We present the first protocol allowing a classical computer to interactively verify the result of an efficient quantum computation. We achieve this by constructing a measurement protocol, which enables a classical verifier to use a quantum prover as a trusted measurement device. The protocol forces the prover to behave as follows: the prover must construct an n qubit state of his choice, measure each qubit in the Hadamard or standard basis as directed by the verifier, and report the measurement results to the verifier. The soundness of this protocol is enforced based on the assumption that the learning with errors problem is computationally intractable for efficient quantum machines.We present the first protocol allowing a classical computer to interactively verify the result of an efficient quantum computation. We achieve this by constructing a measurement protocol, which enables a classical verifier to use a quantum prover as a trusted measurement device. The protocol forces the prover to behave as follows: the prover must construct an n qubit state of his choice, measure each qubit in the Hadamard or standard basis as directed by the verifier, and report the measurement results to the verifier. The soundness of this protocol is enforced based on the assumption that the learning with errors problem is computationally intractable for efficient quantum machines.

arXiv:1804.01082Apr 3, 20182 citations

Classical Verification of Quantum Computations

Urmila Mahadev

We present the first protocol allowing a classical computer to interactively verify the result of an efficient quantum computation. We achieve this by constructing a measurement protocol, which enables a classical verifier to use a quantum prover as a trusted measurement device. The protocol forces the prover to behave as follows: the prover must construct an $n$ qubit state of his choice, measure each qubit in the Hadamard or standard basis as directed by the verifier, and report the measurement results to the verifier. The soundness of this protocol is enforced based on the assumption that the learning with errors problem is computationally intractable for efficient quantum machines.We present the first protocol allowing a classical computer to interactively verify the result of an efficient quantum computation. We achieve this by constructing a measurement protocol, which enables a classical verifier to use a quantum prover as a trusted measurement device. The protocol forces the prover to behave as follows: the prover must construct an $n$ qubit state of his choice, measure each qubit in the Hadamard or standard basis as directed by the verifier, and report the measurement results to the verifier. The soundness of this protocol is enforced based on the assumption that the learning with errors problem is computationally intractable for efficient quantum machines.

SIAM Journal on ComputingJul 21, 202228 citations

Classical verification of quantum measurement for the computational basis and the XY -plane basis

Qingshan Xu, Xiaoqing Tan, Daipengwei Bao +1 more

Recent advances in quantum technologies raise the urgent need of verifying the correct functionality of a quantum device. Certifying the correctness of a quantum device in a fully classical manner is an important research branch. In this paper, we present a measurement protocol that allows a classical verifier to interact with an efficient quantum prover to verify the computational basis or the $XY$ -plane basis measurement on a quantum state. With the help of two adaptive hardcore bit properties of a noisy trapdoor claw-free family, the security of measurement protocol is proved, which is under quantum hardness of the learning with error. The security characterizes the distance between the output distribution of measurement protocol and the distribution obtained by measuring certain quantum states in the designated basis, with or without the presence of honest behavior of the prover. Moreover, exploiting the measurement protocol, we present two device-noise-independent verification protocols of graph states and a classical verification protocol of delegated quantum computing whose soundness is 0.5757.Recent advances in quantum technologies raise the urgent need of verifying the correct functionality of a quantum device. Certifying the correctness of a quantum device in a fully classical manner is an important research branch. In this paper, we present a measurement protocol that allows a classical verifier to interact with an efficient quantum prover to verify the computational basis or the $XY$-plane basis measurement on a quantum state. With the help of two adaptive hardcore bit properties of a noisy trapdoor claw-free family, the security of measurement protocol is proved, which is under quantum hardness of the learning with error. The security characterizes the distance between the output distribution of measurement protocol and the distribution obtained by measuring certain quantum states in the designated basis, with or without the presence of honest behavior of the prover. Moreover, exploiting the measurement protocol, we present two device-noise-independent verification protocols of graph states and a classical verification protocol of delegated quantum computing whose soundness is 0.5757.

Physical Review AMay 26, 20231 citation

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.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:2602.09282Feb 11, 20260 citations

Robust verification of quantum computation

Alexandru Gheorghiu

Quantum computers promise to offer a considerable speed-up in solving certain problems, compared to the best classical algorithms. In many instances, the gap between quantum and classical running times is conjectured to be exponential. While this is great news for those applications where quantum computers would provide such an advantage, it also raises a significant challenge: how can classical computers verify the correctness of quantum computations? In attempting to answer this question, a number of protocols have been developed in which a classical client (referred to as verifier) can interact with one or more quantum servers (referred to as provers) in order to certify the correctness of a quantum computation performed by the server(s). These protocols are of one of two types: either there are multiple non-communicating provers, sharing entanglement, and the verifier is completely classical; or, there is a single prover and the classical verifier has a device for preparing or measuring quantum states. The latter type of protocols are, arguably, more relevant to near term quantum computers, since having multiple quantum computers that share a large amount of entanglement is, from a technological standpoint, extremely challenging. Before the realisation of practical single-prover protocols, a number of challenges need to be addressed: how robust are these protocols to noise on the verifier's device? Can the protocols be made fault-tolerant without significantly increasing the requirements of the verifier? How do we know that the verifier's device is operating correctly? Could this device be eliminated completely, thus having a protocol with a fully classical verifier and a single quantum prover? Our work attempts to provide answers to these questions. First, we consider a single-prover verification protocol developed by Fitzsimons and Kashefi and show that this protocol is indeed robust with respect to deviations on the quantum state prepared by the verifier. We show that this is true even if those deviations are the result of a correlation with the prover's system. We then use this result to give a verification protocol which is device- independent. The protocol consists of a verifier with a measurement device and a single prover. Device-independence means that the verifier need not trust the measurement device (nor the prover) which can be assumed to be fully malicious (though not communicating with the prover). A key element in realising this protocol is a robust technique of Reichardt, Unger and Vazirani for testing, using non-local correlations, that two untrusted devices share a large number of entangled states. This technique is referred to as rigidity of non-local correlations. Our second result is to prove a rigidity result for a type of quantum correlations known as steering correlations. To do this, we first show that steering correlations can be used in order to certify maximally entangled states, in a setting in which each test is independent of the previous one. We also show that the fidelity with which we characterise the state, in this specific test, is optimal. We then improve the previous result by removing the independence assumption. This then leads to our desired rigidity result. We make use of it, in a similar fashion to the device-independent case, in order to give a verification protocol that is one-sided device-independent. The importance of this application is to show how different trust assumptions affect the efficiency of the protocol. Next, we describe a protocol for fault-tolerantly verifying quantum computations, with minimal "quantum requirements" for the verifier. Specifically, the verifier only requires a device for measuring single-qubit states. Both this device, and the prover's operations are assumed to be prone to errors. We show that under standard assumptions about the error model, it is possible to achieve verification of quantum computation using fault-tolerant principles. As a proof of principle, and to better illustrate the inner workings of the protocol, we describe a toy implementation of the protocol in a quantum simulator, and present the results we obtained, when running it for a small computation. Finally, we explore the possibility of having a verification protocol, with a classical verifier and a single prover, such that the prover is blind with respect to the verifier's computation. We give evidence that this is not possible. In fact, our result is only concerned with blind quantum computation with a classical client, and uses complexity theoretic results to argue why it is improbable for such a protocol to exist. We then use these complexity theoretic techniques to show that a client, with the ability to prepare and send quantum states to a quantum server, would not be able to delegate arbitrary NP problems to that server. In other words, even a client with quantum capabilities cannot exploit those capabilities to delegate the computation of NP problems, while keeping the input, to that computation, private. This is again true, provided certain complexity theoretic conjectures are true.Quantum computers promise to offer a considerable speed-up in solving certain problems, compared to the best classical algorithms. In many instances, the gap between quantum and classical running times is conjectured to be exponential. While this is great news for those applications where quantum computers would provide such an advantage, it also raises a significant challenge: how can classical computers verify the correctness of quantum computations? In attempting to answer this question, a number of protocols have been developed in which a classical client (referred to as verifier) can interact with one or more quantum servers (referred to as provers) in order to certify the correctness of a quantum computation performed by the server(s). These protocols are of one of two types: either there are multiple non-communicating provers, sharing entanglement, and the verifier is completely classical; or, there is a single prover and the classical verifier has a device for preparing or measuring quantum states. The latter type of protocols are, arguably, more relevant to near term quantum computers, since having multiple quantum computers that share a large amount of entanglement is, from a technological standpoint, extremely challenging. Before the realisation of practical single-prover protocols, a number of challenges need to be addressed: how robust are these protocols to noise on the verifier's device? Can the protocols be made fault-tolerant without significantly increasing the requirements of the verifier? How do we know that the verifier's device is operating correctly? Could this device be eliminated completely, thus having a protocol with a fully classical verifier and a single quantum prover? Our work attempts to provide answers to these questions. First, we consider a single-prover verification protocol developed by Fitzsimons and Kashefi and show that this protocol is indeed robust with respect to deviations on the quantum state prepared by the verifier. We show that this is true even if those deviations are the result of a correlation with the prover's system. We then use this result to give a verification protocol which is device- independent. The protocol consists of a verifier with a measurement device and a single prover. Device-independence means that the verifier need not trust the measurement device (nor the prover) which can be assumed to be fully malicious (though not communicating with the prover). A key element in realising this protocol is a robust technique of Reichardt, Unger and Vazirani for testing, using non-local correlations, that two untrusted devices share a large number of entangled states. This technique is referred to as rigidity of non-local correlations. Our second result is to prove a rigidity result for a type of quantum correlations known as steering correlations. To do this, we first show that steering correlations can be used in order to certify maximally entangled states, in a setting in which each test is independent of the previous one. We also show that the fidelity with which we characterise the state, in this specific test, is optimal. We then improve the previous result by removing the independence assumption. This then leads to our desired rigidity result. We make use of it, in a similar fashion to the device-independent case, in order to give a verification protocol that is one-sided device-independent. The importance of this application is to show how different trust assumptions affect the efficiency of the protocol. Next, we describe a protocol for fault-tolerantly verifying quantum computations, with minimal "quantum requirements" for the verifier. Specifically, the verifier only requires a device for measuring single-qubit states. Both this device, and the prover's operations are assumed to be prone to errors. We show that under standard assumptions about the error model, it is possible to achieve verification of quantum computation using fault-tolerant principles. As a proof of principle, and to better illustrate the inner workings of the protocol, we describe a toy implementation of the protocol in a quantum simulator, and present the results we obtained, when running it for a small computation. Finally, we explore the possibility of having a verification protocol, with a classical verifier and a single prover, such that the prover is blind with respect to the verifier's computation. We give evidence that this is not possible. In fact, our result is only concerned with blind quantum computation with a classical client, and uses complexity theoretic results to argue why it is improbable for such a protocol to exist. We then use these complexity theoretic techniques to show that a client, with the ability to prepare and send quantum states to a quantum server, would not be able to delegate arbitrary NP problems to that server. In other words, even a client with quantum capabilities cannot exploit those capabilities to delegate the computation of NP problems, while keeping the input, to that computation, private. This is again true, provided certain complexity theoretic conjectures are true.

Nov 29, 20180 citations

A simple protocol for fault tolerant verification of quantum computation

Alexandru Gheorghiu, Matty J. Hoban, Elham Kashefi

With experimental quantum computing technologies now in their infancy, the search for efficient means of testing the correctness of these quantum computations is becoming more pressing. An approach to the verification of quantum computation within the framework of interactive proofs has been fruitful for addressing this problem. Specifically, an untrusted agent (prover) alleging to perform quantum computations can have his claims verified by another agent (verifier) who only has access to classical computation and a small quantum device for preparing or measuring single qubits. However, when this quantum device is prone to errors, verification becomes challenging and often existing protocols address this by adding extra assumptions, such as requiring the noise in the device to be uncorrelated with the noise on the prover's devices. In this paper, we present a simple protocol for verifying quantum computations, in the presence of noisy devices, with no extra assumptions. This protocol is based on post hoc techniques for verification, which allow for the prover to know the desired quantum computation and its input. We also perform a simulation of the protocol, for a one-qubit computation, and find the error thresholds when using the qubit repetition code as well as the Steane code.With experimental quantum computing technologies now in their infancy, the search for efficient means of testing the correctness of these quantum computations is becoming more pressing. An approach to the verification of quantum computation within the framework of interactive proofs has been fruitful for addressing this problem. Specifically, an untrusted agent (prover) alleging to perform quantum computations can have his claims verified by another agent (verifier) who only has access to classical computation and a small quantum device for preparing or measuring single qubits. However, when this quantum device is prone to errors, verification becomes challenging and often existing protocols address this by adding extra assumptions, such as requiring the noise in the device to be uncorrelated with the noise on the prover's devices. In this paper, we present a simple protocol for verifying quantum computations, in the presence of noisy devices, with no extra assumptions. This protocol is based on post hoc techniques for verification, which allow for the prover to know the desired quantum computation and its input. We also perform a simulation of the protocol, for a one-qubit computation, and find the error thresholds when using the qubit repetition code as well as the Steane code.

arXiv:1804.06105Quantum Science and TechnologyNov 6, 201812 citations

n

qubit state of his choice, measure each qubit in the Hadamard or standard basis as directed by the verifier, and report the measurement results to the verifier. The soundness of this protocol is enforced based on the assumption that the learning with errors problem is computationally intractable for efficient quantum machines.

XY

-plane basis measurement on a quantum state. With the help of two adaptive hardcore bit properties of a noisy trapdoor claw-free family, the security of measurement protocol is proved, which is under quantum hardness of the learning with error. The security characterizes the distance between the output distribution of measurement protocol and the distribution obtained by measuring certain quantum states in the designated basis, with or without the presence of honest behavior of the prover. Moreover, exploiting the measurement protocol, we present two device-noise-independent verification protocols of graph states and a classical verification protocol of delegated quantum computing whose soundness is 0.5757.