MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950141386 · doi:10.26421/qic9.1-2-8

Security proof of quantum key distribution with detection efficiency mismatch

2009· article· en· W2950141386 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantum Information and Computation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum key distributionKey (lock)Computer scienceDetectorSet (abstract data type)Spectral efficiencyQuantumKey generationTheoretical computer scienceAlgorithmPhysicsQuantum mechanicsCryptographyComputer networkComputer securityTelecommunicationsChannel (broadcasting)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In theory, quantum key distribution (QKD) offers unconditional security based on the laws of physics. However, as demonstrated in recent quantum hacking theory and experimental papers, detection efficiency loophole can be fatal to the security of practical QKD systems. Here, we describe the physical origin of detection efficiency mismatch in various domains including spatial, spectral, and time domains and in various experimental set-ups. More importantly, we prove the unconditional security of QKD even with detection efficiency mismatch. We explicitly show how the key generation rate is characterized by the maximal detection efficiency ratio between the two detectors. Furthermore, we prove that by randomly switching the bit assignments of the detectors, the effect of detection efficiency mismatch can be completely eliminated.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.958
Threshold uncertainty score0.623

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 communication0.0000.003
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.211 · 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