You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.
Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Cryptography Security
Could Gaussian regenerative stations act as quantum repeaters?
arXiv
Authors: Ryo Namiki, Oleg Gittsovich, Saikat Guha, Norbert Lütkenhaus
Year
2014
Paper ID
47179
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
154
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Higher transmission loss diminishes the performance of optical communication|be it the rate at which classical or quantum data can be sent reliably, or the secure key generation rate of quantum key distribution (QKD). Loss compounds with distance|exponentially in an optical fiber, and inverse-square with distance for a free-space channel. In order to boost classical communication rates over long distances, it is customary to introduce regenerative relays at intermediate points along the channel. It is therefore natural to speculate whether untended regenerative stations, such as phase-insensitive or phase-sensitive optical amplifiers, could serve as repeaters for long-distance QKD. The primary result of this paper rules out all bosonic Gaussian channels to be useful as QKD repeaters, which include phase-insensitive and phase-sensitive amplifiers as special cases, for any QKD protocol. We also delineate the conditions under which a Gaussian relay renders a lossy channel entanglement breaking, which in turn makes the channel useless for QKD.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.