Finite-Key Analysis of Quantum Key Distribution with Characterized Devices Using Entropy Accumulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Entropy Accumulation Theorem (EAT) was introduced to significantly improve the finite-size rates for device-independent quantum information processing tasks such as device-independent quantum key distribution (QKD). A natural question would be whether it also improves the rates for device-dependent QKD. In this work, we provide an affirmative answer to this question. We present new tools for applying the EAT in the device-dependent setting. We present sufficient conditions for the Markov chain conditions to hold as well as general algorithms for constructing the needed min-tradeoff function. Utilizing Dupuis' recent privacy amplification without smoothing result, we improve the key rate by optimizing the sandwiched Rényi entropy directly rather than considering the traditional smooth min-entropy. We exemplify these new tools by considering several examples including the BB84 protocol with the qubit-based version and with a realistic parametric down-conversion source, the six-state four-state protocol and a high-dimensional analog of the BB84 protocol.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| 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 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".