MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086393500 · doi:10.1103/physreva.76.012307

Quantum key distribution with entangled photon sources

2007· article· en· W2086393500 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

VenuePhysical Review A · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsQuantum key distributionQuantum entanglementPhysicsPhotonKey (lock)Computer scienceCoherent statesPhoton entanglementChannel (broadcasting)Quantum channelQuantum mechanicsQuantumComputer networkComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A parametric down-conversion (PDC) source can be used as either a triggered single-photon source or an entangled-photon source in quantum key distribution (QKD). The triggering PDC QKD has already been studied in the literature. On the other hand, a model and a post-processing protocol for the entanglement PDC QKD are still missing. We fill in this important gap by proposing such a model and a post-processing protocol for the entanglement PDC QKD. Although the PDC model is proposed to study the entanglement-based QKD, we emphasize that our generic model may also be useful for other non-QKD experiments involving a PDC source. Since an entangled PDC source is a basis-independent source, we apply Koashi and Preskill's security analysis to the entanglement PDC QKD. We also investigate the entanglement PDC QKD with two-way classical communications. We find that the recurrence scheme increases the key rate and the Gottesman-Lo protocol helps tolerate higher channel losses. By simulating a recent $144\text{\ensuremath{-}}\mathrm{km}$ open-air PDC experiment, we compare three implementations: entanglement PDC QKD, triggering PDC QKD, and coherent-state QKD. The simulation result suggests that the entanglement PDC QKD can tolerate higher channel losses than the coherent-state QKD. The coherent-state QKD with decoy states is able to achieve highest key rate in the low- and medium-loss regions. By applying the Gottesman-Lo two-way post-processing protocol, the entanglement PDC QKD can tolerate up to $70\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\mathrm{dB}$ combined channel losses ($35\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\mathrm{dB}$ for each channel) provided that the PDC source is placed in between Alice and Bob. After considering statistical fluctuations, the PDC setup can tolerate up to $53\phantom{\rule{0.3em}{0ex}}\mathrm{dB}$ channel losses.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.267
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