Zero-knowledge and multi-prover systems are both central notions in classical and quantum complexity theory. There is, however, little research in quantum multi-prover zero-knowledge systems. This paper studies complexity-theoretical aspects of the quantum multi-prover zero-knowledge systems. This paper has two results: 1.QMIP* systems with honest zero-knowledge can be converted into general zero-knowledge systems without any assumptions. 2.QMIP* has computational quantum zero-knowledge systems if a natural computational conjecture holds. One of the main tools is a test (called the GHZ test) that uses GHZ states shared by the provers, which prevents the verifier's attack in the above two results. Another main tool is what we call the Local Hamiltonian based Interactive protocol (LHI protocol). The LHI protocol makes previous research for Local Hamiltonians applicable to check the history state of interactive proofs, and we then apply Broadbent et al.'s zero-knowledge protocol for QMA \cite{BJSW} to quantum multi-prover systems in order to obtain the second result.
Zero-knowledge and multi-prover systems are both central notions in classical and quantum complexity theory. There is, however, little research in quantum multi-prover zero-knowledge systems. This paper studies complexity-theoretical aspects of the quantum multi-prover zero-knowledge systems. This paper has two results: 1.QMIP* systems with honest zero-knowledge can be converted into general zero-knowledge systems without any assumptions. 2.QMIP* has computational quantum zero-knowledge systems if a natural computational conjecture holds. One of the main tools is a test (called the GHZ test) that uses GHZ states shared by the provers, which prevents the verifier's attack in the above two results. Another main tool is what we call the Local Hamiltonian based Interactive protocol (LHI protocol). The LHI protocol makes previous research for Local Hamiltonians applicable to check the history state of interactive proofs, and we then apply Broadbent et al.'s zero-knowledge protocol for QMA \cite{BJSW} to quantum multi-prover systems in order to obtain the second result.
Quantum information and computation provide a fascinating twist on the notion of proofs in computational complexity theory. For instance, one may consider a quantum computational analogue of the complexity class NP, known as QMA, in which a quantum state plays the role of a proof (also called a certificate or witness), and is checked by a polynomial-time quantum computation. For some problems, the fact that a quantum proof state could be a superposition over exponentially many classical states appears to offer computational advantages over classical proof strings. In the interactive proof system setting, one may consider a verifier and one or more provers that exchange and process quantum information rather than classical information during an interaction for a given input string, giving rise to quantum complexity classes such as QIP, QSZK, and QMIP* that represent natural quantum analogues of IP, SZK, and MIP. While quantum interactive proof systems inherit some properties from their classical counterparts, they also possess distinct and uniquely quantum features that lead to an interesting landscape of complexity classes based on variants of this model. In this survey we provide an overview of many of the known results concerning quantum proofs, computational models based on this concept, and properties of the complexity classes they define. In particular, we discuss non-interactive proofs and the complexity class QMA, single-prover quantum interactive proof systems and the complexity class QIP, statistical zero-knowledge quantum interactive proof systems and the complexity class QSZK, and multiprover interactive proof systems and the complexity classes QMIP, QMIP*, and MIP*.
In a proof of knowledge (PoK), a verifier becomes convinced that a prover possesses privileged information. In combination with zero-knowledge proof systems, PoKs play an important role in security protocols such as in digital signatures and authentication schemes, as they enable a prover to demonstrate possession of certain information (such as a private key or a credential), without revealing it. A PoK is formally defined via the existence of an extractor, which is capable of reconstructing the key information that makes a verifier accept, given oracle access to any accepting prover. We extend this concept to the setting of a single classical verifier and multiple quantum provers and present the first statistical zero-knowledge (ZK) PoK proof system for problems in QMA. To achieve this, we establish the PoK property for the ZK protocol of Broadbent, Mehta, and Zhao (TQC 2024), which applies to the local Hamiltonian problem. More specifically, we construct an extractor which, given oracle access to a provers' strategy that leads to high acceptance probability, is able to reconstruct the ground state of a local Hamiltonian. Our result can be seen as a new form of self-testing, where, in addition to certifying a pre-shared entangled state, the verifier also certifies that provers have access to a quantum system, in particular, a ground state; this indicates a new level of verification for a proof of quantumness.
Prior work has established that all problems in NP admit classical zero-knowledge proof systems, and under reasonable hardness assumptions for quantum computations, these proof systems can be made secure against quantum attacks. We prove a result representing a further quantum generalization of this fact, which is that every problem in the complexity class QMA has a quantum zero-knowledge proof system. More specifically, assuming the existence of an unconditionally binding and quantum computationally concealing commitment scheme, we prove that every problem in the complexity class QMA has a quantum interactive proof system that is zero-knowledge with respect to efficient quantum computations. Our QMA proof system is sound against arbitrary quantum provers, but only requires an honest prover to perform polynomial-time quantum computations, provided that it holds a quantum witness for a given instance of the QMA problem under consideration. The proof system relies on a new variant of the QMA-complete local Hamiltonian problem in which the local terms are described by Clifford operations and standard basis measurements. We believe that the QMA-completeness of this problem may have other uses in quantum complexity.
With the rapid development of quantum computers, proofs of quantumness have recently become an interesting research direction. However, in current schemes for proofs of quantumness, quantum provers face the risk of being maliciously exploited by classical verifiers. Through malicious strategies in interaction with quantum provers, classical verifiers could solve some instances of hard problems that arise from the specific scheme in use. This is due to the lack of formalization that prevents malicious verifiers from extracting useful information in proofs of quantumness. To address this issue, we formalize zero-knowledge proofs of quantumness. Intuitively, the zero-knowledge property necessitates that the information gained by the classical verifier from interactions with the quantum prover should not surpass what can be simulated using a simulated classical prover interacting with the same verifier. As a result, the new zero-knowledge notion can prevent a malicious verifier from exploiting quantum advantage. We find that the classical zero-knowledge proof is sufficient to compile some existing proofs of quantumness schemes into zero-knowledge proofs of quantumness schemes. It appears to be more general to require zero-knowledge proof on the verifier side instead of the prover side. This helps to regulate the verifier's behavior from malicious to be honest-but-curious. As a result, both parties will play not only one role in the proofs of quantumness but also the dual role in the classical zero-knowledge proof. Specifically, Shor's factoring-based scheme and the learning with errors-based scheme in [Brakerski et al., FOCS, 2018] can be transformed into zero-knowledge proofs of quantumness by requiring an extractable non-interactive zero-knowledge argument on the verifier side. Zero-knowledge proofs of quantumness can thus be viewed as an enhanced security notion for proofs of quantumness.
Prior work has established that all problems in NP admit classical zero-knowledge proof systems, and under reasonable hardness assumptions for quantum computations, these proof systems can be made secure against quantum attacks. We prove a result representing a further quantum generalization of this fact, which is that every problem in the complexity class QMA has a quantum zero-knowledge proof system. More specifically, assuming the existence of an unconditionally binding and quantum computationally concealing commitment scheme, we prove that every problem in the complexity class QMA has a quantum interactive proof system that is zero-knowledge with respect to efficient quantum computations. Our QMA proof system is sound against arbitrary quantum provers, but only requires an honest prover to perform polynomial-time quantum computations, provided that it holds a quantum witness for a given instance of the QMA problem under consideration.
Quantum Proofs provides an overview of many of the known results concerning quantum proofs, computational models based on this concept, and properties of the complexity classes they define. In particular, it discusses non-interactive proofs and the complexity class QMA, single-prover quantum interactive proof systems and the complexity class QIP, statistical zero-knowledge quantum interactive proof systems and the complexity class QSZK, and multiprover interactive proof systems and the complexity classes QMIP, QMIP*, and MIP*. Quantum Proofs is mainly intended for non-specialists having a basic background in complexity theory and quantum information. A typical reader may be a student or researcher in either area desiring to learn about the fundamentals of the (actively developing) theory of quantum interactive proofs.