Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Algorithms
Certified Randomness without Structure Against Shallow-Query Adversaries
arXiv
Authors: Dakshita Khurana, Bhaskar Roberts, Avishay Tal
Year
2026
Paper ID
76374
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
131
Citations
N/A
Abstract
In a recent breakthrough, Yamakawa and Zhandry (J. ACM 2024) constructed a proof of quantumness in the quantum random oracle model (QROM) in which the quantum prover samples a codeword preimage of a publicly computable function H. They conjectured that given any H, a successful prover must sample their preimage from a high-entropy distribution over possible answers. If true, this would give a certifiable randomness protocol in the quantum random oracle model. As partial evidence for their conjecture, Yamakawa and Zhandry proved the security of their certifiable randomness protocol assuming the Aaronson-Ambainis conjecture. We prove the security of the certifiable randomness protocol of Yamakawa-Zhandry unconditionally, without relying on the unproven Aaronson-Ambainis conjecture, against low query-depth quantum adversaries: specifically, adversaries that make up to olog λ adaptive quantum queries to the random oracle.
Why This Paper Matters
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- In a recent breakthrough, Yamakawa and Zhandry (J.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.