How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Classical Bernstein–Vazirani needs n queries for bounded error
Statement
For the no-offset Bernstein–Vazirani promise on bits, every randomized classical algorithm with worst-case success at least needs at least queries. Querying the standard basis addresses recovers the secret exactly, so the bounded-error and exact classical query complexities are both .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A uniformly sampled secret and a classical algorithm making at most queries to .
Bernstein–Vazirani no-offset promise: is total and the required output is the unique secret .
Binary dot product as parity: the reply is the parity of the coordinate products .
Classical query algorithm: an adaptive query chooses its next address from the random tape and earlier replies; the worst-case query bound applies to each tape and promised input.
Finite probability spaces, outcome weights, events, and event probabilities and The cardinality of a finite set: the uniform secret law averages success over the finite set of possible secrets.
Proof
Fix a random tape. The algorithm is a deterministic adaptive binary decision tree of depth at most , since each query reply is one bit by [F2]. A binary tree of depth at most has at most leaves: this holds at depth zero, and at each added level every prior leaf creates at most two children. Each leaf outputs one candidate secret, so at most one of the secrets reaching that leaf can be correctly recovered. Hence success averaged uniformly over secrets is at most .
For fixed and , there are finitely many deterministic depth-at-most- decision trees on the finite address set, with output labels in . The random-tape algorithm induces weights on this finite strategy set by grouping tapes according to their tree. Averaging step 1.1 over this finite distribution leaves average success at most . If worst-case success is at least on every secret, its average under the uniform secret law is at least . For , the upper bound is at most , a contradiction; therefore .
For each coordinate , query , the string with one at and zeros elsewhere. By [F2], the reply is . These replies give the entire secret, so queries suffice exactly.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
22 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- Ronald de Wolf, Quantum Computing: Lecture Notes, arXiv:1907.09415v6 (2026-08-27) (standard reference, not scraped)
- John Preskill, Quantum Information, Chapter 6: Quantum Algorithms (updated November 2020) (standard reference, not scraped)