pith. sign in

arxiv: 2507.14839 · v4 · submitted 2025-07-20 · 🪐 quant-ph · cs.CR

Time Entangled Quantum Blockchain with Phase Encoding for Classical Data

Ruwanga Konara , Kasun De Zoysa , Anuradha Mahasinghe , Asanka Sayakkara , Nalin Ranasinghe This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-19 04:40 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cs.CR
keywords quantum blockchaintemporal entanglementGHZ statesphase encodingquantum hypergraphinformation-theoretic securityquantum cryptographyblockchain security
0
0 comments X p. Extension

The pith

A quantum blockchain integrates temporal GHZ entanglement with phase encoding to combine tamper detection and scalability.

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

The paper proposes a quantum blockchain framework that merges time-entangled GHZ states with phase encoding to secure classical data against quantum threats. It seeks the physical disturbance detectability of GHZ-based designs together with the efficiency of hypergraph approaches. This matters because classical blockchains depend on cryptography that future quantum computers can break. The result is a conceptual architecture intended to resist undetected measurement attacks while supporting larger structures.

Core claim

The authors conceptualize a novel quantum blockchain architecture that integrates temporal GHZ entanglement with phase encoding inspired by the quantum hypergraph blockchain. The proposed design combines the conceptual information-theoretic tamper sensitivity and resistance of temporal entanglement with improved encoding efficiency, offering a unified conceptual framework for scalable and secure quantum blockchains.

What carries the argument

Temporal GHZ entanglement combined with phase encoding, which carries tamper sensitivity through physical disturbance detection while supporting efficient classical data representation.

Load-bearing premise

That the integration of temporal GHZ entanglement and phase encoding preserves the undetected-measurement-attack detectability of the GHZ scheme while simultaneously delivering the scalability claimed for the hypergraph scheme.

What would settle it

A demonstration that an undetected measurement attack succeeds on the integrated structure without disturbing the entanglement, or a comparison showing no gain in encoding efficiency or scalability over the separate schemes.

read the original abstract

With rapid advancements in quantum computing, it is widely anticipated that scalable quantum hardware may threaten classical cryptography and hence, the internet and the current information security infrastructure in the coming decade. This is mainly due to the operational realizations of quantum algorithms such as Grover and Shor, to which the current classical encryption protocols are vulnerable. Blockchains, i.e., blockchain data structures and their data, rely heavily on classical cryptography. One approach to secure blockchains is to attempt to achieve conceptual information-theoretic security under certain assumptions by defining blockchains on quantum technologies. There have been two major conceptualizations of blockchains data structures on quantum registers: the time-entangled Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state blockchain and the quantum hypergraph blockchain. We conceptualize a new quantum blockchain framework combining features of both these schemes to achieve the conceptual information-theoretic protection against undetected measurement attack (physics-based disturbance detectability) of the time-entangled GHZ blockchain and the scalability and efficiency of the quantum hypergraph blockchain in the proposed quantum blockchain data structure and framework. In this work, we propose a novel quantum blockchain architecture that integrates temporal GHZ entanglement with phase encoding inspired by the quantum hypergraph blockchain. The proposed design combines the conceptual information-theoretic tamper sensitivity/resistance of temporal entanglement with improved encoding efficiency, offering a unified conceptual framework for scalable and secure quantum blockchains.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a novel quantum blockchain architecture integrating temporal GHZ entanglement (for conceptual information-theoretic tamper sensitivity against undetected measurement attacks) with phase encoding inspired by quantum hypergraph schemes (for improved encoding efficiency and scalability). It presents this as a unified conceptual framework for secure and scalable quantum blockchains handling classical data.

Significance. If the integration can be shown to simultaneously preserve GHZ-style physics-based disturbance detectability and deliver the claimed scalability without introducing new vulnerabilities, the work would provide a useful conceptual synthesis of two prior quantum blockchain approaches. The paper explicitly builds on and credits the time-entangled GHZ blockchain and quantum hypergraph blockchain schemes, which is a strength in its framing of unification.

major comments (2)
  1. [Framework description] Framework description section (following the abstract's combined framework paragraph): No explicit state definition, encoding map, or mathematical construction is given for the phase-encoded temporal GHZ state. This is load-bearing for the central claim, as the abstract asserts that the design 'combines the conceptual information-theoretic tamper sensitivity/resistance of temporal entanglement with improved encoding efficiency' without deriving or verifying that phase encoding preserves the measurement-disturbance signature required for undetected-attack detectability.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract and security/efficiency claims paragraph: The assertion that the proposal retains 'physics-based disturbance detectability' from the GHZ scheme while achieving 'scalability and efficiency' from the hypergraph scheme is stated as a direct combination. No attack model, security reduction, or even qualitative analysis is provided to show that the phase encoding does not degrade the detectability property under measurement, making the simultaneous achievement an unverified assumption rather than a derived result.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and introduction could more explicitly separate inherited properties from the two cited schemes versus the novel contributions of the phase-encoding integration.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which help clarify the presentation of our conceptual framework. We address each point below and have revised the manuscript to strengthen the mathematical and analytical content.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Framework description section (following the abstract's combined framework paragraph): No explicit state definition, encoding map, or mathematical construction is given for the phase-encoded temporal GHZ state. This is load-bearing for the central claim, as the abstract asserts that the design 'combines the conceptual information-theoretic tamper sensitivity/resistance of temporal entanglement with improved encoding efficiency' without deriving or verifying that phase encoding preserves the measurement-disturbance signature required for undetected-attack detectability.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the original manuscript presented the integration at a conceptual level without a self-contained mathematical construction. In the revised version, we have added an explicit definition in the Framework Description section. The phase-encoded temporal GHZ state is now defined as |Ψ⟩ = (1/√2)(|0⟩^⊗n + e^{iΦ} |1⟩^⊗n), where the total phase Φ is obtained via the hypergraph-inspired encoding map that assigns phases to classical data bits. Because the encoding consists of diagonal unitaries in the computational basis, it preserves the global entanglement structure of the original temporal GHZ state; any measurement still collapses the superposition and produces detectable inconsistencies along the time axis. This addition directly addresses the load-bearing claim. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Abstract and security/efficiency claims paragraph: The assertion that the proposal retains 'physics-based disturbance detectability' from the GHZ scheme while achieving 'scalability and efficiency' from the hypergraph scheme is stated as a direct combination. No attack model, security reduction, or even qualitative analysis is provided to show that the phase encoding does not degrade the detectability property under measurement, making the simultaneous achievement an unverified assumption rather than a derived result.

    Authors: We agree that the original text stated the combination without supporting reasoning. We have inserted a new qualitative analysis subsection that outlines a basic intercept-resend attack model and shows why phase encoding does not remove the disturbance signature: the encoding operations commute with the GHZ projector and leave the off-diagonal coherence terms intact, so measurement by an adversary still yields random outcomes that violate the expected temporal correlations. The abstract has been updated to reflect this qualitative support rather than an unverified assertion. A full formal security reduction lies outside the scope of the present conceptual paper. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity in conceptual integration of prior schemes

full rationale

The paper proposes a new quantum blockchain by conceptually combining the tamper-detection properties of the time-entangled GHZ scheme with the scalability of the quantum hypergraph scheme via phase encoding. No equations, fitted parameters, or derivations are presented that reduce the central claims to the inputs by construction; the security and efficiency assertions are explicitly attributed to the properties of the two externally cited prior conceptualizations rather than being redefined or statistically forced within this work. The framework description remains a high-level unification without self-referential loops or load-bearing self-citations.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The proposal rests on standard quantum-information assumptions about entanglement persistence and measurement disturbance without new supporting evidence or formal verification.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Temporal GHZ entanglement can detect undetected measurement attacks in a blockchain data structure
    Inherited from the cited time-entangled GHZ blockchain scheme; invoked in the abstract when describing tamper sensitivity.
  • domain assumption Phase encoding can store classical data efficiently inside the entangled quantum states
    Inherited from the cited quantum hypergraph blockchain; invoked when describing improved encoding efficiency.
invented entities (1)
  • Time Entangled Quantum Blockchain with Phase Encoding no independent evidence
    purpose: Unified architecture providing both tamper detectability and scalability
    New conceptual synthesis introduced in the abstract; no independent experimental or formal evidence supplied.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5792 in / 1404 out tokens · 34730 ms · 2026-05-19T04:40:23.789048+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

45 extracted references · 45 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system

    Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. SSRN Electronic Journal, 2008

    work page 2008

  2. [2]

    Fartitchou, H

    M. Fartitchou, H. El Marraki, L. Lafkir, A. Azzouz, K. El Makkaoui, and Z. El Allali. Public-key cryptography behind blockchain security. In 2022 5th International Conference on Networking, Information Systems and Security (NISS), pages 1–5, 2022

    work page 2022

  3. [3]

    Lin, S.-P

    C.-H. Lin, S.-P. Li, Y .-C. Lin, and C.-H. Tsai. Blockchain-based secure storage system for medical image data. In 2023 IEEE 3rd International Conference on Electronic Communications, Internet of Things and Big Data (ICEIB), pages 158–163, 2023

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Kadena and S

    E. Kadena and S. Qose. Blockchain in social media: Eliminating centralized control vs. challenges. In 2022 IEEE 10th Jubilee International Conference on Computational Cybernetics and Cyber-Medical Systems (ICCC), pages 000111–000116, 2022

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Z. Yang, H. Alfauri, B. Farkiani, R. Jain, R. Di Pietro, and A. Erbad. A survey and comparison of post-quantum and quantum blockchains. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials, 26(2):967–1002, 2024. 9 A PREPRINT - SEPTEMBER 3, 2025

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    P. W. Shor. Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring. In Proceedings of the 35th IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 124–134, 1994

    work page 1994

  7. [7]

    R. H. Preston. Applying grover’s algorithm to hash functions: A software perspective. IEEE Access, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    T. M. Fernández-Caramés and P. Fraga-Lamas. Towards post-quantum blockchain: A review on blockchain cryptography resistant to quantum computing attacks. IEEE Access, 8:21091–21116, 2020

    work page 2020

  9. [9]

    Rajan and M

    D. Rajan and M. Visser. Quantum blockchain using entanglement in time. Quantum Reports, 1(1):3–11, 2019

    work page 2019

  10. [10]

    Banerjee, A

    S. Banerjee, A. Mukherjee, and P. K. Panigrahi. Quantum blockchain using weighted hypergraph states. Physical Review Research, 2(1):013322, 2020

    work page 2020

  11. [11]

    Einstein, B

    A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen. Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Physical Review, 47(10):777–780, 1935

    work page 1935

  12. [12]

    C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crépeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters. Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and einstein-podolsky-rosen channels. Physical Review Letters, 70(13):1895–1899, 1993

    work page 1993

  13. [13]

    Quantum internet

    Ming-Xing Luo. Quantum internet. In Quantum Networks: Introduction and Applications, pages 29–57. Springer Nature Singapore, 2024

    work page 2024

  14. [14]

    Carvacho, F

    G. Carvacho, F. Graffitti, V . D’Ambrosio, B. C. Hiesmayr, and F. Sciarrino. Experimental investigation on the geometry of ghz states. Scientific Reports, 7(1):13265, 2017

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    D. M. Greenberger, M. A. Horne, and A. Zeilinger. Going beyond bell’s theorem. arXiv preprint arXiv:0712.0921, 2007

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  16. [16]

    Megidish, A

    E. Megidish, A. Halevy, T. Shacham, T. Dvir, L. Dovrat, and H. S. Eisenberg. Entanglement swapping between photons that have never coexisted. Physical Review Letters, 110(21):210403, 2013

    work page 2013

  17. [17]

    D. Deutsch. Quantum theory, the church–turing principle and the universal quantum computer. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. A. Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 400:97–117, 1985

    work page 1985

  18. [18]

    Deutsch and R

    D. Deutsch and R. Jozsa. Rapid solution of problems by quantum computation. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A: Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 439(1907):553–558, 1992

    work page 1907

  19. [19]

    L. K. Grover. Quantum mechanics helps in searching for a needle in a haystack. Physical Review Letters , 79(2):325–328, 1997

    work page 1997

  20. [20]

    Rossi, M

    M. Rossi, M. Huber, D. Bruß, and C. Macchiavello. Quantum hypergraph states. New Journal of Physics , 15(11):113022, 2013

    work page 2013

  21. [21]

    Gühne, M

    O. Gühne, M. Cuquet, F. E. S. Steinhoff, T. Moroder, M. Rossi, D. Bruß, B. Kraus, and C. Macchiavello. Entan- glement and nonclassical properties of hypergraph states. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 47(33):335303, 2014

    work page 2014

  22. [22]

    R. Qu, J. Wang, Z.-S. Li, and Y .-R. Bao. Encoding hypergraphs into quantum states. Physical Review A , 87(2):022311, 2013

    work page 2013

  23. [23]

    Tsimakuridze and O

    N. Tsimakuridze and O. Gühne. Graph states and local unitary transformations beyond local clifford operations. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical, 50(19):195302, 2017

    work page 2017

  24. [24]

    Kruszynska and B

    C. Kruszynska and B. Kraus. Local entanglability and multipartite entanglement.Physical Review A, 79(5):052304, 2009

    work page 2009

  25. [25]

    Megidish, T

    E. Megidish, T. Shacham, A. Halevy, L. Dovrat, and H. S. Eisenberg. Resource efficient source of multiphoton polarization entanglement. Physical Review Letters, 109(8):080504, 2012

    work page 2012

  26. [26]

    Quantum Tomography of Inductively-Created Large Multiphoton States

    E. Megidish, A. Halevy, Y . Pilnyak, A. Slapa, and H. S. Eisenberg. Quantum tomography of inductively-created large multiphoton states. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.03633, 2017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  27. [27]

    H. Cao, L. M. Hansen, F. Giorgino, L. Carosini, P. Zahálka, F. Zilk, J. C. Loredo, and P. Walther. Photonic source of heralded greenberger-horne-zeilinger states. Physical Review Letters, 132(13):130604, 2024

    work page 2024

  28. [28]

    Omran, H

    A. Omran, H. Levine, A. Keesling, G. Semeghini, T. T. Wang, S. Ebadi, H. Bernien, A. S. Zibrov, H. Pichler, S. Choi, J. Cui, M. Rossignolo, P. Rembold, S. Montangero, T. Calarco, M. Endres, M. Greiner, V . Vuleti ´c, and M. D. Lukin. Generation and manipulation of schrödinger cat states in rydberg atom arrays. Science, 365(6453):570–574, 2019

    work page 2019

  29. [29]

    Xing, X.-M

    W.-B. Xing, X.-M. Hu, Y . Guo, B.-H. Liu, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo. Preparation of multiphoton high-dimensional ghz states. Optics Express, 31:24887–24896, 2023

    work page 2023

  30. [30]

    C. Simon. Towards a global quantum network. Nature Photonics, 11(11):678–680, 2017. 10 A PREPRINT - SEPTEMBER 3, 2025

    work page 2017

  31. [31]

    Quantum Digital Signatures

    D. Gottesman and I. Chuang. Quantum digital signatures. arXiv preprint arXiv:quant-ph/0105032, 2001

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  32. [32]

    D. E. Bruschi, T. C. Ralph, I. Fuentes, T. Jennewein, and M. Razavi. Spacetime effects on satellite-based quantum communications. Physical Review D, 90(4):045041, 2014

    work page 2014

  33. [33]

    M. A. Khan, M. N. Aman, and B. Sikdar. Architecting the quantum future: Key devices and layers in quantum network design. In 2024 IEEE Physical Assurance and Inspection of Electronics (PAINE), pages 1–7, 2024

    work page 2024

  34. [34]

    Diadamo, J

    S. Diadamo, J. Nötzel, B. Zanger, and M. M. Be¸ se. Qunetsim: A software framework for quantum networks. IEEE Transactions on Quantum Engineering, 2:1–12, 2021

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    Jiang, M.-X

    J.-L. Jiang, M.-X. Luo, and S.-Y . Ma. Quantum network capacity of entangled quantum internet.IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 42(7):1900–1918, 2024

    work page 1900

  36. [36]

    Mannalatha, S

    V . Mannalatha, S. Mishra, and A. Pathak. A comprehensive review of quantum random number generators: concepts, classification and the origin of randomness. Quantum Information Processing, 22(12):278, 2023

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    P. Paul, P. S. Aithal, R. Saavedra, and S. Ghosh. Blockchain technology and its types—a short review.International Journal of Applied Science and Engineering (IJASE), 9(2):189–200, 2021

    work page 2021

  38. [38]

    J. Xu, C. Wang, and X. Jia. A survey of blockchain consensus protocols. ACM Computing Surveys, 55(13s):278, 2023

    work page 2023

  39. [39]

    Blockchain Consensus Protocols in the Wild

    C. Cachin and M. Vukolic. Blockchain consensus protocols in the wild. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.01873, 2017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  40. [40]

    Vukoli´c

    M. Vukoli´c. The quest for scalable blockchain fabric: Proof-of-work vs. bft replication. In Open Problems in Network Security, pages 112–125. Springer, 2016

    work page 2016

  41. [41]

    Lloyd, L

    S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, R. Garcia-Patron, V . Giovannetti, Y . Shikano, S. Pirandola, L. A. Rozema, A. Darabi, Y . Soudagar, L. K. Shalm, and A. M. Steinberg. Closed timelike curves via postselection: Theory and experimental test of consistency. Physical Review Letters, 106(4):040403, 2011

    work page 2011

  42. [42]

    Lloyd, L

    S. Lloyd, L. Maccone, R. Garcia-Patron, V . Giovannetti, and Y . Shikano. Quantum mechanics of time travel through post-selected teleportation. Physical Review D, 84(2):025007, 2011

    work page 2011

  43. [43]

    S. J. Olson and T. C. Ralph. Entanglement between the future and the past in the quantum vacuum. Physical Review Letters, 106(11):110404, 2011

    work page 2011

  44. [44]

    S. J. Olson and T. C. Ralph. Extraction of timelike entanglement from the quantum vacuum. Physical Review A, 85(1):012306, 2012

    work page 2012

  45. [45]

    Sabín, B

    C. Sabín, B. Peropadre, M. del Rey, and E. Martín-Martínez. Extracting past-future vacuum correlations using circuit qed. Physical Review Letters, 109(3):033602, 2012. 11

    work page 2012