2005
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Abstract: Suppose Alice wants to perform some computation that could be done quickly on a quantum computer, but she cannot do universal quantum computation. Bob can do universal quantum computation and claims he is willing to help, but Alice wants to be sure that Bob cannot learn her input, the result of her calculation, or perhaps even the function she is trying to compute. We describe a simple, efficient protocol by which Bob can help Alice perform the computation, but there is no way for him to learn anything about i… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

1
143
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
2
1

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 103 publications
(144 citation statements)
references
References 20 publications
(26 reference statements)
1
143
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Reichardt, Unger and Vazirani then proved a more general result for self-testing a tensor product of multiple Bell states as well as the observables acting on these states [18]. 35 It is this latter result that is relevant for the RUV protocol so we give a more formal statement for it: Suppose Alice and Bob win at least n(1 − )cos 2 (π/8) games, with = poly(δ, 1/n) for some δ > 0, such that → 0 as δ → 0 or n → ∞. Then, there exist a local isometry = A ⊗ B and a state |junk such that:…”
Section: Verification Based On Chsh Rigiditymentioning
confidence: 97%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Reichardt, Unger and Vazirani then proved a more general result for self-testing a tensor product of multiple Bell states as well as the observables acting on these states [18]. 35 It is this latter result that is relevant for the RUV protocol so we give a more formal statement for it: Suppose Alice and Bob win at least n(1 − )cos 2 (π/8) games, with = poly(δ, 1/n) for some δ > 0, such that → 0 as δ → 0 or n → ∞. Then, there exist a local isometry = A ⊗ B and a state |junk such that:…”
Section: Verification Based On Chsh Rigiditymentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Here, we simply give a succinct outline of the subject. For more details, see this review of blind quantum computing protocols by Fitzsimons [34] as well as [35][36][37][38][39]. Note that, while the review of Fitzsimons covers all of the material presented in this section (and more), we restate the main ideas, so that our review is self-consistent and also in order to establish some of the notation that is used throughout the rest of the paper.…”
Section: Blind Quantum Computingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In the face of such a demand, the concept of blind quantum computation (BQC) came into being [1]. In 2005, using the circuit-based quantum computing model, Childs proposed the first blind quantum computation protocol [2], which requires the client to have a large quantum memory and the ability to perform Pauli operations. In addition, the client also needs the ability to access quantum channels.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…There is a large body of research that exploits the client-server setting defined in [Chi05] to offer different functionalities, including secure delegated quantum computation [BFK09,MF13,DFPR14,Bro15a,Mah18a,Fit17], verifiable delegated quantum computation [ABOE08,RUV12,FK17,HM15,Bro15b, FHM18,TMM+18,Mah18b,GKK19,Vid20], secure multiparty quantum computation [KP17,KMW17,KW17], and quantum fully homomorphic encryption [BJ15,DSS16]. It turns out that one of the central building blocks for most of these protocols is secure remote state preparation (RSP) that was first defined in [DKL12].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%