MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Laser-seeding Attack in Quantum Key Distribution

2019· article· en· W2917323542 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Applied · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersH2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie ActionsAtlantic Research Center for Information and Communication TechnologiesNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaChina Scholarship CouncilMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadEuropean Regional Development FundHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeFederación Española de Enfermedades RarasNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsQuantum key distributionBB84Key (lock)LaserPhotonQuantumQuantum cryptographyLine (geometry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For effective quantum communication, the security of the photon source is particularly important in the era of measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution (MDI-QKD) and twin-field QKD (TF-QKD). In practice, the security of the source can still be cracked by an adversary. This study experimentally demonstrates that a practical source based on a semiconductor laser diode is vulnerable to a laser-seeding attack, in which light injected from the communication line into the laser yields increased intensities of the prepared states. Theory shows that the unnoticed intensity increase compromises the security of the prepare-and-measure decoy-state BB84 and MDI-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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations98
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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