pith. sign in

arxiv: 2501.12709 · v2 · pith:TJFW2D4Bnew · submitted 2025-01-22 · 🪐 quant-ph · cs.AI· cs.CR· cs.DC

Experimentally validated quantum-secure federated learning over a multi-user quantum network

Zhi-Ping Liu , Xiao-Yu Cao , Hao-Wen Liu , Xiao-Ran Sun , Yu Bao , Jian-Yu Shen , Yu-Shuo Lu , Hua-Lei Yin
show 1 more author
Zeng-Bing Chen
This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 05:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cs.AIcs.CRcs.DC
keywords quantum federated learningquantum key distributioninformation-theoretic securityquantum networksfederated learningquantum internetmodel compression
0
0 comments X

The pith

QuNetQFL masks federated model updates with quantum secret keys for information-theoretic security during aggregation on quantum networks.

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

The paper introduces QuNetQFL, a protocol that runs federated learning on quantum networks by masking each client's local model updates with keys drawn from a shared quantum key distribution setup. This masking step is designed to deliver information-theoretic security against both classical and quantum eavesdroppers while the server aggregates the updates. The authors implement the scheme on a four-client quantum network, run it on quantum datasets and on a hybrid language model for sentiment analysis, and show that one quantum client measurably lifts accuracy on entangled data. Large-scale simulations indicate the approach scales to two hundred clients with a 75 percent drop in communication volume after compression.

Core claim

QuNetQFL is a quantum federated learning protocol in which local model updates are masked with distributed quantum secret keys generated on a multi-user quantum network, thereby providing information-theoretic security during the aggregation phase; the protocol is experimentally realized on a four-client quantum network and shown to maintain accuracy on both quantum and classical tasks while scaling to hundreds of clients with reduced communication overhead.

What carries the argument

Masking of local model updates with distributed quantum secret keys generated across the multi-user quantum network

If this is right

  • Global model accuracy rises when even a single client contributes quantum data on multipartite entangled or non-stabilizer tasks.
  • Hybrid classical-quantum language models can be fine-tuned under the same masking scheme on real quantum hardware with performance comparable to classical federated learning.
  • Communication volume drops by 75 percent after model compression while convergence remains rapid up to 200 clients.
  • The same key-masking step can be applied to any gradient-based federated task that currently relies on classical encryption.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Future quantum-internet backbones could host many such masked aggregation servers without requiring trusted classical intermediaries.
  • The four-client demonstration supplies a concrete benchmark for testing larger quantum-network testbeds or different key-distribution topologies.
  • Model-compression techniques shown here may combine with other quantum-secure primitives such as blind quantum computing for end-to-end private training.

Load-bearing premise

The quantum secret keys stay information-theoretically secure against any adversary throughout the entire aggregation process and the experimental hardware introduces no exploitable side-channel leakage.

What would settle it

Demonstration that an eavesdropper can recover a non-negligible fraction of any client's model update from the masked values sent to the server, either by exploiting the key distribution or by attacking the aggregation step in the four-client setup.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.12709 by Hao-Wen Liu, Hua-Lei Yin, Jian-Yu Shen, Xiao-Ran Sun, Xiao-Yu Cao, Yu Bao, Yu-Shuo Lu, Zeng-Bing Chen, Zhi-Ping Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic of the QuNetQFL Framework. (a) The QuNetQFL framework employs a fully connected quantum network among K clients, where each client uses QKD to securely exchange quantum secure keys with others, enabling pairwise masking of local model updates. Only these masked updates are sent to the server through classical channels, preserving client privacy. The server aggregates the updates to form an unmask… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Experimental setup of the quantum network. At Eve’s site, a continuous-wave laser source is employed with two intensity modulators (IM) and a variable optical attenuator (VOA) to produce weak coherent pulses. Four clients (Alice, Bob, Charlie, and David) are interconnected in the Sagnac loop. When any pair of clients need to establish secret keys, Eve injects the pulses into the loop via a circulator (Cir)… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Performance of QuNetQFL on quantum state classification using QNN. (a) Entanglement classification: final test accuracies are 88.5% with three clients, 91.5% with four clients, and 93% for the benchmark. (b) Nonstabilizerness classification: final test accuracies are 95.8% with three clients, 98.3% with four clients, and 100% for the benchmark. These two tasks used 16-bit quantization (q = 16) over 200 and… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Evaluation of QuNetQFL on the MNIST classification task using QNN. (a) IID setting showing test accuracy and loss across 200 communication rounds for client combinations {3, 6}, {0, 1}, {3, 5}, and {3, 9} with 16-bit quantization. (b) Non-IID setting with identical client configurations as (a) for comparative analysis. (c) Final test accuracy comparison between IID and non-IID settings, with annotated accu… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Federated learning enables decentralized, privacy-preserving training but remains vulnerable to privacy leakage in the quantum era. Quantum federated learning (QFL) offers a promising path towards enhanced security and efficiency. However, a practical and experimentally validated QFL protocol utilizing near-term quantum techniques to address data privacy has been lacking. Here we present QuNetQFL, a QFL protocol implemented on quantum networks, in which local model updates are masked with distributed quantum secret keys, offering information-theoretic security during aggregation. We experimentally validate the protocol on a four-client quantum network and benchmark its performance using the generated keys on quantum and real-world datasets. Adding a single quantum client significantly improves global accuracy for classifying multipartite entangled and non-stabilizer quantum datasets. For language tasks, we apply QuNetQFL to sentiment analysis by federated fine-tuning of a hybrid classical-quantum language model, achieving comparable and robust performance in simulation and on real quantum hardware. Large-scale simulations further demonstrate scalability to 200 clients for handwritten-digit recognition, with rapid convergence and a $75\%$ reduction in communication cost via model compression. Our work establishes a practical and scalable route to quantum-secure federated learning for the emerging quantum internet.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The paper presents QuNetQFL, a quantum federated learning protocol implemented on multi-user quantum networks in which local model updates are masked with distributed quantum secret keys to achieve information-theoretic security during aggregation. It reports experimental validation on a four-client quantum network, performance benchmarks on quantum and classical datasets (including multipartite entangled states and sentiment analysis via hybrid models), accuracy improvements from adding quantum clients, and large-scale simulations showing scalability to 200 clients with 75% communication cost reduction via model compression.

Significance. If the experimental security and accuracy claims hold under the deployed hardware, the work would provide a concrete demonstration of combining QKD-derived keys with federated learning on near-term quantum networks, addressing privacy in the quantum era. The four-client experiment and 200-client simulations offer practical benchmarks, though the absence of explicit device characterization limits the strength of the information-theoretic guarantee.

major comments (2)
  1. [Experimental validation and security analysis sections] The central claim of information-theoretic security (abstract and protocol description) rests on the distributed quantum keys remaining secure against classical and quantum adversaries, but the experimental section provides no device-independent security proof, no quantitative bounds on side-channel leakage from detectors/channels/timing, and no adversarial simulation for the specific 4-client setup; this assumption is load-bearing for the 'quantum-secure' validation.
  2. [Experimental methods and results] The abstract asserts 'experimentally validate the protocol' and reports performance numbers, yet the methods lack data-exclusion criteria, full hardware characterization (e.g., QKD error rates, key rates), and error-bar reporting on the generated keys used for masking, preventing verification that the measured accuracies and security properties are supported by the raw measurements.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Scalability simulations] The 75% communication cost reduction in the 200-client simulation should explicitly compare the compression technique against standard classical FL baselines and state the exact compression ratio used.
  2. [Protocol description] Notation for the hybrid classical-quantum language model and the masking operation with quantum keys could be clarified with an explicit equation in the protocol section.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on the security analysis and experimental reporting. We address each major point below and have revised the manuscript to strengthen the presentation of assumptions and data details.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Experimental validation and security analysis sections] The central claim of information-theoretic security (abstract and protocol description) rests on the distributed quantum keys remaining secure against classical and quantum adversaries, but the experimental section provides no device-independent security proof, no quantitative bounds on side-channel leakage from detectors/channels/timing, and no adversarial simulation for the specific 4-client setup; this assumption is load-bearing for the 'quantum-secure' validation.

    Authors: We agree that the work does not include a device-independent security proof or quantitative side-channel bounds, as the information-theoretic security claim relies on the standard composable security proofs of the underlying QKD protocol (BBM92) implemented in the network. The experimental focus is on protocol integration and performance rather than a new security characterization. We have added an explicit security model subsection referencing the QKD assumptions and noting that side-channel analysis and adversarial simulations for the 4-client setup are outside the current scope. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Experimental methods and results] The abstract asserts 'experimentally validate the protocol' and reports performance numbers, yet the methods lack data-exclusion criteria, full hardware characterization (e.g., QKD error rates, key rates), and error-bar reporting on the generated keys used for masking, preventing verification that the measured accuracies and security properties are supported by the raw measurements.

    Authors: We accept this point. The revised manuscript now includes QKD error rates, secure key rates, and error bars on all performance metrics derived from the keys. We have also clarified that no data exclusion criteria were applied because all successfully generated keys from the four-client runs were used for masking. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: experimental protocol validation with no derivation chain

full rationale

The paper describes an experimental implementation and validation of the QuNetQFL protocol on a four-client quantum network, including benchmarks on quantum and real-world datasets plus large-scale simulations. No equations, predictions, or first-principles derivations are presented that reduce by construction to fitted inputs, self-definitions, or self-citation chains. Security claims rest on standard QKD assumptions rather than any internal mathematical reduction, and the work is framed as a practical demonstration rather than a theoretical derivation. This matches the default expectation of a non-circular experimental paper.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review supplies insufficient detail to enumerate free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the security claim rests on standard assumptions of quantum key distribution that are not expanded here.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5782 in / 1221 out tokens · 57050 ms · 2026-05-23T05:04:37.402441+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. AdeptHEQ-FL: Adaptive Homomorphic Encryption for Federated Learning of Hybrid Classical-Quantum Models with Dynamic Layer Sparing

    cs.LG 2025-07 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    AdeptHEQ-FL integrates hybrid CNN-PQC models, adaptive homomorphic encryption, accuracy-weighted aggregation, and dynamic layer freezing in federated learning to gain accuracy on image datasets while lowering communic...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

92 extracted references · 92 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Select the subset of clients’ indexesS t

    work page

  2. [2]

    For each client i∈St: a) Update the local model and compute the local up- date: ∆ θt i←θt i−θt−1. b) Perform an MDI QKD protocol (see Box 1) with each other connected clients in the S t in the underlying quantum networks, and generate masking vector: mt i← ∑ j∈St,j̸=i (−1)i>j·QKt i,j. c) Compute masked and quantized local update: ∆˜θt i← [ Qq(pt i·∆ θt i)...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Aggregate updates: ∆ θt← [∑ i∈St ∆˜θt i ] mod 2q

    work page

  4. [4]

    end for Output the trained global model parameters θT

    Update global model: θt←θt−1 + Dq(∆ θt). end for Output the trained global model parameters θT . communication and quantum secret key costs. We experimentally validated this approach using a five-party quantum network, achieving quantum secret key generation with key rates exceeding 30 kbps in both 3-client and 4-client scenarios, underscoring the feasibi...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Randomly choose basis ( X or Y ) and prepare corresponding weak coherent states ⊗n k=1|eiφk√µ⟩, whereµis the pulse inten- sity

    work page

  6. [6]

    Send the states to an untrusted node, Eve, for measurement

    work page

  7. [7]

    Decide whether to flip the bit according to the measurement outcome

    work page

  8. [8]

    Estimate bit error rate by clients’ an- nouncements

    work page

  9. [9]

    end for Note: Secret keys used in QuNetQFL can be generated during training or pre-generated to the overall process time

    Perform postprocessing steps (error cor- rection and privacy amplification) to gener- ate enough final secure keys. end for Note: Secret keys used in QuNetQFL can be generated during training or pre-generated to the overall process time. MDI QKD reduces the quantum resources required for client partici- pation, and QuNetQFL is flexible to emerging QKD tec...

    work page

  10. [10]

    LeCun, Y

    Y . LeCun, Y . Bengio, and G. Hinton, Deep learning, Na- ture 521, 436 (2015)

    work page 2015

  11. [11]

    L.-P. Cen, J. Ji, J.-W. Lin, S.-T. Ju, H.-J. Lin, T.-P. Li, Y . Wang, J.-F. Yang, Y .-F. Liu, S. Tan,et al., Automatic detection of 39 fundus diseases and conditions in retinal photographs using deep neural networks, Nat. Commun. 12, 4828 (2021)

    work page 2021

  12. [12]

    B. R. Kiran, I. Sobh, V . Talpaert, P. Mannion, A. A. Al Sallab, S. Yogamani, and P. Pérez, Deep reinforcement learning for autonomous driving: A survey, IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 23, 4909 (2021)

    work page 2021

  13. [13]

    Jumper, R

    J. Jumper, R. Evans, A. Pritzel, T. Green, M. Figurnov, O. Ronneberger, K. Tunyasuvunakool, R. Bates, A. Žídek, A. Potapenko, et al. , Highly accurate protein structure prediction with alphafold, Nature 596, 583 (2021)

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    Davies, P

    A. Davies, P. Veli ˇckovi´c, L. Buesing, S. Blackwell, D. Zheng, N. Tomašev, R. Tanburn, P. Battaglia, C. Blun- dell, A. Juhász, et al., Advancing mathematics by guiding human intuition with ai, Nature 600, 70 (2021)

    work page 2021

  15. [15]

    T. B. Brown, B. Mann, N. Ryder, M. Subbiah, J. Ka- plan, P. Dhariwal, A. Neelakantan, P. Shyam, G. Sas- try, A. Askell, S. Agarwal, A. Herbert-V oss, G. Krueger, T. Henighan, R. Child, A. Ramesh, D. M. Ziegler, J. Wu, C. Winter, C. Hesse, M. Chen, E. Sigler, M. Litwin, S. Gray, B. Chess, J. Clark, C. Berner, S. McCandlish, A. Radford, I. Sutskever, and D....

    work page 2020

  16. [16]

    Milano, J

    S. Milano, J. A. McGrane, and S. Leonelli, Large lan- guage models challenge the future of higher education, Nat. Mach. Intell. 5, 333 (2023)

    work page 2023

  17. [17]

    Scaling Laws for Neural Language Models

    J. Kaplan, S. McCandlish, T. Henighan, T. B. Brown, B. Chess, R. Child, S. Gray, A. Radford, J. Wu, and D. Amodei, Scaling laws for neural language models 11 (2020), arXiv:2001.08361 [cs.LG]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  18. [18]

    Grishin, K

    D. Grishin, K. Obbad, and G. M. Church, Data privacy in the age of personal genomics, Nat. Biotechnol. 37, 1115 (2019)

    work page 2019

  19. [19]

    W. N. Price and I. G. Cohen, Privacy in the age of medical big data, Nat. Med. 25, 37 (2019)

    work page 2019

  20. [20]

    McMahan, E

    B. McMahan, E. Moore, D. Ramage, S. Hampson, and B. A. y. Arcas, Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Data, in Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Artificial Intel- ligence and Statistics , Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, V ol. 54, edited by A. Singh and J. Zhu (PMLR,

    work page

  21. [21]

    Q. Yang, Y . Liu, T. Chen, and Y . Tong, Federated machine learning: Concept and applications, ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST) 10, 1 (2019)

    work page 2019

  22. [22]

    Rieke, J

    N. Rieke, J. Hancox, W. Li, F. Milletari, H. R. Roth, S. Albarqouni, S. Bakas, M. N. Galtier, B. A. Landman, K. Maier-Hein, et al. , The future of digital health with federated learning, npj Digital Med. 3, 119 (2020)

    work page 2020

  23. [23]

    Y . Zhao, J. Zhao, M. Yang, T. Wang, N. Wang, L. Lyu, D. Niyato, and K.-Y . Lam, Local differential privacy- based federated learning for internet of things, IEEE In- ternet Things J. 8, 8836 (2020)

    work page 2020

  24. [24]

    L. Yang, B. Tan, V . W. Zheng, K. Chen, and Q. Yang, Federated recommendation systems, Federated Learning: Privacy and Incentive , 225 (2020)

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Biamonte, P

    J. Biamonte, P. Wittek, N. Pancotti, P. Rebentrost, N. Wiebe, and S. Lloyd, Quantum machine learning, Na- ture 549, 195 (2017)

    work page 2017

  26. [26]

    Cerezo, G

    M. Cerezo, G. Verdon, H.-Y . Huang, L. Cincio, and P. J. Coles, Challenges and opportunities in quantum machine learning, Nat. Comput. Sci. 2, 567 (2022)

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    Zhou, Z.-P

    M.-G. Zhou, Z.-P. Liu, H.-L. Yin, C.-L. Li, T.-K. Xu, and Z.-B. Chen, Quantum neural network for quantum neural computing, Research 6, 0134 (2023)

    work page 2023

  28. [28]

    C. Ren, H. Yu, R. Yan, M. Xu, Y . Shen, H. Zhu, D. Niyato, Z. Y . Dong, and L. C. Kwek, Towards quantum federated learning, arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.09912 (2023)

    work page arXiv 2023

  29. [29]

    S. Y .-C. Chen and S. Yoo, Federated quantum machine learning, Entropy 23, 460 (2021)

    work page 2021

  30. [30]

    A. S. Bhatia, S. Kais, and M. A. Alam, Federated quan- volutional neural network: a new paradigm for collabora- tive quantum learning, Quantum Sci. Technol. 8, 045032 (2023)

    work page 2023

  31. [31]

    Zhao, Non-iid quantum federated learning with one- shot communication complexity, Quantum Mach

    H. Zhao, Non-iid quantum federated learning with one- shot communication complexity, Quantum Mach. Intell. 5, 3 (2023)

    work page 2023

  32. [32]

    Cerezo, A

    M. Cerezo, A. Arrasmith, R. Babbush, S. C. Benjamin, S. Endo, K. Fujii, J. R. McClean, K. Mitarai, X. Yuan, L. Cincio, et al. , Variational quantum algorithms, Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 625 (2021)

    work page 2021

  33. [33]

    Preskill, Quantum computing in the nisq era and be- yond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018)

    J. Preskill, Quantum computing in the nisq era and be- yond, Quantum 2, 79 (2018)

    work page 2018

  34. [34]

    Mothukuri, R

    V . Mothukuri, R. M. Parizi, S. Pouriyeh, Y . Huang, A. De- hghantanha, and G. Srivastava, A survey on security and privacy of federated learning, Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 115, 619 (2021)

    work page 2021

  35. [35]

    Zhang, C

    Y . Zhang, C. Zhang, C. Zhang, L. Fan, B. Zeng, and Q. Yang, Federated learning with quantum secure aggre- gation, arXiv preprint arXiv:2207.07444 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  36. [36]

    C. Li, N. Kumar, Z. Song, S. Chakrabarti, and M. Pistoia, Privacy-preserving quantum federated learning via gradi- ent hiding, Quantum Sci. Technol. 9, 035028 (2024)

    work page 2024

  37. [37]

    Li and D.-L

    W. Li and D.-L. Deng, Quantum delegated and federated learning via quantum homomorphic encryption (2024), arXiv:2409.19359 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    C. Li, B. Li, O. Amer, R. Shaydulin, S. Chakrabarti, G. Wang, H. Xu, H. Tang, I. Schoch, N. Kumar, et al., Blind quantum machine learning with quantum bipartite correlator, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 120602 (2024)

    work page 2024

  39. [39]

    W. Li, S. Lu, and D.-L. Deng, Quantum federated learn- ing through blind quantum computing, Sci. China Phys., Mech. Astron. 64, 100312 (2021)

    work page 2021

  40. [40]

    Wehner, D

    S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, Quantum inter- net: A vision for the road ahead, Science 362, eaam9288 (2018)

    work page 2018

  41. [41]

    H.-L. Yin, Y . Fu, C.-L. Li, C.-X. Weng, B.-H. Li, J. Gu, Y .-S. Lu, S. Huang, and Z.-B. Chen, Experimental quan- tum secure network with digital signatures and encryp- tion, Natl. Sci. Rev. 10, nwac228 (2023)

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    Azuma, S

    K. Azuma, S. E. Economou, D. Elkouss, P. Hilaire, L. Jiang, H.-K. Lo, and I. Tzitrin, Quantum repeaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet, Rev. Mod. Phys. 95, 045006 (2023)

    work page 2023

  43. [43]

    Hermans, M

    S. Hermans, M. Pompili, H. Beukers, S. Baier, J. Borre- gaard, and R. Hanson, Qubit teleportation between non- neighbouring nodes in a quantum network, Nature 605, 663 (2022)

    work page 2022

  44. [44]

    X. Jing, C. Qian, C.-X. Weng, B.-H. Li, Z. Chen, C.- Q. Wang, J. Tang, X.-W. Gu, Y .-C. Kong, T.-S. Chen, et al., Experimental quantum byzantine agreement on a three-user quantum network with integrated photonics, Sci. Adv. 10, eadp2877 (2024)

    work page 2024

  45. [45]

    Schiansky, J

    P. Schiansky, J. Kalb, E. Sztatecsny, M.-C. Roehsner, T. Guggemos, A. Trenti, M. Bozzio, and P. Walther, Demonstration of quantum-digital payments, Nat. Com- mun. 14, 3849 (2023)

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Daiss, S

    S. Daiss, S. Langenfeld, S. Welte, E. Distante, P. Thomas, L. Hartung, O. Morin, and G. Rempe, A quantum-logic gate between distant quantum-network modules, Science 371, 614 (2021)

    work page 2021

  47. [47]

    Cao, B.-H

    X.-Y . Cao, B.-H. Li, Y . Wang, Y . Fu, H.-L. Yin, and Z.-B. Chen, Experimental quantum e-commerce, Sci. Adv. 10, eadk3258 (2024)

    work page 2024

  48. [48]

    H.-K. Lo, M. Curty, and B. Qi, Measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 108, 130503 (2012)

    work page 2012

  49. [49]

    Lucamarini, Z

    M. Lucamarini, Z. L. Yuan, J. F. Dynes, and A. J. Shields, Overcoming the rate–distance limit of quantum key dis- tribution without quantum repeaters, Nature 557, 400 (2018)

    work page 2018

  50. [50]

    Xie, Y .-S

    Y .-M. Xie, Y .-S. Lu, C.-X. Weng, X.-Y . Cao, Z.-Y . Jia, Y . Bao, Y . Wang, Y . Fu, H.-L. Yin, and Z.-B. Chen, Break- ing the rate-loss bound of quantum key distribution with asynchronous two-photon interference, PRX Quantum 3, 020315 (2022)

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    Wang, Z.-Q

    S. Wang, Z.-Q. Yin, D.-Y . He, W. Chen, R.-Q. Wang, P. Ye, Y . Zhou, G.-J. Fan-Yuan, F.-X. Wang, W. Chen, et al., Twin-field quantum key distribution over 830-km fibre, Nat. Photonics 16, 154 (2022)

    work page 2022

  52. [52]

    Gu, X.-Y

    J. Gu, X.-Y . Cao, Y . Fu, Z.-W. He, Z.-J. Yin, H.-L. 12 Yin, and Z.-B. Chen, Experimental measurement-device- independent type quantum key distribution with flawed and correlated sources, Sci. Bull. 67, 2167 (2022)

    work page 2022

  53. [53]

    L. Zhou, J. Lin, Y .-M. Xie, Y .-S. Lu, Y . Jing, H.-L. Yin, and Z. Yuan, Experimental quantum communication over- comes the rate-loss limit without global phase tracking, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 250801 (2023)

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    Liu, W.-J

    Y . Liu, W.-J. Zhang, C. Jiang, J.-P. Chen, C. Zhang, W.-X. Pan, D. Ma, H. Dong, J.-M. Xiong, C.-J. Zhang,et al., Ex- perimental twin-field quantum key distribution over 1000 km fiber distance, Phys. Rev. Lett.130, 210801 (2023)

    work page 2023

  55. [55]

    Chehimi, S

    M. Chehimi, S. Y .-C. Chen, W. Saad, D. Towsley, and M. Debbah, Foundations of quantum federated learn- ing over classical and quantum networks, IEEE Network (2023)

    work page 2023

  56. [56]

    L. U. Khan, W. Saad, Z. Han, E. Hossain, and C. S. Hong, Federated learning for internet of things: Re- cent advances, taxonomy, and open challenges (2021), arXiv:2009.13012 [cs.NI]

    work page arXiv 2021

  57. [57]

    Y . Aono, T. Hayashi, L. Wang, S. Moriai, et al., Privacy- preserving deep learning via additively homomorphic en- cryption, IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 13, 1333 (2017)

    work page 2017

  58. [58]

    Zhang, S

    C. Zhang, S. Li, J. Xia, W. Wang, F. Yan, and Y . Liu, Batchcrypt: efficient homomorphic encryption for cross- silo federated learning, in 2020 USENIX annual technical conference (USENIX ATC 20) (2020) pp. 493–506

    work page 2020

  59. [59]

    C. Chu, L. Jiang, and F. Chen, Cryptoqfl: Quantum feder- ated learning on encrypted data (2023), arXiv:2307.07012 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2023

  60. [60]

    Practical Secure Aggregation for Federated Learning on User-Held Data

    K. Bonawitz, V . Ivanov, B. Kreuter, A. Marcedone, H. B. McMahan, S. Patel, D. Ramage, A. Segal, and K. Seth, Practical secure aggregation for federated learning on user-held data (2016), arXiv:1611.04482 [cs.CR]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  61. [61]

    LaRose and B

    R. LaRose and B. Coyle, c, Phys. Rev. A 102, 032420 (2020)

    work page 2020

  62. [62]

    Bonawitz, V

    K. Bonawitz, V . Ivanov, B. Kreuter, A. Marcedone, H. B. McMahan, S. Patel, D. Ramage, A. Segal, and K. Seth, Practical secure aggregation for privacy-preserving ma- chine learning, in proceedings of the 2017 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (2017) pp. 1175–1191

    work page 2017

  63. [63]

    Friis, G

    N. Friis, G. Vitagliano, M. Malik, and M. Huber, Entan- glement certification from theory to experiment, Nat. Rev. Phys. 1, 72–87 (2018)

    work page 2018

  64. [64]

    J.-H. Cao, F. Chen, Q. Liu, T.-W. Mao, W.-X. Xu, L.-N. Wu, and L. You, Detection of entangled states supported by reinforcement learning, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 073201 (2023)

    work page 2023

  65. [65]

    C. Zhu, Z. Liu, C. Zhu, and X. Wang, Limitations of classically simulable measurements for quantum state dis- crimination, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 (2024)

    work page 2024

  66. [66]

    C. Zhu, C. Zhu, Z. Liu, and X. Wang, Entanglement cost of discriminating quantum states under locality con- straints (2024), arXiv:2402.18446 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2024

  67. [67]

    Kandala, A

    A. Kandala, A. Mezzacapo, K. Temme, M. Takita, M. Brink, J. M. Chow, and J. M. Gambetta, Hardware- efficient variational quantum eigensolver for small molecules and quantum magnets, Nature549, 242 (2017)

    work page 2017

  68. [68]

    Liu and L

    J. Liu and L. Jiang, Quantum data center: Perspectives, IEEE Network , 1–1 (2024)

    work page 2024

  69. [69]

    PennyLane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations

    V . Bergholm, J. Izaac, M. Schuld, C. Gogolin, S. Ahmed, V . Ajith, M. S. Alam, G. Alonso-Linaje, B. Akash- Narayanan, A. Asadi, J. M. Arrazola, U. Azad, S. Ban- ning, C. Blank, T. R. Bromley, B. A. Cordier, J. Ceroni, A. Delgado, O. D. Matteo, A. Dusko, T. Garg, D. Guala, A. Hayes, R. Hill, A. Ijaz, T. Isacsson, D. Ittah, S. Ja- hangiri, P. Jain, E. Jian...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  70. [70]

    Mandil, L

    R. Mandil, L. Qian, and H.-K. Lo, Long-fiber sagnac in- terferometers for twin field quantum key distribution net- works, arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.08009 (2024)

    work page arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    J. Liu, M. Liu, J.-P. Liu, Z. Ye, Y . Wang, Y . Alexeev, J. Eisert, and L. Jiang, Towards provably efficient quan- tum algorithms for large-scale machine-learning models, Nat. Commun. 15, 434 (2024)

    work page 2024

  72. [72]

    Zheng, S

    Y . Zheng, S. Lai, Y . Liu, X. Yuan, X. Yi, and C. Wang, Aggregation service for federated learning: An efficient, secure, and more resilient realization, IEEE Transactions on Dependable and Secure Computing 20, 988 (2022)

    work page 2022

  73. [73]

    Kato, Concentration inequality using unconfirmed knowledge, arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.04357 (2020)

    G. Kato, Concentration inequality using unconfirmed knowledge, arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.04357 (2020)

    work page arXiv 2002

  74. [74]

    Martinez-Mateo, D

    J. Martinez-Mateo, D. Elkouss, and V . Martin, Key recon- ciliation for high performance quantum key distribution, Sci. Rep. 3, 1576 (2013)

    work page 2013

  75. [75]

    C. Ye, S. Mathur, A. Reznik, Y . Shah, W. Trappe, and N. B. Mandayam, Information-theoretically secret key generation for fading wireless channels, IEEE Trans. Inf. Forensics Secur. 5, 240 (2010)

    work page 2010

  76. [76]

    Liu, B.-K

    B. Liu, B.-K. Zhao, W.-R. Yu, and C.-Q. Wu, Fit-pa: Fixed scale fft based privacy amplification algorithm for quantum key distribution, JIT 17, 309 (2016)

    work page 2016

  77. [77]

    Li, B.-Z

    Q. Li, B.-Z. Yan, H.-K. Mao, X.-F. Xue, Q. Han, and H. Guo, High-speed and adaptive fpga-based privacy am- plification in quantum key distribution, IEEE Access 7, 21482 (2019)

    work page 2019

  78. [78]

    Schatzki, A

    L. Schatzki, A. Arrasmith, P. J. Coles, and M. Cerezo, Entangled datasets for quantum machine learning (2021), arXiv:2109.03400 [quant-ph]

    work page arXiv 2021

  79. [79]

    Application of a resource theory for magic states to fault-tolerant quantum computing

    M. Howard and E. Campbell, Application of a Resource Theory for Magic States to Fault-Tolerant Quantum Com- puting, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017), 1609.07488

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  80. [80]

    X. Wang, M. M. Wilde, and Y . Su, Quantifying the magic of quantum channels, New J. Phys. 21, 103002 (2019)

    work page 2019

Showing first 80 references.