In both query and communication complexity, we give separations between the class NISZK, containing those problems with non-interactive statistical zero knowledge proof systems, and the class UPP, containing those problems with randomized algorithms with unbounded error. These results significantly improve on earlier query separations of Vereschagin [Ver95] and Aaronson [Aar12] and earlier communication complexity separations of Klauck [Kla11] and Razborov and Sherstov [RS10]. In addition, our results imply an oracle relative to which the class NISZK is not contained in PP. This answers an open question of Watrous from 2002 [Aar]. The technical core of our result is a stronger hardness amplification theorem for approximate degree, which roughly says that composing the gapped-majority function with any function of high approximate degree yields a function with high threshold degree. Using our techniques, we also give oracles relative to which the following two separations hold: perfect zero knowledge (PZK) is not contained in its complement (coPZK), and SZK (indeed, even NISZK) is not contained in PZK (indeed, even HVPZK). Along the way, we show that HVPZK is contained in PP in a relativizing manner.
We prove a number of implications of these results, which may be of independent interest outside of structural complexity. Specifically, our oracle separation implies that certain parameters of the Polarization Lemma of Sahai and Vadhan [SV03] cannot be much improved in a black-box manner. Additionally, it implies new lower bounds for property testing algorithms with error probability arbitrarily close to 1/2. Finally, our results imply that two-message protocols in the streaming interactive proofs model of Cormode et al. [CTY11] are surprisingly powerful in the sense that, with just logarithmic cost, they can compute functions outside of UPP^CC.
In both query and communication complexity, we give separations between the class NISZK, containing those problems with non-interactive statistical zero knowledge proof systems, and the class UPP, containing those problems with randomized algorithms with unbounded error. These results significantly improve on earlier query separations of Vereschagin [Ver95] and Aaronson [Aar12] and earlier communication complexity separations of Klauck [Kla11] and Razborov and Sherstov [RS10]. In addition, our results imply an oracle relative to which the class NISZK is not contained in PP. This answers an open question of Watrous from 2002 [Aar]. The technical core of our result is a stronger hardness amplification theorem for approximate degree, which roughly says that composing the gapped-majority function with any function of high approximate degree yields a function with high threshold degree. Using our techniques, we also give oracles relative to which the following two separations hold: perfect zero knowledge (PZK) is not contained in its complement (coPZK), and SZK (indeed, even NISZK) is not contained in PZK (indeed, even HVPZK). Along the way, we show that HVPZK is contained in PP in a relativizing manner.
We prove a number of implications of these results, which may be of independent interest outside of structural complexity. Specifically, our oracle separation implies that certain parameters of the Polarization Lemma of Sahai and Vadhan [SV03] cannot be much improved in a black-box manner. Additionally, it implies new lower bounds for property testing algorithms with error probability arbitrarily close to 1/2. Finally, our results imply that two-message protocols in the streaming interactive proofs model of Cormode et al. [CTY11] are surprisingly powerful in the sense that, with just logarithmic cost, they can compute functions outside of UPP^CC.
In recent years, the quantum oracle model introduced by Aaronson and Kuperberg (2007) has found a lot of use in showing oracle separations between complexity classes and cryptographic primitives. It is generally assumed that proof techniques that do not relativize with respect to quantum oracles will also not relativize with respect to classical oracles. Aaronson (2009) showed that this is not the case by showing a complexity class containment that relativizes with respect to classical oracles but not with quantum oracles. However, their result only works for zero-error quantum complexity classes and they leave open the problem for bounded-error complexity classes. We show that there is a quantum oracle problem that is contained in the class QMA, but not in a class we call polyQCPH. However, with respect to classical oracles, QMA is contained in polyQCPH, because polyQCPH is equal to PSPACE with respect to classical oracles. Our result works for polyQCPH, which is a bounded-error complexity class, thus it resolves the open problem from Aaronson (2009). We also show that the same separation holds relative to a distributional oracle, which is a model introduced by Natarajan and Nirkhe (2024). We believe our findings show the need for some caution when using these non-standard oracle models, particularly when showing separations between quantum and classical resources.
Complexity class containments involving interactive proof classes are famously nonrelativizing: although IP=PSPACE, Fortnow and Sipser showed that that there exists an oracle relative to which coNP⊆IP. In contrast, the question of whether the containment BQP⊆IP is relativizing remains wide open. In this work we make progress towards resolving this question by showing that the containment BQP⊆MIP holds with respect to any classical oracle. We obtain this result by constructing, for any classical oracle O, a PCP proof system for BQPO where the verifier makes polynomially many classical queries to an exponentially-long proof, and to the oracle O. Our construction is inspired by the state synthesis algorithm of Grover and Rudolph, and serves as a complement to the "exponential PCP" constructed by Aharonov, Arad, and Vidick, which achieves similar parameters but which is based on different ideas and does not relativize. We propose relativization as a proxy for prover efficiency, and hope that progress towards an IP for BQP in the oracle world will lead to a non-cryptographic interactive protocol for proving any quantum computation to a classical skeptic in the unrelativized world, which is a longstanding open problem in quantum complexity theory.
We study the following problem: with the power of postselection (classically or quantumly), what is your ability to answer adaptive queries to certain languages? More specifically, for what kind of computational classes C, we have P^C belongs to PostBPP or PostBQP? While a complete answer to the above question seems impossible given the development of present computational complexity theory. We study the analogous question in query complexity, which sheds light on the limitation of relativized methods (the relativization barrier) to the above question. Informally, we show that, for a partial function f, if there is no efficient small bounded-error algorithm for f classically or quantumly, then there is no efficient postselection bounded-error algorithm to answer adaptive queries to f classically or quantumly. Our results imply a new proof for the classical oracle separation P^{NP^O} notsubset PP^O, which is arguably more elegant. They also lead to a new oracle separation P^{SZK^O} notsubset PP^O, which is close to an oracle separation between SZK and PP - an open problem in the field of oracle separations. Our result also implies a hardness amplification construction for polynomial approximation: given a function f on n bits, we construct an adaptive-version of f, denoted by F, on O(m·n) bits, such that if f requires large degree to approximate to error 2/3 in a certain one-sided sense, then F requires large degree to approximate even to error 1/2 - 2^{-m}. Our construction achieves the same amplification in the work of Thaler (ICALP, 2016), by composing a function with O(log n) deterministic query complexity, which is in sharp contrast to all the previous results where the composing amplifiers are all hard functions in a certain sense.
The complexity class Quantum Statistical Zero-Knowledge (QSZK), introduced by Watrous (FOCS 2002) and later refined in Watrous (SICOMP, 2009), has the best known upper bound QIP(2)∩co-QIP(2), which was simplified following the inclusion QIP(2)⊆PSPACE established in Jain, Upadhyay, and Watrous (FOCS 2009). Here, QIP(2) denotes the class of promise problems that admit two-message quantum interactive proof systems in which the honest prover is typically computationally unbounded, and co-QIP(2) denotes the complement of QIP(2).
We slightly improve this upper bound to QIP(2)∩co-QIP(2) with a quantum linear-space honest prover. Specifically, the honest prover uses space linear in the size of the transcript of the original QSZK proof system. A similar improvement also applies to the upper bound for the non-interactive variant NIQSZK. Our main techniques are algorithmic versions of the Holevo-Helstrom measurement and the Uhlmann transform, both implementable in quantum linear space, implying polynomial-time complexity in the state dimension, using the recent space-efficient quantum singular value transformation of Le Gall, Liu, and Wang (CC, to appear).
Theoretical computer scientists have been debating the role of oracles since the 1970's. This pa-per illustrates both that oracles can give us nontrivial insights about the barrier problems in circuit complexity, and that they need not prevent us from trying to solve those problems. First, we give an oracle relative to which PP has linear-sized circuits, by proving a new lower bound for perceptrons and low-degree threshold polynomials. This oracle settles a longstanding open question, and generalizes earlier results due to Beigel and to Buhrman, Fortnow, and Thierauf. More importantly, it implies the rst nonrelativizing separation of \\traditional " complexity classes, as opposed to interactive proof classes such as MIP and MAEXP. For Vinodchandran showed, by a nonrelativizing argument, that PP does not have circuits of size nk for any xed k. We present an alternative proof of this fact, which shows that PP does not even have quantum circuits of size nk with quantum advice. To our knowledge, this is the rst nontrivial lower bound on quantum circuit size. Second, we study a beautiful algorithm of Bshouty et al. for learning Boolean circuits in ZPPNP. We show that the NP queries in this algorithm cannot be parallelized by any relativizing technique, by giving an oracle relative to which ZPPNPjj and even BPP NP jj have linear-size circuits. On the other hand, we also show that the NP queries could be parallelized if P = NP. Thus, classes such as ZPPNPjj inhabit a \\twilight zone, " where we need to distinguish between relativizing and black-box techniques. Our results on this subject have implications for computational learning theory as well as for the circuit minimization problem. 1
BQP⊆IP Does Not Relativize
We construct an oracle relative to which BQP⊆IP, resolving a long-standing open question in quantum complexity theory. Together with recent work due to Aaronson et al., our work also gives the first oracle separation between IP and MIP, answering a question dating back to Fortnow's thesis. Our separation is based on the Forrelation problem, where given Boolean functions f and g, the goal is to determine if f is correlated with the Fourier spectrum of g. While this task is solvable by a query-efficient quantum algorithm, we show that it admits no classical interactive protocol with polynomial communication and a polynomial-query verifier.
Our proof is based on (i) a new structural result showing how to approximate Avg-Max circuits (which are well-known to capture the power of interactive proofs in the oracular setting) by convex functions with small first and second derivatives and (ii) a novel analysis establishing that the Forrelation distribution suggested by Aaronson and Ambainis fools such functions.
Our results imply that any prover-efficient classical interactive protocol for BQP must rely on non-relativizing techniques. This might serve as a partial explanation for the lack of progress towards doubly-efficient, unconditionally sound classical verification of quantum computation.