Quantum Complementarity Approach to Device-Independent Security
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Complementarity is an essential feature of quantum mechanics. The preparation of an eigenstate of one observable implies complete randomness in its complementary observable. In quantum cryptography, complementarity allows us to formulate security analyses in terms of phase-error correction. However, the concept becomes much subtler in the device-independent regime that offers security without device characterization. Security proofs of device-independent quantum cryptography tasks are often complex and quite different from those of their more standard device-dependent cousins. The existing proofs pose huge challenges to experiments, among which large data-size requirement is a crux. Here, we show the complementarity security origin of the device-independent tasks. By linking complementarity with quantum nonlocality, we recast the device-independent scheme into a quantum error correction protocol. Going beyond the identical-and-independent-distribution case, we consider the most general attack. We generalize the sample entropy in classical Shannon theory for the finite-size analysis. Our method exhibits good finite-size performance and brings the device-independent scheme to a more practical regime. Applying it to the data in a recent ion-trap-based device-independent quantum key distribution experiment, one could reduce the requirement on data size to less than a third. Furthermore, the operational meaning of complementarity naturally extends device-independent scenarios to advantage key distillation, easing experiments by tolerating higher loss and lower transmittance.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".