A short introduction to Quantum Computing and Quantum Cryptography
Download as PPTX, PDF3 likes766 views
The document provides an introduction to quantum computing, covering essential concepts such as qubits, operations, and measurements. It compares the power of quantum computers to classical ones, exemplified through parity computation and highlights quantum parallelism, where quantum computers can execute multiple calculations simultaneously. Key topics include quantum cryptography and algorithms, emphasizing the unique features of quantum mechanics like superposition and entanglement.
![Quantum key distribution [BB’84]
• Alice & Bob want to establish a secret key
• They communicate through a public quantum
channel
• They make use of the following 2 facts:
• No-cloning theorem: one cannot perfectly copy an
unknown quantum state.
• Information disturbance: if one does not know the
encoding basis, one cannot decode a qubit perfectly
without perturbing (collapsing) it.](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/giannicolascarpa-slides-190417135656/85/A-short-introduction-to-Quantum-Computing-and-Quantum-Cryptography-113-320.jpg)
![But wait!!!
p
Open problem: actually prove
the security of this protocol!
[Buhrman et al, 2011]](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/giannicolascarpa-slides-190417135656/85/A-short-introduction-to-Quantum-Computing-and-Quantum-Cryptography-160-320.jpg)
A short introduction to Quantum Computing and Quantum Cryptography
- 1. Introduction to Quantum Computing Giannicola Scarpa Facultad de Matemáticas UCM
- 2. Overview Part I: What is Quantum Computing? • Qubits, quantum operations, measurements Part II: Are quantum computers more powerful? • Simple example, main algorithms, complexity classes Part III: Some quantum cryptography • Non-locality (certified randomness), quantum key distribution, quantum position verification
- 3. Part I: What is Quantum Computation?
- 6. Some History • First quantum paper: Max Planck, 1900 • The field developed strongly during the 1920s • A Turing Machine (1936) is a classical object • 1980s: Quantum Computing “updates” the model to the latest physics • Uses some non-intuitive concepts: Superposition, collapse of the wave function, interference, entanglement, no-cloning... • You will know about all of these in a hour or so.
- 8. Classical bit • Quantity that is either 0 or 1
- 9. Classical bit • Quantity that is either 0 or 1
- 10. Classical bit • Quantity that is either 0 or 1
- 11. Classical bit • Quantity that is either 0 or 1
- 12. Quantum bit
- 13. Quantum bit
- 14. Quantum bit 10
- 15. Quantum bit • Associate 0 and 1 with orthogonal vectors: 0 = 1 0 1 = 0 1 • Quantum bit is a superposition: 𝛼 𝑜 0 + 𝛼1 1 = 𝛼0 𝛼1 • Unit vector in ℂ2: 𝛼0 2 + 𝛼1 2 = 1
- 17. Wait, you’re cheating! 𝛼 𝑜 0 + 𝛼1 1
- 18. Wait, you’re cheating! 𝛼 𝑜 0 + 𝛼1 1 0.0001000101011101100110011…..
- 19. Wait, you’re cheating! 𝛼 𝑜 0 + ( 1− ) 1
- 20. Wait, you’re cheating! 𝛼 𝑜 0 + ( 1− ) 1 • Valid unit vector, because 𝛼0 2 + 𝛼1 2 = 1
- 21. Wait, you’re cheating! 𝛼 𝑜 0 + ( 1− ) 1 • Valid unit vector, because 𝛼0 2 + 𝛼1 2 = 1 • Where’s the catch here?
- 22. Measurement 0
- 23. Measurement 0 • Measurement collapses the qubit • Observe 0 with probability 𝛼0 2 • Observe 1 with probability 𝛼1 2 • QC is the art of using this hidden information
- 24. Operations on classical bits • What can we do with one bit? • Either we leave it alone, or we flip it! (NOT gate) • What can we do with many bits? • Many things, but AND, OR, NOT are a sufficient set of gates to represent any function as a circuit.
- 25. Operations on one qubit • Quantum mechanics allows to do linear operations on qubits before observing them • Norm-preserving matrices in ℂ2×2 : 𝑈 𝛼0 𝛼1 = 𝛼0 ′ 𝛼1 ′ such that 𝛼0 ′ 2 + 𝛼1 ′ 2 = 1 • NOT gate: 𝑋 = 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 𝛼0 𝛼1 = 𝛼1 𝛼0 • Hadamard gate: 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1
- 26. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1
- 27. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩
- 28. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩
- 29. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩
- 30. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩
- 31. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩
- 32. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩ 𝐻 1 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 0 1 = 1 2 1 −1 = 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩): = |−⟩
- 33. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩ 𝐻 1 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 0 1 = 1 2 1 −1 = 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩): = |−⟩
- 34. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩ 𝐻 1 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 0 1 = 1 2 1 −1 = 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩): = |−⟩
- 35. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩ 𝐻 1 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 0 1 = 1 2 1 −1 = 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩): = |−⟩
- 36. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩ 𝐻 1 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 0 1 = 1 2 1 −1 = 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩): = |−⟩
- 37. Hadamard gate 𝐻 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 𝐻 0 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 1 0 = 1 2 1 1 = 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩): = |+⟩ 𝐻 1 = 1 2 1 1 1 −1 0 1 = 1 2 1 −1 = 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩): = |−⟩ Are these two states distinguishable?
- 38. Distinguishing |+⟩ from |−⟩ 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) vs 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) • Let us try then to apply Hadamard again! 𝐻 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) = 1 2 (𝐻 0 + 𝐻|1⟩) = |0⟩ 𝐻 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) = 1 2 (𝐻 0 − 𝐻|1⟩) = |1⟩ INTERFERENCE!
- 39. Distinguishing |+⟩ from |−⟩ 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) vs 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) • Let us try then to apply Hadamard again! 𝐻 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) = 1 2 (𝐻 0 + 𝐻|1⟩) = |0⟩ 𝐻 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) = 1 2 (𝐻 0 − 𝐻|1⟩) = |1⟩ INTERFERENCE!
- 40. Distinguishing |+⟩ from |−⟩ 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) vs 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) • Let us try then to apply Hadamard again! 𝐻 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) = 1 2 (𝐻 0 + 𝐻|1⟩) = |0⟩ 𝐻 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) = 1 2 (𝐻 0 − 𝐻|1⟩) = |1⟩ INTERFERENCE!
- 41. Distinguishing |+⟩ from |−⟩ 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) vs 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) • Let us try then to apply Hadamard again! 𝐻 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) = 1 2 (𝐻 0 + 𝐻|1⟩) = |0⟩ 𝐻 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) = 1 2 (𝐻 0 − 𝐻|1⟩) = |1⟩ INTERFERENCE!
- 42. More qubits • How to model n qubits? • Unit vector in larger space (dimension 2 𝑛) • Norm-preserving operations and measurements in this exponentially large space • This is why QC is expensive to simulate on classical computers “in the obvious way”. 𝛼00 00 + 𝛼01 01 + 𝛼10 10 +𝛼11 11
- 44. Part II: Are Quantum Computers more powerful?
- 45. Computing Parity • Parity function: 𝑓 𝑥0, 𝑥1 = 𝑥0 𝑋𝑂𝑅 𝑥1 • Query complexity: count the number of times we need to access the memory. • In the classical case: 2 queries needed. • Why? After we read the first bit, the function value is unknown: 𝑓 𝑥0, 𝑥1 = 0 ⇔ 𝑥0 = 𝑥1 𝑓 0,0 = 0 𝑓 0,1 = 1 𝑓 1,0 = 1 𝑓 1,1 = 0
- 46. Computing parity with quantum
- 47. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩
- 48. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩
- 49. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H
- 50. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O
- 51. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H
- 52. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H
- 53. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 0
- 54. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 0 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩)
- 55. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 0 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩)
- 56. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 0 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) |0⟩
- 57. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 1
- 58. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 1 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩)
- 59. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 1 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩)
- 60. Computing parity with quantum • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 1 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) |1⟩
- 61. Wait a second, you’re cheating! • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 1 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) |1⟩
- 62. Yeah, what about THIS??? • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 1 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) |1⟩
- 63. Well, fair enough. Please continue. • A quantum query has the form 𝑂 𝑖 = −1 𝑥 𝑖|𝑖⟩ • As a circuit, we compute parity: |0⟩ H O H 𝑥0 = 0 𝑥1 = 1 1 2 ( 0 + |1⟩) 1 2 ( 0 − |1⟩) |1⟩
- 64. Quantum parallelism • Quantum computers are able to calculate an exponential number of computations at once. • Any classical program can be encoded in a quantum circuit 𝐶 that maps 𝑥 0 ↦ 𝑥 |𝑓 𝑥 ⟩ • Many inputs cane be given in superposition: 𝐶 𝑥 𝛼 𝑥 𝑥 |0⟩ = 𝑥 𝛼 𝑥 𝑥 |𝑓(𝑥)⟩ • Problem: measure collapses to a random 𝑥, 𝑓 𝑥 …
- 65. Quantum parallelism • Quantum computers are able to calculate an exponential number of computations at once. • Any classical program can be encoded in a quantum circuit 𝐶 that maps 𝑥 0 ↦ 𝑥 |𝑓 𝑥 ⟩ • Many inputs cane be given in superposition: 𝐶 𝑥 𝛼 𝑥 𝑥 |0⟩ = 𝑥 𝛼 𝑥 𝑥 |𝑓(𝑥)⟩ • Problem: measure collapses to a random 𝑥, 𝑓 𝑥 … • Again: QC is the art of using this hidden information
- 66. Recipe for a quantum algorithm 1. Put the input in superposition 2. Apply a circuit 𝐶 to everything 3. Do something clever to put more “weight” on the pairs 𝑥, 𝑓(𝑥) of interest 4. Repeat (2) and (3) a certain number of times • (How many? Good luck figuring that out) 5. Measure and enjoy your output
- 67. Recipe for a quantum algorithm 1. Put the input in superposition 2. Apply a circuit 𝐶 to everything 3. Do something clever to put more “weight” on the pairs 𝑥, 𝑓(𝑥) of interest 4. Repeat (2) and (3) a certain number of times • (How many? Good luck figuring that out) 5. Measure and enjoy your output H O H|0⟩
- 68. Famous quantum speedups Deutsch-Jozsa (’92) n/2 classical queries vs 1 quantum query “Is this string constant or balanced?”
- 69. Famous quantum speedups Deutsch-Jozsa (’92) n/2 classical queries vs 1 quantum query “Is this string constant or balanced?” Grover’s search (’96) 𝑛 classical queries vs 𝑛 quantum queries “Does this string contain a 1?”
- 70. Famous quantum speedups Deutsch-Jozsa (’92) n/2 classical queries vs 1 quantum query “Is this string constant or balanced?” Grover’s search (’96) 𝑛 classical queries vs 𝑛 quantum queries “Does this string contain a 1?” Shor’s Factoring (’94) exp(𝑛) classical running time (best known!) vs 𝑝𝑜𝑙𝑦(𝑛) quantum running time “Find the prime factors of 𝑥”
- 72. Change the Church-Turing thesis? • Church-Turing thesis: “A Turing machine can simulate all realistic models of computation” • Complexity-Theoretical Church-Turing thesis: “A Turing machine can efficiently simulate all realistic models of computation”
- 73. Change the Church-Turing thesis? • Church-Turing thesis: “A Turing machine can simulate all realistic models of computation” • Complexity-Theoretical Church-Turing thesis: “A quantum Turing machine can efficiently simulate all realistic models of computation”
- 75. Results in cryptography Three previously impossible tasks that can be done via simple manipulation of quantum information 1. Generation of certified randomness 2. Detection of a spy 3. Certification of GPS coordinates
- 76. Non-Locality Can the microscopic have macroscopic consequences? • Non-Local game: challenge for collaborating but non-communicating players (like when the police cross-checks suspects) • Bell inequality: upper bound on winning probability • Quantum players can perform better than the classical players: they violate the Bell inequality • An implementation disproves classical physics • (They have done it, classical physics is officially false)
- 77. CHSH game
- 78. CHSH game 𝑥 𝑦
- 79. CHSH game 𝑥 𝑦 𝑎 𝑏
- 80. CHSH game 𝑥 𝑦 𝑎 𝑏 The players win if 𝑎 ⊕ 𝑏 = 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑦
- 81. CHSH game 𝑥 𝑦 𝑎 𝑏 The players win if 𝑎 ⊕ 𝑏 = 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑦 Input Winning output 00 same thing 01 same thing 10 same thing 11 different things ⇔
- 82. CHSH game 𝑥 𝑦 𝑎 𝑏 The players win if 𝑎 ⊕ 𝑏 = 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑦 Input Winning output 00 same thing 01 same thing 10 same thing 11 different things ⇔ Pr 𝑤𝑖𝑛 ≤ 0.75
- 83. How do quantum players play? • We need some technical details…
- 84. Measurement in other bases
- 85. Measurement in other bases 1 0
- 86. Measurement in other bases 1 0 +
- 87. Measurement in other bases 1 0 + 1 2 1 2
- 88. Measurement in other bases 1 0 − 1 2 1 2
- 89. Measurement in other bases − 0 + 1 2 1 2
- 90. Measurement in other bases 𝑎 0 𝑏 cos(𝛽) cos(𝛼) α 𝛽
- 92. Wait, how’s this different from having two correlated coins? 00 + |11⟩ 2
- 93. Wait, how’s this different from having two correlated coins?
- 94. Wait, how’s this different from having two correlated coins?
- 95. Wait, how’s this different from having two correlated coins?
- 96. Wait, how’s this different from having two correlated coins?
- 97. 00 + |11⟩ 2
- 98. 00
- 99. 00 + |11⟩ 2𝑎 𝑏
- 100. 𝑎 𝑎 𝑏 𝑎𝑎
- 101. 𝑎 𝑎𝑎 𝑎 𝑏
- 102. 𝑎 𝑎𝑎 𝑎 𝑏 But how does this happen?
- 103. CHSH quantum strategy 𝑥 𝑦 𝑎 𝑏
- 104. CHSH quantum strategy 𝑥 𝑦 𝑎 𝑏 00 + |11⟩ 2
- 105. CHSH quantum strategy 𝑥 𝑦 𝑎 𝑏 00 + |11⟩ 2 On input 0,1
- 106. CHSH quantum strategy 𝑥 𝑦 𝑎 𝑏 00 + |11⟩ 2 On input 0,1
- 107. CHSH quantum strategy They want: a ⊕ 𝑏 = 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑦 On input 0,1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 On input 0,1
- 108. CHSH quantum strategy They want: a ⊕ 𝑏 = 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑦 On input 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 On input 0,1
- 109. CHSH quantum strategy They want: a ⊕ 𝑏 = 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑦 On input 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 On input 0,1
- 110. CHSH quantum strategy They want: a ⊕ 𝑏 = 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑦 On input 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 On input 0,1 Pr 𝑤𝑖𝑛 = cos2 𝜋 8 ≈ 0.85
- 111. CHSH quantum strategy They want: a ⊕ 𝑏 = 𝑥 ⋅ 𝑦 On input 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 On input 0,1 Pr 𝑤𝑖𝑛 = cos2 𝜋 8 ≈ 0.85
- 112. Bell inequality violation • Classical players win with at most 75% probability • Quantum players win with probability ~ 85% ! • This is the most famous Bell inequlity violation... • but there are also unbounded ones! • The CHSH game is used in protocols for randomness certification (e.g Vazirani-Vidick 2011)
- 113. Quantum key distribution [BB’84] • Alice & Bob want to establish a secret key • They communicate through a public quantum channel • They make use of the following 2 facts: • No-cloning theorem: one cannot perfectly copy an unknown quantum state. • Information disturbance: if one does not know the encoding basis, one cannot decode a qubit perfectly without perturbing (collapsing) it.
- 114. No-cloning theorem • There is no quantum operation such that, ∀ 𝑎 𝑈 𝑎 0 = 𝑎 |𝑎⟩
- 115. No-cloning theorem • There is no quantum operation such that, ∀ 𝑎 𝑈 𝑎 0 = 𝑎 |𝑎⟩ Proof
- 116. No-cloning theorem • There is no quantum operation such that, ∀ 𝑎 𝑈 𝑎 0 = 𝑎 |𝑎⟩ Proof • Take two arbitrary states 𝑎 and 𝑏
- 117. No-cloning theorem • There is no quantum operation such that, ∀ 𝑎 𝑈 𝑎 0 = 𝑎 |𝑎⟩ Proof • Take two arbitrary states 𝑎 and 𝑏 • Then we must have (since 𝑈 is norm-preserving) ( 𝑎 |0⟩) 𝑇 𝑏 0
- 118. No-cloning theorem • There is no quantum operation such that, ∀ 𝑎 𝑈 𝑎 0 = 𝑎 |𝑎⟩ Proof • Take two arbitrary states 𝑎 and 𝑏 • Then we must have (since 𝑈 is norm-preserving) ( 𝑎 |0⟩) 𝑇 𝑏 0 = (𝑈 𝑎 0 )) 𝑇 𝑈( 𝑏 |0⟩)
- 119. No-cloning theorem • There is no quantum operation such that, ∀ 𝑎 𝑈 𝑎 0 = 𝑎 |𝑎⟩ Proof • Take two arbitrary states 𝑎 and 𝑏 • Then we must have (since 𝑈 is norm-preserving) ( 𝑎 |0⟩) 𝑇 𝑏 0 = (𝑈 𝑎 0 )) 𝑇 𝑈( 𝑏 |0⟩) = ( 𝑎 |𝑎⟩) 𝑇 𝑏 𝑏
- 120. No-cloning theorem • There is no quantum operation such that, ∀ 𝑎 𝑈 𝑎 0 = 𝑎 |𝑎⟩ Proof • Take two arbitrary states 𝑎 and 𝑏 • Then we must have (since 𝑈 is norm-preserving) ( 𝑎 |0⟩) 𝑇 𝑏 0 = (𝑈 𝑎 0 )) 𝑇 𝑈( 𝑏 |0⟩) = ( 𝑎 |𝑎⟩) 𝑇 𝑏 𝑏 • But this implies ( 𝑎 𝑇|𝑏⟩) = ( 𝑎 𝑇|𝑏⟩)2
- 121. No-cloning theorem • There is no quantum operation such that, ∀ 𝑎 𝑈 𝑎 0 = 𝑎 |𝑎⟩ Proof • Take two arbitrary states 𝑎 and 𝑏 • Then we must have (since 𝑈 is norm-preserving) ( 𝑎 |0⟩) 𝑇 𝑏 0 = (𝑈 𝑎 0 )) 𝑇 𝑈( 𝑏 |0⟩) = ( 𝑎 |𝑎⟩) 𝑇 𝑏 𝑏 • But this implies ( 𝑎 𝑇|𝑏⟩) = ( 𝑎 𝑇|𝑏⟩)2 and this happens when 𝑎, 𝑏 are equal or orthogonal
- 122. Quantum Key distribution (part 1)
- 123. Quantum Key distribution (part 1)
- 124. Quantum Key distribution (part 1) Random string: 0111001101
- 125. Quantum Key distribution (part 1) Random string: 0111001101 Her random bases: +x+xx++x+x His random bases: x++x++xx+x
- 126. Quantum Key distribution (part 1) Random string: 0111001101 Her random bases: +x+xx++x+x His random bases: x++x++xx+x ENCODE & SEND
- 127. Quantum Key distribution (part 1) Random string: 0111001101 Her random bases: +x+xx++x+x His random bases: x++x++xx+x ENCODE & SEND DECODE 1111000101
- 128. Quantum Key distribution (part 1) Random string: 0111001101 Her random bases: +x+xx++x+x His random bases: x++x++xx+x ENCODE & SEND DECODE 1111000101
- 129. Quantum Key distribution (part 2) Random string: 0111001101 +x+xx++x+x x++x++xx+x ENCODE & SEND DECODE 1111000101 Over a public channel: • Inform each other of the choice of bases • Randomly test equality for half of the red positions • (Spy detection - no-cloning, disturbance) • If pass previous point, other half is the shared key!
- 135. Position verification p x y x+y x+y
- 137. Position verification p Blah blah blah blah
- 138. Position verification p Blah blah speed of light
- 139. Position verification p Blah blah 20 milliseconds
- 140. Position verification p She was at P! She was at P!
- 143. Position verification: attack p x yx y
- 144. Position verification: attack p x yx y x+y x+y
- 145. Position verification: attack p x y x+y x+y x y
- 146. Position verification: attack p x y x+y x+y x y She was at P! She was at P!
- 148. Quantum position verification p Basis: × or +
- 149. Quantum position verification p Basis: × or + qubit
- 150. Quantum position verification p Basis: × or + qubit outcome outcome
- 151. Quantum position verification p Basis: × or + qubit outcome outcome She was at P! She was at P!
- 153. Quantum position verification p qubitBasis: × or +
- 154. Quantum position verification p qubitBasis: × or +
- 155. Quantum position verification p qubitBasis: × or + • No cloning theorem: Bob cannot keep a copy of the qubit.
- 156. Quantum position verification p qubitBasis: × or + • No cloning theorem: Bob cannot keep a copy of the qubit. • Information disturbance: Bob cannot attempt to measure, as he doesn’t know the basis!
- 157. Quantum position verification p qubitBasis: × or + • No cloning theorem: Bob cannot keep a copy of the qubit. • Information disturbance: Bob cannot attempt to measure, as he doesn’t know the basis!
- 158. But wait!!!
- 159. But wait!!! p
- 160. But wait!!! p Open problem: actually prove the security of this protocol! [Buhrman et al, 2011]
- 161. What to bring home? • Quantum computing is a model of computation based on the latest physics • You do not need deep knowledge of physics to work with it! • There are many tasks that do not require a full quantum computer that are doable today • QC’s full power is still unknown, but it looks like it can give some meaningful speedups • Proving quantum advantage is tricky. • Careful about big advertisement claims!
- 162. FAQs • Is quantum computing a reality now? • Will we have a quantum computer in our pockets? • Do quantum computers solve useful problems? • Does entanglement allow for faster-than-light communication? My cousin told me so.