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:1311.1534

Interactive proofs for BQP via self-tested graph states (extended abstract)

Matthew McKague

Published Nov 6, 2013• 2 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Using the measurement-based quantum computation model, we construct interactive proofs with non-communicating quantum provers and a classical verifier. Our construction gives interactive proofs for all languages in BQP with a polynomial number of quantum provers, each of which, in the honest case, performs only a single measurement. Our techniques use self-tested graph states which allow us to test the provers for honesty, establishing that they hold onto a particular graph state and measure it in specified bases. In this extended abstract we give an overview of the construction and proofs.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1311.1534

Related papers

Interactive proofs for BQP via self-tested graph states

Matthew McKague

$ \newcommand{\cclass}[1]{\mathsf{#1}} $ Using the measurement-based quantum computation model, we construct interactive proofs with non-communicating quantum provers and a classical verifier. Our construction gives interactive proofs for all languages in $\cclass{BQP}$ with a polynomial number of quantum provers, each of which, in the honest case, performs only a single measurement. In this paper we introduce two main improvements over previous work in self-testing for graph states. Specifically, we derive new error bounds which scale polynomially with the size of the graph compared with exponential dependence on the size of the graph in previous work. We also extend the self-testing error bounds on measurements to a very general set which includes the adaptive measurements used for measurement-based quantum computation as a special case. These improvements allow us to apply graph state self-testing and measurement based quantum computation to build interactive proofs for all languages in $\cclass{BQP}$.

arXiv:1309.5675•Theory of Computing•Jan 1, 2016•97 citations

Quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs

Baocheng Sun, Thomas Vidick

We initiate the study of quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs (qIOPs), a generalization of both quantum Probabilistically Checkable Proofs and quantum Interactive Proofs, as well as a quantum analogue of classical Interactive Oracle Proofs. In the model of quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs, we allow multiple rounds of quantum interaction between the quantum prover and the quantum verifier, but the verifier has limited access to quantum resources. This includes both queries to the prover's messages and the complexity of the quantum circuits applied by the verifier. The question of whether QMA admits a quantum interactive oracle proof system is a relaxation of the quantum PCP Conjecture. We show the following two main constructions of qIOPs, both of which are unconditional: - We construct a qIOP for QMA in which the verifier shares polynomially many EPR pairs with the prover at the start of the protocol and reads only a constant number of qubits from the prover's messages. - We provide a stronger construction of qIOP for QMA in which the verifier not only reads a constant number of qubits but also operates on a constant number of qubits overall, including those in their private registers. However, in this stronger setting, the communication complexity becomes exponential. This leaves open the question of whether strong qIOPs for QMA, with polynomial communication complexity, exist. As a key component of our construction, we introduce a novel single prover many-qubits test, which may be of independent interest.

cs.CCCross-listedarXiv:2601.12874•Jan 20, 2026•0 citations

Interactive Proofs For Quantum Computations

Dorit Aharonov, Michael Ben-Or, Elad Eban +1 more

The widely held belief that BQP strictly contains BPP raises fundamental questions: Upcoming generations of quantum computers might already be too large to be simulated classically. Is it possible to experimentally test that these systems perform as they should, if we cannot efficiently compute predictions for their behavior? Vazirani has asked: If predicting Quantum Mechanical systems requires exponential resources, is QM a falsifiable theory? In cryptographic settings, an untrusted future company wants to sell a quantum computer or perform a delegated quantum computation. Can the customer be convinced of correctness without the ability to compare results to predictions? To answer these questions, we define Quantum Prover Interactive Proofs (QPIP). Whereas in standard Interactive Proofs the prover is computationally unbounded, here our prover is in BQP, representing a quantum computer. The verifier models our current computational capabilities: it is a BPP machine, with access to few qubits. Our main theorem can be roughly stated as: "Any language in BQP has a QPIP, and moreover, a fault tolerant one". We provide two proofs. The simpler one uses a new (possibly of independent interest) quantum authentication scheme (QAS) based on random Clifford elements. This QPIP however, is not fault tolerant. Our second protocol uses polynomial codes QAS due to BCGHS, combined with quantum fault tolerance and multiparty quantum computation techniques. A slight modification of our constructions makes the protocol "blind": the quantum computation and input are unknown to the prover. After we have derived the results, we have learned that Broadbent at al. have independently derived "universal blind quantum computation" using completely different methods. Their construction implicitly implies similar implications.

arXiv:0810.5375•International Conference on Supercomputing•Oct 30, 2008•125 citations

How to Verify a Quantum Computation

Anne Broadbent

We give a new theoretical solution to a leading-edge experimental challenge, namely to the verification of quantum computations in the regime of high computational complexity. Our results are given in the language of quantum interactive proof systems. Specifically, we show that any language in $\mathsf{BQP}$ has a quantum interactive proof system with a polynomial-time classical verifier (who can also prepare random single-qubit pure states), and a quantum polynomial-time prover. Here, soundness is unconditional—i.e., it holds even for computationally unbounded provers. Compared to prior work achieving similar results, our technique does not require the encoding of the input or of the computation; instead, we rely on encryption of the input (together with a method to perform computations on encrypted inputs), and show that the random choice between three types of input (defining a computational run, versus two types of test runs) suffices. Because the overhead is very low for each run (it is linear in the size of the circuit), this shows that verification could be achieved at minimal cost compared to performing the computation. As a proof technique, we use a reduction to an entanglement-based protocol; to the best of our knowledge, this is the first time this technique has been used in the context of verification of quantum computations, and it enables a relatively straightforward analysis.

arXiv:1509.09180•Theory of Computing•Jan 1, 2018•68 citations

Interactive Proofs for Synthesizing Quantum States and Unitaries

Gregory Rosenthal, Henry Yuen

Whereas quantum complexity theory has traditionally been concerned with problems arising from classical complexity theory (such as computing boolean functions), it also makes sense to study the complexity of inherently quantum operations such as constructing quantum states or performing unitary transformations. With this motivation, we define models of interactive proofs for synthesizing quantum states and unitaries, where a polynomial-time quantum verifier interacts with an untrusted quantum prover, and a verifier who accepts also outputs an approximation of the target state (for the state synthesis problem) or the result of the target unitary applied to the input state (for the unitary synthesis problem); furthermore there should exist an "honest" prover which the verifier accepts with probability 1. Our main result is a "state synthesis" analogue of the inclusion $\mathsf{PSPACE} \subseteq \mathsf{IP}$: any sequence of states computable by a polynomial-space quantum algorithm (which may run for exponential time) admits an interactive protocol of the form described above. Leveraging this state synthesis protocol, we also give a unitary synthesis protocol for polynomial space-computable unitaries that act nontrivially on only a polynomial-dimensional subspace. We obtain analogous results in the setting with multiple entangled provers as well.

arXiv:2108.07192•Leibniz international proceedings in informatics•Aug 16, 2021•6 citations

On Removing Interaction from Quantum Proofs

Nicholas Spooner, Max Tromanhauser

An important open question in quantum cryptography is the construction of publicly-verifiable NIZKs for QMA. Classically, one can construct NIZKs for NP in the random oracle model (and sometimes in the standard model) by compiling an honest-verifier ZK (HVZK) $Σ$-protocol for NP using the Fiat-Shamir transformation. Broadbent and Grilo introduced a quantum analog of a $Σ$-protocol (which they call a $Ξ$-protocol) in which the prover's first message is quantum, and show that HVZK $Ξ$-protocols exist for QMA. However, it is not clear how to compile such protocols into NIZKs in the (Q)ROM, because the Fiat-Shamir transformation seems to be incompatible with quantum messages. In this work we give formal evidence that this is indeed the case: we show that if generic "Fiat-Shamir-like" compilers for quantum protocols exist in the QROM (with small completeness and soundness error) then QMA = BQP.

quant-pharXiv:2609.38387•Oct 1, 2026•0 citations
Using the measurement-based quantum computation model, we construct interactive proofs with non-communicating quantum provers and a classical verifier. Our construction gives interactive proofs for all languages in BQP with a polynomial number of quantum provers, each of which, in the honest case, performs only a single measurement. Our techniques use self-tested graph states which allow us to test the provers for honesty, establishing that they hold onto a particular graph state and measure it in specified bases. In this extended abstract we give an overview of the construction and proofs.
$ \newcommand{\cclass}[1]{\mathsf{#1}} $ Using the measurement-based quantum computation model, we construct interactive proofs with non-communicating quantum provers and a classical verifier. Our construction gives interactive proofs for all languages in $\cclass{BQP}$ with a polynomial number of quantum provers, each of which, in the honest case, performs only a single measurement. In this paper we introduce two main improvements over previous work in self-testing for graph states. Specifically, we derive new error bounds which scale polynomially with the size of the graph compared with exponential dependence on the size of the graph in previous work. We also extend the self-testing error bounds on measurements to a very general set which includes the adaptive measurements used for measurement-based quantum computation as a special case. These improvements allow us to apply graph state self-testing and measurement based quantum computation to build interactive proofs for all languages in $\cclass{BQP}$.
We initiate the study of quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs (qIOPs), a generalization of both quantum Probabilistically Checkable Proofs and quantum Interactive Proofs, as well as a quantum analogue of classical Interactive Oracle Proofs. In the model of quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs, we allow multiple rounds of quantum interaction between the quantum prover and the quantum verifier, but the verifier has limited access to quantum resources. This includes both queries to the prover's messages and the complexity of the quantum circuits applied by the verifier. The question of whether QMA admits a quantum interactive oracle proof system is a relaxation of the quantum PCP Conjecture. We show the following two main constructions of qIOPs, both of which are unconditional: - We construct a qIOP for QMA in which the verifier shares polynomially many EPR pairs with the prover at the start of the protocol and reads only a constant number of qubits from the prover's messages. - We provide a stronger construction of qIOP for QMA in which the verifier not only reads a constant number of qubits but also operates on a constant number of qubits overall, including those in their private registers. However, in this stronger setting, the communication complexity becomes exponential. This leaves open the question of whether strong qIOPs for QMA, with polynomial communication complexity, exist. As a key component of our construction, we introduce a novel single prover many-qubits test, which may be of independent interest.
The widely held belief that BQP strictly contains BPP raises fundamental questions: Upcoming generations of quantum computers might already be too large to be simulated classically. Is it possible to experimentally test that these systems perform as they should, if we cannot efficiently compute predictions for their behavior? Vazirani has asked: If predicting Quantum Mechanical systems requires exponential resources, is QM a falsifiable theory? In cryptographic settings, an untrusted future company wants to sell a quantum computer or perform a delegated quantum computation. Can the customer be convinced of correctness without the ability to compare results to predictions? To answer these questions, we define Quantum Prover Interactive Proofs (QPIP). Whereas in standard Interactive Proofs the prover is computationally unbounded, here our prover is in BQP, representing a quantum computer. The verifier models our current computational capabilities: it is a BPP machine, with access to few qubits. Our main theorem can be roughly stated as: "Any language in BQP has a QPIP, and moreover, a fault tolerant one". We provide two proofs. The simpler one uses a new (possibly of independent interest) quantum authentication scheme (QAS) based on random Clifford elements. This QPIP however, is not fault tolerant. Our second protocol uses polynomial codes QAS due to BCGHS, combined with quantum fault tolerance and multiparty quantum computation techniques. A slight modification of our constructions makes the protocol "blind": the quantum computation and input are unknown to the prover. After we have derived the results, we have learned that Broadbent at al. have independently derived "universal blind quantum computation" using completely different methods. Their construction implicitly implies similar implications.
We give a new theoretical solution to a leading-edge experimental challenge, namely to the verification of quantum computations in the regime of high computational complexity. Our results are given in the language of quantum interactive proof systems. Specifically, we show that any language in BQP\mathsf{BQP}BQP has a quantum interactive proof system with a polynomial-time classical verifier (who can also prepare random single-qubit pure states), and a quantum polynomial-time prover. Here, soundness is unconditional—i.e., it holds even for computationally unbounded provers. Compared to prior work achieving similar results, our technique does not require the encoding of the input or of the computation; instead, we rely on encryption of the input (together with a method to perform computations on encrypted inputs), and show that the random choice between three types of input (defining a computational run, versus two types of test runs) suffices. Because the overhead is very low for each run (it is linear in the size of the circuit), this shows that verification could be achieved at minimal cost compared to performing the computation. As a proof technique, we use a reduction to an entanglement-based protocol; to the best of our knowledge, this is the first time this technique has been used in the context of verification of quantum computations, and it enables a relatively straightforward analysis.
Whereas quantum complexity theory has traditionally been concerned with problems arising from classical complexity theory (such as computing boolean functions), it also makes sense to study the complexity of inherently quantum operations such as constructing quantum states or performing unitary transformations. With this motivation, we define models of interactive proofs for synthesizing quantum states and unitaries, where a polynomial-time quantum verifier interacts with an untrusted quantum prover, and a verifier who accepts also outputs an approximation of the target state (for the state synthesis problem) or the result of the target unitary applied to the input state (for the unitary synthesis problem); furthermore there should exist an "honest" prover which the verifier accepts with probability 1. Our main result is a "state synthesis" analogue of the inclusion PSPACE⊆IP\mathsf{PSPACE} \subseteq \mathsf{IP}PSPACE⊆IP: any sequence of states computable by a polynomial-space quantum algorithm (which may run for exponential time) admits an interactive protocol of the form described above. Leveraging this state synthesis protocol, we also give a unitary synthesis protocol for polynomial space-computable unitaries that act nontrivially on only a polynomial-dimensional subspace. We obtain analogous results in the setting with multiple entangled provers as well.
An important open question in quantum cryptography is the construction of publicly-verifiable NIZKs for QMA. Classically, one can construct NIZKs for NP in the random oracle model (and sometimes in the standard model) by compiling an honest-verifier ZK (HVZK) ΣΣΣ-protocol for NP using the Fiat-Shamir transformation. Broadbent and Grilo introduced a quantum analog of a ΣΣΣ-protocol (which they call a ΞΞΞ-protocol) in which the prover's first message is quantum, and show that HVZK ΞΞΞ-protocols exist for QMA. However, it is not clear how to compile such protocols into NIZKs in the (Q)ROM, because the Fiat-Shamir transformation seems to be incompatible with quantum messages. In this work we give formal evidence that this is indeed the case: we show that if generic "Fiat-Shamir-like" compilers for quantum protocols exist in the QROM (with small completeness and soundness error) then QMA = BQP.