English

NP vs QMA_log(2)

Quantum Physics 2011-06-22 v2

Abstract

Although it is believed unlikely that \NP\NP-hard problems admit efficient quantum algorithms, it has been shown that a quantum verifier can solve \NP\NP-complete problems given a "short" quantum proof; more precisely, \NP\QMAlog(2)\NP\subseteq \QMA_{\log}(2) where \QMAlog(2)\QMA_{\log}(2) denotes the class of quantum Merlin-Arthur games in which there are two unentangled provers who send two logarithmic size quantum witnesses to the verifier. The inclusion \NP\QMAlog(2)\NP\subseteq \QMA_{\log}(2) has been proved by Blier and Tapp by stating a quantum Merlin-Arthur protocol for 3-coloring with perfect completeness and gap 124n6\frac{1}{24n^6}. Moreover, Aaronson {\it et al.} have shown the above inclusion with a constant gap by considering O~(n)\widetilde{O}(\sqrt{n}) witnesses of logarithmic size. However, we still do not know if \QMAlog(2)\QMA_{\log}(2) with a constant gap contains \NP\NP. In this paper, we show that 3-SAT admits a \QMAlog(2)\QMA_{\log}(2) protocol with the gap 1n3+ϵ\frac{1}{n^{3+\epsilon}} for every constant ϵ>0\epsilon>0.

Cite

@article{arxiv.0810.5109,
  title  = {NP vs QMA_log(2)},
  author = {Salman Beigi},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:0810.5109},
  year   = {2011}
}

Comments

10 pages. Thanks to referees, the main result is now stated in terms of 3-SAT instead of NP. Clearer proofs. To appear in Quantum Information and Computation

R2 v1 2026-06-21T11:35:51.802Z