aiqbench analysis
This research establishes a definitive equivalence between star-incompatible measurements and the ability to extract steering-based randomness in one-sided device-independent protocols. By proving that randomness can be extracted from any such set, the study provides a robust theoretical foundation for certifying unpredictability against attackers using untrusted quantum devices. Additionally, the authors introduce a computable lower bound on guessing probability via semidefinite programming, offering practical tools for quantifying extractable randomness in high-dimensional systems.
All star-incompatible measurements can certify steering-based randomness
arXiv:2603.12024v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Certifying that quantum randomness generated by untrusted devices is unpredictable to an attacker (say, Eve) is crucial for device-independent security. Bipartite protocols where only one of the parties is trusted are termed one-sided device-independent (1SDI) or steering-based protocols, where the untrusted party (say, Alice) performs measurements on her part of a bipartite entangled state to steer the subsystem of the trusted party (say, Bob) into different ensembles (collectively, an assemblage) of quantum states. Recent work has shown that an assemblage has certified randomness if and only if its realization requires a set of measurements that are star-incompatible, i.e., the measurement setting of interest for the guessing probability of Eve is incompatible with at least one of the remaining measurement settings of Alice. However, can one always extract randomness from star-incompatible measurements? And if so, how much randomness can one extract from them? Here we demonstrate that one can extract steering-based randomness from any set of star-incompatible measurements, thereby establishing an equivalence between star-incompatibility and steering-based randomness. We then provide a lower bound on the minimum guessing probability for a given set of measurements that is computable via semidefinite programming. This bound is tight when the Hilbert space dimension of Bob's system is at least that of Alice's. Finally, to provide a quantitative handle on star-incompatibility and the randomness extractable from it, we introduce a weight-based measure of star-incompatibility and lower bound the amount of star-incompatibility required to certify a given amount of randomness.
Abstract:Certifying that quantum randomness generated by untrusted devices is unpredictable to an attacker (say, Eve) is crucial for device-independent security. Bipartite protocols where only one of the parties is trusted are termed one-sided device-independent (1SDI) or steering-based protocols, where the untrusted party (say, Alice) performs measurements on her part of a bipartite entangled state to steer the subsystem of the trusted party (say, Bob) into different ensembles (collectively, an assemblage) of quantum states. Recent work has shown that an assemblage has certified randomness if and only if its realization requires a set of measurements that are star-incompatible, i.e., the measurement setting of interest for the guessing probability of Eve is incompatible with at least one of the remaining measurement settings of Alice. However, can one always extract randomness from star-incompatible measurements? And if so, how much randomness can one extract from them? Here we demonstrate that one can extract steering-based randomness from any set of star-incompatible measurements, thereby establishing an equivalence between star-incompatibility and steering-based randomness. We then provide a lower bound on the minimum guessing probability for a given set of measurements that is computable via semidefinite programming. This bound is tight when the Hilbert space dimension of Bob's system is at least that of Alice's. Finally, to provide a quantitative handle on star-incompatibility and the randomness extractable from it, we introduce a weight-based measure of star-incompatibility and lower bound the amount of star-incompatibility required to certify a given amount of randomness.
arXiv:2603.12024 [quant-ph]
(or arXiv:2603.12024v2 [quant-ph] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2603.12024 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 332 words
Related coverage

Quantifiers and witnesses for the nonclassicality of measurements and of states
Quantum Journal · Jul 30, 2026

Strict hierarchy between $n$-wise measurement simulability, compatibility structures, and multi-copy compatibility
Quantum Journal · Oct 8, 2026

The Alignment Problem: Computer Science Meets Analytic Philosophy
LessWrong · Oct 18, 2026
Untrusted advice for AI control: Short, strong advice significantly uplifts weak LLMs
LessWrong · Jul 27, 2026