Forging quantum data: classically defeating an IQP-based quantum test

December 11, 2019 Β· Declared Dead Β· πŸ› Quantum

πŸ‘» CAUSE OF DEATH: Ghosted
No code link whatsoever

"No code URL or promise found in abstract"

Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner

Authors Gregory D. Kahanamoku-Meyer arXiv ID 1912.05547 Category quant-ph: Quantum Computing Cross-listed cs.CR Citations 13 Venue Quantum Last Checked 5 months ago
Abstract
Recently, quantum computing experiments have for the first time exceeded the capability of classical computers to perform certain computations -- a milestone termed "quantum computational advantage." However, verifying the output of the quantum device in these experiments required extremely large classical computations. An exciting next step for demonstrating quantum capability would be to implement tests of quantum computational advantage with efficient classical verification, such that larger system sizes can be tested and verified. One of the first proposals for an efficiently-verifiable test of quantumness consists of hiding a secret classical bitstring inside a circuit of the class IQP, in such a way that samples from the circuit's output distribution are correlated with the secret (arXiv:0809.0847). The classical hardness of this protocol has been supported by evidence that directly simulating IQP circuits is hard, but the security of the protocol against other (non-simulating) classical attacks has remained an open question. In this work we demonstrate that the protocol is not secure against classical forgery. We describe a classical algorithm that can not only convince the verifier that the (classical) prover is quantum, but can in fact can extract the secret key underlying a given protocol instance. Furthermore, we show that the key extraction algorithm is efficient in practice for problem sizes of hundreds of qubits. Finally, we provide an implementation of the algorithm, and give the secret vector underlying the "$25 challenge" posted online by the authors of the original paper.
Community shame:
Not yet rated
Community Contributions

Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!

πŸ“œ Similar Papers

In the same crypt β€” Quantum Computing

Died the same way β€” πŸ‘» Ghosted