Write, autoreview, editor, reviewer
3,129
edits
Measurement-Only Universal Blind Quantum Computation: Difference between revisions
Measurement-Only Universal Blind Quantum Computation (edit)
Revision as of 10:00, 6 June 2019
, 6 June 2019→Properties
m (→Notations) |
m (→Properties) |
||
| Line 21: | Line 21: | ||
==Properties== | ==Properties== | ||
*Universality Any model of quantum computation based on MBQC can be changed made blind using these protocols, thus, universality of protocol is implied by universality of the resource state used. | *Universality - Any model of quantum computation based on MBQC can be changed made blind using these protocols, thus, the universality of the protocol is implied by the universality of the resource state used. | ||
* | *Correctness - Correctness for both protocols is implied from MBQC implementing the quantum computation successfully. | ||
*Blindness Blindness for protocol 1a is implied by no-signalling theorem as Client does not send any information to Server by measuring her states. | *Blindness - Blindness for protocol 1a is implied by no-signalling theorem as Client does not send any information to Server by measuring her states. | ||
*Security of protocol 1a is device independent i.e. Client does not need to trust her measurement device in order to guarantee privacy. | *Security of protocol 1a is device independent i.e. Client does not need to trust her measurement device in order to guarantee privacy. | ||
*Protocol 1a can cope with Client’s measurement device inefficiency. | *Protocol 1a can cope with Client’s measurement device inefficiency. | ||
*Protocol 1b can cope with high channel losses but is no longer a no-signalling protocol. In order to make it no- | *Protocol 1b can cope with high channel losses but is no longer a no-signalling protocol. In order to make it no-signalling Client needs to discard measurement device after one use or use a random number generator to indicate if the particle was received or not. | ||
*Both protocols follow the | *Both protocols follow the following definition of blindness: A protocol is blind if, | ||
**The conditional probability distribution of Alice’s computational angles, given all the classical information Bob can obtain during the protocol, and given the measurement results of any POVMs which Bob may perform on his system at any stage of the protocol, is equal to the a priori probability distribution of Alice’s computational angles, and | **The conditional probability distribution of Alice’s computational angles, given all the classical information Bob can obtain during the protocol, and given the measurement results of any POVMs which Bob may perform on his system at any stage of the protocol, is equal to the a priori probability distribution of Alice’s computational angles, and | ||
**The conditional probability distribution of the final output of Alice’s algorithm, given all the classical information Bob can obtain during the protocol, and given the measurement results of any POVMs which Bob may perform on his system at any stage of the protocol, is equal to the a priori probability distribution of the final output of Alice’s algorithm. | **The conditional probability distribution of the final output of Alice’s algorithm, given all the classical information Bob can obtain during the protocol, and given the measurement results of any POVMs which Bob may perform on his system at any stage of the protocol, is equal to the a priori probability distribution of the final output of Alice’s algorithm. | ||
==Notations== | ==Notations== | ||
*(m,n,o) dimensions of cluster state. It could be 2D or 3D. | *(m,n,o) dimensions of cluster state. It could be 2D or 3D. | ||