We connect three distinct lines of research that have recently explored extensions of the classical LOCAL model of distributed computing: A. distributed quantum computing and non-signaling distributions [e.g. STOC 2024], B. finitely-dependent processes [e.g. Forum Math. Pi 2016], and C. locality in online graph algorithms and dynamic graph algorithms [e.g. ICALP 2023]. We prove new results on the capabilities and limitations of all of these models of computing, for locally checkable labeling problems (LCLs). We show that all these settings can be sandwiched between the classical LOCAL model and what we call the randomized online-LOCAL model. Our work implies limitations on the quantum advantage in the distributed setting, and we also exhibit a new barrier for proving tighter bounds. Our main technical results are these: 1. All LCL problems solvable with locality $O(\log^\star n)$ in the classical deterministic LOCAL model admit a finitely-dependent distribution with locality $O(1)$. This answers an open question by Holroyd [2024], and also presents a new barrier for proving bounds on distributed quantum advantage using causality-based arguments. 2. In rooted trees, if we can solve an LCL problem with locality $o(\log \log \log n)$ in the randomized online-LOCAL model (or any of the weaker models, such as quantum-LOCAL), we can solve it with locality $O(\log^\star n)$ in the classical deterministic LOCAL model. One of many implications is that in rooted trees, $O(\log^\star n)$ locality in quantum-LOCAL is not stronger than $O(\log^\star n)$ locality in classical LOCAL.

We present the first local problem that shows a super-constant separation between the classical randomized LOCAL model of distributed computing and its quantum counterpart. By prior work, such a separation was known only for an artificial graph problem with an inherently global definition [Le Gall et al. 2019]. We present a problem that we call iterated GHZ, which is defined using only local constraints. Formally, it is a family of locally checkable labeling problems [Naor and Stockmeyer 1995]; in particular, solutions can be verified with a constant-round distributed algorithm. We show that in graphs of maximum degree $Δ$, any classical (deterministic or randomized) LOCAL model algorithm will require $Ω(Δ)$ rounds to solve the iterated GHZ problem, while the problem can be solved in $1$ round in quantum-LOCAL. We use the round elimination technique to prove that the iterated GHZ problem requires $Ω(Δ)$ rounds for classical algorithms. This is the first work that shows that round elimination is indeed able to separate the two models, and this also demonstrates that round elimination cannot be used to prove lower bounds for quantum-LOCAL. To apply round elimination, we introduce a new technique that allows us to discover appropriate problem relaxations in a mechanical way; it turns out that this new technique extends beyond the scope of the iterated GHZ problem and can be used to e.g. reproduce prior results on maximal matchings [FOCS 2019, PODC 2020] in a systematic manner.

We give an almost complete characterization of the hardness of c-coloring χ-chromatic graphs with distributed algorithms, for a wide range of models of distributed computing. In particular, we show that these problems do not admit any distributed quantum advantage. To do that:

In the famous paper in which he introduced what is now known as the Turing machine, Alan Turing gave a definition of computable real numbers under which it turns out that multiplication by 3 is uncomputable. This shortcoming vanished in a Correction to his paper that Turing himself published shortly afterwards, but it clearly illustrates the subtlety of defining computability issues correctly. In this paper, we give the name “printable” to real numbers that Turing originally called “computable”, we recall what is now the generally accepted definition of computable real numbers (which is not quite Turing's amended definition, but is equivalent to it), and we contrast the two notions. Despite the fact that the multiplication by 3 of printable numbers is uncomputable, as opposed to the same operation on computable numbers, a real number is computable if and only if it is printable. The resolution of this apparent paradox is that no machine can transform the “computable” description of a real number to its “printable” description, as Turing proved in his Correction. Finally, we address the subtle issue of allowing or not the printable description of a real number to end with an infinite sequence of 9s (or of 1s in binary), which was left open by Turing in his Correction. Several of these results were already known, as they appear in scattered places, some in non-refereed publications, but we give a unified treatment with some different proofs and a historical perspective.

In line with advances in recent years about realizing cryptographic functionalities in an information-theoretically secure way from physical phenomena and laws, we propose here to obtain useful tasks from the sole assumption of limited free energy. Specifically, based on that assumption — resulting in a setting loosely related to Maurer’s bounded-storage model — we derive protocols for unconditional proofs-of-thermodynamical-work, secret sharing of free energy, unforgeable money, and proofs-of-position. While our schemes can be considered classical and not quantum per se, they are resistant against both classes of adversaries.

The CHSH no-signalling game studies Bell nonlocality by showcasing a gap between the win rates of classical strategies, quantum-entangled strategies, and no-signalling strategies. Similarly, the CHSH* single-system game explores the advantage of irreversible processes by showcasing a gap between the win rates of classical reversible strategies, quantum reversible strategies, and irreversible strategies. The irreversible process of erasure rules supreme for the CHSH* single-system game, but this erasure advantage does not necessarily extend to every single-system game: We introduce the 32-Game, in which reversibility is irrelevant and only the distinction between classical and quantum operations matters. We showcase our new insight by modifying the CHSH* game to make it erasure-immune, while conserving its quantum advantage. We conclude by the reverse procedure: We tune the 32-Game to make it erasure-vulnerable, and erase its quantum advantage in the process. The take-home message is that, when the size of the single-system is too small for Alice to encode her whole input, quantum advantage and erasure advantage can happen independently.

It seems impossible to certify that a remote hosting service does not leak its users' data - or does quantum mechanics make it possible? We investigate if a server hosting data can information-theoretically prove its definite deletion using a "BB84-like" protocol. To do so, we first rigorously introduce an alternative to privacy by encryption: privacy delegation. We then apply this novel concept to provable deletion and remote data storage. For both tasks, we present a protocol, sketch its partial security, and display its vulnerability to eavesdropping attacks targeting only a few bits.