The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Tight finite-key analysis for quantum cryptography
Open accessAbstract
Despite enormous theoretical and experimental progress in quantum cryptography, the security of most current implementations of quantum key distribution is still not rigorously established. One significant problem is that the security of the final key strongly depends on the number, M, of signals exchanged between the legitimate parties. Yet, existing security proofs are often only valid asymptotically, for unrealistically large values of M. Another challenge is that most security proofs are very sensitive to small differences between the physical devices used by the protocol and the theoretical model used to describe them. Here we show that these gaps between theory and experiment can be simultaneously overcome by using a recently developed proof technique based on the uncertainty relation for smooth entropies. Although they offer significant promise, practical implementations of quantum key distribution are often not as rigorous as theory predicts. This study demonstrates how two instances of such discrepancies can be resolved by taking advantage of an enotropic formulation of the uncertainty principle.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem
Ekert, A. K. (1991) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.67.661 · Cited by 10,777
Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing
Bennett, C. H., & Brassard, G. (2014) · Theoretical Computer Science · doi:10.1016/j.tcs.2014.05.025 · Cited by 8,299
A Fully Quantum Asymptotic Equipartition Property
Tomamichel, M., Colbeck, R., & Renner, R. (2009) · IEEE Transactions on Information Theory · doi:10.1109/tit.2009.2032797 · Cited by 356
Self-citationUniversally Composable Privacy Amplification Against Quantum Adversaries
Renner, R., & König, R. (2005) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30576-7_22 · Cited by 337
Self-citation
Cited by
Advances in quantum cryptography
Pirandola, S., Andersen, U. L., Banchi, L., Berta, M., Bunandar, D., Colbeck, R., Englund, D., Gehring, T., Lupo, C., Ottaviani, C., et al. (2020) · Advances in Optics and Photonics · doi:10.1364/aop.361502 · Cited by 2,033
Self-citationSecure quantum key distribution with realistic devices
Xu, F., Ma, X., Zhang, Q., Lo, H.-K., & Pan, J.-W. (2020) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.92.025002 · Cited by 1,543
Entropic uncertainty relations and their applications
Coles, P. J., Berta, M., Tomamichel, M., & Wehner, S. (2017) · Reviews of Modern Physics · doi:10.1103/revmodphys.89.015002 · Cited by 658
Self-citationQuantum steering: a review with focus on semidefinite programming
Cavalcanti, D., & Skrzypczyk, P. (2017) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6633/80/2/024001 · Cited by 454
Concise security bounds for practical decoy-state quantum key distribution
Lim, C. C. W., Curty, M., Walenta, N., Xu, F., & Zbinden, H. (2014) · Physical Review A · doi:10.1103/physreva.89.022307 · Cited by 400
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Tomamichel, M., Lim, C. C. W., Gisin, N., & Renner, R.
- Venue
- Nature Communications
- Published
- 2012-01-17
- Volume
- 3
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 634-634
- ISSN
- 2041-1723 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2170240091
- Cited by
- 634
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 38.95
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.