Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:0902.4660 · New Journal of Physics

Decoy-state quantum key distribution with both source errors and statistical fluctuations

Xiang‐Bin Wang, Lin Mei Yang, Cheng-Zhi Peng, Jian-Wei Pan

Published Jul 15, 2009• 104 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

We show how to calculate the fraction of single-photon counts of the 3-intensity decoy-state quantum cryptography faithfully with both statistical fluctuations and source errors.Our results rely only on the bound values of a few parameters of the states of pulses.
DOI
10.1088/1367-2630/11/7/075006

Related papers

Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution with source state errors and statistical fluctuation

Cong Jiang, Zong‐Wen Yu, Xiang‐Bin Wang

We show how to calculate the secure final key rate in the four-intensity decoy-state measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution protocol with both source errors and statistical fluctuations with a certain failure probability. Our results rely only on the range of only a few parameters in the source state. All imperfections in this protocol have been taken into consideration without assuming any specific error patterns of the source.

arXiv:1710.08211•Physical Review A•Mar 22, 2017•35 citations

Decoy-state quantum key distribution with large random errors of light intensity

Xiang‐Bin Wang

We show how to do decoy-state quantum key distribution efficiently with large random errors in the intensity control. We present a theorem for efficiently calculating the lower bound of single-photon counts with many undetermined parameters. In the calculation of the single-photon counts of our protocol, the linear terms of the intensity fluctuation disappear and only the quadratic terms take effect. Given that the intensity fluctuation is upper bounded by $\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}5%$, $\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}10%$, and $\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}15%$, the verified lower bound of the percentage of untagged bits from our protocol is as large as 99.7%, 99.0%, and 97.9% of that from an ideal protocol where the light intensity is exactly controlled.

arXiv:quant-ph/0609081•Physical Review A•May 2, 2007•72 citations

Decoy-state method of quantum key distribution with both source errors and statistics fluctuations

Huan-Hang Chi, Zong‐Wen Yu, Xiang‐Bin Wang

The effects of statistical fluctuation and vacuum source fluctuation on the decoy-state method with an unstable decoy source and signal source are studied. The method is improved by a tightened estimation of the vacuum count. Compared with the existing results with an unstable vacuum source and statistical fluctuation, the results presented here have improved the key rate of the 3-intensity protocol for quantum key distribution.

Physical Review A•Oct 5, 2012•16 citations

A review on the decoy-state method for practical quantum key distribution

Xiang‐Bin Wang

We present a review on the historic development of the decoy state method, including the background, principles, methods, results and development. We also clarify some delicate concepts. Given an imperfect source and a very lossy channel, the photon-number-splitting (PNS) attack can make the quantum key distribution (QKD) in practice totally insecure. Given the result of ILM-GLLP, one knows how to distill the secure final key if he knows the fraction of tagged bits. The purpose of decoy state method is to do a tight verification of the the fraction of tagged bits. The main idea of decoy-state method is changing the intensities of source light and one can verify the fraction of tagged bits of certain intensity by watching the the counting rates of pulses of different intensities. Since the counting rates are small quantities, the effect of statistical fluctuation is very important. It has been shown that 3-state decoy-state method in practice can work even with the fluctuations and other errors.

arXiv:quant-ph/0509084•Sep 13, 2005•2 citations

Reexamination of decoy-state quantum key distribution with biased bases

Zong‐Wen Yu, Yi-Heng Zhou, Xiang‐Bin Wang

In order to improve the key rate of the decoy-state method, we need to jointly study yields of different bases. Given the delicate fact that pulses of the same preparation state can have different counting rates if they are measured in different bases, for example, those vacuum pulses and those single-photon pulses, existing results of decoy-state quantum key distribution using biased bases are actually flawed by assuming that they are equal. We fix this flaw through using the idea that yields of pulses prepared in different bases are the same provided that they are prepared in the same state and also measured in the same basis, for example, those single-photon pulses prepared in different bases but measured in the same basis. Based on this, we present correct formulas for the decoy-state method using biased bases. Taking the effects of statistical fluctuations into account, we then numerically study the key rates of different protocols with all parameters being fully optimized. Our result confirms the prior conclusion that the decoy-state method using biased bases can have an advantage over the symmetric protocol with unbiased bases. We obtain high key rates of our four-intensity protocol without using any vacuum source.

arXiv:1509.04011•Physical Review A•Mar 7, 2016•29 citations

Practical decoy-state method in quantum key distribution with a heralded single-photon source

Qin Wang, Xiang‐Bin Wang, Guang‐Can Guo

We propose a practical decoy-state method with heralded single-photon source for quantum key distribution (QKD). In the protocol, three intensities are used and one can estimate the fraction of single-photon counts. The final key rate over transmission distance is simulated under various parameter sets. Due to the lower dark count than that of a coherent state, it is shown that a three-intensity decoy-state QKD with a heralded source can work for a longer distance than that of a coherent state.

arXiv:quant-ph/0610134•Physical Review A•Jan 11, 2007•100 citations
We show how to do decoy-state quantum key distribution efficiently with large random errors in the intensity control. We present a theorem for efficiently calculating the lower bound of single-photon counts with many undetermined parameters. In the calculation of the single-photon counts of our protocol, the linear terms of the intensity fluctuation disappear and only the quadratic terms take effect. Given that the intensity fluctuation is upper bounded by $\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}5%$, $\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}10%$, and $\ifmmode\pm\else\textpm\fi{}15%$, the verified lower bound of the percentage of untagged bits from our protocol is as large as 99.7%, 99.0%, and 97.9% of that from an ideal protocol where the light intensity is exactly controlled.
We present a review on the historic development of the decoy state method, including the background, principles, methods, results and development. We also clarify some delicate concepts. Given an imperfect source and a very lossy channel, the photon-number-splitting (PNS) attack can make the quantum key distribution (QKD) in practice totally insecure. Given the result of ILM-GLLP, one knows how to distill the secure final key if he knows the fraction of tagged bits. The purpose of decoy state method is to do a tight verification of the the fraction of tagged bits. The main idea of decoy-state method is changing the intensities of source light and one can verify the fraction of tagged bits of certain intensity by watching the the counting rates of pulses of different intensities. Since the counting rates are small quantities, the effect of statistical fluctuation is very important. It has been shown that 3-state decoy-state method in practice can work even with the fluctuations and other errors.
In order to improve the key rate of the decoy-state method, we need to jointly study yields of different bases. Given the delicate fact that pulses of the same preparation state can have different counting rates if they are measured in different bases, for example, those vacuum pulses and those single-photon pulses, existing results of decoy-state quantum key distribution using biased bases are actually flawed by assuming that they are equal. We fix this flaw through using the idea that yields of pulses prepared in different bases are the same provided that they are prepared in the same state and also measured in the same basis, for example, those single-photon pulses prepared in different bases but measured in the same basis. Based on this, we present correct formulas for the decoy-state method using biased bases. Taking the effects of statistical fluctuations into account, we then numerically study the key rates of different protocols with all parameters being fully optimized. Our result confirms the prior conclusion that the decoy-state method using biased bases can have an advantage over the symmetric protocol with unbiased bases. We obtain high key rates of our four-intensity protocol without using any vacuum source.