Improved Decoy-state and Flag-state Squashing Methods
Abstract: In this work, we present an improved analysis for decoy-state methods, enhancing both achievable key rates and recovering analytical results for the single intensity scenario. Our primary focus is improving the shortcomings observed in current decoy-state methods, particularly recovering results when employing no decoy intensities. Our methods enable the continuous interpolation across varying numbers of intensity settings. Additionally, we extend decoy-state techniques to encompass scenarios where intensities vary depending on the signal state, thereby relaxing the constraints on experimental implementations. Our findings demonstrate that a minimum of two intensities are sufficient for high asymptotic secret key rates, thereby further softening experimental requirements. Additionally, we address inherent imperfections within detection setups like imperfect beamsplitters. We derive provable secure lower bounds on the subspace population estimation, which is required for certain squashing methods such as the flag-state squasher. These analytical bounds allow us to encompass arbitrary passive linear optical setups, and together with intensities varying with each signal state, lets us include a broad class of experimental setups.
- N. Lütkenhaus, Security against individual attacks for realistic quantum key distribution, Physical Review A 61, 052304 (2000).
- W. Y. Hwang, Quantum Key Distribution with High Loss: Toward Global Secure Communication, Physical Review Letters 91, 057901 (2002).
- X.-B. Wang, Beating the Photon-Number-Splitting Attack in Practical Quantum Cryptography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 230503 (2005).
- P. Rice and J. Harrington, Numerical analysis of decoy state quantum key distribution protocols (2009), arxiv:0901.0013 [quant-ph] .
- W. Wang and N. Lütkenhaus, Numerical security proof for the decoy-state BB84 protocol and measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution resistant against large basis misalignment, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, 043097 (2022).
- S. Nahar, T. Upadhyaya, and N. Lütkenhaus, Imperfect Phase-Randomisation and Generalised Decoy-State Quantum Key Distribution (2023), arxiv:2304.09401 [quant-ph] .
- N. K. H. Li and N. Lütkenhaus, Improving key rates of the unbalanced phase-encoded BB84 protocol using the flag-state squashing model, Phys. Rev. Research 2, 043172 (2020).
- A. Winick, N. Lütkenhaus, and P. J. Coles, Reliable numerical key rates for quantum key distribution, Quantum 2, 77 (2018).
- N. J. Beaudry, T. Moroder, and N. Lütkenhaus, Squashing Models for Optical Measurements in Quantum Communication, Physical Review Letters 101, 093601 (2008).
- U. Leonhardt, Quantum physics of simple optical instruments, Rep. Prog. Phys. 66, 1207 (2003).
- J. Lin, T. Upadhyaya, and N. Lütkenhaus, Asymptotic Security Analysis of Discrete-Modulated Continuous-Variable Quantum Key Distribution, Phys. Rev. X 9, 041064 (2019).
- C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, and N. D. Mermin, Quantum cryptography without Bell’s theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 557 (1992).
- A. Ferenczi and N. Lütkenhaus, Symmetries in quantum key distribution and the connection between optimal attacks and optimal cloning, Phys. Rev. A 85, 052310 (2012).
Paper Prompts
Sign up for free to create and run prompts on this paper using GPT-5.
Top Community Prompts
Collections
Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.