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:2610.37635

Classical Verification of Quantum Computation Beyond the Polynomial Hierarchy

Atul Mantri

quant-phcs.CCcs.CRSubmitted Oct 27, 2026• Announced Oct 28, 2026• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

It is not known whether a classical polynomial-time verifier can verify arbitrary polynomial-time quantum computations with an efficient quantum honest prover without computational assumptions. We show that, relative to a classical oracle, such verification is possible for a language beyond the polynomial hierarchy that is decided exactly in quantum polynomial time. The protocol is public-coin, with perfect completeness and soundness error at most 1/4. To our knowledge, no language with such a proof system was previously proved to lie outside AM relative to an oracle. For every unbounded polynomial-time computable function, the oracle can be chosen so that the message count and the oracle query counts of the quantum algorithm, verifier, and honest prover are bounded by this function of the input length. The message count is optimal up to a constant factor, since for a suitable oracle every interactive proof system for the language uses at least a constant fraction of the messages of our protocol on infinitely many lengths, with a constant depending on its verifier. The language is a variant of recursive Fourier sampling in which code tables encode secrets that address data tables. The tables are evaluated recursively, and the oracle stores only the leaves. The quantum algorithm recovers every secret exactly, and the verifier checks the prover's secrets recursively against random code entries. The recursion restricts the input in a correlated way, as the same secret fixes the code bits and chooses the free coordinate, so Håstad's switching lemma does not apply. We prove a switching theorem for these restrictions, which may be of independent interest. For instances of sufficient height, no constant-depth circuit of size $2^{\mathrm{poly}(n)}$ changes its output with probability above $2^{-Ω(n)}$ when the answer of a random instance is flipped by changing a single leaf.

Related papers

Oracle Separations for the Quantum-Classical Polynomial Hierarchy

Avantika Agarwal, Shalev Ben-David

We study the quantum-classical polynomial hierarchy, QCPH, which is the class of languages solvable by a constant number of alternating classical quantifiers followed by a quantum verifier. Our main result is that QCPH is infinite relative to a random oracle (previously, this was not even known relative to any oracle). We further prove that higher levels of PH are not contained in lower levels of QCPH relative to a random oracle; this is a strengthening of the somewhat recent result that PH is infinite relative to a random oracle (Rossman, Servedio, and Tan 2016). The oracle separation requires lower bounding a certain type of low-depth alternating circuit with some quantum gates. To establish this, we give a new switching lemma for quantum algorithms which may be of independent interest. Our lemma says that for any $d$, if we apply a random restriction to a function $f$ with quantum query complexity $\mathrm{Q}(f)\le n^{1/3}$, the restricted function becomes exponentially close (in terms of $d$) to a depth-$d$ decision tree. Our switching lemma works even in a "worst-case" sense, in that only the indices to be restricted are random; the values they are restricted to are chosen adversarially. Moreover, the switching lemma also works for polynomial degree in place of quantum query complexity.

arXiv:2410.19062•Leibniz international proceedings in informatics•Oct 24, 2024•0 citations

Probabilistically Checking Quantum Proofs, with Interaction

Baocheng Sun, Thomas Vidick

The model of interactive oracle proofs (IOP) generalizes the notion of probabilistically checkable proof (PCP), in which a static proof is verified probabilistically by querying a small number of bits, to the interactive setting: a polynomial-time verifier interacts with an unbounded prover, but is restricted to only reading a small number of bits, in total, from the messages sent by the prover. IOPs provide a relaxed setting in which to study local probabilistic verification. They have proved instrumental in devising efficient methods for verification through subsequent compilation into non-interactive or succinct protocols. We study a quantum analogue of interactive oracle proofs (qIOP) in which the verifier and communication are both allowed to be quantum; yet the verifier is restricted to perform measurements only on a small number of qubits received from the prover. Our main result is a qIOP for any language in QMA, in which the total communication is polynomial but the verifier only reads a polylogarithmic number of qubits in total. The protocol has completeness parameter exponentially close to $1$ and soundness bounded away from $1$ by a constant. In the absence of a quantum PCP theorem, this provides the first information-theoretically sound local and robust characterization of QMA, albeit interactive. Our protocol combines the use of a quantum locally testable code (LTC) with classical techniques, notably probabilistically checkable proofs of proximity (PCPP). We avoid the necessity for complex multi-qubit tests employed in other settings by leveraging the local indistinguishability property of the quantum LTC.

cs.CCCross-listedarXiv:2606.09588•Jun 9, 2026•0 citations

Quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs

Baocheng Sun, Thomas Vidick

We initiate the study of quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs (qIOPs), a generalization of both quantum Probabilistically Checkable Proofs and quantum Interactive Proofs, as well as a quantum analogue of classical Interactive Oracle Proofs. In the model of quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs, we allow multiple rounds of quantum interaction between the quantum prover and the quantum verifier, but the verifier has limited access to quantum resources. This includes both queries to the prover's messages and the complexity of the quantum circuits applied by the verifier. The question of whether QMA admits a quantum interactive oracle proof system is a relaxation of the quantum PCP Conjecture. We show the following two main constructions of qIOPs, both of which are unconditional: - We construct a qIOP for QMA in which the verifier shares polynomially many EPR pairs with the prover at the start of the protocol and reads only a constant number of qubits from the prover's messages. - We provide a stronger construction of qIOP for QMA in which the verifier not only reads a constant number of qubits but also operates on a constant number of qubits overall, including those in their private registers. However, in this stronger setting, the communication complexity becomes exponential. This leaves open the question of whether strong qIOPs for QMA, with polynomial communication complexity, exist. As a key component of our construction, we introduce a novel single prover many-qubits test, which may be of independent interest.

cs.CCCross-listedarXiv:2601.12874•Jan 20, 2026•0 citations

Probabilistically Checking Quantum Proofs, with Interaction

Baocheng Sun, Thomas Vidick

The model of interactive oracle proofs (IOP) generalizes the notion of probabilistically checkable proof (PCP), in which a static proof is verified probabilistically by querying a small number of bits, to the interactive setting: a polynomial-time verifier interacts with an unbounded prover, but is restricted to only reading a small number of bits, in total, from the messages sent by the prover. IOPs provide a relaxed setting in which to study local probabilistic verification. They have proved instrumental in devising efficient methods for verification through subsequent compilation into non-interactive or succinct protoocls. We study a quantum analogue of interactive oracle proofs (qIOP) in which the verifier and communication are both allowed to be quantum; yet the verifier is restricted to perform measurements only on a small number of qubits received from the prover. Our main result is a qIOP for any language in QMA, in which the total communication is polynomial but the verifier only reads a polylogarithmic number of qubits in total. The protocol has completeness parameter exponentially close to 1 and soundness bounded away from 1 by a constant. In the absence of a quantum PCP theorem, this provides the first information-theoretically sound local and robust characterization of QMA, albeit interactive. Previous works in the information-theoretic setting either considered two isolated but entangled quantum provers or quantum verifiers whose effort in a single round is small but remains polynomial when aggregated across all rounds of the protocol. Our protocol combines the use of a quantum locally testable code (LTC) with classical techniques, notably probabilistically checkable proofs of proximity (PCPP). We avoid the necessity for complex multi-qubit tests employed in other settings by leveraging the local indistinguishability property of the quantum LTC.

Leibniz international proceedings in informatics•Jan 1, 2026•0 citations

How to Classically Verify a Quantum Cat without Killing It

Yael Tauman Kalai, Dakshita Khurana, Justin Raizes

A quantum verifier decides membership in QMA using a (single) quantum witness state. This witness may be arbitrary, and no requirement is placed on it beyond its acceptance probability. A protocol claiming to classically verify QMA should offer the same guarantee: any witness that would convince a quantum verifier should also suffice to convince a classical verifier. Unfortunately, existing classical verification of quantum computation (CVQC) protocols behave quite differently from the original QMA verifier: they require many copies of the witness and destroy every one, effectively demanding that the prover solve the hard problem of witness duplication before verification can begin. We build a protocol to classically verify QMA languages that uses a single copy of the prover's QMA witness. Whenever the original QMA verifier accepts that witness with overwhelming probability, our protocol has negligible completeness and soundness errors and returns the witness negligibly disturbed after interaction with an honest verifier. The soundness of our CVQC is based on the post-quantum Learning With Errors (LWE) assumption. As an intermediate step of independent interest, we introduce witness-preserving classical arguments for NP which enable provers that start out with a superposition over NP witnesses to convince a verifier without disturbing their superposition.

quant-pharXiv:2602.09282•Feb 11, 2026•0 citations

Towards the Impossibility of Imperfectly Complete Key Agreement in the QROM

Fuyuki Kitagawa, Ryo Nishimaki, Agi Villanyi +1 more

We make progress towards the impossibility of quantum-computation, classical-communication (QCCC) key agreement by giving the first unconditional polynomial-query attacks that tolerate imperfect completeness in the following settings. First, we give a quantum attack on protocols with arbitrarily many rounds in which both parties' oracle queries and communication are classical before the final round, while local computation may be quantum throughout, and the final round may involve quantum oracle queries and one quantum message. Second, we give a classical attack on constant-round QCCC protocols in which Alice has classical oracle access and Bob may make quantum queries throughout. In both settings, the attacker is computationally unbounded and makes $poly(λ)$ queries to recover the key with nonnegligible probability whenever each party's total honest query bound is at most $poly(λ)$ and the valid agreement probability is inverse-polynomial. As consequences, we rule out query-bounded IND-CPA security for quantum public-key encryption with classical public and secret keys and classical messages of polynomially bounded length in the QROM in either of two settings: (i) key generation has classical oracle access, while encryption, decryption, and the ciphertext may be quantum; or (ii) encryption has classical oracle access and ciphertexts are classical, while key generation and decryption may have quantum oracle access. Both results assume negligible correctness error and polynomial honest query complexity. Combining the constant-round attack with the constructions of Bartusek and Khurana (CRYPTO 2025), we also rule out constant-round oblivious state preparation with polynomial honest query complexity and negligible correctness error in the QROM against computationally unbounded quantum receivers making polynomially many oracle queries.

quant-pharXiv:2608.17610•Aug 19, 2026•0 citations
It is not known whether a classical polynomial-time verifier can verify arbitrary polynomial-time quantum computations with an efficient quantum honest prover without computational assumptions. We show that, relative to a classical oracle, such verification is possible for a language beyond the polynomial hierarchy that is decided exactly in quantum polynomial time. The protocol is public-coin, with perfect completeness and soundness error at most 1/4. To our knowledge, no language with such a proof system was previously proved to lie outside AM relative to an oracle.
For every unbounded polynomial-time computable function, the oracle can be chosen so that the message count and the oracle query counts of the quantum algorithm, verifier, and honest prover are bounded by this function of the input length. The message count is optimal up to a constant factor, since for a suitable oracle every interactive proof system for the language uses at least a constant fraction of the messages of our protocol on infinitely many lengths, with a constant depending on its verifier.
The language is a variant of recursive Fourier sampling in which code tables encode secrets that address data tables. The tables are evaluated recursively, and the oracle stores only the leaves. The quantum algorithm recovers every secret exactly, and the verifier checks the prover's secrets recursively against random code entries. The recursion restricts the input in a correlated way, as the same secret fixes the code bits and chooses the free coordinate, so Håstad's switching lemma does not apply. We prove a switching theorem for these restrictions, which may be of independent interest. For instances of sufficient height, no constant-depth circuit of size 2poly(n)2^{\mathrm{poly}(n)}2poly(n) changes its output with probability above 2−Ω(n)2^{-Ω(n)}2−Ω(n) when the answer of a random instance is flipped by changing a single leaf.
We study the quantum-classical polynomial hierarchy, QCPH, which is the class of languages solvable by a constant number of alternating classical quantifiers followed by a quantum verifier. Our main result is that QCPH is infinite relative to a random oracle (previously, this was not even known relative to any oracle). We further prove that higher levels of PH are not contained in lower levels of QCPH relative to a random oracle; this is a strengthening of the somewhat recent result that PH is infinite relative to a random oracle (Rossman, Servedio, and Tan 2016). The oracle separation requires lower bounding a certain type of low-depth alternating circuit with some quantum gates. To establish this, we give a new switching lemma for quantum algorithms which may be of independent interest. Our lemma says that for any ddd, if we apply a random restriction to a function fff with quantum query complexity Q(f)≤n1/3\mathrm{Q}(f)\le n^{1/3}Q(f)≤n1/3, the restricted function becomes exponentially close (in terms of ddd) to a depth-ddd decision tree. Our switching lemma works even in a "worst-case" sense, in that only the indices to be restricted are random; the values they are restricted to are chosen adversarially. Moreover, the switching lemma also works for polynomial degree in place of quantum query complexity.
The model of interactive oracle proofs (IOP) generalizes the notion of probabilistically checkable proof (PCP), in which a static proof is verified probabilistically by querying a small number of bits, to the interactive setting: a polynomial-time verifier interacts with an unbounded prover, but is restricted to only reading a small number of bits, in total, from the messages sent by the prover. IOPs provide a relaxed setting in which to study local probabilistic verification. They have proved instrumental in devising efficient methods for verification through subsequent compilation into non-interactive or succinct protocols. We study a quantum analogue of interactive oracle proofs (qIOP) in which the verifier and communication are both allowed to be quantum; yet the verifier is restricted to perform measurements only on a small number of qubits received from the prover. Our main result is a qIOP for any language in QMA, in which the total communication is polynomial but the verifier only reads a polylogarithmic number of qubits in total. The protocol has completeness parameter exponentially close to 111 and soundness bounded away from 111 by a constant. In the absence of a quantum PCP theorem, this provides the first information-theoretically sound local and robust characterization of QMA, albeit interactive. Our protocol combines the use of a quantum locally testable code (LTC) with classical techniques, notably probabilistically checkable proofs of proximity (PCPP). We avoid the necessity for complex multi-qubit tests employed in other settings by leveraging the local indistinguishability property of the quantum LTC.
We initiate the study of quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs (qIOPs), a generalization of both quantum Probabilistically Checkable Proofs and quantum Interactive Proofs, as well as a quantum analogue of classical Interactive Oracle Proofs. In the model of quantum Interactive Oracle Proofs, we allow multiple rounds of quantum interaction between the quantum prover and the quantum verifier, but the verifier has limited access to quantum resources. This includes both queries to the prover's messages and the complexity of the quantum circuits applied by the verifier. The question of whether QMA admits a quantum interactive oracle proof system is a relaxation of the quantum PCP Conjecture. We show the following two main constructions of qIOPs, both of which are unconditional: - We construct a qIOP for QMA in which the verifier shares polynomially many EPR pairs with the prover at the start of the protocol and reads only a constant number of qubits from the prover's messages. - We provide a stronger construction of qIOP for QMA in which the verifier not only reads a constant number of qubits but also operates on a constant number of qubits overall, including those in their private registers. However, in this stronger setting, the communication complexity becomes exponential. This leaves open the question of whether strong qIOPs for QMA, with polynomial communication complexity, exist. As a key component of our construction, we introduce a novel single prover many-qubits test, which may be of independent interest.
The model of interactive oracle proofs (IOP) generalizes the notion of probabilistically checkable proof (PCP), in which a static proof is verified probabilistically by querying a small number of bits, to the interactive setting: a polynomial-time verifier interacts with an unbounded prover, but is restricted to only reading a small number of bits, in total, from the messages sent by the prover. IOPs provide a relaxed setting in which to study local probabilistic verification. They have proved instrumental in devising efficient methods for verification through subsequent compilation into non-interactive or succinct protoocls. We study a quantum analogue of interactive oracle proofs (qIOP) in which the verifier and communication are both allowed to be quantum; yet the verifier is restricted to perform measurements only on a small number of qubits received from the prover. Our main result is a qIOP for any language in QMA, in which the total communication is polynomial but the verifier only reads a polylogarithmic number of qubits in total. The protocol has completeness parameter exponentially close to 1 and soundness bounded away from 1 by a constant. In the absence of a quantum PCP theorem, this provides the first information-theoretically sound local and robust characterization of QMA, albeit interactive. Previous works in the information-theoretic setting either considered two isolated but entangled quantum provers or quantum verifiers whose effort in a single round is small but remains polynomial when aggregated across all rounds of the protocol. Our protocol combines the use of a quantum locally testable code (LTC) with classical techniques, notably probabilistically checkable proofs of proximity (PCPP). We avoid the necessity for complex multi-qubit tests employed in other settings by leveraging the local indistinguishability property of the quantum LTC.
A quantum verifier decides membership in QMA using a (single) quantum witness state. This witness may be arbitrary, and no requirement is placed on it beyond its acceptance probability. A protocol claiming to classically verify QMA should offer the same guarantee: any witness that would convince a quantum verifier should also suffice to convince a classical verifier. Unfortunately, existing classical verification of quantum computation (CVQC) protocols behave quite differently from the original QMA verifier: they require many copies of the witness and destroy every one, effectively demanding that the prover solve the hard problem of witness duplication before verification can begin. We build a protocol to classically verify QMA languages that uses a single copy of the prover's QMA witness. Whenever the original QMA verifier accepts that witness with overwhelming probability, our protocol has negligible completeness and soundness errors and returns the witness negligibly disturbed after interaction with an honest verifier. The soundness of our CVQC is based on the post-quantum Learning With Errors (LWE) assumption. As an intermediate step of independent interest, we introduce witness-preserving classical arguments for NP which enable provers that start out with a superposition over NP witnesses to convince a verifier without disturbing their superposition.
We make progress towards the impossibility of quantum-computation, classical-communication (QCCC) key agreement by giving the first unconditional polynomial-query attacks that tolerate imperfect completeness in the following settings. First, we give a quantum attack on protocols with arbitrarily many rounds in which both parties' oracle queries and communication are classical before the final round, while local computation may be quantum throughout, and the final round may involve quantum oracle queries and one quantum message. Second, we give a classical attack on constant-round QCCC protocols in which Alice has classical oracle access and Bob may make quantum queries throughout. In both settings, the attacker is computationally unbounded and makes poly(λ)poly(λ)poly(λ) queries to recover the key with nonnegligible probability whenever each party's total honest query bound is at most poly(λ)poly(λ)poly(λ) and the valid agreement probability is inverse-polynomial. As consequences, we rule out query-bounded IND-CPA security for quantum public-key encryption with classical public and secret keys and classical messages of polynomially bounded length in the QROM in either of two settings: (i) key generation has classical oracle access, while encryption, decryption, and the ciphertext may be quantum; or (ii) encryption has classical oracle access and ciphertexts are classical, while key generation and decryption may have quantum oracle access. Both results assume negligible correctness error and polynomial honest query complexity. Combining the constant-round attack with the constructions of Bartusek and Khurana (CRYPTO 2025), we also rule out constant-round oblivious state preparation with polynomial honest query complexity and negligible correctness error in the QROM against computationally unbounded quantum receivers making polynomially many oracle queries.