21
collaborators
2016–2026
years active
Contributions
QIP QCrypt TQC talk poster presenter award · △program ◇steering ○organizing · filled = chair
5 Talks
| Title | Conference | Type | Co-authors |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classical verification of quantum depth | QCRYPT 2022 | regular | Nai-Hui Chia |
| Classical verification of quantum depth | TQC 2022 | regular ▸ presenter | Nai-Hui Chia |
| Non-interactive Zero-knowledge Protocols for QMA | QIP 2021 | regular | Gorjan Alagic, Andrew Childs, Andrea Coladangelo, Alex Bredariol Grilo, Thomas Vidick, Tina Zhang |
Abstract A non-interactive zero-knowledge (NIZK) proof system for a language L in NP allows a prover (who is provided with an instance x and a witness w) to compute a classical certificate for the claim that x is in L, with the following properties: 1) the protocol can be verified efficiently, and 2) the protocol does not reveal any information about w, besides the fact that it exists (i.e., that x is in L). While NIZKs are known to be impossible in the plain model (i.e., with no additional trusted resource), they are well studied in alternative models and have seen widespread application in classical cryptography. Given the importance of NIZKs, and more generally zero-knowledge protocols, in classical cryptography, there has been a recent effort to achieve such protocols for QMA, a natural quantum analog of NP. However, all previous results only achieved interactive protocols, limiting their cryptographic use. Moreover, they all rely on quantum communication between the prover and the verifier, which may be difficult to achieve. In this submission, we present two NIZK protocols for QMA in the Common Reference String (CRS) model, with additional offline setup. Both protocols are achieved through the homomorphic computation of classical NIZKs for NP, and rely on the hardness of the Learning With Errors problem. However, each of them then combines this core idea with different (seemingly incomparable) techniques: 1) our first protocol makes use of quantum teleportation and quantum communication in an offline setup phase, with a classical online phase; our second protocol leverages techniques for classical verification of quantum computations, and is the only known NIZK for QMA to be completely classical, as well as reusable, meaning that a single setup allows to prove many theorems. Security of the latter is in the Quantum Random Oracle model. |
|||
| Non-interactive classical verification of quantum computation | QCRYPT 2020 | regular | Gorjan Alagic, Andrew Childs, Alex Bredariol Grilo |
In a recent breakthrough, Mahadev constructed an interactive protocol that enables a purely classical party to delegate any quantum computation to an untrusted quantum prover. In this work, we show that this same task can in fact be performed non-interactively and in zero-knowledge. Our protocols result from a sequence of significant improvements to the original four-message protocol of Mahadev. We begin by making the first message instance-independent and moving it to an offline setup phase. We then establish a parallel repetition theorem for the resulting three-message protocol, with an asymptotically optimal rate. This, in turn, enables an application of the Fiat-Shamir heuristic, eliminating the second message and giving a non-interactive protocol. Finally, we employ classical non-interactive zero-knowledge (NIZK) arguments and classical fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) to give a zero-knowledge variant of this construction. This yields the first purely classical NIZK argument system for QMA, a quantum analogue of NP. We establish the security of our protocols under standard assumptions in quantum-secure cryptography. Specifically, our protocols are secure in the Quantum Random Oracle Model, under the assumption that Learning with Errors is quantumly hard. The NIZK construction also requires circuit-private FHE. |
|||
| Quantum algorithm for estimating volumes of convex bodies | QIP 2020 | regular | Shouvanik Chakrabarti, Andrew Childs, Tongyang Li, Chunhao Wang, Xiaodi Wu |
9 Posters
| Title | Conference | Co-authors |
|---|---|---|
| Efficient Closest Matrix Product State Learning in Logarithmic Depth | QIP 2026 | ▸Chia-Ying Lin, Nai-Hui Chia |
| Certified Randomness from Quantum Supremacy | QIP 2024 | Scott Aaronson |
| Oracle Separation of NISQ and Classical Complexity Classes | QIP 2024 | En-Jui Kuo, Nai-Hui Chia, Min-Hsiu Hsieh |
| Non-Interactive Classical Verification of Quantum Depth: A Fine-Grained Characterization | TQC 2024 | Nai-Hui Chia |
| A Verified Optimizer for Quantum Circuits | QIP 2020 | Kesha Hietala, Robert Rand, Xiaodi Wu, Michael Hicks |
| Two-message verification of quantum computation | QIP 2020 | Gorjan Alagic, Andrew Childs |
| Quantum algorithm for multivariate polynomial interpolation | QIP 2017 | Jianxin Chen, Andrew Childs |
| Optimal Quantum Algorithm for Polynomial Interpolation | QCRYPT 2016 | Andrew Childs, Wim van Dam, Igor Shparlinski |
| Optimal quantum algorithm for polynomial interpolation | QIP 2016 | Andrew Childs, Wim van Dam, Igor Shparlinski |
We consider the number of quantum queries required to determine the coefficients of a degree-d polynomial over GF(q). A lower bound shown independently by Kane and Kutin and by Meyer and Pommersheim shows that d/2+1/2 quantum queries are needed to solve this problem with bounded error, whereas an algorithm of Boneh and Zhandry shows that d quantum queries are sufficient. We show that the lower bound is achievable: d/2+1/2 quantum queries suffice to determine the polynomial with bounded error. Furthermore, we show that d/2+1 queries suffice to achieve probability approaching 1 for large q. These upper bounds improve results of Boneh and Zhandry on the insecurity of cryptographic protocols against quantum attacks. We also show that our algorithm's success probability as a function of the number of queries is precisely optimal. Furthermore, the algorithm can be implemented with gate complexity poly(log q) with negligible decrease in the success probability. |
||
Collaborators
| Co-author | Joint talks |
|---|---|
| Andrew Childs | 7 |
| Nai-Hui Chia | 5 |
| Gorjan Alagic | 3 |
| Alex Bredariol Grilo | 2 |
| Igor Shparlinski | 2 |
| Wim van Dam | 2 |
| Xiaodi Wu | 2 |
| Andrea Coladangelo | 1 |
| Chia-Ying Lin | 1 |
| Chunhao Wang | 1 |
| En-Jui Kuo | 1 |
| Jianxin Chen | 1 |
| Kesha Hietala | 1 |
| Michael Hicks | 1 |
| Min-Hsiu Hsieh | 1 |
| Robert Rand | 1 |
| Scott Aaronson | 1 |
| Shouvanik Chakrabarti | 1 |
| Thomas Vidick | 1 |
| Tina Zhang | 1 |