We prove several new results concerning the pure quantum polynomial hierarchy pureQPH. First, we show that QMA(2) ⊆ pureQΣ_2, i.e., two unentangled existential provers can be simulated by competing existential and universal provers. We further prove that pureQΣ_2 ⊆ QΣ_3 ⊆ NEXP. Second, we give an error reduction result for pureQPH, and, as a consequence, prove that pureQPH = QPH. A key ingredient in this result is an improved dimension-independent disentangler. Finally, we initiate the study of quantified Hamiltonian complexity, the quantum analogue of quantified Boolean formulae. We prove that the quantified pure sparse Hamiltonian problem is pureQΣ_i-complete. By contrast, other natural variants (pure/local, mixed/local, and mixed/sparse) admit nontrivial containments but fail to be complete under known techniques. For example, we show that the ∃∀-mixed local Hamiltonian problem lies in NP^QMA ∩ coNP^QMA.
We prove several new results concerning the pure quantum polynomial hierarchy pureQPH. First, we show that QMA(2) ⊆ pureQΣ_2, i.e., two unentangled existential provers can be simulated by competing existential and universal provers. We further prove that pureQΣ_2 ⊆ QΣ_3 ⊆ NEXP. Second, we give an error reduction result for pureQPH, and, as a consequence, prove that pureQPH = QPH. A key ingredient in this result is an improved dimension-independent disentangler. Finally, we initiate the study of quantified Hamiltonian complexity, the quantum analogue of quantified Boolean formulae. We prove that the quantified pure sparse Hamiltonian problem is pureQΣ_i-complete. By contrast, other natural variants (pure/local, mixed/local, and mixed/sparse) admit nontrivial containments but fail to be complete under known techniques. For example, we show that the ∃∀-mixed local Hamiltonian problem lies in NP^QMA ∩ coNP^QMA.
The polynomial-time hierarchy (PH) has proven to be a powerful tool for providing separations in computational complexity theory (modulo standard conjectures such as PH do not collapse). Here, we study whether two quantum generalizations of PH can similarly prove separations in the quantum setting. The first generalization, QCPH , uses classical proofs, and the second, QPH , uses quantum proofs. For the former, we show quantum variants of the Karp-Lipton theorem and Toda's theorem. For the latter, we place its third level, QΣ3 , into NEXP using the ellipsoid method for efficiently solving semidefinite programs. These results yield two implications for QMA(2) , the variant of Quantum Merlin-Arthur ( QMA ) with two unentangled proofs, a complexity class whose characterization has proven difficult. First, if QCPH=QPH (i.e., alternating quantifiers are sufficiently powerful so as to make classical and quantum proofs ``equivalent''), then QMA(2) is in the counting hierarchy (specifically, in Ppppp ). Second, because QMA(2)⊆QΣ3 , QMA(2) is strictly contained in NEXP unless QMA(2)=QΣ3 (i.e., alternating quantifiers do not help in the presence of ``unentanglement'').
The polynomial-time hierarchy (PH) has proven to be a powerful tool for providing separations in computational complexity theory (modulo standard conjectures such as PH does not collapse). Here, we study whether two quantum generalizations of PH can similarly prove separations in the quantum setting. The first generalization, QCPH, uses classical proofs, and the second, QPH, uses quantum proofs. For the former, we show quantum variants of the Karp-Lipton theorem and Toda's theorem. For the latter, we place its third level, QΣ3, into NEXP {using the Ellipsoid Method for efficiently solving semidefinite programs}. These results yield two implications for QMA(2), the variant of Quantum Merlin-Arthur (QMA) with two unentangled proofs, a complexity class whose characterization has proven difficult. First, if QCPH=QPH (i.e., alternating quantifiers are sufficiently powerful so as to make classical and quantum proofs "equivalent"), then QMA(2) is in the Counting Hierarchy (specifically, in PPPPP). Second, unless QMA(2)=QΣ3 (i.e., alternating quantifiers do not help in the presence of "unentanglement"), QMA(2) is strictly contained in NEXP.
Abstract Problems based on the structure of graphs—for example, finding cliques, independent sets, or colorings—are of fundamental importance in classical complexity. Defining well-formulated decision problems for quantum graphs, which are an operator system generalization of graphs, presents several technical challenges. Consequently, the connections between quantum graphs and complexity have been underexplored. In this work, we introduce and study the clique problem for quantum graphs. Our approach utilizes a well-known connection between quantum graphs and quantum channels. The inputs for our problems are presented as quantum channels induced by circuits, which implicitly determine a corresponding quantum graph. We show that when quantifying over all channels, this problem is complete for QMA(2); in fact, it remains QMA(2) -complete when restricted to channels that are probabilistic mixtures of entanglement-breaking and partial trace channels. Quantifying over a subset of entanglementbreaking channels, this problem becomes QMA-complete, and restricting further to deterministic or classical noisy channels gives rise to complete problems for NP and MA, respectively. In this way, we exhibit a classical complexity problem whose natural quantization is QMA(2), rather than QMA, and provide the first problem that allows for a direct comparison of the classes QMA(2), QMA, MA, and NP by quantifying over increasingly larger families of instances. We use methods that are inspired by self-testing to provide a direct proof of QMA(2)-completeness, rather than reducing to a previously studied complete problem. We also give a new proof of the celebrated reduction of QMA( k ) to QMA(2). In parallel, we study a version of the closely related independent set problem for quantum graphs, and provide preliminary evidence that it may be in general weaker in complexity, contrasting to the classical case.
In this work we investigate the computational complexity of the pure consistency of local density matrices (PureCLDM) and pure N-representability (Pure-N-Representability; analog of PureCLDM for bosonic or fermionic systems) problems. In these problems the input is a set of reduced density matrices and the task is to determine whether there exists a global pure state consistent with these reduced density matrices. While mixed CLDM, i.e. where the global state can be mixed, was proven to be QMA-complete by Broadbent and Grilo [JoC 2022], almost nothing was known about the complexity of the pure version. Before our work the best upper and lower bounds were QMA(2) and QMA. Our contribution to the understanding of these problems is twofold. Firstly, we define a pure state analogue of the complexity class QMA+ of Aharanov and Regev [FOCS 2003], which we call PureSuperQMA. We prove that both pure-N-Representability and PureCLDM are complete for this new class. Along the way we supplement Broadbent and Grilo by proving hardness for 2-qubit reduced density matrices and showing that mixed N-Representability is QMA-complete. Secondly, we improve the upper bound on PureCLDM. Using methods from algebraic geometry, we prove that PureSuperQMA is in PSPACE. Our methods, and the PSPACE upper bound, are also valid for PureCLDM with exponential or even perfect precision, hence precisePureCLDM is not preciseQMA(2)=NEXP-complete, unless PSPACE=NEXP. We view this as evidence for a negative answer to the longstanding open question whether PureCLDM is QMA(2)-complete. The techniques we develop for our PSPACE upper bound are quite general. We are able to use them for various applications: from proving PSPACE upper bounds on other quantum problems to giving an efficient parallel (NC) algorithm for (non-convex) quadratically constrained quadratic programs with few constraints.
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.
The polynomial hierarchy plays a central role in classical complexity theory. Here, we define a quantum generalization of the polynomial hierarchy, and initiate its study. We show that not only are there natural complete problems for the second level of this quantum hierarchy, but that these problems are in fact hard to approximate. Using the same techniques, we also obtain hardness of approximation for the class QCMA. Our approach is based on the use of dispersers, and is inspired by the classical results of Umans regarding hardness of approximation for the second level of the classical polynomial hierarchy [Umans, FOCS 1999]. The problems for which we prove hardness of approximation for include, among others, a quantum version of the Succinct Set Cover problem, and a variant of the local Hamiltonian problem with hybrid classical-quantum ground states.