diff options
author | Prefetch | 2022-10-20 18:25:31 +0200 |
---|---|---|
committer | Prefetch | 2022-10-20 18:25:31 +0200 |
commit | 16555851b6514a736c5c9d8e73de7da7fc9b6288 (patch) | |
tree | 76b8bfd30f8941d0d85365990bcdbc5d0643cabc /source/know/concept/bb84-protocol | |
parent | e5b9bce79b68a68ddd2e51daa16d2fea73b84fdb (diff) |
Migrate from 'jekyll-katex' to 'kramdown-math-sskatex'
Diffstat (limited to 'source/know/concept/bb84-protocol')
-rw-r--r-- | source/know/concept/bb84-protocol/index.md | 50 |
1 files changed, 25 insertions, 25 deletions
diff --git a/source/know/concept/bb84-protocol/index.md b/source/know/concept/bb84-protocol/index.md index 1091773..0f75930 100644 --- a/source/know/concept/bb84-protocol/index.md +++ b/source/know/concept/bb84-protocol/index.md @@ -26,8 +26,8 @@ because the later stages of the protocol involve revealing parts of the data over the (insecure) classical channel. For each bit, Alice randomly chooses a qubit basis, -either $\{ \Ket{0}, \Ket{1} \}$ (eigenstates of the $z$-spin $\hat{\sigma}_z$) -or $\{ \Ket{-}, \Ket{+} \}$ (eigenstates of the $x$-spin $\hat{\sigma}_x$). +either $$\{ \Ket{0}, \Ket{1} \}$$ (eigenstates of the $$z$$-spin $$\hat{\sigma}_z$$) +or $$\{ \Ket{-}, \Ket{+} \}$$ (eigenstates of the $$x$$-spin $$\hat{\sigma}_x$$). Using the basis she chose, she then transmits the bits to Bob over the quantum channel, encoding them as follows: @@ -38,7 +38,7 @@ $$\begin{aligned} \end{aligned}$$ Crucially, Bob has no idea which basis Alice used for any of the bits. -For every bit, he chooses $\hat{\sigma}_z$ or $\hat{\sigma}_x$ at random, +For every bit, he chooses $$\hat{\sigma}_z$$ or $$\hat{\sigma}_x$$ at random, and makes a measurement of the qubit, yielding 0 or 1. If he guessed the basis correctly, he gets the bit value intended by Alice, but if he guessed incorrectly, he randomly gets 0 or 1 with a 50-50 probability: @@ -67,7 +67,7 @@ Suppose that Eve is performing an *intercept-resend attack* (not very effective, but simple), where she listens on the quantum channel. For each qubit received from Alice, Eve chooses -$\hat{\sigma}_z$ or $\hat{\sigma}_x$ at random and measures it. +$$\hat{\sigma}_z$$ or $$\hat{\sigma}_x$$ at random and measures it. She records her results and resends the qubits to Bob using the basis she chose, which may or may not be what Alice intended. @@ -105,17 +105,17 @@ In practice, even without Eve, quantum channels are imperfect, and will introduce some errors in the qubits received by Bob. Suppose that after basis reconciliation, Alice and Bob have the strings -$\{a_1, ..., a_N\}$ and $\{b_1, ..., b_N\}$, respectively. -We define $p$ as the probability that Alice and Bob agree on the $n$th bit, +$$\{a_1, ..., a_N\}$$ and $$\{b_1, ..., b_N\}$$, respectively. +We define $$p$$ as the probability that Alice and Bob agree on the $$n$$th bit, which we assume to be greater than 50%: $$\begin{aligned} p = P(a_n = b_n) > \frac{1}{2} \end{aligned}$$ -Ideally, $p = 1$. To improve $p$, the following simple scheme can be used: -starting at $n = 1$, Alice and Bob reveal $A$ and $B$ over the classical channel, -where $\oplus$ is an XOR: +Ideally, $$p = 1$$. To improve $$p$$, the following simple scheme can be used: +starting at $$n = 1$$, Alice and Bob reveal $$A$$ and $$B$$ over the classical channel, +where $$\oplus$$ is an XOR: $$\begin{aligned} A = a_n \oplus a_{n+1} @@ -123,12 +123,12 @@ $$\begin{aligned} B = b_n \oplus b_{n+1} \end{aligned}$$ -If $A = B$, then $a_{n+1}$ and $b_{n+1}$ are discarded to prevent +If $$A = B$$, then $$a_{n+1}$$ and $$b_{n+1}$$ are discarded to prevent a listener on the classical channel from learning anything about the string. -If $A \neq B$, all of $a_n$, $b_n$, $a_{n+1}$ and $b_{n+1}$ are discarded, -and then Alice and Bob move on to $n = 3$, etc. +If $$A \neq B$$, all of $$a_n$$, $$b_n$$, $$a_{n+1}$$ and $$b_{n+1}$$ are discarded, +and then Alice and Bob move on to $$n = 3$$, etc. -Given that $A = B$, the probability that $a_n = b_n$, +Given that $$A = B$$, the probability that $$a_n = b_n$$, which is what we want, is given by: $$\begin{aligned} @@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ $$\begin{aligned} &= \frac{P(a_{n} = b_{n}) \: P(a_{n+1} = b_{n+1})}{P(a_{n} = b_{n}) \: P(a_{n+1} = b_{n+1}) + P(a_{n} \neq b_{n}) \: P(a_{n+1} \neq b_{n+1})} \end{aligned}$$ -We use the definition of $p$ to get the following inequality, +We use the definition of $$p$$ to get the following inequality, which can be verified by plotting: $$\begin{aligned} @@ -150,9 +150,9 @@ $$\begin{aligned} \end{aligned}$$ Alice and Bob can repeat this error correction scheme multiple times, -until their estimate of $p$ is satisfactory. +until their estimate of $$p$$ is satisfactory. This involves discarding many bits, -so the length $N_\mathrm{new}$ of the string they end up with +so the length $$N_\mathrm{new}$$ of the string they end up with after one iteration is given by: $$\begin{aligned} @@ -166,11 +166,11 @@ More efficient schemes exist, which do not consume so many bits. ## Privacy amplification -Suppose that after the error correction step, $p = 1$, +Suppose that after the error correction step, $$p = 1$$, so Alice and Bob fully agree on the random string. However, in the meantime, Eve has been listening, and has been doing a good job -building up her own string $\{e_1, ..., e_N\}$, +building up her own string $$\{e_1, ..., e_N\}$$, such that she knows more that 50% of the bits: $$\begin{aligned} @@ -178,9 +178,9 @@ $$\begin{aligned} \end{aligned}$$ **Privacy amplification** is an optional final step of the BB84 protocol -which aims to reduce Eve's $q$. +which aims to reduce Eve's $$q$$. Alice and Bob use their existing strings to generate a new one -$\{a_1', ..., a_M'\}$: +$$\{a_1', ..., a_M'\}$$: $$\begin{aligned} a_1' @@ -197,8 +197,8 @@ more efficient schemes exist, which consume less. To see why this improves Alice and Bob's privacy, suppose that Eve is following along, -and creates a new string $\{e_1', ..., e_M'\}$ -where $e_m' = e_{2m - 1} \oplus e_{2m}$. +and creates a new string $$\{e_1', ..., e_M'\}$$ +where $$e_m' = e_{2m - 1} \oplus e_{2m}$$. The probability that Eve's result agrees with Alice and Bob's string is given by: @@ -209,7 +209,7 @@ $$\begin{aligned} &= P(e_1 = a_1) \: P(e_2 = a_2) + P(e_1 \neq a_1) \: P(e_2 \neq a_2) \end{aligned}$$ -Recognizing $q$ 's definition, +Recognizing $$q$$ 's definition, we find the following inequality, which can be verified by plotting: @@ -219,8 +219,8 @@ $$\begin{aligned} < q \end{aligned}$$ -After repeating this step several times, $q$ will be close to 1/2, -which is the ideal value: for $q =$ 0.5, +After repeating this step several times, $$q$$ will be close to 1/2, +which is the ideal value: for $$q =$$ 0.5, Eve would only know 50% of the bits, which is equivalent to her guessing at random. |