MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388444328 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.01600

Security Proof for Variable-Length Quantum Key Distribution

2023· preprint· en· W4388444328 on OpenAlexafffund
Devashish Tupkary, Ernest Y.-Z. Tan, Norbert Lütkenhaus

Bibliographic record

VenuearXiv (Cornell University) · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersUniversity of WaterlooNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsQuantum key distributionComputer scienceMathematical proofProtocol (science)Variable (mathematics)Key (lock)QubitPostselectionImplementationCryptographic protocolBB84Theoretical computer scienceQuantum cryptographyCryptographyAlgorithmMathematicsComputer securityQuantumQuantum informationQuantum mechanicsProgramming languagePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present a security proof for variable-length QKD in the Renner framework against IID collective attacks. Our proof can be lifted to coherent attacks using the postselection technique. Our first main result is a theorem to convert a series of security proofs for fixed-length protocols satisfying certain conditions to a security proof for a variable-length protocol. This conversion requires no new calculations, does not require any changes to the final key lengths or the amount of error-correction information, and at most doubles the security parameter. Our second main result is the description and security proof of a more general class of variable-length QKD protocols, which does not require characterizing the honest behaviour of the channel connecting the users before the execution of the QKD protocol. Instead, these protocols adaptively determine the length of the final key, and the amount of information to be used for error-correction, based upon the observations made during the protocol. We apply these results to the qubit BB84 protocol, and show that variable-length implementations lead to higher expected key rates than the fixed-length implementations.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.006
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.129 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuearXiv (Cornell University)→Same topicQuantum Information and Cryptography→French-language works237,207→