Practical private database queries based on a quantum-key-distribution protocol
Why is this work in the frame?
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Full frame distilled prediction
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.
- Candidate categories
- none
- Consensus categories
- none
- Domain
- Candidate signal: noneConsensus signal: none
- Study design
- Candidate signal: Theoretical or conceptualConsensus signal: none
- Genre
- Candidate signal: MethodsConsensus signal: none
- Teacher disagreement score
- 0.951
- Threshold uncertainty score
- 0.622
- Validation status
machine_predicted_unvalidated·codex-gemma-dda1882f352a
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
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.
- Teacher spread
- 0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
- Validation status
score_only:v0-immature-baseline· verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it
Abstract
Private queries allow a user, Alice, to learn an element of a database held by a provider, Bob, without revealing which element she is interested in, while limiting her information about the other elements. We propose to implement private queries based on a quantum-key-distribution protocol, with changes only in the classical postprocessing of the key. This approach makes our scheme both easy to implement and loss tolerant. While unconditionally secure private queries are known to be impossible, we argue that an interesting degree of security can be achieved by relying on fundamental physical principles instead of unverifiable security assumptions in order to protect both the user and the database. We think that the scope exists for such practical private queries to become another remarkable application of quantum information in the footsteps of quantum key distribution.
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.
The record
- Venue
- Physical Review A
- Topic
- Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Field
- Computer Science
- Canadian institutions
- University of Calgary
- Funders
- not available
- Keywords
- Computer scienceQuantum key distributionProtocol (science)Private information retrievalElement (criminal law)Key (lock)Database securityKey distributionDatabaseScope (computer science)Computer securityLimitingQuantumPublic-key cryptographyTheoretical computer scienceEncryptionEngineering
- Has abstract in OpenAlex
- yes