Machine learning for optimal parameter prediction in quantum key distribution
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For a practical quantum key distribution (QKD) system, parameter optimization, the choice of intensities and the probabilities of sending them, is a crucial step in gaining optimal performance, especially when one realistically considers a finite communication time. With the increasing interest in the field to implement QKD over free space on moving platforms, such as drones, handheld systems, and even satellites, one needs to perform parameter optimization with low latency and with very limited computing power. Moreover, with the advent of the internet of things, a highly attractive direction of QKD could be a quantum network with multiple devices and numerous connections, which provides a huge computational challenge for the controller that optimizes parameters for a large-scale network. Traditionally, such an optimization relies on brute-force search or local search algorithms, which are computationally intensive, and will be slow on low-power platforms (which increases latency in the system) or infeasible for even moderately large networks. In this work we present a method that uses a neural network to directly predict the optimal parameters for QKD systems. We test our machine learning algorithm on hardware devices including a Raspberry Pi 3 single-board computer (similar devices are commonly used on drones) and a mobile phone, both of which have a power consumption of less than 5 W, and we find a speedup of up to two to four orders of magnitude when compared to standard local search algorithms. The predicted parameters are highly accurate and can preserve, e.g., over 95%--99% of the optimal secure key rate for a given protocol. Moreover, our approach is highly general and can be applied effectively to various kinds of common QKD protocols.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".