Finite-Size Analysis of Prepare-and-Measure and Decoy-State Quantum Key Distribution via Entropy Accumulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An important goal in quantum key distribution (QKD) is the task of providing a finite-size security proof without the assumption of collective attacks. For prepare-and-measure QKD, one approach for obtaining such proofs is the generalized entropy-accumulation theorem (GEAT) but thus far it has only been applied to study a small selection of protocols. In this work, we present techniques for applying the GEAT in finite-size analysis of generic prepare-and-measure protocols, with a focus on decoy-state protocols. In particular, we present an improved approach for computing entropy bounds for decoy-state protocols, which has the dual benefits of providing tighter bounds than previous approaches (even asymptotically) and being compatible with methods for computing min-trade-off functions in the GEAT. Furthermore, we develop methods to incorporate some improvements to the finite-size terms in the GEAT and implement techniques to automatically optimize the min-trade-off function. Our approach also addresses some numerical-stability challenges specific to prepare-and-measure protocols, which have not been addressed in previous works.
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 | 0.005 | 0.023 |
| 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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| 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".