AI & ML
Pauli Error Composition Determines the Multipartite Advantage in Conference Key Agreement
arXiv cs.NI0 views
arXiv:2610.07251v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: GHZ-based conference key agreement distributes a shared key to $N$ parties in one network use, whereas pairwise BB84 needs $N-1$. The survival of that advantage has been studied against party number, loss, and topology, but almost always with the channel fixed at depolarizing. Simulating both protocols exactly for $N = 3, 4, 5$ under dephasing, amplitude damping, and depolarizing noise, we find the crossover is set by the channel's Pauli error composition, not its identity: normalized to average infidelity, amplitude damping and depolarizing agree to within about 1\% at each group size, while dephasing can tolerate roughly $2.4\times$ more at $N = 3$. We derive a closed-form rate for arbitrary per-party Pauli noise and use it to prove that concentrating a fixed noise budget on one arm is strictly worse than spreading it, and that giving the dealer role to the cleanest arm improves the rate by roughly 18\%. One structural fact drives every result: the phase-error term is a product over all $N$ arms, while the bit-error term stays local to a pair.
Source:https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.07251PreviousAgentic RCA for Internet-Scale Services Using Constrained CreativityNextQuantifying the Privacy Posture of Operator-Side 5G/O-RAN Profiles
Related posts

Here’s how to listen live to Apple’s Q4 2026 earnings call
09to5Mac
Can AI Write CAD? Testing LLM-Generated 3D Models for Manufacturability
0HackerNoon
Guardz Integrates Palo Alto Networks Prisma Browser Protection to Address Growing Workspace Security
0HackerNoon

LinearB Launches Agentic Studio to Steer AI Coding Agents in a $127 Billion Market by 2032
0HackerNoon
We Built a Test to Catch Contact Forms That Lie. It Lied to Us Five Times First
0HackerNoon

The TechBeat: Why Knowledge Graphs and Ontologies Are Making a Comeback in the Age of AI (11/2/2026)
0HackerNoon