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

arXiv:2602.18034

Separating Non-Interactive Classical Verification of Quantum Computation from Falsifiable Assumptions

Mohammed Barhoush, Tomoyuki Morimae, Ryo Nishimaki, Takashi Yamakawa

quant-phcs.CRSubmitted Feb 20, 2026• Announced Feb 23, 2026• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Mahadev [SIAM J. Comput. 2022] introduced the first protocol for classical verification of quantum computation based on the Learning-with-Errors (LWE) assumption, achieving a 4-message interactive scheme. This breakthrough naturally raised the question of whether fewer messages are possible in the plain model. Despite its importance, this question has remained unresolved. In this work, we prove that there is no quantum black-box reduction of non-interactive classical verification of quantum computation of $\textsf{QMA}$ to any falsifiable assumption. Here, "non-interactive" means that after an instance-independent setup, the protocol consists of a single message. This constitutes a strong negative result given that falsifiable assumptions cover almost all standard assumptions used in cryptography, including LWE. Our separation holds under the existence of a $\textsf{QMA} \text{-} \textsf{QCMA}$ gap problem. Essentially, these problems require a slightly stronger assumption than $\textsf{QMA}\neq \textsf{QCMA}$. To support the existence of such problems, we present a construction relative to a quantum unitary oracle.

Comments
36 pages

Related papers

Separating Quantum Indistinguishability Obfuscation from Falsifiable Assumptions

Mohammed Barhoush, Tomoyuki Morimae, Ramis Movassagh

Quantum indistinguishability obfuscation (qIO) aims to make a quantum circuit unintelligible while preserving its functionality. It serves as a foundational primitive for advanced applications, such as witness encryption (WE) for QMA, non-interactive zero-knowledge arguments for QMA, and attribute-based encryption for BQP. Despite its importance, constructing qIO from standard assumptions remains a major open problem. In this work, we prove that the security of WE for QMA cannot be based on any falsifiable cryptographic assumption via a restricted class of quantum black-box reductions. Because qIO for null quantum circuits implies WE for QMA, this also separates null-qIO from falsifiable assumptions. Since almost all standard cryptographic assumptions are falsifiable, our result presents a barrier to basing qIO on standard cryptographic assumptions. The reductions we rule out are restricted: the reduction must query the adversary classically, non-adaptively, at the same security parameter, and only on honestly generated ciphertexts. Moreover, our impossibility applies only to WE with classical ciphertexts, and therefore does not rule out qIO with obfuscators whose output is a quantum state. Ruling out more general reductions, as well as more general forms of WE and qIO, remains open. Our impossibility relies on the existence of a QMA-QCIP[2] gap problem, an average-case assumption postulating a QMA language that cannot be verified with two messages of classical communication.

quant-pharXiv:2608.25195•Aug 27, 2026•0 citations

Single-Round Proofs of Quantumness from Knowledge Assumptions

Petia Arabadjieva, Alexandru Gheorghiu, Victor Gitton +1 more

A proof of quantumness is an efficiently verifiable interactive test that an efficient quantum computer can pass, but all efficient classical computers cannot (under some cryptographic assumption). Such protocols play a crucial role in the certification of quantum devices. Existing single-round protocols (like asking the quantum computer to factor a large number) require large quantum circuits, whereas multi-round ones use smaller circuits but require experimentally challenging mid-circuit measurements. As such, current proofs of quantumness are out of reach for near-term devices. In this work, we construct efficient single-round proofs of quantumness based on existing knowledge assumptions. While knowledge assumptions have not been previously considered in this context, we show that they provide a natural basis for separating classical and quantum computation. Specifically, we show that multi-round protocols based on Decisional Diffie-Hellman (DDH) or Learning With Errors (LWE) can be "compiled" into single-round protocols using a knowledge-of-exponent assumption or knowledge-of-lattice-point assumption, respectively. We also prove an adaptive hardcore-bit statement for a family of claw-free functions based on DDH, which might be of independent interest. Previous approaches to constructing single-round protocols relied on the random oracle model and thus incurred the overhead associated with instantiating the oracle with a cryptographic hash function. In contrast, our protocols have the same resource requirements as their multi-round counterparts without necessitating mid-circuit measurements, making them, arguably, the most efficient single-round proofs of quantumness to date. Our work also helps in understanding the interplay between black-box/white-box reductions and cryptographic assumptions in the design of proofs of quantumness.

arXiv:2405.15736•Leibniz international proceedings in informatics•May 24, 2024•2 citations

Single-Round Proofs of Quantumness from Knowledge Assumptions

Arabadjieva, Petia, Alexandru Gheorghiu, Victor Gitton +1 more

A proof of quantumness is an efficiently verifiable interactive test that an efficient quantum computer can pass, but all efficient classical computers cannot (under some cryptographic assumption). Such protocols play a crucial role in the certification of quantum devices. Existing single-round protocols based solely on a cryptographic hardness assumption (like asking the quantum computer to factor a large number) require large quantum circuits, whereas multi-round ones use smaller circuits but require experimentally challenging mid-circuit measurements. In this work, we construct efficient single-round proofs of quantumness based on existing knowledge assumptions. While knowledge assumptions have not been previously considered in this context, we show that they provide a natural basis for separating classical and quantum computation. Our work also helps in understanding the interplay between black-box/white-box reductions and cryptographic assumptions in the design of proofs of quantumness. Specifically, we show that multi-round protocols based on Decisional Diffie-Hellman (DDH) or Learning With Errors (LWE) can be “compiled” into single-round protocols using a knowledge-of-exponent assumption [7] or knowledge-of-lattice-point assumption [36], respectively. We also prove an adaptive hardcore-bit statement for a family of claw-free functions based on DDH, which might be of independent interest.

•Jan 1, 2025•0 citations

Quantum Black-Box Separations: Succinct Non-Interactive Arguments from Falsifiable Assumptions

Gorjan Alagic, Dana Dachman-Soled, Manasi Shingane +1 more

In their seminal work, Gentry and Wichs (STOC'11) established an impossibility result for the task of constructing an adaptively-sound SNARG via black-box reduction from a falsifiable assumption. An exciting set of recent SNARG constructions demonstrated that, if one adopts a weaker but still quite meaningful notion of adaptive soundness, then impossibility no longer holds (Waters-Wu, Waters-Zhandry, Mathialagan-Peters-Vaikunthanathan ePrint'24). These fascinating new results raise an intriguing possibility: is there a way to remove this slight weakening of adaptive soundness, thereby completely circumventing the Gentry-Wichs impossibility? A natural route to closing this gap would be to use a quantum black-box reduction, i.e., a reduction that can query the SNARG adversary on superpositions of inputs. This would take advantage of the fact that Gentry-Wichs only consider classical reductions. In this work, we show that this approach cannot succeed. Specifically, we extend the Gentry-Wichs impossibility result to quantum black-box reductions, and thereby establish an important limit on the power of such reductions.

IACR Communications in Cryptology•Jan 8, 2026•0 citations

Quantum State Search with Classical Interactive Advice

Mohammed Barhoush

We study whether a quantum verifier can find a hidden quantum state by exchanging classical messages with an unbounded prover who knows the state. The verifier has access to a reflection oracle about the target. For a Haar-random $n$-qubit target, we prove that achieving constant average fidelity with the target requires $(q+1)^2(B+1)=Ω(2^n)$, where $q$ is the number of verifier queries and $B$ is the total prover-to-verifier communication. The bound allows arbitrary classical interaction and unrestricted computation between queries. Our proof extends the lower bound of Aaronson and Kuperberg (ToC'07) from a single classical proof to an arbitrary classical interaction. As a result, we obtain a quantum-oracle separation of QMA from QCIP. In particular, we give a unitary oracle $\mathcal{U}$ such that there exists a language $L\in\mathrm{QMA}^{\mathcal{U}}$ but $L\notin\mathrm{QCIP}^{\mathcal{U}}$. Our separation holds even for UniqueQMA, the restriction of QMA to verification with a unique quantum witness, which is known to be strictly weaker than QMA in the quantum black-box setting. We further give an oracle construction for a notion known as QMA--QCIP[2] gap problem. This gives average case hardness for a QMA language under classical access to a QCIP[2] decision oracle and is used in establishing negative results on witness encryption and quantum indistinguishability obfuscation.

quant-pharXiv:2610.25657•Oct 20, 2026•0 citations

Non-interactive zero-knowledge arguments for QMA, with preprocessing

Andrea Coladangelo, Thomas Vidick, Tina Zhang

We initiate the study of non-interactive zero-knowledge (NIZK) arguments for languages in QMA. Our first main result is the following: if Learning With Errors (LWE) is hard for quantum computers, then any language in QMA has an NIZK argument with preprocessing. The preprocessing in our argument system consists of (i) the generation of a CRS and (ii) a single (instance-independent) quantum message from verifier to prover. The instance-dependent phase of our argument system involves only a single classical message from prover to verifier. Importantly, verification in our protocol is entirely classical, and the verifier needs not have quantum memory; its only quantum actions are in the preprocessing phase. Our second contribution is to extend the notion of a classical proof of knowledge to the quantum setting. We introduce the notions of arguments and proofs of quantum knowledge (AoQK/PoQK), and we show that our non-interactive argument system satisfies the definition of an AoQK. In particular, we explicitly construct an extractor which can recover a quantum witness from any prover which is successful in our protocol. Finally, we show that any language in QMA has an (interactive) proof of quantum knowledge.

arXiv:1911.07546•Nov 18, 2019•5 citations
Mahadev [SIAM J. Comput. 2022] introduced the first protocol for classical verification of quantum computation based on the Learning-with-Errors (LWE) assumption, achieving a 4-message interactive scheme. This breakthrough naturally raised the question of whether fewer messages are possible in the plain model. Despite its importance, this question has remained unresolved.
In this work, we prove that there is no quantum black-box reduction of non-interactive classical verification of quantum computation of QMA\textsf{QMA}QMA to any falsifiable assumption. Here, "non-interactive" means that after an instance-independent setup, the protocol consists of a single message. This constitutes a strong negative result given that falsifiable assumptions cover almost all standard assumptions used in cryptography, including LWE. Our separation holds under the existence of a QMA-QCMA\textsf{QMA} \text{-} \textsf{QCMA}QMA-QCMA gap problem. Essentially, these problems require a slightly stronger assumption than QMA≠QCMA\textsf{QMA}\neq \textsf{QCMA}QMA=QCMA. To support the existence of such problems, we present a construction relative to a quantum unitary oracle.
Quantum indistinguishability obfuscation (qIO) aims to make a quantum circuit unintelligible while preserving its functionality. It serves as a foundational primitive for advanced applications, such as witness encryption (WE) for QMA, non-interactive zero-knowledge arguments for QMA, and attribute-based encryption for BQP. Despite its importance, constructing qIO from standard assumptions remains a major open problem. In this work, we prove that the security of WE for QMA cannot be based on any falsifiable cryptographic assumption via a restricted class of quantum black-box reductions. Because qIO for null quantum circuits implies WE for QMA, this also separates null-qIO from falsifiable assumptions. Since almost all standard cryptographic assumptions are falsifiable, our result presents a barrier to basing qIO on standard cryptographic assumptions. The reductions we rule out are restricted: the reduction must query the adversary classically, non-adaptively, at the same security parameter, and only on honestly generated ciphertexts. Moreover, our impossibility applies only to WE with classical ciphertexts, and therefore does not rule out qIO with obfuscators whose output is a quantum state. Ruling out more general reductions, as well as more general forms of WE and qIO, remains open. Our impossibility relies on the existence of a QMA-QCIP[2] gap problem, an average-case assumption postulating a QMA language that cannot be verified with two messages of classical communication.
A proof of quantumness is an efficiently verifiable interactive test that an efficient quantum computer can pass, but all efficient classical computers cannot (under some cryptographic assumption). Such protocols play a crucial role in the certification of quantum devices. Existing single-round protocols (like asking the quantum computer to factor a large number) require large quantum circuits, whereas multi-round ones use smaller circuits but require experimentally challenging mid-circuit measurements. As such, current proofs of quantumness are out of reach for near-term devices. In this work, we construct efficient single-round proofs of quantumness based on existing knowledge assumptions. While knowledge assumptions have not been previously considered in this context, we show that they provide a natural basis for separating classical and quantum computation. Specifically, we show that multi-round protocols based on Decisional Diffie-Hellman (DDH) or Learning With Errors (LWE) can be "compiled" into single-round protocols using a knowledge-of-exponent assumption or knowledge-of-lattice-point assumption, respectively. We also prove an adaptive hardcore-bit statement for a family of claw-free functions based on DDH, which might be of independent interest. Previous approaches to constructing single-round protocols relied on the random oracle model and thus incurred the overhead associated with instantiating the oracle with a cryptographic hash function. In contrast, our protocols have the same resource requirements as their multi-round counterparts without necessitating mid-circuit measurements, making them, arguably, the most efficient single-round proofs of quantumness to date. Our work also helps in understanding the interplay between black-box/white-box reductions and cryptographic assumptions in the design of proofs of quantumness.
A proof of quantumness is an efficiently verifiable interactive test that an efficient quantum computer can pass, but all efficient classical computers cannot (under some cryptographic assumption). Such protocols play a crucial role in the certification of quantum devices. Existing single-round protocols based solely on a cryptographic hardness assumption (like asking the quantum computer to factor a large number) require large quantum circuits, whereas multi-round ones use smaller circuits but require experimentally challenging mid-circuit measurements. In this work, we construct efficient single-round proofs of quantumness based on existing knowledge assumptions. While knowledge assumptions have not been previously considered in this context, we show that they provide a natural basis for separating classical and quantum computation. Our work also helps in understanding the interplay between black-box/white-box reductions and cryptographic assumptions in the design of proofs of quantumness. Specifically, we show that multi-round protocols based on Decisional Diffie-Hellman (DDH) or Learning With Errors (LWE) can be “compiled” into single-round protocols using a knowledge-of-exponent assumption [7] or knowledge-of-lattice-point assumption [36], respectively. We also prove an adaptive hardcore-bit statement for a family of claw-free functions based on DDH, which might be of independent interest.
In their seminal work, Gentry and Wichs (STOC'11) established an impossibility result for the task of constructing an adaptively-sound SNARG via black-box reduction from a falsifiable assumption. An exciting set of recent SNARG constructions demonstrated that, if one adopts a weaker but still quite meaningful notion of adaptive soundness, then impossibility no longer holds (Waters-Wu, Waters-Zhandry, Mathialagan-Peters-Vaikunthanathan ePrint'24). These fascinating new results raise an intriguing possibility: is there a way to remove this slight weakening of adaptive soundness, thereby completely circumventing the Gentry-Wichs impossibility? A natural route to closing this gap would be to use a quantum black-box reduction, i.e., a reduction that can query the SNARG adversary on superpositions of inputs. This would take advantage of the fact that Gentry-Wichs only consider classical reductions. In this work, we show that this approach cannot succeed. Specifically, we extend the Gentry-Wichs impossibility result to quantum black-box reductions, and thereby establish an important limit on the power of such reductions.
We study whether a quantum verifier can find a hidden quantum state by exchanging classical messages with an unbounded prover who knows the state. The verifier has access to a reflection oracle about the target. For a Haar-random nnn-qubit target, we prove that achieving constant average fidelity with the target requires (q+1)2(B+1)=Ω(2n)(q+1)^2(B+1)=Ω(2^n)(q+1)2(B+1)=Ω(2n), where qqq is the number of verifier queries and BBB is the total prover-to-verifier communication. The bound allows arbitrary classical interaction and unrestricted computation between queries. Our proof extends the lower bound of Aaronson and Kuperberg (ToC'07) from a single classical proof to an arbitrary classical interaction. As a result, we obtain a quantum-oracle separation of QMA from QCIP. In particular, we give a unitary oracle U\mathcal{U}U such that there exists a language L∈QMAUL\in\mathrm{QMA}^{\mathcal{U}}L∈QMAU but L∉QCIPUL\notin\mathrm{QCIP}^{\mathcal{U}}L∈/QCIPU. Our separation holds even for UniqueQMA, the restriction of QMA to verification with a unique quantum witness, which is known to be strictly weaker than QMA in the quantum black-box setting. We further give an oracle construction for a notion known as QMA--QCIP[2] gap problem. This gives average case hardness for a QMA language under classical access to a QCIP[2] decision oracle and is used in establishing negative results on witness encryption and quantum indistinguishability obfuscation.
We initiate the study of non-interactive zero-knowledge (NIZK) arguments for languages in QMA. Our first main result is the following: if Learning With Errors (LWE) is hard for quantum computers, then any language in QMA has an NIZK argument with preprocessing. The preprocessing in our argument system consists of (i) the generation of a CRS and (ii) a single (instance-independent) quantum message from verifier to prover. The instance-dependent phase of our argument system involves only a single classical message from prover to verifier. Importantly, verification in our protocol is entirely classical, and the verifier needs not have quantum memory; its only quantum actions are in the preprocessing phase. Our second contribution is to extend the notion of a classical proof of knowledge to the quantum setting. We introduce the notions of arguments and proofs of quantum knowledge (AoQK/PoQK), and we show that our non-interactive argument system satisfies the definition of an AoQK. In particular, we explicitly construct an extractor which can recover a quantum witness from any prover which is successful in our protocol. Finally, we show that any language in QMA has an (interactive) proof of quantum knowledge.