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

Structure in Complexity Theory Annual Conference

PSPACE is provable by two provers in one round

Jin‐Yi Cai, Anne Condon, R.J. Lipton

Published Dec 10, 2002• 18 citations
Publisher

Abstract

It is shown that every language in PSPACE, or equivalently every language accepted by an unbounded round interactive proof system, has a one-round, two-prover interactive proof with exponentially small error probability. To obtain this result, the correctness of a simple but powerful method for parallelizing two-prover interactive proofs to reduce their error is proved.>

DOI
10.1109/sct.1991.160250

Related papers

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

PSPACE has constant-round quantum interactive proof systems

John Watrous

We introduce quantum interactive proof systems, which are 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 a total of only three messages to be sent between the prover and verifier and has 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.

Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science•Jan 20, 2003•54 citations

On bounded round multiprover interactive proof systems

J. Cai, Anne Condon, R.J. Lipton

Bounded round multiprover interactive proof systems (MIPs) are compared with unbounded round interactive proof systems (IPSs). It is shown that for any constant epsilon , any language accepted by an unbounded round IPS has a bounded round, two-prover MIP that has error probability epsilon , resolving an open problem of L. Fortnow et al. (1988). To obtain this result, it is shown that a certain one-round MIP that simulates the computation of an unbounded round IPS can be executed many times in parallel to significantly reduce its probability of error.>

Structure in Complexity Theory Annual Conference•Dec 4, 2002•16 citations

Parallelization, amplification, and exponential time simulation of quantum interactive proof systems

Alexei Kitaev, John Watrous

In this paper we consider quantum interactive proof systems, which are interactive proof systems in which the prover and verier may perform quantum computations and exchange quantum information. We prove that any polynomial-round quantum interactive proof system with two-sided bounded error can be parallelized to a quantum interactive proof system with exponentially small one-sided error in which the prover and verier exchange only 3 messages. This yields a simplied proof that PSPACE has 3-message quantum interactive proof systems. We also prove that any language having a quantum interactive proof system can be decided in deterministic exponential time, implying that single-prover quantum interactive proof systems are strictly less powerful than multiple-prover classical interactive proof systems unless EXP = NEXP. 1. INTRODUCTION Interactive proof systems were introduced by Babai [3] and Goldwasser, Micali, and Racko [17] in 1985. In the same year, Deutsch [10] gave the rst for...

ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC)•May 1, 2000•215 citations

Beyond IP = PSPACE and QIP = PSPACE: Interactive Proofs in Arbitrary Physical Theories

Kishor Bharti

The equalities IP = PSPACE and QIP = PSPACE, the latter achievable with three messages, raise a basic question: how much of an interactive proof's power comes from the underlying physical theory? We study interactive proofs in general probabilistic theories, which include classical and quantum theory. The answer depends on what the prover and verifier exchange and how the theory specifies efficient operations. When they exchange only classical messages, protocols in every theory satisfying our standard assumptions decide exactly PSPACE. For protocols with a quantum verifier and quantum messages, allowing a prover to use any theory containing quantum theory does not increase the maximum acceptance probability. Thus, the three-message PSPACE result remains valid against such provers. When messages may be arbitrary systems, the interactive-proof class can strictly exceed PSPACE.

quant-pharXiv:2610.00847•Oct 2, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Multiprover Interactive Proofs with Communicating Provers

Michael Ben-Or, Avinatan Hassidim, Haran Pilpel

We introduce a new variant of quantum multiprover interactive proofs (QMIP) where the provers and the verifier are quantum. The verifier can exchange quantum messages with the provers. The provers cannot communicate quantumly between themselves and do not share entanglement, but are unlimited in the classical communication between them, even after receiving messages from the verifier. We show that any language in nondeterministic exponential time (NEXP) can be recognized in this model efficiently, with just two provers and two rounds of communication, and with a constant completeness/soundness gap. This is in contrast to the result of [R. Jain et al., Comm. ACM, 53 (2010), pp. 102--109], which shows that QIP = PSPACE, or equivalently that the set of languages that can be recognized by a quantum verifier communicating with a single quantum prover is equal to PSPACE. To analyze the cheating power of the provers, we give them more power and allow them to perform any separable operation. We then show a unique two-phase protocol in which the provers first commit to a superposition of correct answers to all possible questions, and then in the second phase the verifier opens up the committed answer and checks for correctness and consistency.

SIAM Journal on Computing•Jan 1, 2014•4 citations
It is shown that every language in PSPACE, or equivalently every language accepted by an unbounded round interactive proof system, has a one-round, two-prover interactive proof with exponentially small error probability. To obtain this result, the correctness of a simple but powerful method for parallelizing two-prover interactive proofs to reduce their error is proved.>
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.
We introduce quantum interactive proof systems, which are 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 a total of only three messages to be sent between the prover and verifier and has 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.
Bounded round multiprover interactive proof systems (MIPs) are compared with unbounded round interactive proof systems (IPSs). It is shown that for any constant epsilon , any language accepted by an unbounded round IPS has a bounded round, two-prover MIP that has error probability epsilon , resolving an open problem of L. Fortnow et al. (1988). To obtain this result, it is shown that a certain one-round MIP that simulates the computation of an unbounded round IPS can be executed many times in parallel to significantly reduce its probability of error.>
In this paper we consider quantum interactive proof systems, which are interactive proof systems in which the prover and verier may perform quantum computations and exchange quantum information. We prove that any polynomial-round quantum interactive proof system with two-sided bounded error can be parallelized to a quantum interactive proof system with exponentially small one-sided error in which the prover and verier exchange only 3 messages. This yields a simplied proof that PSPACE has 3-message quantum interactive proof systems. We also prove that any language having a quantum interactive proof system can be decided in deterministic exponential time, implying that single-prover quantum interactive proof systems are strictly less powerful than multiple-prover classical interactive proof systems unless EXP = NEXP. 1. INTRODUCTION Interactive proof systems were introduced by Babai [3] and Goldwasser, Micali, and Racko [17] in 1985. In the same year, Deutsch [10] gave the rst for...
The equalities IP = PSPACE and QIP = PSPACE, the latter achievable with three messages, raise a basic question: how much of an interactive proof's power comes from the underlying physical theory? We study interactive proofs in general probabilistic theories, which include classical and quantum theory. The answer depends on what the prover and verifier exchange and how the theory specifies efficient operations. When they exchange only classical messages, protocols in every theory satisfying our standard assumptions decide exactly PSPACE. For protocols with a quantum verifier and quantum messages, allowing a prover to use any theory containing quantum theory does not increase the maximum acceptance probability. Thus, the three-message PSPACE result remains valid against such provers. When messages may be arbitrary systems, the interactive-proof class can strictly exceed PSPACE.
We introduce a new variant of quantum multiprover interactive proofs (QMIP) where the provers and the verifier are quantum. The verifier can exchange quantum messages with the provers. The provers cannot communicate quantumly between themselves and do not share entanglement, but are unlimited in the classical communication between them, even after receiving messages from the verifier. We show that any language in nondeterministic exponential time (NEXP) can be recognized in this model efficiently, with just two provers and two rounds of communication, and with a constant completeness/soundness gap. This is in contrast to the result of [R. Jain et al., Comm. ACM, 53 (2010), pp. 102--109], which shows that QIP = PSPACE, or equivalently that the set of languages that can be recognized by a quantum verifier communicating with a single quantum prover is equal to PSPACE. To analyze the cheating power of the provers, we give them more power and allow them to perform any separable operation. We then show a unique two-phase protocol in which the provers first commit to a superposition of correct answers to all possible questions, and then in the second phase the verifier opens up the committed answer and checks for correctness and consistency.