The DOI matches its Crossref record.
BLIND QUANTUM COMPUTATION
Abstract
We investigate the possibility of having someone carry out the work of executing a function for you, but without letting him learn anything about your input. Say Alice wants Bob to compute some known function f upon her input x, but wants to prevent Bob from learning anything about x. The situation arises for instance if client Alice has limited computational resources in comparison with mistrusted server Bob, or if x is an inherently mobile piece of data. Could there be a protocol whereby Bob is forced to compute ,f(x)blindly, i.e. without observing x? We provide such a blind computation protocol for the class of functions which admit an efficient procedure to generate random input–output pairs, e.g. factorization. The cheat-sensitive security achieved relies only upon quantum theory being true. The security analysis carried out assumes the eavesdropper performs individual attacks.
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.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The first experimental demonstrations of verifiable blind quantum computing were performed using polarization qubits represented by multi-photon states generated via parametric down-conversion.
“We have shortly described in Section 2.2.2 the first experimental demonstrations of verifiable blind quantum computing, performed using polarization qubits represented by multi-photon states generated via parametric down-conversion [437,444,455,456]”
From Photonic quantum information processing: a review (2019) · cites this paper as [455]
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
No references could be resolved yet.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Photonic quantum information processing: a review
Flamini, F., Spagnolo, N., & Sciarrino, F. (2019) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/1361-6633/aad5b2 · Cited by 770
Demonstration of Blind Quantum Computing
Barz, S., Kashefi, E., Broadbent, A., Fitzsimons, J. F., Zeilinger, A., & Walther, P. (2012) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1214707 · Cited by 475
Universal Blind Quantum Computation
Broadbent, A., Fitzsimons, J., & Kashefi, E. (2009) · 2009 50th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science · doi:10.1109/focs.2009.36 · Cited by 521
Metadata
- Authors
- ARRIGHI, P., & SALVAIL, L.
- Venue
- International Journal of Quantum Information
- Publisher
- World Scientific Pub Co Pte Lt
- Published
- 2006-10
- Volume
- 04
- Issue
- 05
- Pages
- 883-898
- ISSN
- 0219-7499
- 1793-6918
- Cited by
- 118
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
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
