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

Leibniz international proceedings in informatics

En Route to a Standard QMA₁ vs. QCMA Oracle Separation

David Miloschewsky, Supartha Podder, Dorian Rudolph

Published Jan 1, 2026• 0 citations
Publisher

Abstract

We study the power of quantum witnesses under perfect completeness. We construct a classical oracle relative to which a language lies in QMA₁ but not in QCMA when the QCMA verifier is only allowed polynomially many adaptive rounds and exponentially many parallel queries per round. Additionally, we derandomize the permutation-oracle separation of Fefferman and Kimmel, obtaining an in-place oracle separation between QMA₁ and QCMA. Furthermore, we focus on QCMA and QMA with an exponentially small gap, where we show a separation assuming the gap is fixed, but not when it may be arbitrarily small. Finally, we derive consequences for approximate ground-state preparation from sparse Hamiltonian oracle access, including a bounded adaptivity frustration-free variant.

DOI
10.4230/lipics.mfcs.2026.32

Related papers

En Route to a Standard QMA1 vs. QCMA Oracle Separation

David Miloschewsky, Supartha Podder, Dorian Rudolph

We study the power of quantum witnesses under perfect completeness. We construct a classical oracle relative to which a language lies in $\mathsf{QMA}_1$ but not in $\mathsf{QCMA}$ when the $\mathsf{QCMA}$ verifier is only allowed polynomially many adaptive rounds and exponentially many parallel queries per round. Additionally, we derandomize the permutation-oracle separation of Fefferman and Kimmel, obtaining an in-place oracle separation between $\mathsf{QMA}_1$ and $\mathsf{QCMA}$. Furthermore, we focus on $\mathsf{QCMA}$ and $\mathsf{QMA}$ with an exponentially small gap, where we show a separation assuming the gap is fixed, but not when it may be arbitrarily small. Finally, we derive consequences for approximate ground-state preparation from sparse Hamiltonian oracle access, including a bounded-adaptivity frustration-free variant.

quant-pharXiv:2604.26921•Apr 30, 2026•0 citations

Oracle Separation of QMA and QCMA with Bounded Adaptivity

Shalev Ben-David, Srijita Kundu

We give an oracle separation between QMA and QCMA for quantum algorithms that have bounded adaptivity in their oracle queries; that is, the number of rounds of oracle calls is small, though each round may involve polynomially many queries in parallel. Our oracle construction is a simplified version of the construction used recently by Li, Liu, Pelecanos, and Yamakawa (2023), who showed an oracle separation between QMA and QCMA when the quantum algorithms are only allowed to access the oracle classically. To prove our results, we introduce a property of relations called \emph{slipperiness}, which may be useful for getting a fully general classical oracle separation between QMA and QCMA.

arXiv:2402.00298•Leibniz international proceedings in informatics•Jan 1, 2024•1 citation

Separating QMA from QCMA with a classical oracle

John Bostanci, Jonas Haferkamp, Chinmay Nirkhe +1 more

We construct a classical oracle proving that, in a relativized setting, the set of languages decidable by an efficient quantum verifier with a quantum witness (QMA) is strictly bigger than those decidable with access only to a classical witness (QCMA). The separating classical oracle we construct is for a decision problem we coin spectral Forrelation -- the oracle describes two subsets of the boolean hypercube, and the computational task is to decide if there exists a quantum state whose standard basis measurement distribution is well supported on one subset while its Fourier basis measurement distribution is well supported on the other subset. This is equivalent to estimating the spectral norm of a "Forrelation" matrix between two sets that are accessible through membership queries. Our lower bound derives from a simple observation that a query algorithm with a classical witness can be run multiple times to generate many samples from a distribution, while a quantum witness is a "use once" object. This observation allows us to reduce proving a QCMA lower bound to proving a sampling hardness result which does not simultaneously prove a QMA lower bound. To prove said sampling hardness result for QCMA, we observe that quantum access to the oracle can be compressed by expressing the problem in terms of bosons -- a novel "second quantization" perspective on compressed oracle techniques, which may be of independent interest. Using this compressed perspective on the sampling problem, we prove the sampling hardness result, completing the proof.

quant-pharXiv:2511.09551•ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC)•Nov 13, 2025•1 citation

Toward Separating QMA from QCMA with a Classical Oracle

Mark Zhandry

QMA is the class of languages that can be decided by an efficient quantum verifier given a quantum witness, whereas QCMA is the class of such languages where the efficient quantum verifier only is given a classical witness. A challenging fundamental goal in quantum query complexity is to find a classical oracle separation for these classes. In this work, we offer a new approach towards proving such a separation that is qualitatively different than prior work, and show that our approach is sound assuming a natural statistical conjecture which may have other applications to quantum query complexity lower bounds.

•Jan 1, 2025•0 citations

Toward Separating QMA from QCMA with a Classical Oracle

Mark Zhandry

QMA is the class of languages that can be decided by an efficient quantum verifier given a quantum witness, whereas QCMA is the class of such languages where the efficient quantum verifier only is given a classical witness. A challenging fundamental goal in quantum query complexity is to find a classical oracle separation for these classes. In this work, we offer a new approach towards proving such a separation that is qualitatively different than prior work, and show that our approach is sound assuming a natural statistical conjecture which may have other applications to quantum query complexity lower bounds.

arXiv:2411.01718•Leibniz international proceedings in informatics•Nov 4, 2024•0 citations

Separating ClonableQMA and QCMA Relative to a Classical Oracle

Alper Cakan, Kai-Min Chung, Wei-Hsiang Hung +1 more

Since the introduction of the complexity class QMA as a quantum-verifier analogue of NP (Kitaev, 1997), many have wondered whether quantum proofs are necessary or classical proofs suffice - that is, whether QMA = QCMA or QCMA != QMA (Aharonov and Naveh, 2002; Aaronson and Kuperberg, CCC '07). This longstanding question was recently answered by works of Bostanci, Haferkamp, Nirkhe, and Zhandry (STOC '26) and Bostanci, Huang, and Vaikuntanathan (FOCS '26), which showed that quantum proofs are more powerful than classical ones in the classical-oracle setting. However, it remains unclear what exactly makes quantum proofs more powerful than classical ones. In the information-theoretic setting, a family of quantum states is not classicalizable if and only if it is unclonable. Indeed, these recent works also explicitly highlight the unclonability of their quantum proofs as a key mechanism behind their separations, and their arguments crucially rely on this property. This raises the question of whether unclonability is necessary for quantum proofs to be more powerful than classical ones. In this work, we show that even clonable quantum proofs can be more powerful than classical ones relative to a classical oracle by constructing a classical oracle O such that QCMA^O != ClonableQMA^O. This resolves the open question of Nehoran and Zhandry (ITCS '24), who established the analogous separation relative to a quantum oracle. We also show a classical-oracle separation between BQP/clonableqpoly and BQP/poly, and give applications of our results to quantum cryptography.

cs.CCCross-listedarXiv:2610.06740•Oct 6, 2026•0 citations
We study the power of quantum witnesses under perfect completeness. We construct a classical oracle relative to which a language lies in QMA₁ but not in QCMA when the QCMA verifier is only allowed polynomially many adaptive rounds and exponentially many parallel queries per round. Additionally, we derandomize the permutation-oracle separation of Fefferman and Kimmel, obtaining an in-place oracle separation between QMA₁ and QCMA. Furthermore, we focus on QCMA and QMA with an exponentially small gap, where we show a separation assuming the gap is fixed, but not when it may be arbitrarily small. Finally, we derive consequences for approximate ground-state preparation from sparse Hamiltonian oracle access, including a bounded adaptivity frustration-free variant.
We study the power of quantum witnesses under perfect completeness. We construct a classical oracle relative to which a language lies in QMA1\mathsf{QMA}_1QMA1​ but not in QCMA\mathsf{QCMA}QCMA when the QCMA\mathsf{QCMA}QCMA verifier is only allowed polynomially many adaptive rounds and exponentially many parallel queries per round. Additionally, we derandomize the permutation-oracle separation of Fefferman and Kimmel, obtaining an in-place oracle separation between QMA1\mathsf{QMA}_1QMA1​ and QCMA\mathsf{QCMA}QCMA. Furthermore, we focus on QCMA\mathsf{QCMA}QCMA and QMA\mathsf{QMA}QMA with an exponentially small gap, where we show a separation assuming the gap is fixed, but not when it may be arbitrarily small. Finally, we derive consequences for approximate ground-state preparation from sparse Hamiltonian oracle access, including a bounded-adaptivity frustration-free variant.
We give an oracle separation between QMA and QCMA for quantum algorithms that have bounded adaptivity in their oracle queries; that is, the number of rounds of oracle calls is small, though each round may involve polynomially many queries in parallel. Our oracle construction is a simplified version of the construction used recently by Li, Liu, Pelecanos, and Yamakawa (2023), who showed an oracle separation between QMA and QCMA when the quantum algorithms are only allowed to access the oracle classically. To prove our results, we introduce a property of relations called \emph{slipperiness}, which may be useful for getting a fully general classical oracle separation between QMA and QCMA.
We construct a classical oracle proving that, in a relativized setting, the set of languages decidable by an efficient quantum verifier with a quantum witness (QMA) is strictly bigger than those decidable with access only to a classical witness (QCMA). The separating classical oracle we construct is for a decision problem we coin spectral Forrelation -- the oracle describes two subsets of the boolean hypercube, and the computational task is to decide if there exists a quantum state whose standard basis measurement distribution is well supported on one subset while its Fourier basis measurement distribution is well supported on the other subset. This is equivalent to estimating the spectral norm of a "Forrelation" matrix between two sets that are accessible through membership queries. Our lower bound derives from a simple observation that a query algorithm with a classical witness can be run multiple times to generate many samples from a distribution, while a quantum witness is a "use once" object. This observation allows us to reduce proving a QCMA lower bound to proving a sampling hardness result which does not simultaneously prove a QMA lower bound. To prove said sampling hardness result for QCMA, we observe that quantum access to the oracle can be compressed by expressing the problem in terms of bosons -- a novel "second quantization" perspective on compressed oracle techniques, which may be of independent interest. Using this compressed perspective on the sampling problem, we prove the sampling hardness result, completing the proof.
QMA is the class of languages that can be decided by an efficient quantum verifier given a quantum witness, whereas QCMA is the class of such languages where the efficient quantum verifier only is given a classical witness. A challenging fundamental goal in quantum query complexity is to find a classical oracle separation for these classes. In this work, we offer a new approach towards proving such a separation that is qualitatively different than prior work, and show that our approach is sound assuming a natural statistical conjecture which may have other applications to quantum query complexity lower bounds.
QMA is the class of languages that can be decided by an efficient quantum verifier given a quantum witness, whereas QCMA is the class of such languages where the efficient quantum verifier only is given a classical witness. A challenging fundamental goal in quantum query complexity is to find a classical oracle separation for these classes. In this work, we offer a new approach towards proving such a separation that is qualitatively different than prior work, and show that our approach is sound assuming a natural statistical conjecture which may have other applications to quantum query complexity lower bounds.
Since the introduction of the complexity class QMA as a quantum-verifier analogue of NP (Kitaev, 1997), many have wondered whether quantum proofs are necessary or classical proofs suffice - that is, whether QMA = QCMA or QCMA != QMA (Aharonov and Naveh, 2002; Aaronson and Kuperberg, CCC '07). This longstanding question was recently answered by works of Bostanci, Haferkamp, Nirkhe, and Zhandry (STOC '26) and Bostanci, Huang, and Vaikuntanathan (FOCS '26), which showed that quantum proofs are more powerful than classical ones in the classical-oracle setting. However, it remains unclear what exactly makes quantum proofs more powerful than classical ones. In the information-theoretic setting, a family of quantum states is not classicalizable if and only if it is unclonable. Indeed, these recent works also explicitly highlight the unclonability of their quantum proofs as a key mechanism behind their separations, and their arguments crucially rely on this property. This raises the question of whether unclonability is necessary for quantum proofs to be more powerful than classical ones. In this work, we show that even clonable quantum proofs can be more powerful than classical ones relative to a classical oracle by constructing a classical oracle O such that QCMA^O != ClonableQMA^O. This resolves the open question of Nehoran and Zhandry (ITCS '24), who established the analogous separation relative to a quantum oracle. We also show a classical-oracle separation between BQP/clonableqpoly and BQP/poly, and give applications of our results to quantum cryptography.