MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996861426 · doi:10.1142/s0129626410000181

ENTANGLEMENT VERIFICATION WITH AN APPLICATION TO QUANTUM KEY DISTRIBUTION PROTOCOLS

2010· article· en· W1996861426 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueParallel Processing Letters · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum entanglementQuantum key distributionComputer scienceQubitQuantum cryptographyTheoretical computer scienceProtocol (science)Quantum teleportationBell stateCryptographyQuantum networkQuantumQuantum mechanicsQuantum informationAlgorithmPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop an entanglement verification method not based on Bell inequalities, that achieves a higher reliability per number of qubits tested than existing procedures of this kind. Used in a quantum cryptographic context, the method gives rise to a new protocol for distributing classical keys through insecure quantum channels. The cost of quantum and classical communication is significantly reduced in the new protocol, while its security is increased with respect to other entanglement-based protocols exchanging the same number of qubits. To achieve this performance, our scheme relies on a simple quantum circuit and the ability to store qubits.

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)0.000
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 score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.257 · 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