pith. sign in

arxiv: 2603.01060 · v2 · submitted 2026-03-01 · 🪐 quant-ph · cs.CR

Power Network SCADA Quantum Communications: A Comparison of BB84, B92, E91, and SGS04 Quantum Key Distribution Protocols

Hillol Biswas , Kyriakos E. Zoiros This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-15 18:17 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph cs.CR
keywords quantum key distributionSCADApower systemsBB84B92E91SARG04quantum communications
0
0 comments X

The pith

Simulations of BB84, B92, E91 and SARG04 show these QKD protocols can secure real-time SCADA data in power networks.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper establishes that four quantum key distribution protocols remain viable when applied to large multivariate power-system SCADA datasets. A sympathetic reader would care because electric grids transmit massive volumes of telemetry that classical encryption may not protect against future quantum attacks. The study compares protocol outcomes on real-world-scale data while giving priority to availability in the security triad. This comparison is presented as a step toward implementable frameworks that could allow actual deployment of quantum-secure SCADA and PMU networks.

Core claim

By applying the BB84, E91, B92, and SARG04 protocols to large multivariate power-system SCADA datasets, the work shows that these quantum key distribution methods produce outcomes consistent with secure, real-time operation in electric power networks. The comparison highlights that a range of QKD protocols can be used with quantum electronics hardware to address the cybersecurity needs of SCADA communications, where availability is placed first in the AIC triad.

What carries the argument

Simulation-based comparison of four QKD protocols (BB84, B92, E91, SARG04) run on multivariate SCADA datasets, which evaluates their key-generation performance and suitability for high-volume, real-time power-system traffic.

If this is right

  • Power networks can incorporate quantum-secure key distribution into existing SCADA and PMU infrastructure.
  • Protocol choice can be matched to specific data-volume and latency requirements of electric-grid telemetry.
  • Availability-first security design becomes feasible for critical power-system communications.
  • Hardware implementations using the tested protocols can move from simulation toward practical deployment.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Integration testing with actual quantum electronics hardware would be the next concrete step beyond dataset simulation.
  • The same simulation approach could be extended to other critical-infrastructure SCADA systems that face similar real-time data loads.
  • Hybrid classical-quantum key-agreement schemes might be benchmarked against the pure QKD results shown here.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that simulation results on SCADA datasets will accurately predict how the protocols behave when handling the volume and complexity of actual real-time power-system data.

What would settle it

A field trial in which any of the four protocols shows sustained key-rate collapse, excessive error rates, or inability to keep up with typical SCADA telemetry volumes under live grid conditions would falsify the central claim.

read the original abstract

The current state, emerging trends, and practical challenges of optical fiber-based power network SCADA quantum communication must be addressed to fully utilize the technological platform's potential in real-world power system SCADA communications involving massive volumes of real-time data, as well as in managing, encoding, and applications such as quantum cryptography. Quantum key distribution (QKD) is an essential part of the cybersecurity paradigm for quantum communication. Even though quantum computing with individual circuits yields probabilistic outcomes for the problem at hand, real-world datasets are complex and challenging to handle, even with telemetry. When using the cybersecurity triad of availability, confidentiality, and integrity (CIA) in reverse order (AIC), availability is given priority in electric power networks. This research assesses the use of the BB84, E91, B92, and SARG04 cryptographic protocols by applying them to large, multivariate power-system SCADA datasets and comparing the outcomes. By leveraging the variety of QKD protocols available with quantum electronics hardware, this simulation work provides a promising avenue for developing implementable frameworks and deploying SCADA/PMU networks in actual power systems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript simulates the application of the BB84, B92, E91, and SARG04 (noted as SGS04 in the title) quantum key distribution protocols to large multivariate power-system SCADA datasets. It compares protocol outcomes and concludes that this provides a promising avenue for developing implementable quantum-secured frameworks and deploying SCADA/PMU networks in real power systems, with priority given to availability in the reversed AIC cybersecurity triad.

Significance. If the simulations were shown to incorporate realistic quantum-channel parameters and power-network constraints, the work could supply practical benchmarks for QKD integration into critical infrastructure, helping address quantum-era threats to real-time telemetry while preserving high availability.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Methodology] Abstract and Methodology: No quantum channel model is defined (e.g., photon loss, depolarization, or timing jitter), nor is any mapping described from classical multivariate SCADA data to quantum states or photon sequences. Standard QKD metrics applied to generic datasets therefore cannot establish viability for power-system fiber links with realistic attenuation (0.2 dB/km) or PMU sampling constraints.
  2. [Results] Results: The manuscript supplies no quantitative metrics (key rate, quantum bit error rate, secure key length), error analysis, or validation against known QKD benchmarks or theoretical limits for any of the four protocols. Without these, the claim that the outcomes constitute a 'promising avenue' for actual deployment cannot be evaluated.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Title] Title uses 'SGS04' while abstract and text use 'SARG04'; standardize nomenclature.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract states that 'real-world datasets are complex' but provides no concrete description of the SCADA dataset size, dimensionality, or preprocessing steps.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed comments. We address each major point below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the requested clarifications and quantitative elements.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and Methodology] Abstract and Methodology: No quantum channel model is defined (e.g., photon loss, depolarization, or timing jitter), nor is any mapping described from classical multivariate SCADA data to quantum states or photon sequences. Standard QKD metrics applied to generic datasets therefore cannot establish viability for power-system fiber links with realistic attenuation (0.2 dB/km) or PMU sampling constraints.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript lacks an explicit quantum channel model and a clear mapping from classical SCADA data to quantum states. The work was conceived as a high-level comparative study of protocol behavior on realistic multivariate datasets rather than a full physical-layer simulation. In the revised version we will add a dedicated subsection in the Methodology that defines a standard lossy depolarizing channel with 0.2 dB/km attenuation, incorporates timing jitter consistent with PMU sampling rates, and describes the encoding of classical telemetry values into photon polarization or phase states. We will also qualify the scope of the conclusions to reflect these modeling assumptions. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results] Results: The manuscript supplies no quantitative metrics (key rate, quantum bit error rate, secure key length), error analysis, or validation against known QKD benchmarks or theoretical limits for any of the four protocols. Without these, the claim that the outcomes constitute a 'promising avenue' for actual deployment cannot be evaluated.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the original results section presents only comparative protocol outcomes without the standard QKD performance figures. In the revision we will compute and tabulate asymptotic key rates, quantum bit error rates, and finite-key secure key lengths for each protocol under the channel model described above. We will include error bars from Monte-Carlo runs and benchmark the obtained rates against the theoretical PLOB bound and published experimental QKD results for similar loss regimes. The revised text will also temper the deployment claim to emphasize that the work supplies preliminary benchmarks rather than a complete feasibility proof. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: simulation applies known QKD protocols directly to input datasets

full rationale

The paper conducts a comparative simulation by applying the standard BB84, B92, E91, and SARG04 protocols to multivariate SCADA datasets and reports the resulting metrics. No derivation chain, equations, or fitted parameters are described that would reduce any claimed prediction or outcome to the inputs by construction. The central claim rests on direct application of established protocol behaviors to the given data rather than any self-definitional mapping, self-citation load-bearing step, or renaming of known results. This makes the work self-contained against external benchmarks of protocol performance.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the unverified validity of the simulation model for applying QKD protocols to SCADA contexts, which is a domain assumption without external benchmarks or independent evidence supplied in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Simulation of QKD protocols on multivariate SCADA datasets accurately reflects real-world performance and data-handling capabilities
    Invoked in the abstract's description of applying protocols to large power-system datasets without any validation or cross-check mentioned.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5506 in / 1236 out tokens · 78246 ms · 2026-05-15T18:17:49.988484+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

70 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    With TID = 100 and CoT = 7 (18 bytes, timestamp 1.101500), a matching IEC 104 frame indicates a follow -up response or activation confirmation

    A command or interrogation-related transmission is indicated by the message's Type Identifier (TID) = 100, Cause of Transmission (CoT) = 3, payload size of 20 bytes, and timestamp 1.001234. With TID = 100 and CoT = 7 (18 bytes, timestamp 1.101500), a matching IEC 104 frame indicates a follow -up response or activation confirmation. When combined, the exch...

    work page

  2. [2]

    AvgKeySize

    are widely used for packet inspection and real -time situational awareness. These tools support protocol dissection and traffic logging, forming an essential component of cybersecurity monitoring frameworks. 2.4 Foundations of Quantum Communication Quantum communication leverages fundamental principles of quantum mechanics to ensure secure information tra...

    work page 1984

  3. [3]

    What Is Scada ?,

    A. Daneels and W. Salter, “What Is Scada ?,” Int. Conf. Accel. Large Exp. Phys. Control Syst. Trieste, Italy, pp. 339–343, 1999, [Online]. Available: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&btnG=Search&q=intitle:WHAT+IS+SCADA+?#0

    work page 1999

  4. [4]

    Substation automation technologies and advantages,

    S. Bricker, T. Gonen, and L. Rubin, “Substation automation technologies and advantages,” IEEE Comput. Appl. Power, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 31–37, 2001, doi: 10.1109/MCAP.2001.952934

    work page doi:10.1109/mcap.2001.952934 2001

  5. [5]

    The SCADA review: system components, architecture, protocols and future security trends,

    A. Shahzad, S. Musa, A. Aborujilah, and M. Irfan, “The SCADA review: system components, architecture, protocols and future security trends,” Am. J. Appl. Sci., vol. 11, no. 8, p. 1418, 2014

    work page 2014

  6. [6]

    Architecture and security of SCADA systems: A review,

    G. Yadav and K. Paul, “Architecture and security of SCADA systems: A review,” Int. J. Crit. Infrastruct. Prot., vol. 34, 2021, doi: 10.1016/j.ijcip.2021.100433

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijcip.2021.100433 2021

  7. [7]

    Sheldon, McGraw-Hill’s Encyclopedia of Networking and Telecommunications

    T. Sheldon, McGraw-Hill’s Encyclopedia of Networking and Telecommunications. McGraw-Hill Professional, 2001

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    Quantum encryption may secure the Danish energy grid,

    M. T. Hedegaard, “Quantum encryption may secure the Danish energy grid,” pp. 5 –8, 2025

    work page 2025

  9. [9]

    Demonstration of a Quantum Key Distribution Trusted Node on an Electric Utility Fiber Network,

    P. Evans et al., “Demonstration of a Quantum Key Distribution Trusted Node on an Electric Utility Fiber Network,” 2019 IEEE Photonics Conf. IPC 2019 - Proc., pp. 2–3, 2019, doi: 10.1109/IPCon.2019.8908470

    work page doi:10.1109/ipcon.2019.8908470 2019

  10. [10]

    Sci Rep 12:2276

    M. Alshowkan, P. G. Evans, M. Starke, D. Earl, and N. A. Peters, “Authentication of smart grid communications using quantum key distribution,” Sci. Rep., pp. 1–13, 2022, doi: 10.1038/s41598-022- 16090-w

    work page doi:10.1038/s41598-022- 2022

  11. [11]

    From Innovation to Practice : The CESER RMT Program ’ s Real -World Impact on Energy Sector Cybersecurity,

    D. of E. (DOE) US, “From Innovation to Practice : The CESER RMT Program ’ s Real -World Impact on Energy Sector Cybersecurity,” no. August, 2024

    work page 2024

  12. [12]

    A critical analysis of deployed use cases for quantum key distribution and comparison with post-quantum cryptography,

    N. Aquina et al., “A critical analysis of deployed use cases for quantum key distribution and comparison with post-quantum cryptography,” EPJ Quantum Technol., vol. 12, no. 1, 2025, doi: 10.1140/epjqt/s40507-025-00350-5

    work page doi:10.1140/epjqt/s40507-025-00350-5 2025

  13. [13]

    A quantum -based approach for offensive security against cyber attacks in electrical infrastructure,

    D. Lakshmi, N. Nagpal, S. Chandrasekaran, and J. H. D., “A quantum -based approach for offensive security against cyber attacks in electrical infrastructure,” Appl. Soft Comput., vol. 136, p. 110071, 2023, doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110071

    work page doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2023.110071 2023

  14. [14]

    Towards Secured Smart Grid 2.0: Exploring Security Threats, Protection Models, and Challenges,

    L. H. Nguyen et al., “Towards Secured Smart Grid 2.0: Exploring Security Threats, Protection Models, and Challenges,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials, pp. 1–39, 2024, doi: 10.1109/COMST.2024.3493630

    work page doi:10.1109/comst.2024.3493630 2024

  15. [15]

    A novel quantum key distribution resistant against large-pulse attacks,

    K. Karabo, C. Sekga, C. Kissack, M. Mafu, and F. Petruccione, “A novel quantum key distribution resistant against large-pulse attacks,” IET Quantum Commun., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 282–290, 2024, doi: 10.1049/qtc2.12089

    work page doi:10.1049/qtc2.12089 2024

  16. [16]

    Quantum Key Distribution for Critical Infrastructures: Towards Cyber-Physical Security for Hydropower and Dams,

    A. Green, J. Lawrence, G. Siopsis, N. A. Peters, and A. Passian, “Quantum Key Distribution for Critical Infrastructures: Towards Cyber-Physical Security for Hydropower and Dams,” Sensors, vol. 23, no. 24, 2023, doi: 10.3390/s23249818

    work page doi:10.3390/s23249818 2023

  17. [17]

    Recommendation ITU-T G.652: Characteristics of a single-mode optical fibre and cable,

    ITU, “Recommendation ITU-T G.652: Characteristics of a single-mode optical fibre and cable,” Int. Telecommun. Union, no. November 2016, pp. 1–28, 2016

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    ITU-T L.151, Recommendation ITU-T L.151 Installation of optical ground wire cable. 2020

    work page 2020

  19. [19]

    Cyber Security in Power Grid Networks , At the Crossover Domain Intersection,

    H. Biswas, “Cyber Security in Power Grid Networks , At the Crossover Domain Intersection,” 2024 IEEE 5th India Counc. Int. Subsections Conf., pp. 1–6, 2024, doi: 10.1109/INDISCON62179.2024.10744312

    work page doi:10.1109/indiscon62179.2024.10744312 2024

  20. [20]

    Mitigating the aurora vulnerability with existing technology,

    D. Salmon, M. Zeller, A. Guzman, V. Mynam, and M. Donolo, “Mitigating the aurora vulnerability with existing technology,” 36th Annu. West. Prot. Relay Conf., no. October 2009, pp. 1–7, 2009

    work page 2009

  21. [21]

    Assessing and augmenting SCADA cyber security: A survey of techniques,

    S. Nazir, S. Patel, and D. Patel, “Assessing and augmenting SCADA cyber security: A survey of techniques,” Comput. Secur., vol. 70, pp. 436–454, 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2017.06.010. Page 25 of 27

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cose.2017.06.010 2017

  22. [22]

    A Survey on SCADA Systems: Secure Protocols, Incidents, Threats and Tactics,

    D. Pliatsios, P. Sarigiannidis, T. Lagkas, and A. G. Sarigiannidis, “A Survey on SCADA Systems: Secure Protocols, Incidents, Threats and Tactics,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 1942–1976, 2020, doi: 10.1109/COMST.2020.2987688

    work page doi:10.1109/comst.2020.2987688 1942

  23. [23]

    Authentication of Smart Grid by Integrating QKD and Blockchain in SCADA Systems,

    S. Aggarwal and G. Kaddoum, “Authentication of Smart Grid by Integrating QKD and Blockchain in SCADA Systems,” IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manag., vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 5768–5780, 2024, doi: 10.1109/TNSM.2024.3423762

    work page doi:10.1109/tnsm.2024.3423762 2024

  24. [24]

    Guide to Intrusion Detection and Prevention Systems (IDPS),

    K. Scarfone and P. Mell, “Guide to Intrusion Detection and Prevention Systems (IDPS),” Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol., vol. 800–94, no. February, p. 127, 2007, [Online]. Available: http://csrc.ncsl.nist.gov/publications/nistpubs/800-94/SP800-94.pdf

    work page 2007

  25. [25]

    Wireshark · Go Deep

    “Wireshark · Go Deep.” Accessed: Jan. 07, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.wireshark.org/

    work page 2024

  26. [26]

    Suricata

    “Suricata.” [Online]. Available: https://suricata.io/

    work page

  27. [27]

    Available: https://www.snort.org/

    “SNORT.” [Online]. Available: https://www.snort.org/

    work page

  28. [28]

    Heisenberg,Uber den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik, Zeitschrift for Physik, 43, 172 – 98 (1927); https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01397280

    W. Heisenberg, “Über den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik,” Zeitschrift für Phys., vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 172–198, 1927, doi: 10.1007/BF01397280

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01397280 1927

  29. [29]

    Nature 299(5886), 802–803 (1982) https://doi.org/10.1038/299802a0

    W. K. Wootters and W. H. Zurek, “A single quantum cannot be cloned,” Nature, vol. 299, no. 5886, pp. 802–803, 1982, doi: 10.1038/299802a0

    work page doi:10.1038/299802a0 1982

  30. [30]

    Quantum Communication Complexity,

    G. Brassard, “Quantum Communication Complexity,” Found. Phys., vol. 33, no. 11, pp. 1593–1616, 2003, doi: 10.1023/A:1026009100467

    work page doi:10.1023/a:1026009100467 2003

  31. [31]

    Recent progress in quantum photonic chips for quantum communication and internet,

    W. Luo et al., “Recent progress in quantum photonic chips for quantum communication and internet,” Light Sci. Appl. 2023 121, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 1–22, 2023, doi: 10.1038/s41377-023-01173-8

    work page doi:10.1038/s41377-023-01173-8 2023

  32. [32]

    Security analysis of the decoy method with the Bennett -Brassard 1984 protocol for finite key lengths,

    M. Hayashi and R. Nakayama, “Security analysis of the decoy method with the Bennett -Brassard 1984 protocol for finite key lengths,” New J. Phys., vol. 16, no. 21, pp. 24550–24565, 2014, doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/16/6/063009

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/16/6/063009 1984

  33. [33]

    Efficient decoy-state quantum key distribution with quantified security,

    M. Lucamarini et al., “Efficient decoy-state quantum key distribution with quantified security,” Opt. Express, vol. 21, no. 21, p. 24550, 2013, doi: 10.1364/oe.21.024550

    work page doi:10.1364/oe.21.024550 2013

  34. [34]

    Long-Distance Continuous-Variable Quantum Key Distribution over 202.81 km of Fiber,

    Y. Zhang et al., “Long-Distance Continuous-Variable Quantum Key Distribution over 202.81 km of Fiber,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 125, no. 1, 2020, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVLETT.125.010502

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.125.010502 2020

  35. [35]

    Zhang, Y

    Y. Zhang, Y. Bian, Z. Li, S. Yu, and H. Guo, “Continuous-variable quantum key distribution system: Past, present, and future,” Appl. Phys. Rev., vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–55, 2024, doi: 10.1063/5.0179566

    work page doi:10.1063/5.0179566 2024

  36. [36]

    Experimental Quantum Communication Overcomes the Rate-Loss Limit without Global Phase Tracking,

    L. Zhou et al., “Experimental Quantum Communication Overcomes the Rate-Loss Limit without Global Phase Tracking,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 130, no. 25, p. 250801, 2023, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVLETT.130.250801/FIGURES/4/THUMBNAIL

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.130.250801/figures/4/thumbnail 2023

  37. [37]

    Researchers demonstrate the UK’s first long-distance ultra-secure communication over a quantum network

    U. of Cambridge, “Researchers demonstrate the UK’s first long-distance ultra-secure communication over a quantum network.” [Online]. Available: https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/researchers- demonstrate-the-uks-first-long-distance-ultra-secure-communication-over-a-quantum

    work page

  38. [38]

    Comparing one- and two-way quantum repeater architectures,

    P. Mantri, K. Goodenough, and D. Towsley, “Comparing one- and two-way quantum repeater architectures,” Commun. Phys., vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 1–14, 2025, doi: 10.1038/S42005-025-02222- X;SUBJMETA=259,481,483,639,766;KWRD=INFORMATION+THEORY+AND+COMPUTATION, QUANTUM+INFORMATION

    work page doi:10.1038/s42005-025-02222- 2025

  39. [39]

    Quantum repeaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet,

    K. Azuma et al., “Quantum repeaters: From quantum networks to the quantum internet,” Rev. Mod. Phys., vol. 95, no. 4, p. 45006, 2023, doi: 10.1103/REVMODPHYS.95.045006/FIGURES/23/THUMBNAIL

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.95.045006/figures/23/thumbnail 2023

  40. [40]

    Generalized Quantum Repeater Graph States,

    B. Li, K. Goodenough, F. Rozpȩdek, and L. Jiang, “Generalized Quantum Repeater Graph States,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 134, no. 19, p. 190801, 2025, doi: 10.1103/PHYSREVLETT.134.190801/FIGURES/2/THUMBNAIL

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.134.190801/figures/2/thumbnail 2025

  41. [41]

    Quantum teleportation coexisting with classical communications in optical fiber,

    J. M. Thomas et al., “Quantum teleportation coexisting with classical communications in optical fiber,” Opt. Vol. 11, Issue 12, pp. 1700-1707, vol. 11, no. 12, pp. 1700–1707, 2024, doi: Page 26 of 27 10.1364/OPTICA.540362

    work page doi:10.1364/optica.540362 2024

  42. [42]

    High-rate intercity quantum key distribution with a semiconductor single-photon source,

    J. Yang et al., “High-rate intercity quantum key distribution with a semiconductor single-photon source,” Light Sci. Appl. 2024 131, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2024, doi: 10.1038/s41377-024-01488-0

    work page doi:10.1038/s41377-024-01488-0 2024

  43. [43]

    Security considerations for quantum key distribution network,

    ITU-T, “Security considerations for quantum key distribution network,” p. 25, 2020

    work page 2020

  44. [44]

    QPUF 3.0: Sustainable Cybersecurity of Smart Grid through Security-By-Design based on Quantum-PUF and Quantum Key Distribution,

    V. K. V. V. Bathalapalli, S. Mohanty, C. Pan, and E. Kougianos, “QPUF 3.0: Sustainable Cybersecurity of Smart Grid through Security-By-Design based on Quantum-PUF and Quantum Key Distribution,” pp. 935–940, Jun. 2025, doi: 10.1145/3716368.3735275

    work page doi:10.1145/3716368.3735275 2025

  45. [45]

    Securing SCADA systems in smart grids with IoT integration: A Self-Defensive Post-Quantum Blockchain Architecture,

    M. T. Naz, W. Elmedany, and M. Ali, “Securing SCADA systems in smart grids with IoT integration: A Self-Defensive Post-Quantum Blockchain Architecture,” Internet Things (The Netherlands), vol. 28, no. February, p. 101381, 2024, doi: 10.1016/j.iot.2024.101381

    work page doi:10.1016/j.iot.2024.101381 2024

  46. [46]

    Securing industrial control systems: Developing a SCADA/IoT test bench and evaluating lightweight cipher performance on hardware simulator,

    D. Upadhyay, S. Ghosh, H. Ohno, M. Zaman, and S. Sampalli, “Securing industrial control systems: Developing a SCADA/IoT test bench and evaluating lightweight cipher performance on hardware simulator,” Int. J. Crit. Infrastruct. Prot., vol. 47, p. 100705, 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcip.2024.100705

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ijcip.2024.100705 2024

  47. [47]

    Intelligent Energy Management Systems in Industry 5.0: Cybersecurity Applications in Examples,

    B. Wyrzykowska, H. Szczepaniuk, E. K. Szczepaniuk, A. Rytko, and M. Kacprzak, “Intelligent Energy Management Systems in Industry 5.0: Cybersecurity Applications in Examples,” Energies 2024, Vol. 17, Page 5871, vol. 17, no. 23, p. 5871, 2024, doi: 10.3390/EN17235871

    work page doi:10.3390/en17235871 2024

  48. [48]

    A Quantum-Based Signcryption for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition ( SCADA ) Networks,

    S. Ghosh, M. Zaman, B. Plourde, and S. Sampalli, “A Quantum-Based Signcryption for Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition ( SCADA ) Networks,” pp. 1–27, 2022

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    Preskill

    L. K. Grover, “A fast quantum mechanical algorithm for database search,” pp. 212 –219, 1996, doi: 10.1145/237814.237866

    work page doi:10.1145/237814.237866 1996

  50. [50]

    Multi-Phase Quantum Resistant Framework for Secure Communication in SCADA Systems,

    S. Ghosh, M. Zaman, R. Joshi, and S. Sampalli, “Multi-Phase Quantum Resistant Framework for Secure Communication in SCADA Systems,” IEEE Trans. Dependable Secur. Comput., vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 5461–5478, 2024, doi: 10.1109/TDSC.2024.3378474

    work page doi:10.1109/tdsc.2024.3378474 2024

  51. [51]

    High-dimensional quantum cloning and applications to quantum hacking,

    F. Bouchard, R. Fickler, R. W. Boyd, and E. Karimi, “High-dimensional quantum cloning and applications to quantum hacking,” no. February, pp. 1–6, 2017

    work page 2017

  52. [52]

    Research and Application of Firewall Log and Intrusion Detection Log Data Visualization System,

    M. Mingze, “Research and Application of Firewall Log and Intrusion Detection Log Data Visualization System,” IET Softw., vol. 2024, no. 1, 2024, doi: 10.1049/2024/7060298

    work page doi:10.1049/2024/7060298 2024

  53. [53]

    IEC 62351-4 Security Implementations for IEC 61850 MMS Messages,

    T. S. Ustun and S. M. S. Hussain, “IEC 62351-4 Security Implementations for IEC 61850 MMS Messages,” IEEE Access, vol. 8, pp. 123979–123985, 2020, doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3001926

    work page doi:10.1109/access.2020.3001926 2020

  54. [54]

    Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing,

    C. H. Bennet and G. Brassard, “Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing,” 1984

    work page 1984

  55. [55]

    Quantum cryptography using any two nonorthogonal states,

    C. H. Bennett, “Quantum cryptography using any two nonorthogonal states,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 68, no. 21, pp. 3121–3124, May 1992, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.68.3121

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.68.3121 1992

  56. [56]

    Quantum cryptography based on bell’s theorem,

    A. K. Ekert, “Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 661– 663, Aug. 1991, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.67.661

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.67.661 1991

  57. [57]

    Scarani, A

    V. Scarani, A. Acín, G. Ribordy, and N. Gisin, “Quantum Cryptography Protocols Robust against Photon Number Splitting Attacks for Weak Laser Pulse Implementations,” Phys. Rev. Lett., vol. 92, no. 5, p. 57901, Feb. 2004, doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.92.057901

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.92.057901 2004

  58. [58]

    Power networks SCADA communication cybersecurity, a Qiskit implementation,

    H. Biswas, “Power networks SCADA communication cybersecurity, a Qiskit implementation,” J. Supercomput., vol. 81, no. 13, p. 1262, 2025, doi: 10.1007/s11227-025-07758-x

    work page doi:10.1007/s11227-025-07758-x 2025

  59. [59]

    Electricity and Gas IDS | Datahub

    “Electricity and Gas IDS | Datahub.” Accessed: Jan. 07, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://data.pnnl.gov/group/nodes/dataset/13470

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    PNNL Electricity and Natural Gas System Dataset Documentation,

    T. W. Edgar, “PNNL Electricity and Natural Gas System Dataset Documentation,” no. April, 2020

    work page 2020

  61. [61]

    Welcome To Colaboratory - Colab

    “Welcome To Colaboratory - Colab.” Accessed: Apr. 22, 2024. [Online]. Available: https://colab.research.google.com/notebooks/welcome.ipynb

    work page 2024

  62. [62]

    Release News: Qiskit SDK v2.0 is here!

    Qiskit Team, “Release News: Qiskit SDK v2.0 is here!” Page 27 of 27

    work page

  63. [63]

    Data Encoding for VQC in Qiskit , A Comparison With Novel Hybrid Encoding,

    H. Biswas, “Data Encoding for VQC in Qiskit , A Comparison With Novel Hybrid Encoding,” 2025, [Online]. Available: https://arxiv.org/abs/2503.14062

    work page arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Comparing a Few Qubit Systems for Superconducting Hardware Compatibility and Circuit Design Sensitivity in Qiskit

    H. Biswas, “Comparing a Few Qubit Systems for Superconducting Hardware Compatibility and Circuit Design Sensitivity in Qiskit”, doi: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2506.14075

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

  65. [65]

    A Review of Quantum Key Distribution Protocols in the Perspective of Smart Grid,

    P. Kong, “A Review of Quantum Key Distribution Protocols in the Perspective of Smart Grid,” IEEE Syst. J., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 41–54, 2022, doi: 10.1109/JSYST.2020.3024956

    work page doi:10.1109/jsyst.2020.3024956 2022

  66. [66]

    Quantum generalizations of Bell’s inequality,

    B. S. Cirel’son, “Quantum generalizations of Bell’s inequality,” Lett. Math. Phys., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 93– 100, 1980, doi: 10.1007/BF00417500

    work page doi:10.1007/bf00417500 1980

  67. [67]

    Bounds for the quantity of information transmitted by a quantum communication channel,

    A. S. Holevo, “Bounds for the quantity of information transmitted by a quantum communication channel,” Probl. Peredachi Informatsii, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 3–11, 1973

    work page 1973

  68. [68]

    Efficient quantum key distribution secure against no-signalling eavesdroppers,

    A. Ac, “Efficient quantum key distribution secure against no-signalling eavesdroppers,” 2006, doi: 10.1088/1367-2630/8/8/126

    work page doi:10.1088/1367-2630/8/8/126 2006

  69. [69]

    & Winter, A

    I. Devetak and A. Winter, “Distillation of secret key and entanglement from quantum states,” Proc. R. Soc. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci., vol. 461, no. 2053, pp. 207–235, Jan. 2005, doi: 10.1098/rspa.2004.1372

    work page doi:10.1098/rspa.2004.1372 2053

  70. [70]

    PROPOSED EXPERIMENT TO TEST LOCAL HIDDEN-VARIABLE THEORIES,

    J. F. . Clauserf;, M. A. Horne, Abner Shimony;, and R. A. Holt, “PROPOSED EXPERIMENT TO TEST LOCAL HIDDEN-VARIABLE THEORIES,” vol. 23, no. 15, pp. 880–884, 1969

    work page 1969