Omar Fawzi
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
The existence of quantum uncertainty relations is the essential reason that some classically unrealizable cryptographic primitives become realizable when quantum communication is allowed. One operational manifestation of these uncertainty relations is a purely quantum effect referred to as information locking [DiVincenzo et al. 2004]. A locking scheme can be viewed as a cryptographic protocol in which a uniformly random n-bit message is encoded in a quantum system using a classical key of size much smaller than n. Without the key, no measurement of this quantum state can extract more than a negligible amount of information about the message, in which case the message is said to be “locked”. Furthermore, knowing the key, it is possible to recover, that is “unlock”, the message.
In this article, we make the following contributions by exploiting a connection between uncertainty relations and low-distortion embeddings of Euclidean spaces into slightly larger spaces endowed with the ℓ1 norm. We introduce the notion of a metric uncertainty relation and connect it to low-distortion embeddings of ℓ2 into ℓ1. A metric uncertainty relation also implies an entropic uncertainty relation. We prove that random bases satisfy uncertainty relations with a stronger definition and better parameters than previously known. Our proof is also considerably simpler than earlier proofs. We then apply this result to show the existence of locking schemes with key size independent of the message length. Moreover, we give efficient constructions of bases satisfying metric uncertainty relations. The bases defining these metric uncertainty relations are computable by quantum circuits of almost linear size. This leads to the first explicit construction of a strong information locking scheme. These constructions are obtained by adapting an explicit norm embedding due to Indyk [2007] and an extractor construction of Guruswami et al. [2009]. We apply our metric uncertainty relations to exhibit communication protocols that perform equality testing of n-qubit states. We prove that this task can be performed by a single message protocol using O(log2 n) qubits and n bits of communication, where the computation of the sender is efficient.
- Ahlswede, R. and Dueck, G. 1989. Identification via channels. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 35, 1, 15--29. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Ambainis, A. 2010. Limits on entropic uncertainty relations. Quant. Inf. Comput. 10, 9 & 10, 848--858. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ambainis, A., Mosca, M., Tapp, A., and de Wolf, R. 2000. Private quantum channels. In Proceedings of ACM STOC. 547--553. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ambainis, A. and Smith, A. 2004. Small Pseudo-random Families of matrices: Derandomizing approximate quantum encryption. In Proceedings of APPROX-RANDOM. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3122, 249--260.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Aubrun, G., Szarek, S., and Werner, E. 2010. Nonadditivity of Rényi entropy and Dvoretzky’s theorem. J. Math. Phys. 51, 2, 022102.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Aubrun, G., Szarek, S., and Werner, E. 2011. Hastingss additivity counterexample via Dvoretzkys theorem. Commun. Math. Phys. 305, 85--97.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Audenaert, K. 2007. A sharp continuity estimate for the von Neumann entropy. J. Phys. A - Math. Theor. 40, 28, 8127.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ball, K. 1997. An elementary introduction to modern convex geometry. Flavors Geom. 31, 1--58.Google Scholar
- Ballester, M. A. and Wehner, S. 2007. Entropic uncertainty relations and locking: Tight bounds for mutually unbiased bases. Phys. Rev. A 75, 2, 022319.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Bennett, C. H. and Brassard, G. 1984. Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing.Google Scholar
- Bennett, C. H., DiVincenzo, D., Smolin, J. A., and Wootters, W. K. 1996. Mixed-state entanglement and quantum error correction. Phys. Rev. A 54, 5, 3824--3851.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Berta, M., Fawzi, O., and Wehner, S. 2012. Quantum to classical randomness extractors. In Proceedings of CRYPTO. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 7417, Springer Verlag, 776--793.Google Scholar
- Bialynicki-Birula, I. and Mycielski, J. 1975. Uncertainty relations for information entropy in wave mechanics. Comm. Math. Phys. 44, 2, 129--132.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Buhrman, H., Cleve, R., Watrous, J., and de Wolf, R. 2001. Quantum fingerprinting. Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 16, 167902.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Buhrman, H., Christandl, M., Hayden, P., Lo, H. K., and Wehner, S. 2006. Security of quantum bit string commitment depends on the information measure. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 25, 250501.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Buhrman, H., Christandl, M., Hayden, P., Lo, H. K., and Wehner, S. 2008. Possibility, impossibility, and cheat sensitivity of quantum-bit string commitment. Phys. Rev. A 78, 2, 22316.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Damgård, I., Pedersen, T. B., and Salvail, L. 2004. On the key-uncertainty of quantum ciphers and the computational security of one-way quantum transmission. In Proceedings of EUROCRYPT. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3027, 91--108.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Damgård, I., Fehr, S., Salvail, L., and Schaffner, C. 2005a. Cryptography in the bounded quantum-storage model. In Proceedings of IEEE FOCS. 449--458. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Damgård, I., Pedersen, T. B., and Salvail, L. 2005b. A quantum cipher with near optimal key-recycling. In Proceedings of CRYPTO. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 3621, 494--510. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Damgård, I., Fehr, S., Renner, R., Salvail, L., and Schaffner, C. 2007. A tight high-order entropic quantum uncertainty relation with applications. In Proceedings of CRYPTO. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 4622, Springer-Verlag, 360--378. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Dankert, C., Cleve, R., Emerson, J., and Livine, E. 2009. Exact and approximate unitary 2-designs and their application to fidelity estimation. Phys. Rev. A 80, 1, 12304.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Desrosiers, S. P. 2009. Entropic security in quantum cryptography. Quantum Inf. Process. 8, 331--345. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Desrosiers, S. P. and Dupuis, F. 2010. Quantum entropic security and approximate quantum encryption. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 56, 7, 3455--3464. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Deutsch, D. 1983. Uncertainty in quantum measurements. Phys. Rev. Lett. 50, 9, 631--633.Google ScholarCross Ref
- DiVincenzo, D. P., Horodecki, M., Leung, D. W., Smolin, J. A., and Terhal, B. M. 2004. Locking classical correlations in quantum states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 6, 67902.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Dodis, Y. and Smith, A. 2005. Entropic security and the encryption of high entropy messages. Theory Crypto., 556--577. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Doeblin, W. 1938. Exposé de la théorie des chaınes simples constantes de markov á un nombre fini détats. Mathé. de l’Union Interbalkanique 2, 77--105, 78--80.Google Scholar
- Dupuis, F. 2010. A decoupling approach to quantum information theory. Ph.D. dissertation, Université de Montreal.Google Scholar
- Dupuis, F., Florjanczyk, J., Hayden, P., and Leung, D. 2010. Locking classical information. arXiv:1011.1612v1 {quant-ph}.Google Scholar
- Dvijotham, K. and Fazel, M. 2010. A nullspace analysis of the nuclear norm heuristic for rank minimization. In Proceedings of ICASSP. IEEE, 3586--3589.Google Scholar
- Dvoretzky, A. 1961. Some results on convex bodies and Banach spaces. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Linear Spaces. Jerusalem Academic Press, 123--160.Google Scholar
- Fannes, M. 1973. A continuity property of the entropy density for spin lattice systems. Comm. Math. Phys. 31, 4, 291--294.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Figiel, T., Lindenstrauss, J., and Milman, V. D. 1977. The dimension of almost spherical sections of convex bodies. Acta Math. 139, 1, 53--94.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Gavinsky, D. and Ito, T. 2010. Quantum fingerprints that keep secrets. arXiv:1010.5342v1 {quant-ph}.Google Scholar
- Goldreich, O. 2008. Computational Complexity: A Conceptual Perspective. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Goldreich, O. and Wigderson, A. 1997. Tiny families of functions with random properties: A quality-size trade-off for hashing. Random Struct. Algor. 11, 4, 315--343. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Guruswami, V., Lee, J., and Razborov, A. 2008. Almost Euclidean subspaces of ℓ N 1 via expander codes. In Proceedings of ACM-SIAM SODA. SIAM, 353--362. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Guruswami, V., Umans, C., and Vadhan, S. 2009. Unbalanced expanders and randomness extractors from Parvaresh--Vardy codes. J. ACM 56, 4. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hallgren, S., Moore, C., Rötteler, M., Russell, A., and Sen, P. 2010. Limitations of quantum coset states for graph isomorphism. J. ACM 57, 6. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Harrow, A., Hayden, P., and Leung, D. 2004. Superdense coding of quantum states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 18, 187901.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hastings, M. B. 2009. Superadditivity of communication capacity using entangled inputs. Nature Phys. 5, 4, 255--257.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hayden, P. and Winter, A. 2008. Counterexamples to the maximal p-norm multiplicativity conjecture for all p > 1. Comm. Math. Phys. 284, 1, 263--280.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hayden, P. and Winter, A. 2012. Weak decoupling duality and quantum identification. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 58, 7, 4914--4929.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hayden, P., Leung, D., Shor, P. W., and Winter, A. 2004. Randomizing quantum states: Constructions and applications. Comm. Math. Phys. 250, 2, 371--391.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hayden, P., Leung, D., and Winter, A. 2006. Aspects of generic entanglement. Comm. Math. Phys. 265, 1, 95--117.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Heath, R. W., Strohmer, T., and Paulraj, A. J. 2006. On quasi-orthogonal signatures for CDMA systems. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 52, 3, 1217--1226. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Heisenberg, W. 1927. Über den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik. Zeitschrift für Physik A Hadrons and Nuclei 43, 3, 172--198.Google Scholar
- Horodecki, K., Horodecki, M., Horodecki, P., and Oppenheim, J. 2005. Locking entanglement with a single qubit. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 20, 200501.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Impagliazzo, R., Levin, L., and Luby, M. 1989. Pseudo-random generation from one-way functions. In Proceedings of ACM STOC. 12--24. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Indyk, P. 2006. Stable distributions, pseudorandom generators, embeddings, and data stream computation. J. ACM 53, 3, 307--323. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Indyk, P. 2007. Uncertainty principles, extractors, and explicit embeddings of L2 into L1. In Proceedings of ACM STOC. 615--620. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Indyk, P. and Szarek, S. 2010. Almost-euclidean subspaces of ℓ1n via tensor products: A simple approach to randomness reduction. In Proceedings of APPROX-RANDOM. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6302, Springer, 632--641. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kashin, B. 1977. Sections of some finite dimensional sets and classes of smooth functions. Izv. Acad. Nauk SSSR 41, 334--351.Google Scholar
- Koashi, M. and Winter, A. 2004. Monogamy of quantum entanglement and other correlations. Phys. Rev. A 69, 2, 022309.Google ScholarCross Ref
- König, R., Renner, R., Bariska, A., and Maurer, U. 2007. Small accessible quantum information does not imply security. Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 14, 140502.Google ScholarCross Ref
- König, R., Wehner, S., and Wullschleger, J. 2012. Unconditional security from noisy quantum storage. IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory 58, 3, 1962--1984. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kushilevitz, E. and Nisan, N. 1997. Communication Complexity. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ledoux, M. 2001. The Concentration of Measure Phenomenon. American Mathematical Society.Google Scholar
- Leung, D. 2009. A survey on locking of bipartite correlations. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 143. 012008.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lo, H. K. and Chau, H. F. 1997. Is quantum bit commitment really possible? Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 17, 3410--3413.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lubotzky, A., Phillips, R., and Sarnak, P. 1988. Ramanujan graphs. Combinatorica 8, 3, 261--277.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Maassen, H. and Uffink, J. B. M. 1988. Generalized entropic uncertainty relations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 12, 1103--1106.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Matoušek, J. 2002. Lectures on Discrete Geometry. Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mayers, D. 1997. Unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment is impossible. Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 17, 3414--3417.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Milman, V. D. 1971. New proof of the theorem of A. Dvoretzky on intersections of convex bodies. Funct. Anal. Appl. 5, 288--295.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Milman, V. D. and Schechtman, G. 1986. Asymptotic Theory of Finite Dimensional Normed Spaces. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 1200, Springer-Verlag. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Oppenheim, J. and Horodecki, M. 2005. How to reuse a one-time pad and other notes on authentication, encryption, and protection of quantum information. Phys. Rev. A 72, 4, 042309.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Pisier, G. 1989. The Volume of Convex Bodies and Banach Space Geometry. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Radhakrishnan, J., Rötteler, M., and Sen, P. 2009. Random measurement bases, Quantum state distinction and applications to the hidden subgroup problem. Algorithmica 55, 3, 490--516. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Raz, R., Reingold, O., and Vadhan, S. 1999. Extracting all the randomness and reducing the error in Trevisan’s extractors. In Proceedings of ACM STOC. ACM, 149--158. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Reingold, O., Vadhan, S., and Wigderson, A. 2000. Entropy waves, the zig-zag graph product, and new constant-degree expanders and extractors. In Proceedings of IEEE FOCS. 3--13. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Robertson, H. P. 1929. The uncertainty principle. Phys. Rev. 34, 1, 163--164.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Russell, A. and Wang, H. 2002. How to fool an unbounded adversary with a short key. In Proceedings of EUROCRYPT. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2332, Springer-Verlag, 133--148. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Shaltiel, R. 2002. Recent developments in explicit constructions of extractors. Bull. EATCS 77, 67--95.Google Scholar
- Shoup, V. 1990. New algorithms for finding irreducible polynomials over finite fields. Math. Comp. 54, 189, 435--447.Google Scholar
- Shoup, V. 1992. Searching for primitive roots in finite fields. Math. Comp. 58, 197, pp. 369--380.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Spekkens, R. W. and Rudolph, T. 2001. Degrees of concealment and bindingness in quantum bit commitment protocols. Phys. Rev. A 65, 1, 12310.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Szarek, S. 2006. Convexity, complexity, and high dimensions. In Proceedings of the International Congress of Mathematicians. Vol. 2, 1599--1621.Google Scholar
- Tomamichel, M. and Renner, R. 2011. Uncertainty relation for smooth entropies. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 11, 110506.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tomamichel, M., Lim, C., Gisin, N., and Renner, R. 2012. Tight finite-key analysis for quantum cryptography. Nat. Comm. 3, 634.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tropp, J. 2004. Topics in sparse approximation. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
- Vadhan, S. 2007. The unified theory of pseudorandomness: guest column. ACM SIGACT News 38, 3, 39--54. Google ScholarDigital Library
- von zur Gathen, J. and Gerhard, J. 1999. Modern Computer Algebra. Cambridge University Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wehner, S. and Winter, A. 2010. Entropic uncertainty relations---A survey. New J. Phys. 12, 025009.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Winter, A. 2004. Quantum and classical message identification via quantum channels. Quantum Inf. Comput. 4, 6&7, 563--578. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Wootters, W. K. and Fields, B. D. 1989. Optimal state-determination by mutually unbiased measurements. Ann. Physics 191, 2, 363--381.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Zuckerman, D. 1997. Randomness-optimal oblivious sampling. Random Struct. Algor. 11, 4, 345--367. Google ScholarDigital Library
Index Terms
- From Low-Distortion Norm Embeddings to Explicit Uncertainty Relations and Efficient Information Locking
Recommendations
From low-distortion norm embeddings to explicit uncertainty relations and efficient information locking
STOC '11: Proceedings of the forty-third annual ACM symposium on Theory of computingQuantum uncertainty relations are at the heart of many quantum cryptographic protocols performing classically impossible tasks. One operational manifestation of these uncertainty relations is a purely quantum effect referred to as information locking. A ...
Conditional entropic uncertainty relations for Tsallis entropies
The entropic uncertainty relations are a very active field of scientific inquiry. Their applications include quantum cryptography and studies of quantum phenomena such as correlations and non-locality. In this work we find entanglement-dependent ...
Cyclic quantum teleportation
We propose a scheme of cyclic quantum teleportation for three unknown qubits using six-qubit maximally entangled state as the quantum channel. Suppose there are three observers Alice, Bob and Charlie, each of them has been given a quantum system such as ...
Comments