Paper detail

Squash Operator and Symmetry

This paper begins with a simple proof of the existence of squash operators compatible with the Bennett-Brassard 1984 (BB84) protocol which suits single-mode as well as multi-mode threshold detectors. The proof shows that, when a given detector is symmetric under cyclic group C_4, and a certain observable associated with it has rank two as a matrix, then there always exists a corresponding squash operator. Next, we go on to investigate whether the above restriction of "rank two" can be eliminated; i.e., is cyclic symmetry alone sufficient to guarantee the existence of a squash operator? The motivation behind this question is that, if this were true, it would imply that one could realize a device-independent and unconditionally secure quantum key distribution protocol. However, the answer turns out to be negative, and moreover, one can instead prove a no-go theorem that any symmetry is, by itself, insufficient to guarantee the existence of a squash operator.

preprint2009arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.