Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 32 references

A Modular Benchmark of Variational Quantum Attack Algorithms for S-DES

T0 review · 2 major / 0 minor · reviewed 2026-06-30 · grok-4.3

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Carefully optimized combinations of variational circuit components can make quantum attacks on S-DES more efficient than naive quantum search.

desk verdict The paper gives a modular benchmark for VQA attacks on S-DES but evaluates everything in noiseless simulation. read the letter →

arxiv 2606.30143 v1 pith:WWKNAN2Z submitted 2026-06-29 quant-ph

Zeguo Wang , Quanfeng Lu , Wentao Yang , Shijie Wei , Gui-Lu Long , Kai Wen This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph
keywords variationalquantumalgorithmscryptanalysisS-DESNISQdevicesbenchmarkframeworksymmetriccipherattacksansatzoptimization
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper sets up a single framework that splits variational quantum attacks into four parts: how to prepare the starting state, how to build the adjustable circuit, how to define the cost that the optimizer tries to minimize, and which classical optimizer to use. It then runs numerical simulations on S-DES to test many combinations of these parts and records how fast each combination finds the secret key and how often it succeeds. The simulations show that some combinations reach high success rates with lower effective complexity than a plain quantum search would need. This modular testing supplies concrete metrics and a repeatable way to judge future variational attacks on small symmetric ciphers.

What carries the argument

The four-component modular framework (initial state preparation, Ansatz design, cost function, classical optimization) that turns attack design into a searchable space of combinations evaluated by standardized metrics.

What would settle it

Executing the highest-performing modular configurations identified in simulation on a real NISQ device and finding that they fail to converge or match the simulated success rates and resource counts would falsify the performance claims.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

A unified modular framework consisting of initial state preparation, parameterized circuit (Ansatz) design, cost function construction, and classical optimization allows systematic comparison of design choices; numerical simulations on S-DES reveal clear performance hierarchies among configurations and demonstrate that carefully optimized designs can significantly outperform naive quantum search in convergence behavior, success probability, and effective time complexity.

Load-bearing premise

Numerical simulations of the variational circuits on classical computers accurately predict how the same circuits will behave and perform when executed on actual noisy quantum hardware.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Some combinations of the four components produce measurably faster convergence and higher success probability than others.
  • Standardized metrics for convergence, success probability, and effective time complexity can rank variational attack designs.
  • S-DES functions as a practical, small-scale testbed for comparing NISQ-era attacks on symmetric ciphers.
  • Optimized modular designs achieve better effective time complexity than naive quantum search methods.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same modular comparison method could be applied to slightly larger toy ciphers to check whether the performance ordering remains stable.
  • If the simulation-to-hardware gap is small, the best configurations supply concrete circuit templates that could be tested on current cloud quantum processors.
  • The framework offers a template for benchmarking variational methods on other combinatorial search problems outside cryptography.
  • Future work could add hardware noise models directly into the benchmark loop to close the simulation-reality gap.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a modular benchmarking framework for variational quantum attacks on S-DES, decomposing the attack into four components (state preparation, ansatz, cost function, optimizer). It performs classical numerical simulations to compare design alternatives, claims to identify clear performance hierarchies among configurations, and asserts that optimized designs significantly outperform naive quantum search in convergence, success probability, and effective time complexity. Standardized metrics are introduced, and S-DES is positioned as a testbed for NISQ-era symmetric cipher attacks.

Significance. A systematic, modular benchmark for VQA cryptanalysis could be useful if results are reproducible and robust. The unified framework and standardized metrics are positive elements. However, the central claim of performance hierarchies and outperformance of naive search cannot be evaluated because no data, tables, figures, error bars, or verification details are provided in the manuscript, limiting significance. The NISQ positioning is further weakened by reliance on noiseless simulations.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that 'simulations reveal clear performance hierarchies' and 'carefully optimized designs can significantly outperform naive quantum search' is unsupported; no data, tables, figures, error bars, exclusion criteria, or verification details are presented, preventing assessment of the central claim.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract and positioning for NISQ-era attacks: the evaluation uses numerical simulations on classical computers with no indication that gate errors, decoherence, or readout noise were modeled. This assumption is load-bearing for the claimed applicability and performance hierarchy, as noiseless variational circuits can exhibit artificially high success rates.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback. The comments correctly identify gaps in evidence presentation and simulation assumptions that limit evaluability of the central claims. We address each point below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that 'simulations reveal clear performance hierarchies' and 'carefully optimized designs can significantly outperform naive quantum search' is unsupported; no data, tables, figures, error bars, exclusion criteria, or verification details are presented, preventing assessment of the central claim.

    Authors: We agree the abstract claims cannot be assessed without supporting data. The manuscript text describes the simulations and comparisons but does not include the actual numerical results, tables, or figures. In revision we will add the key performance tables, convergence plots with error bars, success probabilities, and verification details (including exclusion criteria) so that the claimed hierarchies and outperformance versus naive search become directly verifiable. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and positioning for NISQ-era attacks: the evaluation uses numerical simulations on classical computers with no indication that gate errors, decoherence, or readout noise were modeled. This assumption is load-bearing for the claimed applicability and performance hierarchy, as noiseless variational circuits can exhibit artificially high success rates.

    Authors: We agree the simulations are noiseless and that this must be stated explicitly. The current work isolates modular design effects under ideal conditions; the NISQ positioning is forward-looking. We will revise the abstract, introduction, and methods to state that all reported results are noiseless, to note the absence of noise modeling, and to discuss how the observed hierarchies may change under realistic noise, thereby removing the unsupported applicability claim. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: empirical benchmarking study with independent simulation results

full rationale

The paper is a comparative benchmarking study that evaluates modular design choices for variational quantum attacks on S-DES through direct numerical simulations on classical computers. Claims of performance hierarchies and outperformance of naive search are presented as outcomes of those simulations (convergence, success probability, time complexity), not as quantities derived from or fitted to the paper's own equations. No self-definitional steps, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations appear in the provided abstract or methodology description. The derivation chain consists of standard simulation-based comparison and is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 0 assumptions · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identifiable from the provided text.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A Modular Benchmark of Variational Quantum Attack Algorithms for S-DES." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/WWKNAN2Z

@misc{pith2026260630143,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A Modular Benchmark of Variational Quantum Attack Algorithms for S-DES},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/WWKNAN2Z}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2606.30143}
}
read the original abstract

Variational quantum algorithms (VQAs) have emerged as a promising approach to quantum cryptanalysis on noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices. Although numerous variational attack schemes have been proposed for symmetric cryptosystems, a systematic and modular benchmarking framework to evaluate their performance is still lacking. In this work, we present a comprehensive benchmark study of variational quantum attacks on the Simplified Data Encryption Standard (S-DES), focusing on the modular design choices that determine attack efficiency. We formulate variational quantum attacks within a unified framework consisting of four components: initial state preparation, parameterized circuit (Ansatz) design, cost function construction, and classical optimization. Through numerical simulations, we systematically compare representative design alternatives and evaluate their combinations in terms of convergence behavior, success probability, and effective time complexity. We further introduce standardized metrics for assessing variational quantum attack performance. Our results reveal clear performance hierarchies among different modular configurations and show that carefully optimized designs can significantly outperform naive quantum search. This work establishes a principled benchmark methodology for variational quantum cryptanalysis and positions S-DES as a practical testbed for evaluating quantum attacks on symmetric ciphers in the NISQ era.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.30143 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2: Two Ansatz architectures. (a) A fully unitary Ansatz composed of alternating single-qubit [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3: The dependence of score on parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4: Complexity comparison under different learning rates: Each bar represents the average iteration count over [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5: Optimization results. (a) Evolution of the loss function as a function of the iteration number under the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

32 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P. W. Shor, inProceedings 35th annual symposium on foundations of computer science(Ieee, 1994) pp. 124–134

    1994

  2. [2]

    How to factor 2048 bit RSA integers with less than a million noisy qubits

    C. Gidney, How to factor 2048 bit RSA integers with less than a million noisy qubits, arXiv preprint arXiv:2505.15917 (2025)

    work page Pith review arXiv

  3. [3]

    R. L. Rivest, A. Shamir, and L. Adleman, A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems, Communications of the ACM21, 120 (1978)

    1978

  4. [4]

    L. K. Grover, inProceedings of the twenty-eighth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing(1996) pp. 212–219

    1996

  5. [5]

    Long, Grover algorithm with zero theoretical failure rate, Physical Review A64, 022307 (2001)

    G.-L. Long, Grover algorithm with zero theoretical failure rate, Physical Review A64, 022307 (2001)

    2001

  6. [6]

    Wang, S.-J

    Z.-G. Wang, S.-J. Wei, and G.-L. Long, A quantum circuit design of AES requiring fewer quantum qubits and gate operations, Frontiers of Physics17, 41501 (2022)

    2022

  7. [7]

    Z. Li, F. Gao, S. Qin, and Q. Wen, New record in the number of qubits for a quantum implementation of AES, Frontiers in Physics11, 1171753 (2023)

    2023

  8. [8]

    Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

    J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the NISQ era and beyond, Quantum2, 79 (2018)

    2018

Show all 32 references
  1. [9]

    Peruzzo, J

    A. Peruzzo, J. McClean, P. Shadbolt, M.-H. Yung, X.-Q. Zhou, P. J. Love, A. Aspuru-Guzik, and J. L. O’brien, A variational eigenvalue solver on a photonic quantum processor, Nature communications5, 4213 (2014). 13

    2014

  2. [10]

    Cerezo, A

    M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, K. Fujii, J. R. McClean, K. Mitarai, X. Yuan, L. Cincio, et al., Variational quantum algorithms, Nature Reviews Physics3, 625 (2021)

    2021

  3. [11]

    Farhi, J

    E. Farhi, J. Goldstone, and S. Gutmann, A quantum approximate optimization algorithm, arXiv preprint arXiv:1411.4028 (2014)

    2014 arXiv

  4. [12]

    McArdle, S

    S. McArdle, S. Endo, A. Aspuru-Guzik, S. C. Benjamin, and X. Yuan, Quantum computational chemistry, Reviews of Modern Physics92, 015003 (2020)

    2020

  5. [13]

    J. Wen, Z. Wang, C. Chen, J. Xiao, H. Li, L. Qian, Z. Huang, H. Fan, S. Wei, and G. Long, A full circuit-based quantum algorithm for excited-states in quantum chemistry, Quantum8, 1219 (2024)

    2024

  6. [14]

    Fauseweh, Quantum many-body simulations on digital quantum computers: State-of-the-art and future challenges, Nature Communications15, 2123 (2024)

    B. Fauseweh, Quantum many-body simulations on digital quantum computers: State-of-the-art and future challenges, Nature Communications15, 2123 (2024)

    2024

  7. [15]

    Z. Wang, S. Wei, G.-L. Long, and L. Hanzo, Variational quantum attacks threaten advanced encryption standard based symmetric cryptography, Science China Information Sciences65, 200503 (2022)

    2022

  8. [16]

    Z. Wang, M. Zheng, J. Wu, K. Wen, S. Wei, and G.-L. Long, Reducing quantum resources for attacking S-AES on quantum devices, npj Quantum Information11, 157 (2025)

    2025

  9. [17]

    Aizpurua, P

    B. Aizpurua, P. Bermejo, J. Etxezarreta Mart´ ınez, and R. Or´ us, Hacking cryptographic protocols with advanced variational quantum attacks, ACM Transactions on Quantum Computing6, 1 (2025)

    2025

  10. [18]

    E. F. Schaefer, A simplified data encryption standard algorithm, Cryptologia20, 77 (1996)

    1996

  11. [19]

    Jiacheng, L

    F. Jiacheng, L. Xizhe, Q. Sujuan, and G. Fei, Attack on Simplified DES Based on Variational Quantum Algorithm (in Chinese), Journal of China Academy of Electronics and Information Technology20, 331 (2025)

    2025

  12. [20]

    Ke¸ ceci, Quantum Error Correction Codes and Their Impact on Scalable Quantum Computation: Current Approaches and Future Perspectives, Zenodo Open Science Articles (2025)

    M. Ke¸ ceci, Quantum Error Correction Codes and Their Impact on Scalable Quantum Computation: Current Approaches and Future Perspectives, Zenodo Open Science Articles (2025)

    2025

  13. [21]

    Larocca, S

    M. Larocca, S. Thanasilp, S. Wang, K. Sharma, J. Biamonte, P. J. Coles, L. Cincio, J. R. McClean, Z. Holmes, and M. Cerezo, Barren plateaus in variational quantum computing, Nature Reviews Physics , 1 (2025)

    2025

  14. [22]

    H. Qi, L. Wang, H. Zhu, A. Gani, and C. Gong, The barren plateaus of quantum neural networks: review, taxonomy and trends., Quantum Information Processing22(2023)

    2023

  15. [23]

    Weimer, A

    H. Weimer, A. Kshetrimayum, and R. Or´ us, Simulation methods for open quantum many-body systems, Reviews of Modern Physics93, 015008 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    M. S. Daoud, M. Shehab, H. M. Al-Mimi, L. Abualigah, R. A. Zitar, and M. K. Y. Shambour, Gradient-based optimizer (GBO): a review, theory, variants, and applications, Archives of Computational Methods in Engineering30, 2431 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    J. A. Nelder and R. Mead, A simplex method for function minimization, The computer journal7, 308 (1965)

    1965

  18. [26]

    B¨ ack and H.-P

    T. B¨ ack and H.-P. Schwefel, An overview of evolutionary algorithms for parameter optimization, Evolutionary computation 1, 1 (1993)

    1993

  19. [27]

    S. Sim, P. D. Johnson, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, Expressibility and entangling capability of parameterized quantum circuits for hybrid quantum-classical algorithms, Advanced Quantum Technologies2, 1900070 (2019). 14 Appendix A: The details of S-DES Sub-key generation. The initial 1...

    2019

  20. [28]

    Combination I Combination I corresponds to the configuration with uniform superposition initialization, a unitary Ansatz, a 7-regular graph-structured cost function, and gradient descent optimization, as summarized in Table II. Following the same evaluation protocol as in Sect...

  21. [29]

    The number of Grover iterations is set to one

    Combination III Combination III corresponds to the configuration with Grover-enhanced state, a unitary Ansatz, a 7-regular graph- structured cost function, and gradient descent optimization, as summarized in Table II. The number of Grover iterations is set to one. Following th...

  22. [30]

    Combination IV Combination IV corresponds to the configuration with uniform superposition initialization, a unitary Ansatz, a 0-regular graph-structured cost function, and gradient descent optimization, as summarized in Table II. 21 Following the same evaluation protocol as in...

  23. [31]

    In the Nelder–Mead (N–M) algorithm, the initial simplex is constructed as follows

    Combination V Combination V corresponds to the configuration with uniform superposition initialization, a unitary Ansatz, a 0-regular graph-structured cost function, and Nelder–Mead optimization, as summarized in Table II. In the Nelder–Mead (N–M) algorithm, the initial simple...

  24. [32]

    The hyperparameter settings are the same as those in the previous section

    Combination VI Combination VI corresponds to the configuration with Grover-enhanced initialization, a unitary Ansatz, a 0-regular graph-structured cost function, and Nelder–Mead optimization, as summarized in Table II. The hyperparameter settings are the same as those in the p...

Pith tools

Reviewed June 30, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.