MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Entropy Bounds for Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution with Local Bell Test

2024· article· en· W4402641121 on OpenAlexafffund
Ernest Y.-Z. Tan, Ramona Wolf

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaQuantERAAir Force Office of Scientific ResearchEidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichUniversity of WaterlooMinisterium für Kultur und Wissenschaft des Landes Nordrhein-WestfalenNational Centres of Competence in Research SwissMAPInnovation, Science and Economic Development Canada
KeywordsQuantum key distributionBell test experimentsQuantum mechanicsKey (lock)Statistical physicsComputer sciencePhysicsEntropy (arrow of time)QuantumBell's theoremQuantum entanglement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the main challenges in device-independent quantum key distribution (DIQKD) is achieving the required Bell violation over long distances, as the channel losses result in low overall detection efficiencies. Recent works have explored the concept of certifying nonlocal correlations over extended distances through the use of a local Bell test. Here, an additional quantum device is placed in close proximity to one party, using short-distance correlations to verify nonlocal behavior at long distances. However, existing works have either not resolved the question of DIQKD security against active attackers in this setup, or used methods that do not yield tight bounds on the key rates. In this work, we introduce a general formulation of the key rate computation task in this setup that can be combined with recently developed methods for analyzing standard DIQKD. Using this method, we show that if the short-distance devices exhibit sufficiently high detection efficiencies, positive key rates can be achieved in the long-distance branch with lower detection efficiencies as compared to standard DIQKD setups. This highlights the potential for improved performance of DIQKD over extended distances in scenarios where short-distance correlations are leveraged to validate quantum correlations.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.008
Open science0.0030.006
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.258 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207