VLDB 2026 Research / reviewers in the wild / expert
Jamie Sikora
dblp:53/8937
· DBLP profile ↗
6ranked-venue papers
0as first author
2since 2021 · last 2025
0000-0001-8203-9133ORCID · verified
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Theory of computation · 6 · 2 since 2021
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2025 | Quantum Protocols for Rabin Oblivious TransferabstractRabin oblivious transfer is the cryptographic task where Alice wishes to receive a bit from Bob but it may get lost with probability 1/2. In this work, we provide protocol designs which yield quantum protocols with improved security. Moreover, we provide a constant lower bound on any quantum protocol for Rabin oblivious transfer. To quantify the security of this task with asymmetric cheating definitions, we introduce the notion of cheating advantage which may be of independent interest in the study of other asymmetric cryptographic primitives. Erika Andersson, Akshay Bansal, James T. Peat, Jamie Sikora, Jiawei Wu 0005 |
FSTTCS | 4 |
| 2022 | Quantum generalizations of the polynomial hierarchy with applications to QMA(2)abstractThe polynomial-time hierarchy (PH) has proven to be a powerful tool for providing separations in computational complexity theory (modulo standard conjectures such as PH do not collapse). Here, we study whether two quantum generalizations of PH can similarly prove separations in the quantum setting. The first generalization, $$\rm{QCPH}$$ , uses classical proofs, and the second, $$\rm{QPH}$$ , uses quantum proofs. For the former, we show quantum variants of the Karp-Lipton theorem and Toda's theorem. For the latter, we place its third level, $$\rm{Q\Sigma_3}$$ , into NEXP using the ellipsoid method for efficiently solving semidefinite programs. These results yield two implications for $$\rm{QMA(2)}$$ , the variant of Quantum Merlin-Arthur ( $$\rm{QMA}$$ ) with two unentangled proofs, a complexity class whose characterization has proven difficult. First, if $$\rm{QCPH = QPH}$$ (i.e., alternating quantifiers are sufficiently powerful so as to make classical and quantum proofs ``equivalent''), then QMA(2) is in the counting hierarchy (specifically, in $${\rm P}^{{\rm pp}^{{\rm pp}}}$$ ). Second, because $$\rm{QMA(2)}\subseteq \rm{Q\Sigma_3}$$ , $$\rm{QMA(2)}$$ is strictly contained in NEXP unless $$\rm{QMA(2)}=\rm{Q\Sigma_3}$$ (i.e., alternating quantifiers do not help in the presence of ``unentanglement''). Sevag Gharibian, Miklos Santha, Jamie Sikora, Aarthi Sundaram, Justin Yirka |
Comput. Complex. | 3 |
| 2018 | Quantum Generalizations of the Polynomial Hierarchy with Applications to QMA(2)
Sevag Gharibian, Miklos Santha, Jamie Sikora, Aarthi Sundaram, Justin Yirka |
MFCS | 3 |
| 2015 | Ground State Connectivity of Local Hamiltonians
Sevag Gharibian, Jamie Sikora |
ICALP (1) | 2 |
| 2015 | QMA with Subset State Witnesses
Alex Bredariol Grilo, Iordanis Kerenidis, Jamie Sikora |
MFCS (2) | 3 |
| 2010 | Lower bounds for Quantum Oblivious TransferabstractOblivious transfer is a fundamental primitive in cryptography. While perfect information theoretic security is impossible, quantum oblivious transfer protocols can limit the dishonest players' cheating. Finding the optimal security parameters in such protocols is an important open question. In this paper we show that every 1-out-of-2 oblivious transfer protocol allows a dishonest party to cheat with probability bounded below by a constant strictly larger than $1/2$. Alice's cheating is defined as her probability of guessing Bob's index, and Bob's cheating is defined as his probability of guessing both input bits of Alice. In our proof, we relate these cheating probabilities to the cheating probabilities of a coin flipping protocol and conclude by using Kitaev's coin flipping lower bound. Then, we present an oblivious transfer protocol with two messages and cheating probabilities at most $3/4$. Last, we extend Kitaev's semidefinite programming formulation to more general primitives, where the security is against a dishonest player trying to force the outcome of the other player, and prove optimal lower and upper bounds for them. André Chailloux, Iordanis Kerenidis, Jamie Sikora |
FSTTCS | 3 |