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:0810.0693 · IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC)

Oracularization and Two-Prover One-Round Interactive Proofs against Nonlocal Strategies

Tsuyoshi Ito, Hirotada Kobayashi, Keiji Matsumoto

Published Jul 1, 2009• 69 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

This paper presents three results on the power of two-prover one-round interactive proof systems based on oracularization under the existence of prior entanglement between dishonest provers. It is proved that the two-prover one-round interactive proof system for PSPACE by Cai, Condon, and Lipton [JCSS 48:183-193, 1994] still achieves exponentially small soundness error in the existence of prior entanglement between dishonest provers (and more strongly, even if dishonest provers are allowed to use arbitrary no-signaling strategies). It follows that, unless the polynomial-time hierarchy collapses to the second level, two-prover systems are still advantageous to single-prover systems even when only malicious provers can use quantum information. It is also shown that a "dummy" question may be helpful when constructing an entanglement-resistant multi-prover system via oracularization. This affirmatively settles a question posed by Kempe et al. [FOCS 2008, pp. 447-456] and every language in NEXP is proved to have a two-prover one-round interactive proof system even against entangled provers, albeit with exponentially small gap between completeness and soundness. In other words, it is NP-hard to approximate within an inverse-polynomial the value of a classical two-prover one-round game against entangled provers. Finally, both for the above proof system for NEXP and for the quantum two-prover one-round proof system for NEXP proposed by Kempe et al., it is proved that exponentially small completeness-soundness gaps are best achievable unless soundness analysis uses the structure of the underlying system with unentangled provers.

DOI
10.1109/ccc.2009.22

Related papers

Entanglement-resistant two-Prover interactive proof systems and non-adaptive PIRs

Richard Cleve, Dmitry Gavinsky, Rahul Jain

We show that every language in $\np$ is recognized by a two-prover interactive proof system with the following properties. The proof system is entanglement-resistant (i.e., its soundness is robust against provers who have prior shared entanglement), it has one round of interaction, the provers' answers are single bits, and the completeness-soundness gap is constant (formally, $\np\subseteq \xmips_{1-\varepsilon,1/2+\varepsilon}\mo[2]$, for any~$\varepsilon$ such that $0 < \varepsilon < 1/4$). Our result is based on the ``oracularizing" property of a particular private information retrieval scheme (PIR), and it suggests that investigating related properties of other PIRs might bear further fruit.

Quantum Information and Computation•Jul 1, 2009•14 citations

Generalized Tsirelson Inequalities, Commuting-Operator Provers, and Multi-prover Interactive Proof Systems

Tsuyoshi Ito, Hirotada Kobayashi, Daniel Preda +2 more

A central question in quantum information theory and computational complexity is how powerful nonlocal strategies are in cooperative games with imperfect information, such as multi-prover interactive proof systems. This paper develops a new method for proving limits of nonlocal strategies that make use of prior entanglement among players (or, provers, in the terminology of multi-prover interactive proofs). Instead of proving the limits for usual isolated provers who initially share entanglement, this paper proves the limits for "commuting-operator provers", who share private space, but can apply only such operators that are commutative with any operator applied by other provers. Obviously, these commuting-operator provers are at least as powerful as usual isolated but prior-entangled provers, and thus, limits in the model with commuting-operator provers immediately give limits in the usual model with prior-entangled provers. Using this method, we obtain an n-party generalization of the Tsirelson bound for the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality, for every n. Our bounds are tight in the sense that, in every n-party case, the equality is achievable by a usual nonlocal strategy with prior entanglement. We also apply our method to a three-prover one-round binary interactive proof system for NEXP. Combined with the technique developed by Kempe, Kobayashi, Matsumoto, Toner and Vidick to analyze the soundness of the proof system, it is proved to be NP-hard to distinguish whether the entangled value of a three-prover one-round binary-answer game is equal to one or at most 1-1/p(n) for some polynomial p, where n is the number of questions. This is in contrast to the two-prover one-round binary-answer case, where the corresponding problem is efficiently decidable. Alternatively, NEXP has a three-prover one-round binary interactive proof system with perfect completeness and soundness 1 middot 2-poly.

arXiv:0712.2163•IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC)•Jun 1, 2008•28 citations

New Perspectives on Multi-Prover Interactive Proofs

Claude Crépeau, Nan Yang

The existing multi-prover interactive proof framework suffers from incompleteness in terms of soundness and zero-knowledge that is not completely addressed in the literature. The problem is that the existing definitions of what is local, entangled and no-signalling are not rich enough to capture the full generality of multi-prover interaction. In general, existing proofs do not take into account possible changes in locality either during a protocol's execution or when protocols are composed together. This is especially problematic for zero-knowledge, as composing commitments is the only known way of achieving zero-knowledge outside of some NP-intermediate languages. In this work, we introduce the locality hierarchy for multiparty (multi-round) interaction, and for the first time a complete definition of multi-round multiparty no-signalling distributions and strategies. Within this framework, we define the locality of a protocol which involves the provers, verifiers, simulators and distinguishers. We show that an existing protocol for NEXP [BFL90] and a zero-knowledge variant we introduce are sound in a local sense, but are zero-knowledge in a sense that is even stronger than usually understood. All prior claims of zero-knowledge proofs in the multi-prover model were actually incorrect. Finally, we present similar constructions for entangled and no-signalling prover sets for NEXP and EXP based on [IV12] and [KRR14] using new multi-prover commitment schemes.

•Jan 1, 2018•0 citations

Entangled Games Are Hard to Approximate

Julia Kempe, Hirotada Kobayashi, Keiji Matsumoto +2 more

We establish the first hardness results for the problem of computing the value of one-round games played by a verifier and a team of provers who can share quantum entanglement. In particular, we show that it is NP-hard to approximate within an inverse polynomial the value of a one-round game with (i) a quantum verifier and two entangled provers or (ii) a classical verifier and three entangled provers. Previously it was not even known if computing the value exactly is NP-hard. We also describe a mathematical conjecture, which, if true, would imply hardness of approximation of entangled-prover games to within a constant. Using our techniques we also show that every language in PSPACE has a two-prover one-round interactive proof system with perfect completeness and soundness $1-1/\,\mathrm{poly}$ even against entangled provers. We start our proof by describing two ways to modify classical multiprover games to make them resistant to entangled provers. We then show that a strategy for the modified game that uses entanglement can be “rounded” to one that does not. The results then follow from classical inapproximability bounds. Our work implies that, unless $\mathrm{P}=\mathrm{NP}$, the values of entangled-prover games cannot be computed by semidefinite programs that are polynomial in the size of the verifier's system, a method that has been successful for more restricted quantum games.

SIAM Journal on Computing•Jan 1, 2011•47 citations

PSPACE has 2-round quantum interactive proof systems

John Watrous

In this paper we consider quantum interactive proof systems, i.e., interactive proof systems in which the prover and verifier may perform quantum computations and exchange quantum messages. It is proved that every language in PSPACE has a quantum interactive proof system that requires only two rounds of communication between the prover and verifier, while having exponentially small (one-sided) probability of error. It follows that quantum interactive proof systems are strictly more powerful than classical interactive proof systems in the constant-round case unless the polynomial time hierarchy collapses to the second level.

arXiv:cs/9901015•Jan 27, 1999•6 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
This paper presents three results on the power of two-prover one-round interactive proof systems based on oracularization under the existence of prior entanglement between dishonest provers. It is proved that the two-prover one-round interactive proof system for PSPACE by Cai, Condon, and Lipton [JCSS 48:183-193, 1994] still achieves exponentially small soundness error in the existence of prior entanglement between dishonest provers (and more strongly, even if dishonest provers are allowed to use arbitrary no-signaling strategies). It follows that, unless the polynomial-time hierarchy collapses to the second level, two-prover systems are still advantageous to single-prover systems even when only malicious provers can use quantum information. It is also shown that a "dummy" question may be helpful when constructing an entanglement-resistant multi-prover system via oracularization. This affirmatively settles a question posed by Kempe et al. [FOCS 2008, pp. 447-456] and every language in NEXP is proved to have a two-prover one-round interactive proof system even against entangled provers, albeit with exponentially small gap between completeness and soundness. In other words, it is NP-hard to approximate within an inverse-polynomial the value of a classical two-prover one-round game against entangled provers. Finally, both for the above proof system for NEXP and for the quantum two-prover one-round proof system for NEXP proposed by Kempe et al., it is proved that exponentially small completeness-soundness gaps are best achievable unless soundness analysis uses the structure of the underlying system with unentangled provers.
We show that every language in $\np$ is recognized by a two-prover interactive proof system with the following properties. The proof system is entanglement-resistant (i.e., its soundness is robust against provers who have prior shared entanglement), it has one round of interaction, the provers' answers are single bits, and the completeness-soundness gap is constant (formally, $\np\subseteq \xmips_{1-\varepsilon,1/2+\varepsilon}\mo[2]$, for any~ε\varepsilonε such that 0<ε<1/40 < \varepsilon < 1/40<ε<1/4). Our result is based on the ``oracularizing" property of a particular private information retrieval scheme (PIR), and it suggests that investigating related properties of other PIRs might bear further fruit.
A central question in quantum information theory and computational complexity is how powerful nonlocal strategies are in cooperative games with imperfect information, such as multi-prover interactive proof systems. This paper develops a new method for proving limits of nonlocal strategies that make use of prior entanglement among players (or, provers, in the terminology of multi-prover interactive proofs). Instead of proving the limits for usual isolated provers who initially share entanglement, this paper proves the limits for "commuting-operator provers", who share private space, but can apply only such operators that are commutative with any operator applied by other provers. Obviously, these commuting-operator provers are at least as powerful as usual isolated but prior-entangled provers, and thus, limits in the model with commuting-operator provers immediately give limits in the usual model with prior-entangled provers. Using this method, we obtain an n-party generalization of the Tsirelson bound for the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt inequality, for every n. Our bounds are tight in the sense that, in every n-party case, the equality is achievable by a usual nonlocal strategy with prior entanglement. We also apply our method to a three-prover one-round binary interactive proof system for NEXP. Combined with the technique developed by Kempe, Kobayashi, Matsumoto, Toner and Vidick to analyze the soundness of the proof system, it is proved to be NP-hard to distinguish whether the entangled value of a three-prover one-round binary-answer game is equal to one or at most 1-1/p(n) for some polynomial p, where n is the number of questions. This is in contrast to the two-prover one-round binary-answer case, where the corresponding problem is efficiently decidable. Alternatively, NEXP has a three-prover one-round binary interactive proof system with perfect completeness and soundness 1 middot 2-poly.
The existing multi-prover interactive proof framework suffers from incompleteness in terms of soundness and zero-knowledge that is not completely addressed in the literature. The problem is that the existing definitions of what is local, entangled and no-signalling are not rich enough to capture the full generality of multi-prover interaction. In general, existing proofs do not take into account possible changes in locality either during a protocol's execution or when protocols are composed together. This is especially problematic for zero-knowledge, as composing commitments is the only known way of achieving zero-knowledge outside of some NP-intermediate languages. In this work, we introduce the locality hierarchy for multiparty (multi-round) interaction, and for the first time a complete definition of multi-round multiparty no-signalling distributions and strategies. Within this framework, we define the locality of a protocol which involves the provers, verifiers, simulators and distinguishers. We show that an existing protocol for NEXP [BFL90] and a zero-knowledge variant we introduce are sound in a local sense, but are zero-knowledge in a sense that is even stronger than usually understood. All prior claims of zero-knowledge proofs in the multi-prover model were actually incorrect. Finally, we present similar constructions for entangled and no-signalling prover sets for NEXP and EXP based on [IV12] and [KRR14] using new multi-prover commitment schemes.
We establish the first hardness results for the problem of computing the value of one-round games played by a verifier and a team of provers who can share quantum entanglement. In particular, we show that it is NP-hard to approximate within an inverse polynomial the value of a one-round game with (i) a quantum verifier and two entangled provers or (ii) a classical verifier and three entangled provers. Previously it was not even known if computing the value exactly is NP-hard. We also describe a mathematical conjecture, which, if true, would imply hardness of approximation of entangled-prover games to within a constant. Using our techniques we also show that every language in PSPACE has a two-prover one-round interactive proof system with perfect completeness and soundness 1−1/ poly1-1/\,\mathrm{poly}1−1/poly even against entangled provers. We start our proof by describing two ways to modify classical multiprover games to make them resistant to entangled provers. We then show that a strategy for the modified game that uses entanglement can be “rounded” to one that does not. The results then follow from classical inapproximability bounds. Our work implies that, unless P=NP\mathrm{P}=\mathrm{NP}P=NP, the values of entangled-prover games cannot be computed by semidefinite programs that are polynomial in the size of the verifier's system, a method that has been successful for more restricted quantum games.
In this paper we consider quantum interactive proof systems, i.e., interactive proof systems in which the prover and verifier may perform quantum computations and exchange quantum messages. It is proved that every language in PSPACE has a quantum interactive proof system that requires only two rounds of communication between the prover and verifier, while having exponentially small (one-sided) probability of error. It follows that quantum interactive proof systems are strictly more powerful than classical interactive proof systems in the constant-round case unless the polynomial time hierarchy collapses to the second level.
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.