Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 6 minor 145 references

Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution: Protocols, Quantum Games, and Security

T0 review · 5 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This review claims that device-independent QKD, though not yet fully demonstrated, is a coherent and viable response to trusted-device QKD's side-channel problem, with a spectrum of protocol variants and a clear set of open problems.

desk verdict A useful but currently unreliable DIQKD survey: broad coverage, genuine organizational value, and several load-bearing technical errors that need fixing before it can serve as a dependable reference. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.14243 v1 pith:7U6KWK6N submitted 2025-05-20 quant-ph

Syed M. Arslan , Saif Al-Kuwari , M. T. Rahim , Hashir Kuniyal This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-ph MSC 81P9481P4081P4594A60 PACS 03.67.Dd03.65.Ud
keywords device-independentquantumkeydistributionDIQKDBellinequalityCHSHgamenon-localgamessecurityside-channelattacksloophole-freetest
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper is a review of device-independent quantum key distribution (DIQKD), the protocol family that derives security from observed Bell-inequality violations rather than from any trust in the key-generating hardware. The authors aim to give a single reading path through the field: why ordinary QKD can be hacked through detector and side-channel loopholes, how Bell tests and nonlocal games certify security, which protocol variants relax which device assumptions, and what experiments have achieved so far. The paper's own claim is that this survey is a reliable entry point to DIQKD, and if that claim holds, a newcomer can learn both the theoretical security machinery and the practical state of the art in one pass.

What carries the argument

The central object is the CHSH Bell game, in which Alice and Bob receive inputs $x,y\in\{0,1\}$ and win when $x\land y=a\oplus b$; classically the best winning probability is $3/4$, while an entangled quantum strategy reaches $\cos^2(\pi/8)\approx 0.85$. The review uses this game, alongside alternatives such as the Mermin-Peres magic square game, to organize the whole field: per-round min-entropy bounds feed into the Entropy Accumulation Theorem to handle coherent attacks, and the same game outcomes are what loophole-free Bell experiments must certify before full device independence can be claimed.

What would settle it

Checking the printed CHSH winning condition in Eq. (10), which appears as $x\cdot y=a+b\pmod 2$ with $\cdot$ described as AND, against the standard condition $x\land y=a\oplus b$ already provides a concrete test of restatement quality, and the same check applied to the EAT inequality and to the Bell parameters quoted for the photonic and matter-based experiments would settle whether the survey's technical content can be trusted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is a landscape claim about where DIQKD stands. On the paper's telling, DIQKD is a spectrum: fully device-independent QKD treats both stations as black boxes and needs loophole-free Bell tests; one-sided and semi-device-independent variants trust one station or bound the Hilbert-space dimension; measurement-device-independent QKD outsources detection to an untrusted intermediary. Across all variants, the CHSH inequality is the shared certification engine: a violation of $S\le 2$, ideally approaching $2\sqrt{2}$, demonstrates the nonlocal correlations from which secrecy is derived, and the achievable secret-key rate is set by the quantum bit error rate together with a Holevo bound on the eavesdropper's information. The paper also asserts that, despite loophole-free Bell tests on photonic, atomic, and solid-state platforms, a complete end-to-end DIQKD implementation with key distillation under full device independence has not yet been achieved.

Load-bearing premise

The review's whole value rests on its faithful restatement of the primary literature: if the security proofs, protocol descriptions, or experimental numbers are distorted in the survey, the review misleads rather than informs a reader who relies on it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Bell-certified correlations suffice, even fully adversarial hardware can be used to generate key, provided the Bell test is loophole-free and the measurement settings are chosen independently and unpredictably.
  • The CHSH game remains the most practical certification tool, while the Mermin-Peres magic-square protocol can surpass CHSH-based key rates only when its optimal quantum strategy is implemented faithfully.
  • Loophole-free Bell violations on photonic, atomic, and solid-state platforms bring partial or proof-of-concept DIQKD within reach, but a full DIQKD run from entanglement generation through key distillation under complete device independence still remains to be shown.
  • Security against coherent attacks rests on the Entropy Accumulation Theorem, whose per-round entropy accumulation replaces the simple i.i.d. addition that works only for collective attacks.
  • Noise tolerance, generation rates, satellite-based links, and on-chip integration are the open problems that separate the current demonstrations from robust high-performance DIQKD.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • An extension the paper leaves implicit: measurement-device-independent QKD is the most likely near-term deployment path, and full DIQKD may arrive by progressively removing the remaining trust assumptions rather than through one new protocol.
  • A related consequence not developed in the paper: the same Bell-certification machinery that secures DIQKD could also certify quantum randomness expansion in a composable way, and the protocol tables make that connection visible.
  • A testable extension: benchmark the Mermin-Peres protocol against biased CHSH under realistic noise and finite key lengths to see whether its ideal-condition key-rate advantage survives in practice.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript is a survey of Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution (DIQKD). It reviews the foundational ideas (Bell tests, CHSH inequality, security definitions), the main protocol families (fully DI, one-sided DI, semi-DI, MDI, DDI), the use of nonlocal games (CHSH, Mermin-Peres magic square, GHZ, Monty Hall, RGB), the security models (individual, collective, coherent, including the Entropy Accumulation Theorem), recent experimental implementations, and open problems. The central claim of the paper is that it provides a comprehensive and reliable review of the state of DIQKD, suitable as an entry point to the field.

Significance. If the technical content were accurate, this review would fill a useful role: it collects a broad literature, covers a wide range of protocols and attacks, and includes recent experimental results (e.g., the 2022 demonstrations by Zhang et al. and Nadlinger et al., and the 2023 superconducting loophole-free Bell test). The paper has no original derivations and no fitted parameters, so the risk of circular reasoning is low, and it relies instead on faithful restatement of cited theorems and protocols. However, the value of such a review depends entirely on the correctness of those restatements. The errors identified below in the CHSH winning condition, in the statement of the Entropy Accumulation Theorem, and in the Holevo bound are not merely typographical: they would mislead a reader who uses the equations to understand or apply DIQKD security proofs.

major comments (5)
  1. [§IV-C1, Eq. (10)] The CHSH winning condition is written as x·y = a+b (mod 2), with the text stating that '·' and '+' represent the AND and OR operators. The correct condition is x·y = a⊕b (mod 2), i.e., the product (AND) of the inputs must equal the XOR of the outputs, not the OR. Because Eq. (10) is used to derive the classical winning probability in Eq. (12) and to motivate the quantum strategy in the same section, this error propagates through the game-based description of DIQKD and should be corrected.
  2. [§VI-C, Eq. (19)] The statement of the Entropy Accumulation Theorem is materially incomplete. The paper writes Hmin(X_R|E) ≥ Σ_{j∈R} h_j, omitting both the smooth-min-entropy parameter ε and the finite-size correction term that decreases with the number of rounds. The actual EAT bounds the smooth min-entropy by the sum of per-round entropies minus an error term involving ε and the round count. Since Section VI presents EAT as the primary tool for proving security against coherent attacks, this omission is load-bearing for any reader trying to understand or reproduce the security argument.
  3. [§III, Eq. (5)] The claimed Holevo bound κ(B1:E) ≤ (1 + sqrt((S/2)^2 − 1))/2 is dimensionally inconsistent with its use in Eq. (4), where κ must be an entropy. The expression on the right is a number between 0 and 1, not an entropy, and it cannot serve as a bound on the Holevo quantity. The standard result bounds the Holevo quantity by the binary entropy h((1 + sqrt((S/2)^2 − 1))/2) (or a related quantity). As written, Eq. (5) misstates the relationship between the CHSH violation and Eve's information.
  4. [§IV-B] The claimed advantage of the three-party game over the two-party game is not supported by the text. The authors compute the same numerical winning probability (0.85) as in the two-party game and then assert that including Bob 'weakens the entanglement power between Alice and Eve, hence increasing the min-entropy value.' No derivation is given for this conclusion, and the comparison appears to conflate Eve's marginal guessing probability in Section IV-A with the joint Bob–Eve guessing probability defined in Eq. (8). The identical numerical value does not, by itself, establish a security advantage, and the argument needs to be made precise.
  5. [§IV-C1, quantum winning strategy] The computation of the quantum winning probability for the CHSH game is garbled. The text states 'pwin|01 = pwin|10 = pwin|11 = 1/4 Σ_{x,y} pwin|xy = cos^2(π/8)', which is not a valid per-input calculation; the factors and the sum are not presented in a way that yields the claimed value. Each conditional winning probability should be evaluated separately, and the average should be taken with the correct prior. This obscures the central result that the quantum strategy achieves approximately 0.85 average success probability.
minor comments (6)
  1. [§I] The roadmap sentence 'Section II Section III provides...' is missing a conjunction and appears to be a typo; the intended structure should be stated clearly. Also, the claim that 'Section VI provides a comprehensive study of the potential attacks' is imprecise, since attacks are systematically reviewed in Section II-B and Section VI is titled 'Security of DIQKD'.
  2. [§III] The sentence after Eq. (2) states that the value 'will change to ±√2, making the inequality un-violated.' This value is unexplained and does not correspond to any standard CHSH threshold; the relevant comparison is between the local bound 2 and the Tsirelson bound 2√2. Please correct or remove this sentence.
  3. [§III and §VII] Table and figure cross-references are inconsistent with the displayed numbering. The text refers to 'Table III' when the displayed table is Table I, and Section VII refers to 'Table VII' and Section VI-C to 'Table VI-C' for tables that appear to be Tables VII and VIII. All such references should be checked and aligned with the actual table numbering.
  4. [§V, CHSH protocol] In step 8 of the CHSH-based protocol, the abort condition compares the observed winning probability with the ideal quantum value cos^2(π/8). As written, this threshold would reject every real implementation because of finite-size fluctuations; the authors should either cite a finite-size statistical test or reformulate the condition with a suitable confidence parameter.
  5. [§VI-C] The text refers to a 'Martinangle inequality'; this should be 'Martingale inequality' (or 'Azuma inequality' as used elsewhere in the paragraph).
  6. [References] Reference [139] is missing the author list; it should include the authors of the 'Challenging local realism with human choices' paper. The reference list also contains several entries with inconsistent formatting (e.g., [47] uses a full publisher format while others are abbreviated).

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the paper is a literature survey whose claims are attributed to external primary sources, with no fitted parameters, self-defined quantities, or load-bearing self-citations.

full rationale

This is a review/survey paper whose central assertion is that it provides a comprehensive overview of DIQKD theory, protocols, security proofs, and experiments. It contains no original derivation, no fitting of parameters, and no prediction that is defined in terms of its own output. Every substantive technical claim, such as the Holevo bound in Eq. (5), the CHSH game analysis in Section IV-C1, the MPG game strategy, and the security statements in Sections VI and VII, is explicitly attributed to cited primary literature (e.g., Acin et al. 2007, Pironio et al. 2009, Vazirani and Vidick, Dupuis et al. for EAT, and experimental papers). The paper does not invoke a uniqueness theorem or an ansatz from the authors' own prior work; no self-citation is load-bearing. The manuscript does contain concrete technical errors, such as the CHSH condition in Eq. (10) (where the winning condition should use XOR, not AND as stated) and the statement of the Entropy Accumulation Theorem in Eq. (19) (which omits the smooth-min-entropy qualification and the EAT correction term), but these are correctness and reliability problems, not circular reasoning. A misstatement of an external theorem is not a derivation that reduces to its own inputs. Under the hard rules, circularity can only be claimed when the paper itself exhibits the reduction; no such reduction is present here.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new quantities. It draws all mathematical machinery from the cited literature, so the ledger is limited to standard background formalism.

assumptions (3)
  • standard math Bell-CHSH formalism: local hidden variable models satisfy S <= 2 and quantum correlations reach S = 2√2.
    Invoked throughout Sections III and V to certify nonlocality; cited to CHSH [43] and EPR [44].
  • standard math Monogamy of entanglement limits Eve's information when Alice and Bob share strong correlations.
    Used in Section IV-B to argue the three-party game increases min-entropy; cited to Yang [90] and Tomamichel et al. [91].
  • standard math Entropy Accumulation Theorem combines per-round min-entropy for non-i.i.d. rounds.
    Applied in Section VI-C to coherent attacks; cited to Dupuis, Fawzi, and Renner [131].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution: Protocols, Quantum Games, and Security." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7U6KWK6N

@misc{pith2026250514243,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution: Protocols, Quantum Games, and Security},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7U6KWK6N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.14243}
}
read the original abstract

Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) is based on the laws of quantum mechanics to enable provably secure communication. Despite its theoretical security promise, practical QKD systems are vulnerable to serious attacks, including side-channel attacks and detector loopholes, and assumes a trusted device characterization. Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution (DIQKD) overcomes these limitations by relying solely on observed nonlocal correlations, certified through Bell inequality violations, thereby removing assumptions about the internal workings of the measurement devices. In this paper, we first review the foundational principles underlying DIQKD, including Bell tests and security definitions. We then examine a range of protocol designs, including CHSH-based schemes, and non-local game frameworks, alongside with their security proofs. We also assess recent experimental implementations and discuss source architectures, detection technologies, and finite-key analyses. Finally, we identify current open problems, such as noise tolerance, generation rates, and integration with quantum networks, and outline promising directions for future research to realize robust, high-performance DIQKD.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.14243 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Key theoretical and experimental advancements in DIQKD. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Schematic illustrating the basic setup of a DIQKD protocol. Alice and Bob are connected via two channels: 1) a quantum channel that enables the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overview of a DIQKD Protocol. The protocol begins with the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Visual representation of the Fully Device-Independent Quantum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: This schematic illustrates the framework of One-Sided Device [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: This schematic depicts the Semi-Device-Independent Quantum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: This schematic depicts the Measurement-Device-Independent [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

145 extracted references · 72 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Quantum hacking: Experimental demonstration of time-shift attack against prac- tical quantum-key-distribution systems,

    Y . Zhao, C.-H. F. Fung, B. Qi, C. Chen, and H.-K. Lo, “Quantum hacking: Experimental demonstration of time-shift attack against prac- tical quantum-key-distribution systems,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 78, no. 4, p. 042333, 2008

    2008

  2. [2]

    Controlling an actively-quenched single photon detector with bright light,

    S. Sauge, L. Lydersen, A. Anisimov, J. Skaar, and V . Makarov, “Controlling an actively-quenched single photon detector with bright light,” Optics express, vol. 19, no. 23, pp. 23590–23600, 2011

    2011

  3. [3]

    Full-field implementation of a perfect eavesdropper on a quantum cryptography system,

    I. Gerhardt, Q. Liu, A. Lamas-Linares, J. Skaar, C. Kurtsiefer, and V . Makarov, “Full-field implementation of a perfect eavesdropper on a quantum cryptography system,” Nature communications, vol. 2, no. 1, p. 349, 2011

    2011

  4. [4]

    Hacking commercial quantum cryptography systems by tailored bright illumination,

    L. Lydersen, C. Wiechers, C. Wittmann, D. Elser, J. Skaar, and V . Makarov, “Hacking commercial quantum cryptography systems by tailored bright illumination,” Nature photonics, vol. 4, no. 10, pp. 686– 689, 2010

    2010

  5. [5]

    Thermal blinding of gated detectors in quantum cryp- tography,

    L. Lydersen, C. Wiechers, C. Wittmann, D. Elser, J. Skaar, and V . Makarov, “Thermal blinding of gated detectors in quantum cryp- tography,” Optics express, vol. 18, no. 26, pp. 27938–27954, 2010

    2010

  6. [6]

    Quantum key distribution with realistic states: photon-number statistics in the photon-number splitting attack,

    N. L ¨utkenhaus and M. Jahma, “Quantum key distribution with realistic states: photon-number statistics in the photon-number splitting attack,” New Journal of Physics , vol. 4, no. 1, p. 44, 2002

    2002

  7. [7]

    Advances in quantum cryptography,

    S. Pirandola, U. L. Andersen, L. Banchi, M. Berta, D. Bunandar, R. Colbeck, D. Englund, T. Gehring, C. Lupo, C. Ottaviani, et al. , “Advances in quantum cryptography,” Advances in optics and photon- ics, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 1012–1236, 2020

    2020

  8. [8]

    Trojan- horse attacks on quantum-key-distribution systems,

    N. Gisin, S. Fasel, B. Kraus, H. Zbinden, and G. Ribordy, “Trojan- horse attacks on quantum-key-distribution systems,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 73, no. 2, p. 022320, 2006

    2006

Show all 145 references
  1. [9]

    Advances in device-independent quan- tum key distribution,

    V . Zapatero, T. van Leent, R. Arnon-Friedman, W.-Z. Liu, Q. Zhang, H. Weinfurter, and M. Curty, “Advances in device-independent quan- tum key distribution,” npj quantum information , vol. 9, no. 1, p. 10, 2023

    2023

  2. [10]

    Quantum cryptography based on bell’s theorem,

    A. K. Ekert, “Quantum cryptography based on bell’s theorem,” Physical review letters, vol. 67, no. 6, p. 661, 1991

    1991

  3. [11]

    Quantum cryptography with imperfect ap- paratus,

    D. Mayers and A. Yao, “Quantum cryptography with imperfect ap- paratus,” in Proceedings 39th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (Cat. No. 98CB36280) , pp. 503–509, IEEE, 1998

    1998

  4. [12]

    Self testing quantum apparatus,

    D. Mayers and A. Yao, “Self testing quantum apparatus,” arXiv preprint quant-ph/0307205, 2003

    2003 arXiv

  5. [13]

    No signaling and quantum key distribution,

    J. Barrett, L. Hardy, and A. Kent, “No signaling and quantum key distribution,” Physical review letters, vol. 95, no. 1, p. 010503, 2005

    2005

  6. [14]

    Device-independent security of quantum cryptography against collec- tive attacks,

    A. Ac ´ın, N. Brunner, N. Gisin, S. Massar, S. Pironio, and V . Scarani, “Device-independent security of quantum cryptography against collec- tive attacks,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 98, no. 23, p. 230501, 2007

    2007

  7. [15]

    A device-independent quantum key distribution system for distant users,

    W. Zhang, T. van Leent, K. Redeker, R. Garthoff, R. Schwonnek, F. Fertig, S. Eppelt, W. Rosenfeld, V . Scarani, C. C.-W. Lim, et al., “A device-independent quantum key distribution system for distant users,” Nature, vol. 607, no. 7920, pp. 687–691, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    Simple and tight device-independent security proofs,

    R. Arnon-Friedman, R. Renner, and T. Vidick, “Simple and tight device-independent security proofs,” SIAM Journal on Computing , vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 181–225, 2019

    2019

  9. [17]

    Fully device-independent quantum key distribution,

    U. Vazirani and T. Vidick, “Fully device-independent quantum key distribution,” Physical Review Letters , 2014

    2014

  10. [18]

    Device-independent quantum key distribution secure against collective attacks,

    S. Pironio, A. Ac ´ın, N. Brunner, N. Gisin, S. Massar, and V . Scarani, “Device-independent quantum key distribution secure against collective attacks,” New Journal of Physics , vol. 11, no. 4, p. 045021, 2009

    2009

  11. [19]

    Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing,

    C. BENNET, “Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing,” in Proc. of IEEE Int. Conf. on Comp. Sys. and Signal Proc., Dec. 1984, 1984

    1984

  12. [20]

    Phys. rev. lett.,

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crepeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, “Phys. rev. lett.,” Phys. Rev. Lett, vol. 68, no. 3121, 1992

    1992

  13. [21]

    Decoy state quantum key distribution,

    H.-K. Lo, X. Ma, and K. Chen, “Decoy state quantum key distribution,” Physical review letters, vol. 94, no. 23, p. 230504, 2005

    2005

  14. [22]

    Continuous variable quantum cryptog- raphy using coherent states,

    F. Grosshans and P. Grangier, “Continuous variable quantum cryptog- raphy using coherent states,” Physical review letters , vol. 88, no. 5, p. 057902, 2002

    2002

  15. [23]

    Gaussian quantum information,

    C. Weedbrook, S. Pirandola, R. Garc ´ıa-Patr´on, N. J. Cerf, T. C. Ralph, J. H. Shapiro, and S. Lloyd, “Gaussian quantum information,” Reviews of Modern Physics , vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 621–669, 2012

    2012

  16. [24]

    Entanglement-based cv-qkd with information reconciliation over entanglement-assisted link,

    I. B. Djordjevic and V . Nafria, “Entanglement-based cv-qkd with information reconciliation over entanglement-assisted link,” Entropy, vol. 26, no. 4, p. 305, 2024

    2024

  17. [25]

    Quantum cryptography without bell’s theorem,

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, and N. D. Mermin, “Quantum cryptography without bell’s theorem,” Phys. Rev. Lett. , vol. 68, pp. 557–559, Feb 1992

    1992

  18. [26]

    Quantum man-in-the-middle attacks on qkd protocols: Proposal of a novel attack strategy,

    H. Amellal, S. El Hajjami, K. Kaushik, G. Chhabra, and S. A. Yadav, “Quantum man-in-the-middle attacks on qkd protocols: Proposal of a novel attack strategy,” in 2023 6th International Conference on Contemporary Computing and Informatics (IC3I) , vol. 6, pp. 513–519, IEEE, 2023

    2023

  19. [27]

    Different vulnerabilities and chal- lenges of quantum key distribution protocol: A review.,

    C. Ghosh, A. Parag, and S. Datta, “Different vulnerabilities and chal- lenges of quantum key distribution protocol: A review.,” International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science, vol. 8, no. 8, 2017

    2017

  20. [28]

    Attack to quantum cryptosystems through rf fingerprints from photon detectors,

    K. Durak, N. C. Jam, and S. Karamzadeh, “Attack to quantum cryptosystems through rf fingerprints from photon detectors,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics , vol. 28, no. 2: Optical Detectors, pp. 1–7, 2021

    2021

  21. [29]

    Deep-learning-based radio-frequency side-channel attack on quantum key distribution,

    A. Baliuka, M. St ¨ocker, M. Auer, P. Freiwang, H. Weinfurter, and L. Knips, “Deep-learning-based radio-frequency side-channel attack on quantum key distribution,” Physical Review Applied , vol. 20, no. 5, p. 054040, 2023

    2023

  22. [30]

    Phase-remapping attack in practical quantum-key-distribution systems,

    C.-H. F. Fung, B. Qi, K. Tamaki, and H.-K. Lo, “Phase-remapping attack in practical quantum-key-distribution systems,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 75, no. 3, p. 032314, 2007

    2007

  23. [31]

    Partially random phase attack to the practical two-way quantum-key-distribution system,

    S.-H. Sun, M. Gao, M.-S. Jiang, C.-Y . Li, and L.-M. Liang, “Partially random phase attack to the practical two-way quantum-key-distribution system,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 85, no. 3, p. 032304, 2012

    2012

  24. [32]

    Feasibility of double-click attack on a passive detection quantum key distribution system,

    P. Zhang and C. Li, “Feasibility of double-click attack on a passive detection quantum key distribution system,” Chinese Physics Letters , vol. 28, no. 7, p. 070304, 2011

    2011

  25. [33]

    Faked states attack using detector efficiency mismatch on sarg04, phase-time, dpsk, and ekert protocols,

    V . Makarov and J. Skaar, “Faked states attack using detector efficiency mismatch on sarg04, phase-time, dpsk, and ekert protocols,” arXiv preprint quant-ph/0702262, 2007

    2007 arXiv

  26. [34]

    After-gate attack on a quantum cryptosystem,

    C. Wiechers, L. Lydersen, C. Wittmann, D. Elser, J. Skaar, C. Mar- quardt, V . Makarov, and G. Leuchs, “After-gate attack on a quantum cryptosystem,” New Journal of Physics, vol. 13, no. 1, p. 013043, 2011

    2011

  27. [35]

    Quantum key distribution with high loss: toward global secure communication,

    W.-Y . Hwang, “Quantum key distribution with high loss: toward global secure communication,” Physical review letters , vol. 91, no. 5, p. 057901, 2003

    2003

  28. [36]

    Proc. ieee int. conf. on computers, systems and signal processing, bangalore, india,

    C. H. Bennett and G. i. Brassard, “Proc. ieee int. conf. on computers, systems and signal processing, bangalore, india,” in Proc. of the IEEE Int. Conf. on Computers Systems and Signal Processing Bangalore India, p. 175, 1984

    1984

  29. [37]

    Simple proof of security of the bb84 quantum key distribution protocol,

    P. W. Shor and J. Preskill, “Simple proof of security of the bb84 quantum key distribution protocol,” Physical review letters , vol. 85, no. 2, p. 441, 2000

    2000

  30. [38]

    Information-theoretically secure secret-key agreement by not authenticated public discussion,

    U. Maurer, “Information-theoretically secure secret-key agreement by not authenticated public discussion,” in International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques , pp. 209– 225, Springer, 1997

    1997

  31. [39]

    Improved timing resolution single-photon detectors in daytime free-space quantum key distribution with 1.25 ghz transmission rate,

    A. Restelli, J. C. Bienfang, C. W. Clark, I. Rech, I. Labanca, M. Ghioni, and S. Cova, “Improved timing resolution single-photon detectors in daytime free-space quantum key distribution with 1.25 ghz transmission rate,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics, v...

    2010

  32. [40]

    Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution,

    H.-K. Lo, M. Curty, and B. Qi, “Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution,” Physical review letters , vol. 108, no. 13, p. 130503, 2012

    2012

  33. [41]

    Time-shift attack in practical quantum cryptosystems,

    B. Qi, C.-H. F. Fung, H.-K. Lo, and X. Ma, “Time-shift attack in practical quantum cryptosystems,” arXiv preprint quant-ph/0512080 , 2005

    2005 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Efficient quantum key distribution secure against no-signalling eavesdroppers,

    A. Acin, S. Massar, and S. Pironio, “Efficient quantum key distribution secure against no-signalling eavesdroppers,” New Journal of Physics , vol. 8, no. 8, p. 126, 2006

    2006

  35. [43]

    Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories,

    J. F. Clauser, M. A. Horne, A. Shimony, and R. A. Holt, “Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories,” Physical review letters, vol. 23, no. 15, p. 880, 1969

    1969

  36. [44]

    Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?,

    A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, “Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?,” Physical review, vol. 47, no. 10, p. 777, 1935

    1935

  37. [45]

    One-sided device-independent quantum key distribution: Security, feasibility, and the connection with steering,

    C. Branciard, E. G. Cavalcanti, S. P. Walborn, V . Scarani, and H. M. Wiseman, “One-sided device-independent quantum key distribution: Security, feasibility, and the connection with steering,”Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 85, no. 1, p. 010301, 2012

    2012

  38. [46]

    Semi-device-independent security of one-way quantum key distribution,

    M. Pawłowski and N. Brunner, “Semi-device-independent security of one-way quantum key distribution,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 84, no. 1, p. 010302, 2011

    2011

  39. [47]

    Fully Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution Using Synchronous Correlations,

    N. Rodrigues and B. Lackey, “Fully Device-Independent Quantum Key Distribution Using Synchronous Correlations,” in 18th Confer- ence on the Theory of Quantum Computation, Communication and Cryptography (TQC 2023) (O. Fawzi and M. Walter, eds.), vol. 266 of Leibniz Internationa...

    2023

  40. [48]

    Quantum key distribution using deterministic single-photon sources over a field- installed fibre link,

    M. Zahidy, M. T. Mikkelsen, R. M ¨uller, B. Da Lio, M. Krehbiel, Y . Wang, N. Bart, A. D. Wieck, A. Ludwig, M. Galili,et al., “Quantum key distribution using deterministic single-photon sources over a field- installed fibre link,” npj Quantum Information , vol. 10, no. 1, p. 2, 2024

    2024

  41. [49]

    Finite-key analysis for one-sided device-independent quantum key distribution,

    Y . Wang, W.-s. Bao, H.-w. Li, C. Zhou, and Y . Li, “Finite-key analysis for one-sided device-independent quantum key distribution,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 88, no. 5, p. 052322, 2013

    2013

  42. [50]

    One- sided device-independent qkd and position-based cryptography from monogamy games,

    M. Tomamichel, S. Fehr, J. Kaniewski, and S. Wehner, “One- sided device-independent qkd and position-based cryptography from monogamy games,” in Advances in Cryptology–EUROCRYPT 2013: 32nd Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniqu...

    2013

  43. [51]

    Experimental demonstration of gaussian protocols for one-sided device-independent quantum key distribution,

    N. Walk, S. Hosseini, J. Geng, O. Thearle, J. Y . Haw, S. Armstrong, S. M. Assad, J. Janousek, T. C. Ralph, T. Symul, et al., “Experimental demonstration of gaussian protocols for one-sided device-independent quantum key distribution,” Optica, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 634–642, 2016

    2016

  44. [52]

    One-sided device-independent quantum key distribution for two independent parties,

    J. Xin, X.-M. Lu, X. Li, and G. Li, “One-sided device-independent quantum key distribution for two independent parties,” Optics Express, vol. 28, no. 8, pp. 11439–11450, 2020

    2020

  45. [53]

    Einstein-podolsky-rosen steering: Closing the detection loophole with non-maximally-entangled states and arbitrary low effi- ciency,

    G. Vallone, “Einstein-podolsky-rosen steering: Closing the detection loophole with non-maximally-entangled states and arbitrary low effi- ciency,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 87, no. 2, p. 020101, 2013

    2013

  46. [54]

    Fine-grained einstein- podolsky-rosen–steering inequalities,

    T. Pramanik, M. Kaplan, and A. S. Majumdar, “Fine-grained einstein- podolsky-rosen–steering inequalities,” Physical Review A , vol. 90, no. 5, p. 050305, 2014

    2014

  47. [55]

    Quantification of gaussian quantum steering,

    I. Kogias, A. R. Lee, S. Ragy, and G. Adesso, “Quantification of gaussian quantum steering,” Physical review letters , vol. 114, no. 6, p. 060403, 2015

    2015

  48. [56]

    Stronger steerability criterion for more uncertain continuous-variable systems,

    P. Chowdhury, T. Pramanik, and A. S. Majumdar, “Stronger steerability criterion for more uncertain continuous-variable systems,” Physical Review A, vol. 92, no. 4, p. 042317, 2015

    2015

  49. [57]

    Fundamental limits on key rates in device-independent quantum key distribution,

    E. Kaur, M. M. Wilde, and A. Winter, “Fundamental limits on key rates in device-independent quantum key distribution,” New Journal of Physics, vol. 22, no. 2, p. 023039, 2020

    2020

  50. [58]

    Manipulated multipartite continue-variable epr steering with loss and gaussian noise,

    S. Zhai and N. Yuan, “Manipulated multipartite continue-variable epr steering with loss and gaussian noise,” Chinese Journal of Lasers , vol. 48, no. 20, p. 2012001, 2021

    2021

  51. [59]

    Distillation of gaussian einstein-podolsky-rosen steering with noiseless linear amplification,

    Y . Liu, K. Zheng, H. Kang, D. Han, M. Wang, L. Zhang, X. Su, and K. Peng, “Distillation of gaussian einstein-podolsky-rosen steering with noiseless linear amplification,” npj Quantum Information, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 38, 2022

    2022

  52. [60]

    Manipulating the direction of one-way steering in an optomechanical ring cavity,

    J. E. Qars, B. Boukhris, A. Tirbiyine, and A. Labrag, “Manipulating the direction of one-way steering in an optomechanical ring cavity,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.16346 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Security of a practical semi-device-independent quantum key distribution protocol against collective attacks,

    Y . Wang, W.-S. Bao, H.-W. Li, C. Zhou, and Y . Li, “Security of a practical semi-device-independent quantum key distribution protocol against collective attacks,” Chinese Physics B, vol. 23, no. 8, p. 080303, 2014

    2014

  54. [62]

    Semi-device-independent qkd based on bb84 and a chsh-type estimation,

    E. Woodhead, C. C. W. Lim, and S. Pironio, “Semi-device-independent qkd based on bb84 and a chsh-type estimation,” in Conference on Quantum Computation, Communication, and Cryptography , pp. 107– 115, Springer, 2012

    2012

  55. [63]

    Semi device independence of the bb84 protocol,

    E. Woodhead, “Semi device independence of the bb84 protocol,” New Journal of Physics , vol. 18, no. 5, p. 055010, 2016

    2016

  56. [64]

    On the secu- rity of semi-device-independent qkd protocols,

    A. Chaturvedi, M. Ray, R. Veynar, and M. Pawłowski, “On the secu- rity of semi-device-independent qkd protocols,” Quantum information processing, vol. 17, pp. 1–20, 2018

    2018

  57. [65]

    Finite-key bound for semi-device-independent quantum key distribution,

    C. Zhou, P. Xu, W.-S. Bao, Y . Wang, Y . Zhang, M.-S. Jiang, and H.- W. Li, “Finite-key bound for semi-device-independent quantum key distribution,” Optics express, vol. 25, no. 15, pp. 16971–16980, 2017

    2017

  58. [66]

    Semi-device-independent multiparty quantum key distribution in the asymptotic limit,

    Y . Jo and W. Son, “Semi-device-independent multiparty quantum key distribution in the asymptotic limit,” OSA Continuum , vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 814–826, 2019

    2019

  59. [67]

    Measurement-device- independent quantum cryptography,

    F. Xu, M. Curty, B. Qi, and H.-K. Lo, “Measurement-device- independent quantum cryptography,” IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Quantum Electronics , vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 148–158, 2014

    2014

  60. [68]

    Experimental measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution with imper- fect sources,

    Z. Tang, K. Wei, O. Bedroya, L. Qian, and H.-K. Lo, “Experimental measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution with imper- fect sources,” Physical Review A , vol. 93, no. 4, p. 042308, 2016

    2016

  61. [69]

    Experimental measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with uncharacterized encoding,

    C. Wang, S. Wang, Z.-Q. Yin, W. Chen, H.-W. Li, C.-M. Zhang, Y .-Y . Ding, G.-C. Guo, and Z.-F. Han, “Experimental measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with uncharacterized encoding,” Optics Letters, vol. 41, no. 23, pp. 5596–5599, 2016

    2016

  62. [70]

    Measurement- device-independent quantum key distribution over a 404 km optical fiber,

    H.-L. Yin, T.-Y . Chen, Z.-W. Yu, H. Liu, L.-X. You, Y .-H. Zhou, S.- J. Chen, Y . Mao, M.-Q. Huang, W.-J. Zhang, et al. , “Measurement- device-independent quantum key distribution over a 404 km optical fiber,” Physical review letters, vol. 117, no. 19, p. 190501, 2016

    2016

  63. [71]

    Ex- perimental demonstration of continuous-variable measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution over optical fiber,

    Y . Tian, P. Wang, J. Liu, S. Du, W. Liu, Z. Lu, X. Wang, and Y . Li, “Ex- perimental demonstration of continuous-variable measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution over optical fiber,”Optica, vol. 9, no. 5, pp. 492–500, 2022

    2022

  64. [72]

    Experimental three-state measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution with uncharacterized sources,

    X.-Y . Zhou, H.-J. Ding, C.-H. Zhang, J. Li, C.-M. Zhang, and Q. Wang, “Experimental three-state measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution with uncharacterized sources,” Optics Letters, vol. 45, no. 15, pp. 4176–4179, 2020

    2020

  65. [73]

    Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution coexisting with classical communication,

    R. Valivarthi, P. Umesh, C. John, K. A. Owen, V . B. Verma, S. W. Nam, D. Oblak, Q. Zhou, and W. Tittel, “Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution coexisting with classical communication,” Quantum Science and Technology , vol. 4, no. 4, p. 045002, 2019

    2019

  66. [74]

    Experimental measurement-device-independent quantum digital signatures,

    G. Roberts, M. Lucamarini, Z. Yuan, J. Dynes, L. Comandar, A. Sharpe, A. Shields, M. Curty, I. Puthoor, and E. Andersson, “Experimental measurement-device-independent quantum digital signatures,” Nature communications, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 1098, 2017

    2017

  67. [75]

    Measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution over asymmetric channel and unstable channel,

    X.-L. Hu, Y . Cao, Z.-W. Yu, and X.-B. Wang, “Measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution over asymmetric channel and unstable channel,” Scientific Reports, vol. 8, no. 1, p. 17634, 2018

    2018

  68. [76]

    Measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with hyper-encoding,

    Z.-X. Cui, W. Zhong, L. Zhou, and Y .-B. Sheng, “Measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with hyper-encoding,” Science China Physics, Mechanics & Astronomy , vol. 62, no. 11, p. 110311, 2019

    2019

  69. [77]

    High-dimensional measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution on two- dimensional subspaces,

    L. Dellantonio, A. S. Sørensen, and D. Bacco, “High-dimensional measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution on two- dimensional subspaces,” Physical Review A , vol. 98, no. 6, p. 062301, 2018

    2018

  70. [78]

    A high dimensional measurement- device-independent quantum key distribution scheme based on optical quantum state fusion and fission,

    L. Li, C. Zhu, D. Quan, and C. Pei, “A high dimensional measurement- device-independent quantum key distribution scheme based on optical quantum state fusion and fission,” International Journal of Theoretical Physics, vol. 57, pp. 3902–3911, 2018

    2018

  71. [79]

    Feasible high-dimensional measurement-device-independent quantum key dis- tribution,

    M.-Y . Yang, P. Zhao, L. Zhou, W. Zhong, and Y .-B. Sheng, “Feasible high-dimensional measurement-device-independent quantum key dis- tribution,” Laser Physics Letters , vol. 18, no. 7, p. 075204, 2021

    2021

  72. [80]

    High-dimensional quantum key distribution implemented with biphotons,

    C. Sekga, M. Mafu, and M. Senekane, “High-dimensional quantum key distribution implemented with biphotons,” Scientific Reports , vol. 13, no. 1, p. 1229, 2023

    2023

  73. [81]

    Long-distance free-space measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution,

    Y . Cao, Y .-H. Li, K.-X. Yang, Y .-F. Jiang, S.-L. Li, X.-L. Hu, M. Ab- ulizi, C.-L. Li, W. Zhang, Q.-C. Sun, et al., “Long-distance free-space measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution,” Physical Review Letters, vol. 125, no. 26, p. 260503, 2020

    2020

  74. [82]

    Measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution of multiple degrees of freedom of a single photon,

    Y .-F. Yan, L. Zhou, W. Zhong, and Y .-B. Sheng, “Measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution of multiple degrees of freedom of a single photon,” Frontiers of Physics, vol. 16, pp. 1–11, 2021

    2021

  75. [83]

    High-speed measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with integrated silicon photon- ics,

    K. Wei, W. Li, H. Tan, Y . Li, H. Min, W.-J. Zhang, H. Li, L. You, Z. Wang, X. Jiang, et al. , “High-speed measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with integrated silicon photon- ics,” Physical Review X , vol. 10, no. 3, p. 031030, 2020

    2020

  76. [84]

    Higher key rate of measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution through joint data processing,

    C. Jiang, Z.-W. Yu, X.-L. Hu, and X.-B. Wang, “Higher key rate of measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution through joint data processing,” Physical Review A , vol. 103, no. 1, p. 012402, 2021

    2021

  77. [85]

    High- rate and high-capacity measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution with fibonacci matrix coding in free space,

    H. Lai, M. Luo, J. Pieprzyk, J. Zhang, L. Pan, and M. A. Orgun, “High- rate and high-capacity measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution with fibonacci matrix coding in free space,” Science China Information Sciences, vol. 61, pp. 1–11, 2018

    2018

  78. [86]

    Improved data post-processing in quantum key distribution and application to loss thresholds in device independent qkd,

    X. Ma and N. L ¨utkenhaus, “Improved data post-processing in quantum key distribution and application to loss thresholds in device independent qkd,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1109.1203 , 2011

    2011 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Feasible attack on detector-device-independent quantum key distribution,

    K. Wei, H. Liu, H. Ma, X. Yang, Y . Zhang, Y . Sun, J. Xiao, and Y . Ji, “Feasible attack on detector-device-independent quantum key distribution,” Scientific reports, vol. 7, no. 1, p. 449, 2017

    2017

  80. [88]

    Insecurity of detector-device-independent quantum key distribution,

    S. Sajeed, A. Huang, S. Sun, F. Xu, V . Makarov, and M. Curty, “Insecurity of detector-device-independent quantum key distribution,” Physical review letters, vol. 117, no. 25, p. 250505, 2016

    2016

  81. [89]

    The operational meaning of min-and max-entropy,

    R. Konig, R. Renner, and C. Schaffner, “The operational meaning of min-and max-entropy,” IEEE Transactions on Information theory , vol. 55, no. 9, pp. 4337–4347, 2009

    2009

  82. [90]

    A simple proof of monogamy of entanglement,

    D. Yang, “A simple proof of monogamy of entanglement,” Physics Letters A, vol. 360, no. 2, pp. 249–250, 2006

    2006

  83. [91]

    A monogamy- of-entanglement game with applications to device-independent quan- tum cryptography,

    M. Tomamichel, S. Fehr, J. Kaniewski, and S. Wehner, “A monogamy- of-entanglement game with applications to device-independent quan- tum cryptography,” New Journal of Physics, vol. 15, no. 10, p. 103002, 2013

    2013

  84. [92]

    Incompatible results of quantum measurements,

    A. Peres, “Incompatible results of quantum measurements,” Physics Letters A, vol. 151, no. 3-4, pp. 107–108, 1990

    1990

  85. [93]

    Hidden variables and the two theorems of john bell,

    N. D. Mermin, “Hidden variables and the two theorems of john bell,” Reviews of Modern Physics , vol. 65, no. 3, p. 803, 1993

    1993

  86. [94]

    Experimental demonstration of quantum pseudotelepathy,

    J.-M. Xu, Y .-Z. Zhen, Y .-X. Yang, Z.-M. Cheng, Z.-C. Ren, K. Chen, X.-L. Wang, and H.-T. Wang, “Experimental demonstration of quantum pseudotelepathy,” Physical Review Letters , vol. 129, no. 5, p. 050402, 2022

    2022

  87. [95]

    Pseudo-telepathy: input car- dinality and bell-type inequalities,

    N. Gisin, A. A. M ´ethot, and V . Scarani, “Pseudo-telepathy: input car- dinality and bell-type inequalities,” International Journal of Quantum Information, vol. 5, no. 04, pp. 525–534, 2007

    2007

  88. [96]

    Key distribution based on three player quantum games,

    N. Toyota, “Key distribution based on three player quantum games,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1010.1813 , 2010

    2010 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Rational quantum secret sharing scheme based on ghz state,

    X. Zhang, L. Wang, S. Lin, N. Wang, and L. Hong, “Rational quantum secret sharing scheme based on ghz state,” Quantum Information Processing, vol. 22, no. 2, p. 91, 2023

    2023

  90. [98]

    Device independent quantum key distribution using three-party pseudo-telepathy,

    J. Basak, A. Maitra, and S. Maitra, “Device independent quantum key distribution using three-party pseudo-telepathy,” in International Conference on Cryptology in India , pp. 456–471, 2019

    2019

  91. [99]

    Quantum version of the monty hall problem,

    A. P. Flitney and D. Abbott, “Quantum version of the monty hall problem,” Physical Review A , vol. 65, no. 6, p. 062318, 2002

    2002

  92. [100]

    Quantum key-distribution protocols based on a quantum version of the monty hall game,

    L. F. Quezada and S.-H. Dong, “Quantum key-distribution protocols based on a quantum version of the monty hall game,” Annalen der Physik, vol. 532, no. 6, p. 2000126, 2020

    2020

  93. [101]

    Causal quantum theory and the collapse locality loophole,

    A. Kent, “Causal quantum theory and the collapse locality loophole,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 72, no. 1, p. 012107, 2005

    2005

  94. [102]

    Quantum and relativistic protocols for secure multi-party computation,

    R. Colbeck, “Quantum and relativistic protocols for secure multi-party computation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:0911.3814 , 2009

    2009 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Proposal for implementing device-independent quantum key distribution¡? format?¿ based on a heralded qubit amplifier,

    N. Gisin, S. Pironio, and N. Sangouard, “Proposal for implementing device-independent quantum key distribution¡? format?¿ based on a heralded qubit amplifier,” Physical review letters , vol. 105, no. 7, p. 070501, 2010

    2010

  96. [104]

    Efficient heralding of photonic qubits with applications to device- independent quantum key distribution,

    D. Pitkanen, X. Ma, R. Wickert, P. van Loock, and N. L ¨utkenhaus, “Efficient heralding of photonic qubits with applications to device- independent quantum key distribution,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 84, no. 2, p. 022325, 2011

    2011

  97. [105]

    Heralded-qubit amplifiers for practi- cal device-independent quantum key distribution,

    M. Curty and T. Moroder, “Heralded-qubit amplifiers for practi- cal device-independent quantum key distribution,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 84, no. 1, p. 010304, 2011

    2011

  98. [106]

    Proposal for a loophole-free bell test based on spin–photon interactions in cavities,

    N. Brunner, A. B. Young, C. Hu, and J. G. Rarity, “Proposal for a loophole-free bell test based on spin–photon interactions in cavities,” New Journal of Physics , vol. 15, no. 10, p. 105006, 2013

    2013

  99. [107]

    Device-independent quantum key distribution with spin-coupled cavities,

    A. M ´attar, J. B. Brask, and A. Ac´ın, “Device-independent quantum key distribution with spin-coupled cavities,” Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics , vol. 88, no. 6, p. 062319, 2013

    2013

  100. [108]

    Loss tolerant device-independent quantum key distribution: a proof of principle,

    G. Vallone, A. Dall’Arche, M. Tomasin, and P. Villoresi, “Loss tolerant device-independent quantum key distribution: a proof of principle,” New Journal of Physics , vol. 16, no. 6, p. 063064, 2014

    2014

  101. [109]

    Device-independent quantum key distribution with local bell test,

    C. C. W. Lim, C. Portmann, M. Tomamichel, R. Renner, and N. Gisin, “Device-independent quantum key distribution with local bell test,” Physical Review X , vol. 3, no. 3, p. 031006, 2013

    2013

  102. [110]

    Quantum key distribution based on quantum dimension and independent devices,

    H.-W. Li, Z.-Q. Yin, W. Chen, S. Wang, G.-C. Guo, and Z.-F. Han, “Quantum key distribution based on quantum dimension and independent devices,” Physical Review A , vol. 89, no. 3, p. 032302, 2014

    2014

  103. [111]

    Device-independent quantum cryp- tography for continuous variables,

    K. Marshall and C. Weedbrook, “Device-independent quantum cryp- tography for continuous variables,” Physical Review A , vol. 90, no. 4, p. 042311, 2014

    2014

  104. [112]

    Loophole-free bell test using electron spins in diamond: second experiment and additional analysis,

    B. Hensen, N. Kalb, M. Blok, A. Dr ´eau, A. Reiserer, R. Vermeulen, R. Schouten, M. Markham, D. Twitchen, K. Goodenough, et al. , “Loophole-free bell test using electron spins in diamond: second experiment and additional analysis,” Scientific reports , vol. 6, no. 1, p. 30289, 2016

    2016

  105. [113]

    Heralded amplification of path entangled quantum states,

    F. Monteiro, E. Verbanis, V . C. Vivoli, A. Martin, N. Gisin, H. Zbinden, and R. Thew, “Heralded amplification of path entangled quantum states,” Quantum Science and Technology , vol. 2, no. 2, p. 024008, 2017

    2017

  106. [114]

    Long-distance device-independent quantum key distribution,

    V . Zapatero and M. Curty, “Long-distance device-independent quantum key distribution,” Scientific Reports, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 17749, 2019

    2019

  107. [115]

    Device-independent quantum key distribution based on the mermin- peres magic square game,

    Y .-Z. Zhen, Y . Mao, Y .-Z. Zhang, F. Xu, and B. C. Sanders, “Device-independent quantum key distribution based on the mermin- peres magic square game,” Physical Review Letters , vol. 131, no. 8, p. 080801, 2023

    2023

  108. [116]

    Biased nonlocal quantum games,

    T. Lawson, N. Linden, and S. Popescu, “Biased nonlocal quantum games,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1011.6245 , 2010

    2010 arXiv

  109. [117]

    Lecture notes: Security proofs of quantum key distribution,

    G. Murta, “Lecture notes: Security proofs of quantum key distribution,” 2023

    2023

  110. [118]

    Sequential attack impairs security in device-independent quantum key distribution,

    P. Roy, S. Sasmal, S. Bera, S. Gupta, A. Roy, and A. Majumdar, “Sequential attack impairs security in device-independent quantum key distribution,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.16822 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  111. [119]

    Reply to’discrete and continuous variables for measurement-device- independent quantum cryptography’,

    S. Pirandola, C. Ottaviani, G. Spedalieri, C. Weedbrook, S. L. Braun- stein, S. Lloyd, T. Gehring, C. S. Jacobsen, and U. L. Andersen, “Reply to’discrete and continuous variables for measurement-device- independent quantum cryptography’,” Nature Photonics, vol. 9, no. 12, pp. ...

    2015

  112. [120]

    Biased random number generator based on bell’s theorem,

    Y .-G. Tan, Y .-H. Hu, and H.-F. Yang, “Biased random number generator based on bell’s theorem,” Chinese Physics Letters , vol. 33, no. 3, p. 030302, 2016

    2016

  113. [121]

    Measurement-device-independent entanglement- based quantum key distribution,

    X. Yang, K. Wei, H. Ma, S. Sun, H. Liu, Z. Yin, Z. Li, S. Lian, Y . Du, and L. Wu, “Measurement-device-independent entanglement- based quantum key distribution,” Physical Review A , vol. 93, no. 5, p. 052303, 2016

    2016

  114. [122]

    Self- referenced continuous-variable measurement-device-independent quan- tum key distribution,

    Y . Wang, X. Wang, J. Li, D. Huang, L. Zhang, and Y . Guo, “Self- referenced continuous-variable measurement-device-independent quan- tum key distribution,” Physics Letters A , vol. 382, no. 17, pp. 1149– 1156, 2018

    2018

  115. [123]

    Dual-phase-modulated plug- and-play measurement-device-independent continuous-variable quan- tum key distribution,

    Q. Liao, Y . Wang, D. Huang, and Y . Guo, “Dual-phase-modulated plug- and-play measurement-device-independent continuous-variable quan- tum key distribution,” Optics Express , vol. 26, no. 16, pp. 19907– 19920, 2018

    2018

  116. [124]

    Long-distance continuous-variable measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with discrete modulation,

    H.-X. Ma, P. Huang, D.-Y . Bai, T. Wang, S.-Y . Wang, W.-S. Bao, and G.-H. Zeng, “Long-distance continuous-variable measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with discrete modulation,” Phys- ical Review A , vol. 99, no. 2, p. 022322, 2019

    2019

  117. [125]

    Measurement-device-independent quantum key distri- bution with inaccurate coherent sources,

    G.-D. Kang, “Measurement-device-independent quantum key distri- bution with inaccurate coherent sources,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computer Science and Application Engi- neering, pp. 1–4, 2019

    2019

  118. [126]

    Secu- rity analysis of passive measurement-device-independent continuous- variable quantum key distribution with almost no public communica- tion,

    X. Wu, Y . Wang, S. Li, W. Zhang, D. Huang, and Y . Guo, “Secu- rity analysis of passive measurement-device-independent continuous- variable quantum key distribution with almost no public communica- tion,” Quantum Information Processing , vol. 18, pp. 1–16, 2019

    2019

  119. [127]

    Security of continuous-variable measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with imperfect state preparation,

    H.-X. Ma, P. Huang, T. Wang, S.-Y . Wang, W.-S. Bao, and G.-H. Zeng, “Security of continuous-variable measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution with imperfect state preparation,” Physics Letters A , vol. 383, no. 36, p. 126005, 2019

    2019

  120. [128]

    Advantage distillation for device-independent quantum key distribution,

    E. Y .-Z. Tan, C. C.-W. Lim, and R. Renner, “Advantage distillation for device-independent quantum key distribution,”Physical Review Letters, vol. 124, no. 2, p. 020502, 2020

    2020

  121. [129]

    Device-independent secret key rates via a postselected bell inequality,

    S. Datta, H. Kampermann, and D. Bruß, “Device-independent secret key rates via a postselected bell inequality,” Physical Review A , vol. 105, no. 3, p. 032451, 2022

    2022

  122. [130]

    Plug-and-play continuous variable measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution,

    J. Zhou, Y . Feng, J. Shi, and R. Shi, “Plug-and-play continuous variable measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution,” Annalen der Physik, vol. 535, no. 5, p. 2200614, 2023

    2023

  123. [131]

    Entropy accumulation,

    F. Dupuis, O. Fawzi, and R. Renner, “Entropy accumulation,” Com- munications in Mathematical Physics , vol. 379, no. 3, pp. 867–913, 2020

    2020

  124. [132]

    A fully quantum asymp- totic equipartition property,

    M. Tomamichel, R. Colbeck, and R. Renner, “A fully quantum asymp- totic equipartition property,” IEEE Transactions on information theory, vol. 55, no. 12, pp. 5840–5847, 2009

    2009

  125. [133]

    Device independent quantum key distribution secure against coherent attacks with memoryless measurement devices,

    M. McKague, “Device independent quantum key distribution secure against coherent attacks with memoryless measurement devices,” New Journal of Physics , vol. 11, no. 10, p. 103037, 2009

    2009

  126. [134]

    Continuous-variable measurement-device-independent multipartite quantum communication,

    Y . Wu, J. Zhou, X. Gong, Y . Guo, Z.-M. Zhang, and G. He, “Continuous-variable measurement-device-independent multipartite quantum communication,” Physical Review A, vol. 93, no. 2, p. 022325, 2016

    2016

  127. [135]

    Device-independent quantum key distribution with generalized two- mode schr ¨odinger cat states,

    C. J. Broadbent, K. Marshall, C. Weedbrook, and J. C. Howell, “Device-independent quantum key distribution with generalized two- mode schr ¨odinger cat states,” Physical Review A , vol. 92, no. 5, p. 052318, 2015

    2015

  128. [136]

    Fully device independent quantum key distribution,

    U. Vazirani and T. Vidick, “Fully device independent quantum key distribution,” Communications of the ACM , vol. 62, no. 4, pp. 133– 133, 2019

    2019

  129. [137]

    One-sided di-qkd secure against coherent attacks over long distances,

    M. Masini and S. Sarkar, “One-sided di-qkd secure against coherent attacks over long distances,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.11850 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  130. [138]

    Significant-loophole-free test of bell’s theorem with entangled photons,

    M. Giustina, M. A. M. Versteegh, S. Wengerowsky, J. Handsteiner, A. Hochrainer, K. Phelan, F. Steinlechner, J. Kofler, J.-A. Larsson, C. Abell´an, W. Amaya, V . Pruneri, M. W. Mitchell, J. Beyer, T. Gerrits, A. E. Lita, L. K. Shalm, S. W. Nam, T. Scheidl, R. Ursin, B. Wittmann...

    2015

  131. [139]

    Challenging local realism with human choices,

    “Challenging local realism with human choices,” Nature, vol. 557, no. 7704, pp. 212–216, 2018

    2018

  132. [140]

    Toward a photonic demonstration of device-independent quantum key distribution,

    W.-Z. Liu, Y .-Z. Zhang, Y .-Z. Zhen, M.-H. Li, Y . Liu, J. Fan, F. Xu, Q. Zhang, and J.-W. Pan, “Toward a photonic demonstration of device-independent quantum key distribution,”Physical Review Letters, vol. 129, no. 5, p. 050502, 2022

    2022

  133. [141]

    Event-ready bell test using entangled atoms simultaneously closing detection and locality loopholes,

    W. Rosenfeld, D. Burchardt, R. Garthoff, K. Redeker, N. Ortegel, M. Rau, and H. Weinfurter, “Event-ready bell test using entangled atoms simultaneously closing detection and locality loopholes,” Phys- ical review letters, vol. 119, no. 1, p. 010402, 2017

    2017

  134. [142]

    Experimental quantum key distribution certified by bell’s theorem,

    D. P. Nadlinger, P. Drmota, B. C. Nichol, G. Araneda, D. Main, R. Srinivas, D. M. Lucas, C. J. Ballance, K. Ivanov, E.-Z. Tan, et al., “Experimental quantum key distribution certified by bell’s theorem,” Nature, vol. 607, no. 7920, pp. 682–686, 2022

    2022

  135. [143]

    Loophole-free bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres,

    B. Hensen, H. Bernien, A. E. Dr ´eau, A. Reiserer, N. Kalb, M. S. Blok, J. Ruitenberg, R. F. Vermeulen, R. N. Schouten, C. Abell ´an, et al. , “Loophole-free bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres,” Nature, vol. 526, no. 7575, pp. 682–686, 2015

    2015

  136. [144]

    Loophole-free bell inequality violation with superconducting circuits,

    S. Storz, J. Sch ¨ar, A. Kulikov, P. Magnard, P. Kurpiers, J. L ¨utolf, T. Walter, A. Copetudo, K. Reuer, A. Akin, et al., “Loophole-free bell inequality violation with superconducting circuits,” Nature, vol. 617, no. 7960, pp. 265–270, 2023

    2023

  137. [145]

    Reconfigurable entanglement distribution network based on pump management of a spontaneous four-wave mixing source,

    J. Liu, D. Liu, Z. Jin, Z. Lin, H. Li, L. You, X. Feng, F. Liu, K. Cui, W. Zhang, et al. , “Reconfigurable entanglement distribution network based on pump management of a spontaneous four-wave mixing source,” Science Advances, vol. 10, no. 50, p. eado9822, 2024

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.