MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1992938819 · doi:10.1007/s10623-015-0067-5

Finding shortest lattice vectors faster using quantum search

2015· article· en· W1992938819 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDesigns Codes and Cryptography · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of WaterlooCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
FundersEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilCanadian Institute for Advanced ResearchInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueLorentz CenterNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsLattice problemQuantumLattice (music)Computer scienceTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmPhysicsQuantum mechanicsCryptography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By applying a quantum search algorithm to various heuristic and provable sieve algorithms from the literature, we obtain improved asymptotic quantum results for solving the shortest vector problem on lattices. With quantum computers we can provably find a shortest vector in time $$2^{1.799n + o(n)}$$ , improving upon the classical time complexities of $$2^{2.465n + o(n)}$$ of Pujol and Stehlé and the $$2^{2n + o(n)}$$ of Micciancio and Voulgaris, while heuristically we expect to find a shortest vector in time $$2^{0.268n + o(n)}$$ , improving upon the classical time complexity of $$2^{0.298n + o(n)}$$ of Laarhoven and De Weger. These quantum complexities will be an important guide for the selection of parameters for post-quantum cryptosystems based on the hardness of the shortest vector problem.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.800

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.212 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it