Document Open Access Logo

The Compressed Oracle Is A Worthy (Multiplicative) Adversary

Authors Stacey Jeffery , Sebastian Zur

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.ICALP.2026.118.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.89 MB
  • 23 pages

Document Identifiers

Related Versions

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Quantum complexity theory
Keywords
  • Quantum query complexity
  • compressed oracle
  • adversary method

Metrics

Abstract

The compressed oracle technique, introduced in the context of quantum cryptanalysis, is the latest method for proving quantum query lower bounds, and has had an impressive number of applications since its introduction, due in part to the ease of importing classical lower bound intuition into the quantum setting via this method. Previously, the main quantum query lower bound methods were the polynomial method, the adversary method, and the multiplicative adversary method, and their relative powers were well understood. In this work, we situate the compressed oracle technique within this established landscape, by showing that it is a special case of the multiplicative adversary method. To accomplish this, we introduce a simplified restriction of the multiplicative adversary method, the MLADV method, that remains powerful enough to capture the polynomial
method and exhibit a strong direct product theorem, but is much simpler to reason about. We show that the compressed oracle technique is also captured by the MLADV method. This might make the MLADV method a promising direction in the current quest to extend the compressed oracle technique to non-product distributions.

Cite As Get BibTex

Stacey Jeffery and Sebastian Zur. The Compressed Oracle Is A Worthy (Multiplicative) Adversary. In 53rd International Colloquium on Automata, Languages, and Programming (ICALP 2026). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 374, pp. 118:1-118:23, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2026) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.ICALP.2026.118

Author Details

Stacey Jeffery
  • QuSoft, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • CWI, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  • University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Sebastian Zur
  • IRIF, Paris, France
  • CNRS, Paris, France

Funding

  • Jeffery, Stacey: This work is supported by ERC STG grant 101040624-ASC-Q and NWO Klein project number OCENW.Klein.061. SJ is a CIFAR Fellow in the Quantum Information Science Program.

References

  1. Scott Aaronson and Yaoyun Shi. Quantum lower bounds for the collision and the element distinctness problems. Journal of the ACM, 51(4):595-605, 2004. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0112086. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1008731.1008735.
  2. Gorjan Alagic, Joseph Carolan, Christian Majenz, and Saliha Tokat. The sponge is quantum indifferentiable. arXiv preprint, 2025. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.16887.
  3. A. Ambainis. Quantum lower bounds by quantum arguments. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 64(4):750-767, 2002. Earlier version in STOC'00. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0002066. URL: https://doi.org/10.1006/jcss.2002.1826.
  4. Andris Ambainis. Polynomial degree vs. quantum query complexity. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 72(2):220-238, 2006. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0305028. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCSS.2005.06.006.
  5. Andris Ambainis. A new quantum lower bound method, with an application to a strong direct product theorem for quantum search. Theory of Computing, 6(1):1-25, 2010. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0508200. URL: https://doi.org/10.4086/TOC.2010.V006A001.
  6. Andris Ambainis, Loïck Magnin, Martin Roetteler, and Jérémie Roland. Symmetry-assisted adversaries for quantum state generation. In 2011 IEEE 26th Annual Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 167-177. IEEE, 2011. https://arxiv.org/abs/1012.2112. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/CCC.2011.24.
  7. Andris Ambainis, Robert Špalek, and Ronald de Wolf. A new quantum lower bound method, with applications to direct product theorems and time-space tradeoffs. In Proceedings of the thirty-eighth annual ACM symposium on Theory of Computing, pages 618-633, 2006. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0511200.
  8. Howard Barnum and Michael Saks. A lower bound on the quantum query complexity of read-once functions. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 69(2):244-258, 2004. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0201007. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JCSS.2004.02.002.
  9. Robert Beals, Harry Buhrman, Richard Cleve, Michele Mosca, and Ronald e Wolf. Quantum lower bounds by polynomials. Journal of the ACM, 48(4):778-797, 2001. Earlier version in FOCS'98. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/9802049. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/502090.502097.
  10. Aleksandrs Belovs. A direct reduction from the polynomial to the adversary method. In 19th Conference on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography, 2024. https://arxiv.org/abs/2301.10317. Google Scholar
  11. Aleksandrs Belovs and Ansis Rosmanis. Adversary lower bounds for the collision and the set equality problems. Quantum Information and Computation, 2017. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1310.5185.
  12. Guido Bertoni, Joan Daemen, Michaël Peeters, and Gilles Van Assche. Sponge functions. In ECRYPT hash workshop, 2007. Google Scholar
  13. Harry Buhrman and Robert Špalek. Quantum verification of matrix products. In Proceedings of the 17th ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), pages 880-889, 2006. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0409035.
  14. Kai-Min Chung, Serge Fehr, Yu-Hsuan Huang, and Tai-Ning Liao. On the compressed-oracle technique, and post-quantum security of proofs of sequential work. In Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT 2021: 40th Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, Zagreb, Croatia, October 17-21, 2021, Proceedings, Part II, pages 598-629. Springer, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-77886-6_21.
  15. Jan Czajkowski, Christian Majenz, Christian Schaffner, and Sebastian Zur. Quantum lazy sampling and game-playing proofs for quantum indifferentiability. arXiv preprint, 2019. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.11477.
  16. Jelle Don, Serge Fehr, Christian Majenz, and Christian Schaffner. Online-extractability in the quantum random-oracle model. In Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT 2022: 41st Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, Trondheim, Norway, May 30-June 3, 2022, Proceedings, Part III, pages 677-706. Springer, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07082-2_24.
  17. Sebastian Dörn and Thomas Thierauf. The quantum query complexity of algebraic properties. In Fundamentals of Computation Theory: 16th International Symposium, FCT 2007, Budapest, Hungary, August 27-30, 2007. Proceedings 16, pages 250-260. Springer, 2007. https://arxiv.org/abs/0705.1446. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74240-1_22.
  18. Christoph Dürr, Mark Heiligman, Peter Høyer, and Mehdi Mhalla. Quantum query complexity of some graph problems. SIAM Journal on Computing, 35(6):1310-1328, 2006. Earlier version in ICALP'04. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0401091. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/050644719.
  19. Alex B Grilo, Kathrin Hövelmanns, Andreas Hülsing, and Christian Majenz. Tight adaptive reprogramming in the qrom. In Advances in Cryptology-ASIACRYPT 2021: 27th International Conference on the Theory and Application of Cryptology and Information Security, Singapore, December 6-10, 2021, Proceedings, Part I 27, pages 637-667. Springer, 2021. https://arxiv.org/abs/2010.15103. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-92062-3_22.
  20. Yassine Hamoudi and Frédéric Magniez. Quantum time-space tradeoff for finding multiple collision pairs. ACM Transactions on Computation Theory, 15(1-2):1-22, 2023. https://arxiv.org/abs/2002.08944. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3589986.
  21. Peter Høyer, Troy Lee, and Robert Špalek. Negative weights make adversaries stronger. In Proceedings of the 39th ACM Symposium on the Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 526-535, 2007. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0611054. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1250790.1250867.
  22. Stacey Jeffery and Sebastian Zur. The compressed oracle is a worthy (multiplicative) adversary. arXiv preprint, 2025. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.07876.
  23. Hartmut Klauck, Robert Špalek, and Ronald De Wolf. Quantum and classical strong direct product theorems and optimal time-space tradeoffs. SIAM Journal on Computing, 36(5):1472-1493, 2007. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0402123. URL: https://doi.org/10.1137/05063235X.
  24. Troy Lee and Jérémie Roland. A strong direct product theorem for quantum query complexity. computational complexity, 22:429-462, 2013. https://arxiv.org/abs/1104.4468. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S00037-013-0066-8.
  25. Qipeng Liu and Mark Zhandry. On finding quantum multi-collisions. In Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT 2019: 38th Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, Darmstadt, Germany, May 19-23, 2019, Proceedings, Part III 38, pages 189-218. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-17659-4_7.
  26. Qipeng Liu and Mark Zhandry. Revisiting post-quantum fiat-shamir. In Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2019: 39th Annual International Cryptology Conference, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 18-22, 2019, Proceedings, Part II 39, pages 326-355. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26951-7_12.
  27. Loïck Magnin and Jérémie Roland. Explicit relation between all lower bound techniques for quantum query complexity. International Journal of Quantum Information, 13(04):1350059, 2015. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1209.2713.
  28. Ben W Reichardt. Span programs and quantum query complexity: The general adversary bound is nearly tight for every boolean function. In 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 544-551. IEEE, 2009. https://arxiv.org/abs/0904.2759. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/FOCS.2009.55.
  29. Ansis Rosmanis. Tight bounds for inverting permutations via compressed oracle arguments. arXiv preprint, 2021. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2103.08975.
  30. Alexander A Sherstov. Strong direct product theorems for quantum communication and query complexity. In Proceedings of the forty-third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 41-50, 2011. https://arxiv.org/abs/1011.4935. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1993636.1993643.
  31. Robert Špalek. The multiplicative quantum adversary. In 2008 23rd Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity, pages 237-248. IEEE, 2008. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0703237.
  32. Mark Zhandry. How to record quantum queries, and applications to quantum indifferentiability. In Annual International Cryptology Conference, pages 239-268. Springer, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26951-7_9.
  33. Shengyu Zhang. On the power of ambainis lower bounds. Theoretical Computer Science, 339(2-3):241-256, 2005. https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0311060. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.TCS.2005.01.019.
Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2026 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact