Interactive Proofs for Quantum Computation: Difference between revisions

From Quantum Protocol Zoo
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
Providing solution to the functionality [[Verification of Universal Quantum Computation|Verification of Quantum Computation]], is a class [https://complexityzoo.uwaterloo.ca/Complexity_Zoo:M#ma MA] (Merlin-Arthur) that consists of all the problems whose solution can be verified by a BPP machine (verifier that has a classical computer) when given a proof by a 'witness' (prover). As believed, MA is not entirely contained in BQP (problems that can be solved by a quantum computer) [[Interactive Proofs for Quantum Computation#References|(1)(2)]], the functionality of verification asks 'Does every problem in BQP admit an interactive-proof system in which the prover is restricted to BQP computations?' The [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.04487.pdf example protocol] answers this question by defining quantum prover interactive proofs and state 'Any language in BQP has a QPIP (quantum prover interactive proofs) which hides the computation from the prover'. [https://complexityzoo.uwaterloo.ca/Complexity_Zoo:I#ip IP] (interactive proof systems) is a generalisation of class MA, which involves multiple interaction between the prover (untrusted company) and the verifier (consumer).
Providing solution to the functionality [[Verification of Universal Quantum Computation|Verification of Quantum Computation]], is a class [https://complexityzoo.uwaterloo.ca/Complexity_Zoo:M#ma MA] (Merlin-Arthur) that consists of all the problems whose solution can be verified by a BPP machine (verifier that has a classical computer) when given a proof by a 'witness' (prover). As believed, MA is not entirely contained in BQP (problems that can be solved by a quantum computer) [[Interactive Proofs for Quantum Computation#References|(1)(2)]], the functionality of verification asks 'Does every problem in BQP admit an interactive-proof system in which the prover is restricted to BQP computations?' The [https://arxiv.org/pdf/1704.04487.pdf example protocol] answers this question by defining quantum prover interactive proofs and state 'Any language in BQP has a QPIP (quantum prover interactive proofs) which hides the computation from the prover'. [https://complexityzoo.uwaterloo.ca/Complexity_Zoo:I#ip IP] (interactive proof systems) is a generalisation of class MA, which involves multiple interaction between the prover (untrusted company) and the verifier (consumer).
==Assumptions==
*It is assumed that the company and consumer share a classical key drawn from a probability distribution.
==Outline==
==Notations==
*<math>k</math>:classical key
*<math>p(k)</math>:Probability distribution from which the classical key has been drawn
*<math>|\psi\rangle</math>: State to be authenticated
*<math>|flag\rangle</math>: Test state for successful authentication
*<math>Enc_{k}</math>: Encoding procedure
*<math>\rho</math>: Encoded state sent over insecure channel by the sender
*<math>\rho '</math>: Encoded state tampered by eavesdropper through insecure channel, received by the receiver
*<math>Dec_k</math>: Decoding procedure
*<math>Dec_k (\rho')</math>: Decoded state obtained by the receiver
==Requirements==
==Protocol Description==
==Further Information==
==Further Information==
==References==
==References==
#[https://epubs.siam.org/doi/10.1137/S0097539796300921 Bernstein and Vazirani (1997)]
#[https://epubs.siam.org/doi/10.1137/S0097539796300921 Bernstein and Vazirani (1997)]
#[https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=796590 Watrous (2000)]
#[https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=796590 Watrous (2000)]
<div style='text-align: right;'>''contributed by Shraddha Singh''</div>
<div style='text-align: right;'>''contributed by Shraddha Singh''</div>

Latest revision as of 11:50, 12 July 2019

Providing solution to the functionality Verification of Quantum Computation, is a class MA (Merlin-Arthur) that consists of all the problems whose solution can be verified by a BPP machine (verifier that has a classical computer) when given a proof by a 'witness' (prover). As believed, MA is not entirely contained in BQP (problems that can be solved by a quantum computer) (1)(2), the functionality of verification asks 'Does every problem in BQP admit an interactive-proof system in which the prover is restricted to BQP computations?' The example protocol answers this question by defining quantum prover interactive proofs and state 'Any language in BQP has a QPIP (quantum prover interactive proofs) which hides the computation from the prover'. IP (interactive proof systems) is a generalisation of class MA, which involves multiple interaction between the prover (untrusted company) and the verifier (consumer).

Assumptions[edit]

  • It is assumed that the company and consumer share a classical key drawn from a probability distribution.

Outline[edit]

Notations[edit]

  • :classical key
  • :Probability distribution from which the classical key has been drawn
  • : State to be authenticated
  • : Test state for successful authentication
  • : Encoding procedure
  • : Encoded state sent over insecure channel by the sender
  • : Encoded state tampered by eavesdropper through insecure channel, received by the receiver
  • : Decoding procedure
  • : Decoded state obtained by the receiver

Requirements[edit]

Protocol Description[edit]

Further Information[edit]

References[edit]

  1. Bernstein and Vazirani (1997)
  2. Watrous (2000)
contributed by Shraddha Singh