Entropy test results
Test run: 27 July 2026 · Published: 10 August 2026
This page publishes the statistical test results behind the randomness claim on our homepage, plus enough method to let you re-run them against the live API yourself.
What was tested
One million bits pulled from the live QuantumRand API in 245 sequential calls
(business-tier key, 4,096 bits per call), while the service reported
real_quantum_seeded=true — that is, while its generator was seeded from real
IBM quantum hardware. The same battery was then run on one million bits from
/dev/urandom as a control, to check the test harness itself.
Seven tests from the NIST SP 800-22 suite, at a significance level of α = 0.01. This is a seven-test subset, not the complete fifteen-test suite — see what this is not.
| Test | p-value | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Monobit (frequency) | 0.99362 | Pass |
| Block frequency | 0.35037 | Pass |
| Runs | 0.69358 | Pass |
| Longest run of ones | 0.78545 | Pass |
| Cumulative sums | 0.98526 | Pass |
| Approximate entropy | 0.97349 | Pass |
| Discrete Fourier transform (spectral) | 0.67293 | Pass |
| Test | p-value | Verdict |
|---|---|---|
| Monobit (frequency) | 0.56057 | Pass |
| Block frequency | 0.71675 | Pass |
| Runs | 0.26801 | Pass |
| Longest run of ones | 0.24866 | Pass |
| Cumulative sums | 0.85547 | Pass |
| Approximate entropy | 0.06922 | Pass |
| Discrete Fourier transform (spectral) | 0.40886 | Pass |
What this shows — and what it does not
Both sources pass all seven tests. That is the expected and correct result, and we want to be precise about what it means.
- It shows that QuantumRand's output is statistically indistinguishable from ideal randomness on these tests. Nothing in the delivery path — the generator, the entropy pool, the API — is introducing detectable structure.
- It does not show that our output is "more random" than a good classical
generator. It isn't, and no statistical test could show that:
/dev/urandompasses too. Any vendor claiming otherwise is misreading their own results. - It is not the complete SP 800-22 suite. Seven of the fifteen tests are implemented. It is also not a NIST certification, an accredited lab result, or a validation of any kind — it is our own test run, published so you can check it.
What the quantum seed actually buys you is provenance: the seed originates in quantum hardware rather than a formula, and every API response is labelled with the source that produced it. That is a supply-chain property, not a per-bit statistical one.
Re-running it yourself
The battery is deliberately reproducible. With an API key, pull a million bits and run any
SP 800-22 implementation over them — ours, NIST's reference suite, or
dieharder. Bits arrive as hex; n is the number of bits
(a multiple of 4, at most 4096 per call):
curl -H "X-API-Key: $QR_KEY" \
"https://quantumrand.dev/generate/hex?n=4096"
Repeat to your sample size, concatenate, convert hex to a bitstream, and test. Check the
source field on each response so you know what you measured, and
/health for the seed state at the time of your
run — seed_source and real_quantum_seeded tell you whether the
generator was on a real hardware seed or a labelled fallback.
Expect p-values to differ from ours. They should: each run is a fresh sample, and a p-value is not a score. A single test falling below α on one run is ordinary sampling behaviour, not a defect — that is what α = 0.01 means.
Questions about the method
If you want the exact runner we used, or you re-run this and get a result you can't reconcile with ours, email hello@qntyx.io and we'll share the harness and compare notes.