pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.29706 · v1 · pith:FNUPFM3Xnew · submitted 2026-05-28 · 🪐 quant-ph

Finite-key feasibility of geostationary quantum key distribution

Vaisakh Mannalath , V\'ictor Zapatero , Marcos Curty This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-29 06:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum key distributiongeostationary satellitesfinite-key analysisdecoy-state BB84satellite downlinksecret key ratechannel modelingcloud cover
0
0 comments X

The pith

Geostationary satellite quantum key distribution achieves positive secret key rates with finite-key decoy-state BB84 protocols despite high loss and noise.

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

This paper conducts an end-to-end feasibility analysis of quantum key distribution from geostationary satellites using a decoy-state BB84 protocol in the downlink. It incorporates variable-length finite-key security analysis and tight statistical bounds while modeling realistic channel losses and background noise that vary with cloud cover and environment. The study evaluates performance across rural, urban, and coastal settings at multiple wavelengths and forecasts annual secret-key yields over Europe from historical cloud data. It maps the high-dimensional parameter space to reveal trade-offs and bottlenecks that set the boundaries of workable operation. The findings supply concrete operating thresholds and design guidelines for missions seeking continuous continental-scale secure links.

Core claim

Incorporating variable-length finite-key security and tight statistical bounds into the decoy-state BB84 protocol expands the positive-key regime for GEO downlink QKD, making it feasible under a physically realistic channel model that includes extreme loss, variable cloud cover, and background noise across environments and wavelengths.

What carries the argument

The physically realistic channel model that captures dominant loss and noise mechanisms, paired with finite-key security analysis applied to principal receiver architectures in the GEO downlink configuration.

If this is right

  • Positive secret key rates become achievable in rural, urban, and coastal environments at visible Fraunhofer minima and telecom wavelengths.
  • Annual secret-key yields across Europe can be forecasted from historical cloud data.
  • Systematic mapping of the parameter space identifies the key trade-offs and performance bottlenecks that govern feasibility.
  • Practical operating thresholds and actionable design guidelines emerge for future GEO-QKD missions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Confirmation would favor GEO platforms for continuous coverage rather than relying solely on low-Earth-orbit constellations.
  • The thresholds could directly shape choices of wavelength, receiver design, and operational windows in mission planning.
  • Sensitivity tests against unmodeled extremes such as prolonged cloud cover would strengthen or limit the forecasts.
  • Hybrid systems linking GEO downlinks to ground fiber networks could extend secure reach beyond single-satellite footprints.

Load-bearing premise

The channel model accurately captures the dominant loss and noise mechanisms including variable cloud cover and background noise levels across environments.

What would settle it

An actual GEO satellite QKD experiment that measures secret key rates falling below the calculated positive thresholds in the modeled rural, urban, or coastal scenarios would disprove the feasibility.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.29706 by Marcos Curty, Vaisakh Mannalath, V\'ictor Zapatero.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Finite-size secret-key rate ℓ/N for an asymmetric active BB84 receiver as a function of total system loss (x axis) and noise-click probability pnoise (y axis). The color map and black contour lines show the finite-size secret-key rate. Columns correspond to misalignment values of 0% and 3%, while rows correspond to afterpulsing probabilities of 0% and 2%. corrected coherence length grow approximately in pr… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: System loss (dB) as a function of receiver aperture [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Combined loss and performance map as a function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: makes the finite-size cost explicit for the default urban daytime architecture with aT = 0.75 m, aR = 1.5 m, and low AO correction. It is the block-size counterpart of the preceding daytime feasibility plots: channels that are admissible in the loss-noise and zenith-angle maps can still be operationally unattractive if they require impractically many transmission rounds before yielding a positive secret-ke… view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Geographic map of the cloud-weighted annual secret [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Secret-key length ℓ (y axis) versus ground arc distance darc (x axis), both on logarithmic scales, for the two signal wavelengths shown in the panel titles, λ = 854.445 nm and λ = 1550.027 nm. In each panel, the colored solid and dashed curves give the urban nighttime and moderate-noise daytime GEO-link results, respectively, for the default aperture pair aT = 0.75 m and aR = 1.5 m with an SNSPD Spec B re… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Finite-size secret-key rate ℓ/N (y axis) versus overall system loss (x axis) for asymmetric active, asymmetric passive, and symmetric passive BB84 receiver architectures. The three subfigures correspond, respectively, to background￾noise probabilities pnoise = 10−7 , 10−8 , and 10−9 per detector per gate. In all cases the optimization uses N = 1012 , ϵtot = 10−8 , misalignment emis = 0.5%, and no afterpul… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Geometry of the satellite-to-ground downlink sce [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Cross-sectional geometry used to derive the max [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Local ENU geometry used in the azimuth derivation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Spot radius at the ground (y axis) versus zenith [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Climatological mean fraction of time for different [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Loss-budget decomposition with loss in dB (y [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Spectral radiance (y axis) versus the full moon’s [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p035_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: shows the background noise as a function of the sites, detectors, and illumination conditions. At night, the lowest points are set by detector dark counts, so the SNSPD cases sit well below the APD cases, but as the daylight background rises the curves bunch together and the location dependence becomes dominant, with the coastal points consistently highest. The figure identifies the regimes in which bette… view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Spectral radiance (top, y axis) and atmospheric [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: fixes the site and receiver aperture and varies daytime noise and transmitter aperture. For 656.448 and 854.445 nm, increasing the daytime background mainly acts by pulling the zenith cutoff leftward; the rate level at small zenith angles changes less dramatically than the accessible-angle range. Increasing the transmitter aperture from 0.75 m to 1.0 m recovers part of that lost margin, but not enough to … view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: System loss (dB) as a function of receiver aperture [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p039_22.png] view at source ↗
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: Finite-size secret-key rate ℓ/N (y axis) versus zenith angle (x axis) as a function of the bandwidth of the AO under nighttime operation at fixed apertures aT = 0.75 m and aR = 1.5 m, with SMF coupling and Spec B detectors. Rows correspond to rural, urban, and coastal locations, and columns compare no AO, low-bandwidth AO (fc = 130 Hz), and strong AO (fc = 500 Hz). Curve color denotes wavelength {656.448,… view at source ↗
Figure 26
Figure 26. Figure 26: Annual finite-size secret-key volume (y axis) versus [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p041_26.png] view at source ↗
Figure 28
Figure 28. Figure 28: System loss (dB) as a function of the receiver [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p042_28.png] view at source ↗
Figure 27
Figure 27. Figure 27: Finite-size secret-key rate ℓ/N as a function of total system loss (x axis, including receiver optics/filter and detector efficiency) and noise-click probability pnoise per de￾tector per gate (y axis, log scale) for an asymmetric active receiver assuming the default finite-key settings, in particu￾lar N = 1012 and ϵtot = 10−8 . The color map and black contour labels show the finite-size secret-key rate. C… view at source ↗
Figure 29
Figure 29. Figure 29: Finite-size secret-key rate ℓ/N as a function of receiver aperture aR (x axis) and transmitter aperture aT (y axis) for the default urban geometry with θ = 60◦ , low AO correction (fc = 130 Hz), SMF coupling, and an SNSPD Spec B receiver. The color map and black contour labels show the finite-size secret-key rate. Rows correspond to λ = 656.448 nm, λ = 854.445 nm, and λ = 1550.027 nm, while columns compar… view at source ↗
Figure 32
Figure 32. Figure 32: Finite-key rate ℓ/N (y axis) versus the number of transmission rounds N (x axis), with both axes on logarith￾mic scales, for the default urban link with fixed transmitter aperture aT = 0.75 m, receiver aperture aR = 1.5 m, low AO correction (fc = 130 Hz), SMF coupling, and Spec B detec￾tors. Columns correspond to λ = 656.448 nm, λ = 854.445 nm, and λ = 1550.027 nm, while rows compare nighttime, daytime mo… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum key distribution (QKD) via geostationary Earth orbit (GEO) satellites offers a compelling route to continuous, continental-scale secure communications. However, operation in this regime entails extreme channel loss and significant background noise, particularly if daylight operation is desired. We present a comprehensive end-to-end feasibility study of a decoy-state BB84 protocol in a GEO downlink configuration, incorporating variable-length finite-key security and tight statistical bounds to expand the achievable positive-key regime. Our analysis encompasses the principal receiver architectures relevant to downlink QKD and employs a physically realistic channel model that captures the dominant loss and noise mechanisms. We evaluate performance across rural, urban, and coastal environments at multiple wavelengths, including visible Fraunhofer absorption minima and the telecom band. Using historical cloud data across Europe, we forecast the annual secret-key yield across the continent. Through a systematic exploration of the high-dimensional parameter space, we identify key trade-offs and performance bottlenecks that determine feasibility. These results establish practical operating thresholds and provide actionable design guidelines for future GEO-QKD missions.

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

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript conducts a comprehensive end-to-end feasibility study of decoy-state BB84 QKD in a GEO satellite downlink. It incorporates variable-length finite-key security analysis with tight statistical bounds, a physically realistic channel model for loss and noise (including variable cloud cover), and historical cloud data to forecast annual secret-key yields across Europe in rural, urban, and coastal settings at multiple wavelengths. The work systematically explores the high-dimensional parameter space to identify trade-offs, performance bottlenecks, and practical operating thresholds for future missions.

Significance. If the calculations are accurate, the results provide actionable design guidelines and operating thresholds for GEO-QKD systems under realistic conditions, including daylight operation. The combination of finite-key analysis with environmental forecasting using historical data is a strength that enhances the practical relevance of the feasibility claims.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the phrase 'variable-length finite-key security and tight statistical bounds' would benefit from a parenthetical reference to the specific bound family (e.g., 'using the variable-length analysis of Ref. X') to allow readers to locate the exact security proof immediately.
  2. The manuscript should explicitly state the range of free parameters explored (channel loss, background rates, finite-key block sizes) and whether any were tuned post hoc to achieve positive key rates; this would strengthen the independence of the reported thresholds.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough summary and positive evaluation of the manuscript, including the recommendation for minor revision. No specific major comments were listed in the report, so we have no individual points requiring detailed rebuttal or clarification at this stage. We will incorporate the minor revisions suggested by the editor and referee in the next version of the manuscript.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper is a standard feasibility analysis applying the decoy-state BB84 protocol with finite-key bounds to a channel model and historical cloud data for yield forecasting. All reported thresholds and trade-offs follow directly from applying the stated models and data to the parameter space; no step reduces by construction to a fitted input renamed as prediction, self-definitional relation, or load-bearing self-citation chain. The central claims remain independent of the inputs once the model and data are accepted.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central feasibility claims rest on standard QKD security assumptions plus numerous modeled channel parameters whose values are chosen or fitted to represent rural, urban, and coastal conditions; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • channel loss and background noise rates
    Values for atmospheric loss, cloud attenuation, and detector noise are selected or fitted per environment and wavelength to produce the reported key rates.
  • finite-key statistical parameters
    Block sizes, failure probabilities, and smoothing parameters in the variable-length finite-key analysis are chosen to expand the positive-key regime.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Decoy-state BB84 with finite-key analysis yields secure keys against general attacks when the observed statistics satisfy the stated bounds.
    Invoked throughout the end-to-end study as the security foundation.
  • domain assumption Historical cloud data and standard atmospheric models are representative of future operating conditions.
    Used to forecast annual yields across Europe.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5712 in / 1375 out tokens · 29025 ms · 2026-06-29T06:53:01.434929+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. Finite-key security analysis of decoy-state QKD with source and detector imperfections

    quant-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Analytical finite-key security proof for decoy-state QKD that incorporates state-preparation flaws, bit/basis side-channel leakage and correlations, intensity fluctuations, and detection-efficiency mismatches.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

163 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    These effects increase the apparent beam radius at the receiver beyond its diffraction-limited value [80]

    Turbulence This refers to irregular variations in the atmospheric refractive index, driven by temperature gradients, wind shear, pressure and humidity fluctuations, which per- turb the propagation of optical waves. These effects increase the apparent beam radius at the receiver beyond its diffraction-limited value [80]. In a satellite-to-ground downlink s...

  2. [2]

    Even with perfect alignment, a significant fraction of the transmitted beam power may fall outside the finite receiver aperture

    Geometric loss Geometric loss, often referred to as aperture truncation loss, occurs because the optical beam spreads due to diffraction and atmospheric turbulence as it propagates. Even with perfect alignment, a significant fraction of the transmitted beam power may fall outside the finite receiver aperture. Assuming a circularly symmetric Gaussian inten...

  3. [3]

    This misalignment reduces the effective power coupled into the system

    Pointing loss Pointing loss arises from the residual mechanical jitter of the transmitter, which causes random displacements of the beam centroid relative to the center of the receiver aperture [82]. This misalignment reduces the effective power coupled into the system. Modeling the pointing error as a Gaussian random vari- able with radial standard devia...

  4. [4]

    1 + aR r0 5/3#−6/5 ,(H34) wherer 0 is the Fried coherence parameter, given by r0 =

    Coupling loss The coupling loss quantifies the fraction of transmitted optical power that falls outside the receiver field of view (FOV) and is not coupled into the detection system. In a free-space optical (FSO) receiver, the FOV defines the angular region over which the detector collects the in- coming light. The choice of FOV directly determines the tr...

  5. [5]

    In this framework, AO correction is modeled as an effective enhancement of the Fried coherence value from its uncorrected valuer0 to a closed-loop corrected value rCL 0 > r0

    Adaptive optics compensation Adaptive optics (AO) systems are implemented to re- duce turbulence-induced phase distortions by actively correcting phase aberrations across the receiver aperture [86]. In this framework, AO correction is modeled as an effective enhancement of the Fried coherence value from its uncorrected valuer0 to a closed-loop corrected v...

  6. [6]

    We note that the MODTRAN radiative transfer code [98] provides an alternative, widely used implementation with comparable capabilities

    Absorption/scattering loss To model the channel loss arising from atmospheric ab- sorption and scattering processes, we employ a radiative transfer code, via thelibRadtran package [55, 56]. We note that the MODTRAN radiative transfer code [98] provides an alternative, widely used implementation with comparable capabilities. Both codes offer suites of stan...

    2035

  7. [7]

    Overall system loss Combining all the effects detailed so far, the overall transmittance ηsys of the satellite downlink system is given by ηsys =η geoηpηcplηatmηRηD,(H44) where ηR denotes the total internal transmittance of the receiver subsystem excluding the single-photon detectors. This term captures the aggregate efficiency of the tele- scope optics (...

  8. [8]

    Background noise This subsection gives the explicit calculation of the mean background-photon level¯nB and the derived noise- click probability pnoise that define the nighttime and day- time noise scenarios used in Sec. V. For a receiver with angular field of viewΩFOV, using a detector within a temporal window∆t and a spectral filter of bandwidth∆λ center...

  9. [9]

    These scenarios are characterized by their altitude, visibility conditions, and atmospheric turbulence profiles, as summarized in Table II

    Locations To assess the feasibility of GEO-QKD under diverse operational conditions, we consider three representative locations for the OGS that span a practical range of atmo- spheric environments. These scenarios are characterized by their altitude, visibility conditions, and atmospheric turbulence profiles, as summarized in Table II. The three location...

  10. [10]

    Wavelengths Wefocusonthreerepresentativewavelengths: 656.448nm (Hα line), 854.445 nm (Ca II line), and 1550.027 nm (C- band representative). The first two lie on prominent Fraunhofer lines in the solar spectrum, where the Sun it- self is significantly dimmer because a substantial fraction of the radiation at those wavelengths is absorbed before it leaves ...

  11. [11]

    We consider Si APDs for visible and near-infrared wave- lengths, InGaAs/InP APDs for telecom wavelengths, and SNSPDs across the spectrum

    Single-photon detection The performance of a satellite-to-ground QKD link critically depends on the receiver’s detection hardware. We consider Si APDs for visible and near-infrared wave- lengths, InGaAs/InP APDs for telecom wavelengths, and SNSPDs across the spectrum. A comparative survey of commercially available modules and state-of-the-art research dev...

  12. [12]

    Misalignment Extensiveexperimentalandtheoreticalworkhasdemon- strated effective approaches for mitigating polarization misalignment in satellite-based QKD systems. In theMi- ciusmissions, active polarization control was implemented using reference laser pulses to monitor the evolving polar- ization state of the downlink channel, enabling real-time compens...

  13. [13]

    27–32, we present an expanded version of some of the figures presented in the main text

    Index of Expanded Main-Text Figures Finally, in Figs. 27–32, we present an expanded version of some of the figures presented in the main text. In particular, Figure 27 extends Fig. 1 by adding a1%mis- alignment column and a1%afterpulsing row. Figure 28 extends Fig. 3 by adding a656.448nm row and a130 Hz AO column. Figure 29 extends Fig. 5 by adding a 656....

  14. [14]

    C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing, Theor. Comput. Sci.560, 7 (2014), originally published in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing, Bangalore, India, 1984

    2014

  15. [15]

    A. K. Ekert, Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett.67, 661 (1991)

    1991

  16. [16]

    H.-K. Lo, M. Curty, and K. Tamaki, Secure quantum key distribution, Nat. Photonics8, 595 (2014)

    2014

  17. [17]

    Pirandola, U

    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, Adv. Opt. Photonics12, 1012 (2020)

    2020

  18. [18]

    F. Xu, X. Ma, Q. Zhang, H.-K. Lo, and J.-W. Pan, Secure quantum key distribution with realistic devices, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 025002 (2020)

    2020

  19. [19]

    H.-K. Lo, H. F. Chau, and M. Ardehali, Efficient quan- tum key distribution scheme and a proof of its uncondi- tional security, J. Cryptol.18, 133 (2005)

    2005

  20. [20]

    Liuet al., 1002 km twin-field quantum key distribu- tion with finite-key analysis, Quantum Frontiers2, 16 (2023)

    Y. Liuet al., 1002 km twin-field quantum key distribu- tion with finite-key analysis, Quantum Frontiers2, 16 (2023)

    2023

  21. [21]

    J. S. Sidhu, S. K. Joshi,et al., Advances in space quan- tum communications, IET Quantum Commun.2, 182 (2021)

    2021

  22. [22]

    Bedington, J

    R. Bedington, J. M. Arrazola, and A. Ling, Progress in satellite quantum key distribution, npj Quantum Inf.3, 30 (2017)

    2017

  23. [23]

    Liao, W.-Q

    S.-K. Liao, W.-Q. Cai, W.-Y. Liu, L. Zhang, Y. Li, J.-G. Ren, J. Yin, Q. Shen, Y. Cao, Z.-P. Li,et al., Satellite- to-ground quantum key distribution, Nature549, 43 (2017)

    2017

  24. [24]

    Liao, W.-Q

    S.-K. Liao, W.-Q. Cai, J. Handsteiner, B. Liu, J. Yin, L. Zhang, D. Rauch, M. Fink, J.-G. Ren, W.-Y. Liu, et al.,Satellite-relayedintercontinentalquantumnetwork, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 030501 (2018)

    2018

  25. [25]

    Hwang, Quantum key distribution with high loss: Toward global secure communication, Phys

    W.-Y. Hwang, Quantum key distribution with high loss: Toward global secure communication, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 057901 (2003)

    2003

  26. [26]

    H.-K. Lo, X. Ma, and K. Chen, Decoy state quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 230504 (2005)

    2005

  27. [27]

    Wang, Beating the photon-number-splitting attack in practical quantum cryptography, Phys

    X.-B. Wang, Beating the photon-number-splitting attack in practical quantum cryptography, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 230503 (2005)

    2005

  28. [28]

    Li, S.-K

    Y. Li, S.-K. Liao, Y. Cao, J.-G. Ren, W.-Y. Liu, J. Yin, Q. Shen, J.-C. Qiang, S. Zhang, A.-L. Jia,et al., Microsatellite-based real-time quantum key distribution, Nature640, 47 (2025)

    2025

  29. [29]

    Liao, H.-L

    S.-K. Liao, H.-L. Yong, C. Liu, G.-L. Shentu, D.-D. Li, J. Lin, H. Dai, S.-Q. Zhao, B. Li, J.-Y. Guan,et al., Long- distance free-space quantum key distribution in daylight towards inter-satellite communication, Nat. Photonics 11, 509 (2017)

    2017

  30. [30]

    Avesani, L

    M. Avesani, L. Calderaro, M. Schiavon, A. Stanco, C. Ag- nesi, A. Santamato, M. Zahidy, A. Scriminich, G. Fo- letto, G. Contestabile,et al., Full daylight quantum-key- distribution at 1550 nm enabled by integrated silicon photonics, npj Quantum Inf.7, 93 (2021)

    2021

  31. [31]

    W.-Q. Cai, Y. Li, B. Li, J.-G. Ren, S.-K. Liao, Y. Cao, L. Zhang, M. Yang, J.-C. Wu, Y.-H. Li,et al., Free-space quantum key distribution during daylight and at night, Optica11, 647 (2024)

    2024

  32. [32]

    Bourgoin, E

    J.-P. Bourgoin, E. Meyer-Scott, B. L. Higgins, B. Helou, C. Erven, H. Hübel, B. Kumar, D. Hudson, I. D’Souza, R. Girard,et al., A comprehensive design and perfor- mance analysis of low Earth orbit satellite quantum communication, New J. Phys.15, 023006 (2013)

    2013

  33. [33]

    J. S. Sidhu, T. Brougham, D. McArthur, R. G. Pousa, and D. K. Oi, Finite key performance of satellite quan- tum key distribution under practical constraints, Com- mun. Phys.6, 210 (2023)

    2023

  34. [34]

    Vasylyev, W

    D. Vasylyev, W. Vogel, and F. Moll, Satellite-mediated quantum atmospheric links, Phys. Rev. A99, 053830 (2019)

    2019

  35. [35]

    Liege, P

    T. Liege, P. Lognoné, M. Schiavon, C. B. Lim, J.-M. Co- nan, E. Diamanti, and D. Dequal, Analysis of untrusted- node quantum key distribution from a geostationary satellite, Quantum Sci. Technol.11, 025002 (2026)

    2026

  36. [36]

    Xin, China’s new Dawn: Pan Jianwei reveals high- orbit quantum satellite for global network, South China Morning Post (2025), [Online; accessed 2026-01-16]

    L. Xin, China’s new Dawn: Pan Jianwei reveals high- orbit quantum satellite for global network, South China Morning Post (2025), [Online; accessed 2026-01-16]. Announcement at 2024 Zhongguancun Forum, Beijing

    2025

  37. [37]

    Dirks, I

    B. Dirks, I. Ferrario, A. Le Pera, D. V. Finocchiaro, M. Desmons, D. de Lange, H. de Man, A. J. Meskers, J. Morits, N. M. Neumann,et al., GEOQKD: quantum key distribution from a geostationary satellite, inInter- national Conference on Space Optics—ICSO 2020, Vol. 11852 (SPIE, 2021) p. 222

    2020

  38. [38]

    W. Klop, R. Saathof, N. Doelman, M. Gruber, T. Moens, C. I. O. Tamayo, and C. Duque, QKD optical ground terminal developments, inInternational Conference on Space Optics—ICSO 2020, Vol. 11852 (SPIE, 2021) p. 388

    2020

  39. [39]

    Hispasat, Hispasat and ESA agree to develop the first QKD system combining the delivery of quantum keys from GEO and LEO orbits (2025), [Online; accessed 2026-05-15]

    2025

  40. [40]

    A. Abad, P. Pintó, F. Cuervo, Á. Álvaro, L. Pascual, J. C. Gil, V. Gaspar, J. Autrán, L. F. Rodríguez, M. Reyes García-Talavera, L. Trigo Vidarte, V. Pruneri, D. Domingo, M. I. García, A. Álvarez-Herrero, T. Be- lenger, V. Fernandez, P. Arteaga-Díaz, D. Cano, J. Sanz, C. Miravet, P. Campo, J. Bermejo, M. Curty, V. Martín, J. P. Brito, and L. Ortíz, Quantu...

    2022

  41. [41]

    Alvaro, L

    A. Alvaro, L. Pascual, T. Colombo, M. Guerault, and V. Giner, GARBO QKD GEO: challenges and ar- chitecture, inInternational Conference on Space Op- tics—ICSO 2024, Vol. 13699 (SPIE, 2025) p. 1527

    2024

  42. [42]

    Pirandola, Satellite quantum communications: Fun- damental bounds and practical security, Phys

    S. Pirandola, Satellite quantum communications: Fun- damental bounds and practical security, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 023130 (2021)

    2021

  43. [43]

    Pirandola, Limits and security of free-space quantum communications, Phys

    S. Pirandola, Limits and security of free-space quantum communications, Phys. Rev. Res.3, 013279 (2021)

    2021

  44. [44]

    Günthner, I

    K. Günthner, I. Khan,et al., Quantum-limited measure- ments of optical signals from a geostationary satellite, Optica4, 611 (2017)

    2017

  45. [45]

    C. C. W. Lim, M. Curty, N. Walenta, F. Xu, and H. Zbinden, Concise security bounds for practical decoy- state quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. A89, 022307 46 (2014)

    2014

  46. [46]

    R. J. Serfling, Probability inequalities for the sum in sampling without replacement, Ann. Stat.2, 39 (1974)

    1974

  47. [47]

    Hoeffding, Probability inequalities for sums of bounded random variables, J

    W. Hoeffding, Probability inequalities for sums of bounded random variables, J. Am. Stat. Assoc.58, 13 (1963)

    1963

  48. [48]

    Curty, F

    M. Curty, F. Xu, W. Cui, C. C. W. Lim, K. Tamaki, and H.-K. Lo, Finite-key analysis for measurement-device- independent quantum key distribution, Nat. Commun. 5, 3732 (2014)

    2014

  49. [49]

    Zhang, Q

    Z. Zhang, Q. Zhao, M. Razavi, and X. Ma, Improved key-rate bounds for practical decoy-state quantum-key- distribution systems, Phys. Rev. A95, 012333 (2017)

    2017

  50. [50]

    Attema, J

    T. Attema, J. W. Bosman, and N. M. Neumann, Opti- mizing the decoy-state BB84 QKD protocol parameters, Quantum Inf. Process.20, 154 (2021)

    2021

  51. [51]

    Bancal and P

    J.-D. Bancal and P. Sekatski, Simple Buehler-optimal confidence intervals on the average success probabil- ity of independent Bernoulli trials, arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.12558 (2022)

    work page arXiv 2022

  52. [52]

    Mannalath, V

    V. Mannalath, V. Zapatero, and M. Curty, Sharp finite statistics for quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Lett. 135, 020803 (2025)

    2025

  53. [53]

    Elementary Tail Bounds on the Hypergeometric Distribution

    V. Mannalath, V. Zapatero, and M. Curty, Elementary Tail Bounds on the Hypergeometric Distribution, arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.19726 (2025)

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  54. [54]

    Tomamichel, C

    M. Tomamichel, C. C. W. Lim, N. Gisin, and R. Renner, Tight finite-key analysis for quantum cryptography, Nat. Commun.3, 634 (2012)

    2012

  55. [55]

    Phys.14, 093014 (2012)

    M.HayashiandT.Tsurumaru,Conciseandtightsecurity analysis of the Bennett–Brassard 1984 protocol with finite key lengths, New J. Phys.14, 093014 (2012)

    1984

  56. [56]

    Tupkary, S

    D. Tupkary, S. Nahar, P. Sinha, and N. Lütkenhaus, Phase error rate estimation in QKD with imperfect de- tectors, Quantum9, 1937 (2025)

    1937

  57. [57]

    Tupkary, E

    D. Tupkary, E. Y.-Z. Tan, and N. Lütkenhaus, Security proof for variable-length quantum key distribution, Phys. Rev. Res.6, 023002 (2024)

    2024

  58. [58]

    Z. Wang, D. Tupkary, and S. Nahar, Phase error esti- mation for passive detection setups with imperfections and memory effects, arXiv preprint arXiv:2508.21486 (2025)

    work page arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    Tzallas, A

    V. Tzallas, A. Hünerbein, M. Stengel, J. F. Meirink, N. Benas, J. Trentmann, and A. Macke, CRAAS: a European cloud regime dAtAset based on the CLAAS- 2.1 climate data record, Remote Sens.14, 5548 (2022)

    2022

  60. [60]

    Wright,Exact confidence bounds when sampling from small finite universes: an easy reference based on the hypergeometric distribution, Lecture Notes in Statistics, Vol

    T. Wright,Exact confidence bounds when sampling from small finite universes: an easy reference based on the hypergeometric distribution, Lecture Notes in Statistics, Vol. 66 (Springer New York, 1991)

    1991

  61. [61]

    A. E. Siegman,Lasers(University Science Books, 1986)

    1986

  62. [62]

    A. E. Siegman, Defining, measuring, and optimizing laser beam quality, SPIE Proceedings1868, 2 (1993)

    1993

  63. [63]

    R.HufnagelandN.Stanley,Modulationtransferfunction associated with image transmission through turbulent media, J. Opt. Soc. Am.54, 52 (1964)

    1964

  64. [64]

    G. C. Valley, Isoplanatic degradation of tilt correction and short-term imaging systems, Appl. Opt.19, 574 (1980)

    1980

  65. [65]

    J. W. Hardy,Adaptive optics for astronomical telescopes, Vol. 16 (Oxford University Press, USA, 1998)

    1998

  66. [66]

    C. J. Pugh, J.-F. Lavigne, J.-P. Bourgoin, B. L. Higgins, and T. Jennewein, Adaptive optics benefit for quantum key distribution uplink from ground to a satellite, Adv. Opt. Technol.9, 263 (2020)

    2020

  67. [67]

    R. N. Lanning, M. A. Harris, D. W. Oesch, M. D. Oliker, and M. T. Gruneisen, Quantum communication over atmospheric channels: a framework for optimizing wave- length and filtering, Phys. Rev. Appl.16, 044027 (2021)

    2021

  68. [68]

    C. Emde, R. Buras-Schnell, A. Kylling, B. Mayer, J. Gasteiger, U. Hamann, J. Kylling, B. Richter, C. Pause, T. Dowling,et al., The libRadtran software package for radiative transfer calculations (version 2.0.1), Geosci. Model Dev.9, 1647 (2016)

    2016

  69. [69]

    Mayer and A

    B. Mayer and A. Kylling, Technical note: The libRad- tran software package for radiative transfer calculations - description and examples of use, Atmos. Chem. Phys. 5, 1855 (2005)

    2005

  70. [70]

    United States Committee on Extension to the Standard Atmosphere,US standard atmosphere, 1976(National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1976)

    1976

  71. [71]

    E. P. Shettle and R. W. Fenn,Models for the aerosols of the lower atmosphere and the effects of humidity varia- tions on their optical properties, AFGL Technical Report AFGL-TR-79-0214 (Air Force Geophysics Laboratory, Air Force Systems Command, United States Air Force, Hanscom AFB, MA, 1979) Environmental Research Pa- pers No. 676, 94 pp

    1979

  72. [72]

    E. P. Shettle, Models of aerosols, clouds, and precipita- tion for atmospheric propagation studies, inAtmospheric Propagation in the UV, Visible, IR and MM-Wave Re- gion and Related Systems Aspects, AGARD Conference Proceedings No. 454 (Advisory Group for Aerospace Re- search and Development, Copenhagen, Denmark, 1990) pp. 15–1–15–13

    1990

  73. [73]

    Finkensieper, J

    S. Finkensieper, J. F. Meirink, G.-J. van Zadelhoff, T. Hanschmann, N. Benas, M. Stengel, P. Fuchs, R. Holl- mann, J. Kaiser, and M. Werscheck, CLAAS-2.1: CM SAFCLoudpropertydAtAsetusingSEVIRI-Edition2.1 (2020), dataset, Satellite Application Facility on Climate Monitoring (CM SAF); [Online; accessed 2025-10-22]

    2020

  74. [74]

    ESO, Sky Model Calculator (n.d.), [Online; accessed 2026-05-15]

    2026

  75. [75]

    S. Noll, W. Kausch, M. Barden, A. Jones, C. Szyszka, S. Kimeswenger, and J. Vinther, An atmospheric radi- ation model for Cerro Paranal-I. The optical spectral range, Astron. Astrophys.543, A92 (2012)

    2012

  76. [76]

    Jones, S

    A. Jones, S. Noll, W. Kausch, C. Szyszka, and S.Kimeswenger,Anadvancedscatteredmoonlightmodel for Cerro Paranal, Astron. Astrophys.560, A91 (2013)

    2013

  77. [77]

    J. S. Sidhu, T. Brougham, D. McArthur, R. G. Pousa, and D. K. L. Oi, Finite key effects in satellite quantum key distribution, npj Quantum Inf.8, 18 (2022)

    2022

  78. [78]

    Pirandola, R

    S. Pirandola, R. Laurenza, C. Ottaviani, and L. Banchi, Fundamental limits of repeaterless quantum communi- cations, Nat. Commun.8, 15043 (2017)

    2017

  79. [79]

    Pirandola, End-to-end capacities of a quantum com- munication network, Commun

    S. Pirandola, End-to-end capacities of a quantum com- munication network, Commun. Phys.2, 51 (2019)

    2019

  80. [80]

    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)

    2023

Showing first 80 references.