Superselection rules and quantum protocols

Type: Article

Publication Date: 2004-05-21

Citations: 146

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.69.052326

Abstract

We show that superselection rules do not enhance the information-theoretic security of quantum cryptographic protocols. Our analysis employs two quite different methods. The first method uses the concept of a reference system -- in a world subject to a superselection rule, unrestricted operations can be simulated by parties who share access to a reference system with suitable properties. By this method, we prove that if an n-party protocol is secure in a world subject to a superselection rule, then the security is maintained even if the superselection rule is relaxed. However, the proof applies only to a limited class of superselection rules, those in which the superselection sectors are labeled by unitary irreducible representations of a compact symmetry group. The second method uses the concept of the format of a message sent between parties -- by verifying the format, the recipient of a message can check whether the message could have been sent by a party who performed charge-conserving operations. By this method, we prove that protocols subject to general superselection rules (including those pertaining to nonabelian anyons in two dimensions) are no more secure than protocols in the unrestricted world. However, the proof applies only to two-party protocols. Our results show in particular that, if no assumptions are made about the computational power of the cheater, then secure quantum bit commitment and strong quantum coin flipping with arbitrarily small bias are impossible in a world subject to superselection rules.

Locations

  • Physical Review A - View
  • arXiv (Cornell University) - View - PDF
  • DataCite API - View

Similar Works

Action Title Year Authors
+ Superselection Rules in Quantum Cryptography 2002 Dominic Mayers
+ Security trade-offs in ancilla-free quantum bit commitment in the presence of superselection rules 2004 David P. DiVincenzo
John A. Smolin
Barbara M. Terhal
+ PDF Chat Entanglement and symmetry: A case study in superselection rules, reference frames, and beyond 2006 Steven J.M. Jones
Howard M. Wiseman
Stephen D. Bartlett
J. A. Vaccaro
D. T. Pope
+ PDF Chat Reference frames, superselection rules, and quantum information 2007 Stephen D. Bartlett
Terry Rudolph
Robert W. Spekkens
+ Reference frames for Bell inequality violation in the presence of superselection rules 2011 Tomasz Paterek
PaweƂ KurzyƄski
Daniel K. L. Oi
Dagomir Kaszlikowski
+ Entanglement in the presence of superselection rules 2003 Stephen D. Bartlett
Howard M. Wiseman
+ PDF Chat Quantifying the resource of sharing a reference frame 2005 S. J. van Enk
+ PDF Chat Why quantum state verification cannot be both efficient and secure: a categorical approach 2024 Fabian Wiesner
Ziad Chaoui
Diana Kessler
Anna Pappa
Martti Karvonen
+ Reference frames and refbits 2004 van Enk
+ Secure Classical Bit Commitment using Fixed Capacity Communication Channels 1999 Adrian Kent
+ PDF Chat Tradeoff between extractable mechanical work, accessible entanglement, and ability to act as a reference system, under arbitrary superselection rules 2008 J. A. Vaccaro
Fabio Anselmi
Howard M. Wiseman
Kurt Jacobs
+ PDF Chat Entanglement, superselection rules and supersymmetric quantum mechanics 2014 E. Cattaruzza
E. Gozzi
Carlo Pagani
+ PDF Chat Secret Quantum Communication of a Reference Frame 2007 Giulio Chiribella
Lorenzo Maccone
Paolo Perinotti
+ PDF Chat Unconditionally Secure Quantum Bit Commitment is Impossible 1997 Dominic Mayers
+ PDF Chat Entanglement Constrained by Superselection Rules 2003 Stephen D. Bartlett
Howard M. Wiseman
+ Quantum And Relativistic Protocols For Secure Multi-Party Computation 2009 Roger Colbeck
+ Quantum And Relativistic Protocols For Secure Multi-Party Computation 2009 Roger Colbeck
+ PDF Chat Superselection Rules and Bosonic Quantum Computational Resources 2024 Éloi Descamps
Nicolas Fabre
Astghik Saharyan
A. Keller
P. Milman
+ Violation of Bell's inequality in the presence of superselection rules 2010 Tomasz Paterek
PaweƂ KurzyƄski
Daniel K. L. Oi
Dagomir Kaszlikowski
+ PDF Chat Quantum Commitments and Signatures Without One-Way Functions 2022 Tomoyuki Morimae
Takashi Yamakawa

Works That Cite This (115)

Action Title Year Authors
+ PDF Chat No Signaling and Quantum Key Distribution 2005 Jonathan Barrett
Lucién Hardy
Adrian Kent
+ PDF Chat Reference frames, superselection rules, and quantum information 2007 Stephen D. Bartlett
Terry Rudolph
Robert W. Spekkens
+ PDF Chat Continuous Symmetries and Approximate Quantum Error Correction 2020 Philippe Faist
Sepehr Nezami
Victor V. Albert
Grant Salton
Fernando Pastawski
Patrick Hayden
John Preskill
+ Disentangling the Physics of the Attractive Hubbard Model via the Accessible and Symmetry-Resolved Entanglement Entropies 2023 Tong Shen
Hatem Barghathi
Adrian Del Maestro
Brenda M. Rubenstein
+ PDF Chat Possibility, impossibility, and cheat sensitivity of quantum-bit string commitment 2008 Harry Buhrman
Matthias Christandl
Patrick Hayden
Hoi‐Kwong Lo
Stephanie Wehner
+ PDF Chat Methods for producing decoherence-free states and noiseless subsystems using photonic qutrits 2008 C. Allen Bishop
Mark Byrd
+ PDF Chat Entanglement under restricted operations: Analogy to mixed-state entanglement 2006 Stephen D. Bartlett
Andrew C. Doherty
Robert W. Spekkens
Howard M. Wiseman
+ PDF Chat DIALOGUE CONCERNING TWO VIEWS ON QUANTUM COHERENCE: FACTIST AND FICTIONIST 2006 Stephen D. Bartlett
Terry Rudolph
Robert W. Spekkens
+ Microcanonical thermodynamics in general physical theories 2017 Giulio Chiribella
Carlo Maria Scandolo
+ PDF Chat Quantum reference frames and deformed symmetries 2008 Florian Girelli
David Poulin