MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2725746804 · doi:10.7146/brics.v10i3.21774

On the Computational Collapse of Quantum Information

2003· article· en· W2725746804 on OpenAlexaff
Claude Crépeau, Paul Dumais, Dominic Mayers, Louis Salvail

Bibliographic record

VenueBRICS Report Series · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeMcGill University
FundersDanmarks GrundforskningsfondNational Research Foundation
KeywordsOblivious transferCommitment schemeComputer scienceQuantumTheoretical computer scienceCommunication sourceQuantum capacityString (physics)Quantum computerPredicate (mathematical logic)MathematicsDiscrete mathematicsComputationQuantum networkCryptographyAlgorithmQuantum mechanicsPhysicsComputer network

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyze the situation where computationally binding string commitment schemes are used to force the receiver of a BB84 encoding of a classical bitstring to measure upon reception. Since measuring induces an irreversible collapse to the received quantum state, even given extra information after the measurement does not allow the receiver to evaluate reliably some predicates apply to the classical bits encoded in the state. This fundamental quantum primitive is called quantum measure commitment (QMC) and allows for secure two-party computation of classical functions. An adversary to QMC is one that can both provide valid proof of having measured the received states while still able to evaluate a predicate applied to the classical content of the encoding. We give the first quantum black-box reduction for the security of QMC to the binding property of the string commitment. We characterize a class of quantum adversaries against QMC that can be transformed into adversaries against a weak form for the binding property of the string commitment. Our result provides a construction for 1--2-oblivious transfer that is computationally secure against the receiver and unconditionally secure against the sender from any string commitment scheme satisfying a weak binding property.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0030.007
Open science0.0020.008
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBRICS Report SeriesSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207