Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Saachi Mutreja

dblp:330/3303 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
7ranked-venue papers
2as first author
7since 2021 · last 2025
0009-0002-6825-7112ORCID · corroborated

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Theory of computation · 4 · 4 since 2021Security and privacy · 2 · 1 first-author · 2 since 2021Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 first-author · 1 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Theoretical computer science
3 papers
Quantum computing and quantum information · 65% Computational complexity · 35%
Network and information security
3 papers
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis · 51% Cryptographic protocols and secure computation · 49%
Artificial intelligence
1 paper
Learning theory · 100%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Distributed systems · 100%

Topics — the 14 heaviest of 15, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Computational complexity
pseudorandomness
0.912025
QMA vs QCMA and Pseudorandomness · STOC 2025
Quantum computing and quantum information › quantum complexity theory
QMA vs QCMA
0.912025
QMA vs QCMA and Pseudorandomness · STOC 2025
Quantum computing and quantum information
quantum complexity theory
0.912025
QMA vs QCMA and Pseudorandomness · STOC 2025
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
communication complexity
0.812024
On the Communication Complexity of Secure Multi-Party Computation With Aborts · PODC 2024
Cryptographic protocols and secure computation
secure multiparty computation
0.812024
On the Communication Complexity of Secure Multi-Party Computation With Aborts · PODC 2024
Machine learning › Learning theory
PAC learning
0.712023
PAC Verification of Statistical Algorithms · COLT 2023
Machine learning › Learning theory
statistical query learning
0.712023
PAC Verification of Statistical Algorithms · COLT 2023
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis › randomness extraction
deterministic extractor
0.712023
Extracting Randomness from Samplable Distributions, Revisited · FOCS 2023
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
randomness extraction
0.712023
Extracting Randomness from Samplable Distributions, Revisited · FOCS 2023
Computational complexity › circuit complexity
circuit lower bounds
0.712023
Extracting Randomness from Samplable Distributions, Revisited · FOCS 2023
Cryptographic primitives and cryptanalysis
group actions
0.312025
Quantum State Group Actions · CRYPTO (2) 2025
Distributed systems › consensus
byzantine agreement
0.212024
On the Communication Complexity of Secure Multi-Party Computation With Aborts · PODC 2024
Distributed systems
consensus
0.212024
On the Communication Complexity of Secure Multi-Party Computation With Aborts · PODC 2024
Quantum computing and quantum information
quantum circuit
0.212023
Extracting Randomness from Samplable Distributions, Revisited · FOCS 2023

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

pseudorandomness · 1.3postselecting circuits · 1.3interactive proof · 0.7VC dimension lower bounds · 0.7
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2025 Quantum State Group Actions
Saachi Mutreja, Mark Zhandry
CRYPTO (2)1
2025 QMA vs QCMA and Pseudorandomness
Jiahui Liu 0003, Saachi Mutreja, Henry Yuen
STOC2
2024 On the Communication Complexity of Secure Multi-Party Computation With Aborts
abstract
A central goal of cryptography is Secure Multi-party Computation (MPC), where n parties desire to compute a function of their joint inputs without letting any party learn about the inputs of its peers. Unfortunately, it is well-known that MPC guaranteeing output delivery to every party is infeasible when a majority of the parties are malicious. In fact, parties operating over a point-to-point network (i.e., without access to a broadcast channel) cannot even reach an agreement on the output when more than one third of the parties are malicious (Lamport, Shostak, and Pease, JACM 1980).
James Bartusek, Thiago Bergamaschi, Seri Khoury, Saachi Mutreja, Orr Paradise
PODC4
2024 On Black-Box Separations of Quantum Digital Signatures from Pseudorandom States
Andrea Coladangelo, Saachi Mutreja
TCC (3)2
2023 Robustness for Space-Bounded Statistical Zero Knowledge
Eric Allender, Jacob Gray, Saachi Mutreja, Harsha Tirumala, Pengxiang Wang 0002
APPROX/RANDOM3
2023 PAC Verification of Statistical Algorithms
abstract
Goldwasser et al. (2021) recently proposed the setting of PAC verification, where a hypothesis (machine learning model) that purportedly satisfies the agnostic PAC learning objective is verified using an interactive proof. In this paper we develop this notion further in a number of ways. First, we prove a lower bound of $\Omega(\sqrt{d}/\varepsilon^2)$ i.i.d. samples for PAC verification of hypothesis classes of VC dimension $d$. Second, we present a protocol for PAC verification of unions of intervals over $\mathbb{R}$ that improves upon their proposed protocol for that task, and matches our lower bound’s dependence on $d$. Third, we introduce a natural generalization of their definition to verification of general statistical algorithms, which is applicable to a wider variety of settings beyond agnostic PAC learning. Showcasing our proposed definition, our final result is a protocol for the verification of statistical query algorithms that satisfy a combinatorial constraint on their queries.
Saachi Mutreja, Jonathan Shafer
COLT1
2023 Extracting Randomness from Samplable Distributions, Revisited
abstract
Randomness extractors provide a generic way of converting sources of randomness that are merely unpredictable into almost uniformly random bits. While in general, deterministic randomness extraction is impossible, it is possible if the source has some structural constraints.While much of the literature on deterministic extraction has focused on sources with strong independence properties, a natural class where deterministic extraction is possible is sources that can sampled by a polynomial size circuit, Levin [SIAM J Comp’86]. Trevisan and Vadhan [FOCS’00] explicitly constructed deterministic randomness extractors for this class of sources, assuming very strong circuit lower bounds.We suggest that there is perhaps an even more reasonable model of natural sources of randomness than Levin’s: sources sampled by polynomial size quantum circuits. Under a suitable circuit lower bound, we show that Trevisan and Vadhan’s extractor indeed works for this class.Along the way, we substantially improve their analysis in the classical case, showing that a circuit lower bound against NP-circuits suffice in the classical case (as opposed to a lower bounds on $\Sigma_{5}$-circuits, as shown by Trevisan and Vadhan). Moreover, we show that under this assumption, it is possible to handle sources sampled by postselecting circuits (a variant of nondeterministic circuits). We show that this model is sufficient to capture randomness extraction in the presence of efficiently computable leakage.
Marshall Ball, Eli Goldin, Dana Dachman-Soled, Saachi Mutreja
FOCS4