You're viewing papers too quickly. Please wait a moment.<br>This helps keep the archive available for everyone.
Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Algorithms
An Efficient Quantum Decoder for Prime-Power Fields
arXiv
Authors: Lior Eldar
Year
2022
Paper ID
58184
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
132
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We consider a version of the nearest-codeword problem on finite fields mathbb{F}q using the Manhattan distance, an analog of the Hamming metric for non-binary alphabets. Similarly to other lattice related problems, this problem is NP-hard even up to constant factor approximation. We show, however, that for q = pm where p is small relative to the code block-size n, there is a quantum algorithm that solves the problem in time {rm poly}(n), for approximation factor 1/n2, for any p. On the other hand, to the best of our knowledge, classical algorithms can efficiently solve the problem only for much smaller inverse polynomial factors. Hence, the decoder provides an exponential improvement over classical algorithms, and places limitations on the cryptographic security of large-alphabet extensions of code-based cryptosystems like Classic McEliece.
Why This Paper Matters
- It adds a 2022 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We consider a version of the nearest-codeword problem on finite fields mathbbFq using the Manhattan distance, an analog of the Hamming metric for non-binary alphabets.
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.