebrated equality MIP = NEXP in the absence of entanglement, ever since the introduction of the class MIP* it was open whether shared entanglement between the provers could weaken or strengthen the computational power of multi-prover interactive proofs. Our result shows that it does not weaken their computational power: MIP* contains MIP. At the heart of our result is a proof that Babai, Fort now, and Lund's multilinearity test is sound even in the presence of entanglement between the provers, and our analysis of this test could be of independent interest. As a byproduct we show that the correlations produced by any entangled strategy which succeeds in the multilinearity test with high probability can always be closely approximated using shared randomness alone.
It is known that there exist multi-prover interactive protocols (MIP\mathsf{MIP}MIP protocols) for the complexity class NEXP\mathsf{NEXP}NEXP, succinct MIP\mathsf{MIP}MIP protocols for NP\mathsf{NP}NP and multi-prover interactive protocols with shared entanglement (MIP∗\mathsf{MIP}^\astMIP∗ protocols) for RE\mathsf{RE}RE. This extraordinary power of multi-prover interactive proof systems comes from the assumption that provers do not communicate with each other during the protocols. If they are allowed to communicate freely, the setting is the same as in the single-prover case, and the computational power of the system becomes significantly weaker. In this paper, we investigate for the first time the setting where communication (i.e., leakage of information) between provers is allowed but bounded. We introduce two techniques to approach this question and show that multi-prover interactive proof systems are robust against some amount of leakage. Our first technique is based on parallel repetition theorems. We apply it to show that for any polynomial ppp, we can construct two-prover one-round MIP\mathsf{MIP}MIP and MIP∗\mathsf{MIP}^\astMIP∗ protocols for NEXP\mathsf{NEXP}NEXP and RE\mathsf{RE}RE, respectively, that are robust against p(n)p(n)p(n) bits of leakage. We further derive our second technique to convert any low-soundness PCP construction to a two-prover one-round MIP\mathsf{MIP}MIP protocol for NP\mathsf{NP}NP robust against leakage. We also discuss the relation between robustness against leakage in multi-prover interactive proof systems and the Sliding Scale Conjecture in the PCP literature.
The central question in quantum multi-prover interactive proof systems is whether or not entanglement shared among provers affects the verification power of the proof system. We study for the first time positive aspects of prior entanglement and show how it can be used to parallelize any multi- prover quantum interactive proof system to a one-round system with perfect completeness, soundness bounded away from 1 by an inverse polynomial in the input size, and one extra proven Alternatively, we can also parallelize to a three-turn system with the same number of provers, where the verifier only broadcasts the outcome of a coin flip. This "public-coin" property is somewhat surprising, since in the classical case public-coin multi-prover interactive proofs are equivalent to single prover ones.