MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060392644 · doi:10.1103/physreva.89.062305

Quantum fingerprinting with coherent states and a constant mean number of photons

2014· article· en· W2060392644 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Miguel Arrazola, Norbert Lütkenhaus

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review A · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperposition principleQubitBeam splitterPhotonTRACE (psycholinguistics)Protocol (science)Coherent statesQuantumConstant (computer programming)PhysicsQuantum stateQuantum mechanicsStatistical physicsComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a protocol for quantum fingerprinting that is ready to be implemented with current technology and is robust to experimental errors. The basis of our scheme is an implementation of the signal states in terms of a coherent state in a superposition of time-bin modes. Experimentally, this requires only the ability to prepare coherent states of low amplitude and to interfere them in a balanced beam splitter. The states used in the protocol are arbitrarily close in trace distance to states of $O({log}_{2}n)$ qubits, thus exhibiting an exponential separation in abstract communication complexity compared to the classical case. The protocol uses a number of optical modes that is proportional to the size $n$ of the input bit strings but a total mean photon number that is constant and independent of $n$. Given the expended resources, our protocol achieves a task that is provably impossible using classical communication only. In fact, even in the presence of realistic experimental errors and loss, we show that there exist a large range of input sizes for which our quantum protocol transmits an amount of information that can be more than two orders of magnitude smaller than a classical fingerprinting protocol.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations61
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review ASame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207