Phys. Rev. A 74, 032330 (2006) [16 pages]
Decoy-state quantum key distribution with two-way classical postprocessing
Abstract
References (51)
Citing Articles
Xiongfeng Ma, 1 Chi-Hang Fred Fung, 1 Frédéric Dupuis, 2 Kai Chen, 1 Kiyoshi Tamaki, 3 and Hoi-Kwong Lo11Center for Quantum Information and Quantum Control, Department of Physics and Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5S 1A7
2Département IRO, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada H3C 3J7
3NTT Basic Research Laboratories, NTT Corporation, 3-1, Morinosato Wakamiya Atsugi-Shi, Kanagawa, 243-0198, and CREST, JST Agency, 4-1-8 Honcho, Kawaguchi, Saitama, 332-0012, Japan
Received 4 May 2006; published 25 September 2006
Decoy states have recently been proposed as a useful method for substantially improving the performance of quantum key distribution (QKD) protocols when a coherent-state source is used. Previously, data postprocessing schemes based on one-way classical communications were considered for use with decoy states. In this paper, we develop two data postprocessing schemes for the decoy-state method using two-way classical communications. Our numerical simulation (using parameters from a specific QKD experiment as an example) results show that our scheme is able to extend the maximal secure distance from 142 km (using only one-way classical communications with decoy states) to 181 km. The second scheme is able to achieve a 10% greater key generation rate in the whole regime of distances. We conclude that decoy-state QKD with two-way classical postprocessing is of practical interest.
©2006 The American Physical Society
REFERENCES (51)
For access to fully linked references, you need to log in.
For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.
- P. W. Shor and J. Preskill, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 441 (2000).
- D. Deutsch et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2818 (1996);
80, 2022(E) (1998).
- C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 722 (1996);
- D. Deutsch, A. Ekert, R. Jozsa, C. Macchiavello, S. Popescu, and A. Sanpera, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2818 (1996);
80, 2022(E) (1998).
- H. F. Chau, Phys. Rev. A 66, 060302(R) (2002).
- K. Gerd, H. Vollbrecht, and F. Verstraete, Phys. Rev. A 71, 062325 (2005).
- R. Renner, N. Gisin, and B. Kraus, Phys. Rev. A 72, 012332 (2005).
- K. Horodecki, D. Leung, H.-K. Lo, and J. Oppenheim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 070501 (2006).
- C. Gobby, Z. L. Yuan, and A. J. Shields, Appl. Phys. Lett. 84, 3762 (2004).
- N. Lütkenhaus, Phys. Rev. A 61, 052304 (2000).
- M. Koashi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 120501 (2004).
- W.-Y. Hwang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 057901 (2003).
- H.-K. Lo, X. Ma, and K. Chen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 230504 (2005).
- X. Ma, B. Qi, Y. Zhao, and H.-K. Lo, Phys. Rev. A 72, 012326 (2005).
- X.-B. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 230503 (2005);
Phys. Rev. A 72, 012322 (2005).
- Y. Zhao, B. Qi, X. Ma, H.-K. Lo, and L. Qian, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 070502 (2006).
- C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824 (1996).
- A. R. Calderbank and P. W. Shor, Phys. Rev. A 54, 1098 (1996);
- J. Dehaene, M. Van den Nest, B. De Moor, and F. Verstraete, Phys. Rev. A 67, 022310 (2003).
- B. Huttner, N. Imoto, N. Gisin, and T. Mor, Phys. Rev. A 51, 1863 (1995).
- G. Brassard, N. Lütkenhaus, T. Mor, and B. C. Sanders, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 1330 (2000).
- K. Tamaki and H.-K. Lo, Phys. Rev. A 73, 010302(R) (2006).
- A. K. Ekert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991).
- C. H. Bennett, Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3121 (1992).
- D. Bruss, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 3018 (1998).
- V. Scarani, A. Acin, G. Ribordy, and N. Gisin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 057901 (2004).
- C.-H. F. Fung, K. Tamaki, and H.-K. Lo, Phys. Rev. A 73, 012337 (2006).
CITING ARTICLES
For access to citing articles, you need to log in.For access to citing articles, you need to Log in.
|
A new free weekly publication from APS
|
You are not logged in to this journal. Log in
| Subscription Information
View Cart
Download Citation
MyScitation
Print View