Valiant-Vazirani showed in 1985 [VV85] that solving NP with the promise that yes instances have only one witness is powerful enough to solve the entire NP class (under randomized reductions). We are interested in extending this result to the quantu
m setting. We prove extensions to the classes Merlin-Arthur MA and Quantum-Classical-Merlin-Arthur QCMA. Our results have implications for the complexity of approximating the ground state energy of a quantum local Hamiltonian with a unique ground state and an inverse polynomial spectral gap. We show that the estimation (to within polynomial accuracy) of the ground state energy of poly-gapped 1-D local Hamiltonians is QCMA-hard [AN02], under randomized reductions. This is in stark contrast to the case of constant gapped 1-D Hamiltonians, which is in NP [Has07]. Moreover, it shows that unless QCMA can be reduced to NP by randomized reductions, there is no classical description of the ground state of every poly-gapped local Hamiltonian that allows efficient calculation of expectation values. Finally, we discuss a few of the obstacles to the establishment of an analogous result to the class Quantum-Merlin-Arthur (QMA). In particular, we show that random projections fail to provide a polynomial gap between two witnesses.
In (single-server) Private Information Retrieval (PIR), a server holds a large database $DB$ of size $n$, and a client holds an index $i in [n]$ and wishes to retrieve $DB[i]$ without revealing $i$ to the server. It is well known that information the
oretic privacy even against an `honest but curious server requires $Omega(n)$ communication complexity. This is true even if quantum communication is allowed and is due to the ability of such an adversarial server to execute the protocol on a superposition of databases instead of on a specific database (`input purification attack). Nevertheless, there have been some proposals of protocols that achieve sub-linear communication and appear to provide some notion of privacy. Most notably, a protocol due to Le Gall (ToC 2012) with communication complexity $O(sqrt{n})$, and a protocol by Kerenidis et al. (QIC 2016) with communication complexity $O(log(n))$, and $O(n)$ shared entanglement. We show that, in a sense, input purification is the only potent adversarial strategy, and protocols such as the two protocols above are secure in a restricted variant of the quantum honest but curious (a.k.a specious) model. More explicitly, we propose a restricted privacy notion called emph{anchored privacy}, where the adversary is forced to execute on a classical database (i.e. the execution is anchored to a classical database). We show that for measurement-free protocols, anchored security against honest adversarial servers implies anchored privacy even against specious adversaries. Finally, we prove that even with (unlimited) pre-shared entanglement it is impossible to achieve security in the standard specious model with sub-linear communication, thus further substantiating the necessity of our relaxation. This lower bound may be of independent interest (in particular recalling that PIR is a special case of Fully Homomorphic Encryption).
The widely held belief that BQP strictly contains BPP raises fundamental questions: if we cannot efficiently compute predictions for the behavior of quantum systems, how can we test their behavior? In other words, is quantum mechanics falsifiable? In
cryptographic settings, how can a customer of a future untrusted quantum computing company be convinced of the correctness of its quantum computations? To provide answers to these questions, we define Quantum Prover Interactive Proofs (QPIP). Whereas in standard interactive proofs the prover is computationally unbounded, here our prover is in BQP, representing a quantum computer. The verifier models our current computational capabilities: it is a BPP machine, with access to only a few qubits. Our main theorem states, roughly: Any language in BQP has a QPIP, which also hides the computation from the prover. We provide two proofs, one based on a quantum authentication scheme (QAS) relying on random Clifford rotations and the other based on a QAS which uses polynomial codes (BOCG+ 06), combined with secure multiparty computation methods. This is the journal version of work reported in 2008 (ABOE08) and presented in ICS 2010; here we have completed the details and made the proofs rigorous. Some of the proofs required major modifications and corrections. Notably, the claim that the polynomial QPIP is fault tolerant was removed. Similar results (with different protocols) were reported independently around the same time of the original version in BFK08. The initial independent works (ABOE08, BFK08) ignited a long line of research of blind verifiable quantum computation, which we survey here, along with connections to various cryptographic problems. Importantly, the problems of making the results fault tolerant as well as removing the need for quantum communication altogether remain open.
When incorporated in quantum sensing protocols, quantum error correction can be used to correct for high frequency noise, as the correction procedure does not depend on the actual shape of the noise spectrum. As such, it provides a powerful way to co
mplement usual refocusing techniques. Relaxation imposes a fundamental limit on the sensitivity of state of the art quantum sensors which cannot be overcome by dynamical decoupling. The only way to overcome this is to utilize quantum error correcting codes. We present a superconducting magnetometry design that incorporates approximate quantum error correction, in which the signal is generated by a two qubit Hamiltonian term. This two-qubit term is provided by the dynamics of a tunable coupler between two transmon qubits. For fast enough correction, it is possible to lengthen the coherence time of the device beyond the relaxation limit.
We study the computational strength of quantum particles (each of finite dimensionality) arranged on a line. First, we prove that it is possible to perform universal adiabatic quantum computation using a one-dimensional quantum system (with 9 states
per particle). This might have practical implications for experimentalists interested in constructing an adiabatic quantum computer. Building on the same construction, but with some additional technical effort and 12 states per particle, we show that the problem of approximating the ground state energy of a system composed of a line of quantum particles is QMA-complete; QMA is a quantum analogue of NP. This is in striking contrast to the fact that the analogous classical problem, namely, one-dimensional MAX-2-SAT with nearest neighbor constraints, is in P. The proof of the QMA-completeness result requires an additional idea beyond the usual techniques in the area: Not all illegal configurations can be ruled out by local checks, so instead we rule out such illegal configurations because they would, in the future, evolve into a state which can be seen locally to be illegal. Our construction implies (assuming the quantum Church-Turing thesis and that quantum computers cannot efficiently solve QMA-complete problems) that there are one-dimensional systems which take an exponential time to relax to their ground states at any temperature, making them candidates for being one-dimensional spin glasses.
The quantum analogue of a constraint satisfaction problem is a sum of local Hamiltonians - each local Hamiltonian specifies a local constraint whose violation contributes to the energy of the given quantum state. Formalizing the intuitive connection
between the ground (minimal) energy of the Hamiltonian and the minimum number of violated constraints is problematic, since the number of constraints being violated is not well defined when the terms in the Hamiltonian do not commute. The detectability lemma proved in this paper provides precisely such a quantitative connection. We apply the lemma to derive a quantum analogue of a basic primitive in classical complexity: amplification of probabilities by random walks on expander graphs. It holds under the restriction that the interaction graph of the local Hamiltonian is an expander. Our proofs are based on a novel structure imposed on the Hilbert space that we call the $XY$ decomposition, which enables a reduction from the quantum non-commuting case to the commuting case (where many classical arguments go through). The results may have several interesting implications. First, proving a quantum analogue to the PCP theorem is one of the most important challenges in quantum complexity theory. Our quantum gap amplification lemma may be viewed as the quantum analogue of the first of the three main steps in Dinurs PCP proof. Quantum gap amplification may also be related to spectral gap amplification, and in particular, to fault tolerance of adiabatic computation. Finally, the detectability lemma, and the $XY$ decomposition provide a handle on the structure of local Hamiltonians and their ground states.
The widely held belief that BQP strictly contains BPP raises fundamental questions: Upcoming generations of quantum computers might already be too large to be simulated classically. Is it possible to experimentally test that these systems perform as
they should, if we cannot efficiently compute predictions for their behavior? Vazirani has asked: If predicting Quantum Mechanical systems requires exponential resources, is QM a falsifiable theory? In cryptographic settings, an untrusted future company wants to sell a quantum computer or perform a delegated quantum computation. Can the customer be convinced of correctness without the ability to compare results to predictions? To answer these questions, we define Quantum Prover Interactive Proofs (QPIP). Whereas in standard Interactive Proofs the prover is computationally unbounded, here our prover is in BQP, representing a quantum computer. The verifier models our current computational capabilities: it is a BPP machine, with access to few qubits. Our main theorem can be roughly stated as: Any language in BQP has a QPIP, and moreover, a fault tolerant one. We provide two proofs. The simpler one uses a new (possibly of independent interest) quantum authentication scheme (QAS) based on random Clifford elements. This QPIP however, is not fault tolerant. Our second protocol uses polynomial codes QAS due to BCGHS, combined with quantum fault tolerance and multiparty quantum computation techniques. A slight modification of our constructions makes the protocol blind: the quantum computation and input are unknown to the prover. After we have derived the results, we have learned that Broadbent at al. have independently derived universal blind quantum computation using completely different methods. Their construction implicitly implies similar implications.
