pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.09217 · v1 · pith:CTLOTAX3new · submitted 2026-06-08 · 🪐 quant-ph

Satellite-Based Quantum Communication: Performance Evaluation of Discrete-Variable Quantum Key Distribution Protocols

Muskan This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 16:29 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords quantum key distributionsatellite QKDhigh-dimensional protocolsBB84atmospheric effectsLEO satellite linksdiscrete-variable QKD
0
0 comments X

The pith

HD-BB84 achieves higher key rates and better noise tolerance than HD-Extended B92 in satellite QKD simulations.

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

The paper evaluates discrete-variable QKD protocols including BB84, B92, BBM92, and E91 for LEO satellite links using beam propagation models that incorporate diffraction, turbulence, attenuation, and pointing errors. It extends the analysis to high-dimensional versions of BB84 and extended B92 with an elliptic-beam approximation for turbulence effects. Numerical results under varying dimensions, weather, and zenith angles show HD-BB84 delivering higher secret key rates, greater noise tolerance, and more favorable key-rate distributions than HD-Extended B92. A sympathetic reader would care because these comparisons indicate which protocols could make long-distance satellite-based secure key exchange more practical.

Core claim

Simulations with circular beam models for standard protocols and elliptic-beam approximations for high-dimensional ones demonstrate that HD-BB84 achieves higher key rates, superior noise tolerance, and more favorable probability distributions of the key rate compared to HD-Extended B92 under varying system dimensions, weather conditions, and zenith angles for LEO satellite links.

What carries the argument

Elliptic-beam approximation used to model turbulence-induced distortions in high-dimensional QKD protocols for uplink and downlink.

If this is right

  • Protocol performance depends strongly on channel asymmetries, beam characteristics, and environmental noise.
  • High-dimensional encoding can improve robustness for satellite-based QKD.
  • The results provide guidance for selecting protocols suited to LEO links.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The relative advantage of HD-BB84 could inform choices in designing future satellite quantum networks that combine multiple protocols.
  • Extending the same simulation framework to entanglement-based protocols might reveal similar dimensional scaling trends.
  • Validation against actual satellite data would clarify how much the models must be adjusted for real atmospheric variability.

Load-bearing premise

The circular and elliptic beam propagation models plus the selected atmospheric parameters adequately represent real LEO satellite uplink and downlink conditions.

What would settle it

An experimental satellite QKD test that measures lower or equal key rates and worse noise tolerance for HD-BB84 relative to HD-Extended B92 under comparable conditions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.09217 by Muskan.

Figure 2.6
Figure 2.6. Figure 2.6: 1: (a) QBER and key rate versus zenith angle for the BB84 protocol in the uplink [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p049_2_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.6
Figure 2.6. Figure 2.6: 2: (a) QBER and key rate versus zenith angle for the B92 protocol in the uplink (night [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p050_2_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.6
Figure 2.6. Figure 2.6: 3: (a) QBER and key rate versus zenith angle for the E91 protocol in the uplink (night [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p051_2_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.6
Figure 2.6. Figure 2.6: 4: (a) QBER and key rate versus zenith angle for the BBM92 protocol in the uplink [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p052_2_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.6
Figure 2.6. Figure 2.6: 5: QBER and key rate versus zenith angle for all considered QKD protocols: (a,d) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p053_2_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2: 1: Plot of variation of key-rate and QBER with channel noise parameter (both plots [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p065_3_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2: 2: Diagram illustrating the received beam and the receiving aperture. L is the total link [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p068_3_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.2
Figure 3.2. Figure 3.2: 3: This figure depicted that the non-uniform free-space link between the satellite and the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p069_3_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3: 1: Plot of variation of average key rate (per pulse) with zenith angle in different weather [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p073_3_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3: 2: Plot of variation of average key rate (per pulse) with total link length under condition [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p075_3_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3: 3: Plot of the distribution of key-rate variation for different channel noise parameters [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p077_3_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3.3
Figure 3.3. Figure 3.3: 4: Plot of distribution of key-rate variation for different zenith angles ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p079_3_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3: 1: The plot illustrates how the average key rate (per pulse) varies with the zenith [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p090_4_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3: 2: Plot depicting the variation in key rate distribution across different zenith angles [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p091_4_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum Key Distribution (QKD) has emerged as a fundamentally secure approach to communication in the era of quantum computing, offering protection against threats posed to classical cryptographic schemes such as RSA and Diffie-Hellman. This thesis presents a comprehensive performance analysis of satellite-based QKD protocols, focusing on both prepare-and-measure and entanglement-based schemes under realistic atmospheric and operational conditions. The study begins by introducing the theoretical foundations of quantum communication, including qubits, entanglement, and quantum entropy, and motivates the need for satellite-based QKD to overcome the distance limitations of fiber-based systems. Subsequently, the thesis evaluates four prominent QKD protocols-BB84, B92, BBM92, and E91-using a circular beam propagation model that incorporates atmospheric effects such as diffraction, turbulence, attenuation, and pointing errors, along with environmental noise contributions for uplink and downlink. Comparative numerical simulations reveal that protocol performance is strongly influenced by channel asymmetries, beam propagation characteristics, and noise, providing guidance on optimal protocol selection for low Earth orbit (LEO) satellite links. The research further investigates high-dimensional (HD) QKD protocols, specifically HD-BB84 and HD-Extended B92, using the elliptic-beam approximation to account for turbulence-induced distortions for both uplink and downlink. Simulations under vary ing system dimensions, weather conditions, and zenith angles demonstrate that HD-BB84 achieves higher key rates, superior noise tolerance, and more favorable probability distributions of the key rate compared to HD-Extended B92, highlighting the advantages of high-dimensional encoding for robust satellite-based QKD.

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

3 major / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript evaluates discrete-variable QKD protocols for satellite links, applying a circular-beam propagation model (including diffraction, turbulence, attenuation, and pointing errors) to BB84, B92, BBM92, and E91, and an elliptic-beam approximation to HD-BB84 and HD-Extended B92. Numerical simulations under varying dimensions, weather, and zenith angles conclude that HD-BB84 yields higher key rates, better noise tolerance, and more favorable key-rate distributions than HD-Extended B92 for LEO uplink/downlink.

Significance. If the beam-propagation models and atmospheric-parameter choices accurately capture real LEO conditions, the work supplies comparative guidance on protocol selection for satellite QKD and illustrates potential advantages of high-dimensional encoding. The lack of any reported validation against flight data or alternative solvers, however, confines the results to the specific modeling framework employed.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that HD-BB84 outperforms HD-Extended B92 in key rate, noise tolerance, and rate distributions is obtained exclusively from simulations that switch from a circular-beam model (standard protocols) to an elliptic-beam approximation (HD protocols) without any reported justification, derivation, or accuracy assessment of the switch for LEO uplink/downlink statistics.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: no information is supplied on the numerical methods, Monte-Carlo sampling details, error bars, or convergence checks used to generate the key-rate curves and probability distributions, rendering the quantitative comparisons unverifiable and the sensitivity to the listed free parameters (turbulence strength, attenuation coefficients, pointing-error variances) unquantified.
  3. [Abstract] Abstract: the reported performance ordering rests on a fixed set of atmospheric and pointing-error parameters with no sensitivity study or comparison to measured satellite-link statistics; if the elliptic-beam approximation or chosen parameter values deviate from actual conditions, the superiority conclusion becomes an artifact of the model rather than a robust prediction.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: typographical error 'vary ing' should read 'varying'.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments, which highlight areas where the presentation of our modeling choices and numerical procedures can be strengthened. We address each major comment below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the requested clarifications and additional analyses.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the central claim that HD-BB84 outperforms HD-Extended B92 in key rate, noise tolerance, and rate distributions is obtained exclusively from simulations that switch from a circular-beam model (standard protocols) to an elliptic-beam approximation (HD protocols) without any reported justification, derivation, or accuracy assessment of the switch for LEO uplink/downlink statistics.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the manuscript does not explicitly justify or derive the switch to the elliptic-beam approximation for the high-dimensional protocols. This modeling choice is motivated by the fact that higher-dimensional encoding is more sensitive to the elliptical beam distortions caused by atmospheric turbulence, which the circular model does not capture. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated paragraph in the methods section that derives the elliptic approximation from the turbulence-induced beam wander statistics for LEO links and cites supporting literature on its accuracy for uplink/downlink scenarios. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: no information is supplied on the numerical methods, Monte-Carlo sampling details, error bars, or convergence checks used to generate the key-rate curves and probability distributions, rendering the quantitative comparisons unverifiable and the sensitivity to the listed free parameters (turbulence strength, attenuation coefficients, pointing-error variances) unquantified.

    Authors: The numerical implementation details were omitted from the abstract and condensed in the main text. We will expand the numerical methods section to specify the Monte-Carlo sampling procedure (number of realizations, sampling method), the computation of error bars (e.g., via standard deviation across realizations or bootstrap), and the convergence criteria applied to the key-rate curves and probability distributions. This will make the quantitative comparisons verifiable and allow assessment of parameter sensitivity. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the reported performance ordering rests on a fixed set of atmospheric and pointing-error parameters with no sensitivity study or comparison to measured satellite-link statistics; if the elliptic-beam approximation or chosen parameter values deviate from actual conditions, the superiority conclusion becomes an artifact of the model rather than a robust prediction.

    Authors: The atmospheric and pointing-error parameters were selected from standard LEO models in the literature. We agree that the absence of an explicit sensitivity study limits the robustness claim. In the revision we will add a sensitivity analysis that varies turbulence strength, attenuation coefficients, and pointing-error variances over realistic ranges and reports how the performance ordering between HD-BB84 and HD-Extended B92 is affected. Direct comparison to flight data lies outside the scope of this simulation study but will be discussed with reference to available experimental benchmarks. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; results from independent physical models

full rationale

The paper evaluates QKD protocols via numerical simulations of beam propagation (circular model for standard protocols, elliptic approximation for HD protocols) incorporating diffraction, turbulence, attenuation, pointing errors, and atmospheric parameters. These inputs are external physical models, not derived from or fitted to the target performance metrics (key rates, noise tolerance, probability distributions). No self-definitional equations, fitted inputs renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations are present. The central claim (HD-BB84 superiority) follows directly from the simulation outputs under varying dimensions, weather, and zenith angles, without reduction to its own inputs by construction. This is the expected non-circular outcome for model-driven performance analysis.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

Review performed on abstract only; full manuscript unavailable, so ledger entries are inferred at the level of stated modeling assumptions.

free parameters (1)
  • atmospheric turbulence strength, attenuation coefficients, pointing error variances
    These parameters enter the beam propagation and noise models and are required to produce the reported key-rate curves.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption The chosen circular and elliptic beam models plus environmental noise terms accurately capture real LEO uplink/downlink physics
    Invoked when the abstract states that simulations incorporate diffraction, turbulence, attenuation, and pointing errors.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5803 in / 1256 out tokens · 22867 ms · 2026-06-27T16:29:41.046998+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

164 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems

    Ronald L Rivest, Adi Shamir, and Leonard Adleman. “A method for obtaining digital signatures and public-key cryptosystems” . In: Communications of the ACM 21.2 (1978), pp. 120–126

    1978

  2. [2]

    New directions in cryptography

    Whitfield Diffie and Martin E Hellman. “New directions in cryptography” . In: Democratizing cryptography: the work of Whitfield Diffie and Martin Hellman . 2022, pp. 365–390

    2022

  3. [3]

    Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring

    Peter W Shor. “Algorithms for quantum computation: discrete logarithms and factoring” . In: Proceedings 35th annual symposium on foundations of computer science . Ieee. 1994, pp. 124–134

    1994

  4. [4]

    Moore’s law: past, present and future

    Robert R Schaller. “Moore’s law: past, present and future” . In: IEEE spectrum 34.6 (2002), pp. 52–59

    2002

  5. [5]

    Quantum communication

    Nicolas Gisin and Rob Thew. “Quantum communication” . In: Nature photonics 1.3 (2007), pp. 165–171

    2007

  6. [6]

    Quantum computation and quantum information

    Michael A Nielsen and Isaac L Chuang. Quantum computation and quantum information . Cambridge university press, 2010

    2010

  7. [7]

    Quantum key distribution

    Ramona Wolf. Quantum key distribution . Vol. 988. Springer, 2021

    2021

  8. [8]

    Elements of quantum computation and quantum communication

    Anirban Pathak. Elements of quantum computation and quantum communication . CRC Press Boca Raton, 2013

    2013

  9. [9]

    Quantum computing explained

    David McMahon. Quantum computing explained . John Wiley & Sons, 2008

    2008

  10. [10]

    On quantum Rényi entropies: A new generalization and some properties

    Martin Müller-Lennert, Frédéric Dupuis, Oleg Szehr, Serge Fehr, and Marco Tomamichel. “On quantum Rényi entropies: A new generalization and some properties” . In: Journal of Mathematical Physics 54.12 (2013)

    2013

  11. [11]

    Quantum cryptog- raphy

    Nicolas Gisin, Grégoire Ribordy, Wolfgang Tittel, and Hugo Zbinden. “Quantum cryptog- raphy” . In:Reviews of Modern Physics 74.1 (2002), p. 145

    2002

  12. [13]

    A single quantum cannot be cloned

    William K Wootters and Wojciech H Zurek. “A single quantum cannot be cloned” . In: Nature 299.5886 (1982), pp. 802–803

    1982

  13. [14]

    Quantum cloning

    Valerio Scarani, Sofyan Iblisdir, Nicolas Gisin, and Antonio Acín. “Quantum cloning” . In: Reviews of Modern Physics 77.4 (2005), pp. 1225–1256

    2005

  14. [15]

    A Tutorial on Quantum Key Distribution Protocols With Interactive Simulation of QBER and SKR Per- formance Metrics

    Ushnik Nath, Ramniwas Meena, Shahnoor Ali, and Neel Kanth Kundu. “A Tutorial on Quantum Key Distribution Protocols With Interactive Simulation of QBER and SKR Per- formance Metrics” . In: IET Quantum Communication 7.1 (2026), e70033. 79

    2026

  15. [16]

    Heisenberg uncertainty principle

    Werner Heisenberg. “Heisenberg uncertainty principle” . In: Zeitschrift für Physik 43 (1927), p. 172

    1927

  16. [17]

    Conjugate coding

    Stephen Wiesner. “Conjugate coding” . In: ACM Sigact News 15.1 (1983), pp. 78–88

    1983

  17. [18]

    Quantum key distribution and coin tossing

    CH Bennett and G Brassard. “Quantum key distribution and coin tossing” . In: Proc. of IEEE Int. Conf. on Computers, Systems, and Signal Processing (Bangalore, India, 1984) . 1984, pp. 175–179

    1984

  18. [19]

    Quantum cryptography using any two nonorthogonal states

    Charles H. Bennett. “Quantum cryptography using any two nonorthogonal states” . In:Phys. Rev. Lett. 68 (1992)

    1992

  19. [20]

    Quantum cryptography pro- tocols robust against photon number splitting attacks

    Valerio Scarani, A Acin, Grégoire Ribordy, and Nicolas Gisin. “Quantum cryptography pro- tocols robust against photon number splitting attacks” . In:ERATO Conference on Quantum Information Science . 2003, pp. 4–6

    2003

  20. [21]

    Quantum key distribution (QKD) protocols: A survey

    Ali Ibnun Nurhadi and Nana Rachmana Syambas. “Quantum key distribution (QKD) protocols: A survey” . In: 2018 4th International Conference on Wireless and Telematics (ICWT). IEEE. 2018, pp. 1–5

    2018

  21. [22]

    Ad- vances in quantum cryptography

    Stefano Pirandola, Ulrik L Andersen, Leonardo Banchi, Mario Berta, Darius Bunandar, Roger Colbeck, Dirk Englund, Tobias Gehring, Cosmo Lupo, Carlo Ottaviani, et al. “Ad- vances in quantum cryptography” . In:Advances in optics and photonics 12.4 (2020), pp. 1012– 1236

    2020

  22. [24]

    Quantum cryptography without Bell’s theorem

    Charles H Bennett, Gilles Brassard, and N David Mermin. “Quantum cryptography without Bell’s theorem” . In: Physical Review Letters 68.5 (1992), p. 557

    1992

  23. [25]

    Dynamics of quantum coher- ence and non-classical correlations in open quantum system coupled to a squeezed thermal bath

    Neha Pathania, Ramniwas Meena, and Subhashish Banerjee. “Dynamics of quantum coher- ence and non-classical correlations in open quantum system coupled to a squeezed thermal bath” . In: Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications (2026), p. 131405

    2026

  24. [26]

    Continuous variable quantum cryptography

    Timothy C Ralph. “Continuous variable quantum cryptography” . In: Physical Review A 61.1 (1999), p. 010303

    1999

  25. [27]

    Continuous variable quantum cryptography using coherent states

    Frédéric Grosshans and Philippe Grangier. “Continuous variable quantum cryptography using coherent states” . In: Physical review letters 88.5 (2002), p. 057902

    2002

  26. [28]

    Quantum cryptography without switching

    Christian Weedbrook, Andrew M Lance, Warwick P Bowen, Thomas Symul, <? format?> Timothy C Ralph, and Ping Koy Lam. “Quantum cryptography without switching” . In: Physical review letters 93.17 (2004), p. 170504

    2004

  27. [29]

    Unconditional security proof of long-distance continuous-variable quantum key distribution with discrete modulation

    Anthony Leverrier and Philippe Grangier. “Unconditional security proof of long-distance continuous-variable quantum key distribution with discrete modulation” . In:Physical review letters 102.18 (2009), p. 180504

    2009

  28. [30]

    Continuous variable-based quantum commu- nication in the ocean: R. Meena, S. Banerjee

    Ramniwas Meena and Subhashish Banerjee. “Continuous variable-based quantum commu- nication in the ocean: R. Meena, S. Banerjee” . In: Quantum Information Processing 24.2 (2025), p. 46

    2025

  29. [31]

    Unidimensional continuous-variable quantum key distribution

    Vladyslav C Usenko and Frédéric Grosshans. “Unidimensional continuous-variable quantum key distribution” . In: Physical Review A 92.6 (2015), p. 062337

    2015

  30. [32]

    Husimi phase distribution in non-Gaussian operations

    Ramniwas Meena, Chandan Kumar, and Subhashish Banerjee. “Husimi phase distribution in non-Gaussian operations” . In: Physical Review A 112.2 (2025), p. 023702. 80

    2025

  31. [33]

    The rationale for the optimal continuous-variable quantum key distribution protocol

    Roman Goncharov, Irina Vorontsova, Daniil Kirichenko, Ilya Filipov, Iurii Adam, Vladimir Chistiakov, Semyon Smirnov, Boris Nasedkin, Boris Pervushin, Daria Kargina, et al. “The rationale for the optimal continuous-variable quantum key distribution protocol” . In: Optics 3.4 (2022), pp. 338–351

    2022

  32. [34]

    Differential phase shift quantum key distribution

    Kyo Inoue, Edo Waks, and Yoshihisa Yamamoto. “Differential phase shift quantum key distribution” . In: Physical review letters 89.3 (2002), p. 037902

    2002

  33. [35]

    Fast and simple one-way quantum key distribution

    Damien Stucki, Nicolas Brunner, Nicolas Gisin, Valerio Scarani, and Hugo Zbinden. “Fast and simple one-way quantum key distribution” . In: Applied Physics Letters 87.19 (2005)

    2005

  34. [36]

    Deterministic secure direct communication using en- tanglement

    Kim Boström and Timo Felbinger. “Deterministic secure direct communication using en- tanglement” . In:Physical Review Letters 89.18 (2002), p. 187902

    2002

  35. [37]

    Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution

    Hoi-Kwong Lo, Marcos Curty, and Bing Qi. “Measurement-device-independent quantum key distribution” . In: Physical review letters 108.13 (2012), p. 130503

    2012

  36. [38]

    Overcoming the rate–distance limit of quantum key distribution without quantum repeaters

    Marco Lucamarini, Zhiliang L Yuan, James F Dynes, and Andrew J Shields. “Overcoming the rate–distance limit of quantum key distribution without quantum repeaters” . In: Nature 557.7705 (2018), pp. 400–403

    2018

  37. [39]

    Security against individual attacks for realistic quantum key distri- bution

    Norbert Lütkenhaus. “Security against individual attacks for realistic quantum key distri- bution” . In: Physical Review A 61.5 (2000), p. 052304

    2000

  38. [40]

    Quantum key distribution with high loss: toward global secure com- munication

    Won-Young Hwang. “Quantum key distribution with high loss: toward global secure com- munication” . In:Physical Review Letters 91.5 (2003), p. 057901

    2003

  39. [41]

    Practical decoy state for quantum key distribution

    Xiongfeng Ma, Bing Qi, Yi Zhao, and Hoi-Kwong Lo. “Practical decoy state for quantum key distribution” . In: Physical Review A—Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics 72.1 (2005), p. 012326

    2005

  40. [42]

    Experimental quantum key distribution beyond the repeaterless secret key capacity

    Mariella Minder, Mirko Pittaluga, George Lloyd Roberts, Marco Lucamarini, James F Dynes, ZL Yuan, and Andrew J Shields. “Experimental quantum key distribution beyond the repeaterless secret key capacity” . In: Nature Photonics 13.5 (2019), pp. 334–338

    2019

  41. [43]

    Secure quantum key distribution over 421 km of optical fiber

    Alberto Boaron, Gianluca Boso, Davide Rusca, Cédric Vulliez, Claire Autebert, Misael Caloz, Matthieu Perrenoud, Gaëtan Gras, Félix Bussières, Ming-Jun Li, et al. “Secure quantum key distribution over 421 km of optical fiber” . In: Physical Review Letters 121.19 (2018), p. 190502

    2018

  42. [44]

    Inside quantum re- peaters

    William J Munro, Koji Azuma, Kiyoshi Tamaki, and Kae Nemoto. “Inside quantum re- peaters” . In: IEEE Journal of Selected topics in quantum electronics 21.3 (2015), pp. 78– 90

    2015

  43. [45]

    All-photonic quantum repeaters

    Koji Azuma, Kiyoshi Tamaki, and Hoi-Kwong Lo. “All-photonic quantum repeaters” . In: Nature Communications 6.1 (2015), pp. 1–7

    2015

  44. [46]

    Long-range big quantum-data transmission

    Michael Zwerger, Alexander Pirker, Vedran Dunjko, Hans J Briegel, and Wolfgang Dür. “Long-range big quantum-data transmission” . In: Physical Review Letters 120.3 (2018), p. 030503

    2018

  45. [47]

    Efficient quantum repeater with respect to both entanglement-concentration rate and complexity of local operations and classical commu- nication

    Zhaofeng Su, Ji Guan, and Lvzhou Li. “Efficient quantum repeater with respect to both entanglement-concentration rate and complexity of local operations and classical commu- nication” . In: Physical Review A 97.1 (2018), p. 012325

    2018

  46. [48]

    Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics

    Nicolas Sangouard, Christoph Simon, Hugues De Riedmatten, and Nicolas Gisin. “Quantum repeaters based on atomic ensembles and linear optics” . In: Reviews of Modern Physics 83.1 (2011), pp. 33–80. 81

    2011

  47. [49]

    En- tanglement over global distances via quantum repeaters with satellite links

    K Boone, J-P Bourgoin, E Meyer-Scott, K Heshami, T Jennewein, and C Simon. “En- tanglement over global distances via quantum repeaters with satellite links” . In: Physical Review A 91.5 (2015), p. 052325

    2015

  48. [50]

    Progress in satellite quan- tum key distribution

    Robert Bedington, Juan Miguel Arrazola, and Alexander Ling. “Progress in satellite quan- tum key distribution” . In: npj Quantum Information 3.1 (2017), p. 30

    2017

  49. [51]

    A comprehensive design and performance analysis of low Earth orbit satellite quantum communication

    Jean-Philippe Bourgoin, Evan Meyer-Scott, Brendon L Higgins, B Helou, Chris Erven, Hannes Huebel, B Kumar, D Hudson, Ian D’Souza, Ralph Girard, et al. “A comprehensive design and performance analysis of low Earth orbit satellite quantum communication” . In: New Journal of Physics 15.2 (2013), p. 023006

    2013

  50. [52]

    Feasibility of satellite quantum key distribution

    Cristian Bonato, Andrea Tomaello, Vania Da Deppo, Giampiero Naletto, and Paolo Vil- loresi. “Feasibility of satellite quantum key distribution” . In: New Journal of Physics 11.4 (2009), p. 045017

    2009

  51. [53]

    Satellite-to-ground quantum key distribution

    Sheng-Kai Liao, Wen-Qi Cai, Wei-Yue Liu, Liang Zhang, Yang Li, Ji-Gang Ren, Juan Yin, Qi Shen, Yuan Cao, Zheng-Ping Li, et al. “Satellite-to-ground quantum key distribution” . In: Nature 549.7670 (2017), pp. 43–47

    2017

  52. [54]

    Satellite-to-ground entanglement-based quantum key distribution

    Juan Yin, Yuan Cao, Yu-Huai Li, Ji-Gang Ren, Sheng-Kai Liao, Liang Zhang, Wen-Qi Cai, Wei-Yue Liu, Bo Li, Hui Dai, et al. “Satellite-to-ground entanglement-based quantum key distribution” . In: Physical review letters 119.20 (2017), p. 200501

    2017

  53. [55]

    Ground-to-satellite quantum teleportation

    Ji-Gang Ren, Ping Xu, Hai-Lin Yong, Liang Zhang, Sheng-Kai Liao, Juan Yin, Wei-Yue Liu, Wen-Qi Cai, Meng Yang, Li Li, et al. “Ground-to-satellite quantum teleportation” . In: Nature 549.7670 (2017), pp. 70–73

    2017

  54. [56]

    Quantum cryp- tography: Key distribution and beyond

    Akshata Shenoy-Hejamadi, Anirban Pathak, and Srikanth Radhakrishna. “Quantum cryp- tography: Key distribution and beyond” . In: Quanta 6.1 (2017), pp. 1–47

    2017

  55. [57]

    MODTRAN® 6: A major upgrade of the MODTRAN® radia- tive transfer code

    Alexander Berk, Patrick Conforti, Rosemary Kennett, Timothy Perkins, Fred Hawes, and Jeannette Van Den Bosch. “MODTRAN® 6: A major upgrade of the MODTRAN® radia- tive transfer code” . In: 2014 6th Workshop on Hyperspectral Image and Signal Processing: Evolution in Remote Sensing (WHISPERS) . IEEE. 2014, pp. 1–4

    2014

  56. [58]

    Isoplanatic degradation of tilt correction and short-term imaging sys- tems

    George C Valley. “Isoplanatic degradation of tilt correction and short-term imaging sys- tems” . In: Applied Optics 19.4 (1980), pp. 574–577

    1980

  57. [59]

    Modulation transfer function associated with image trans- mission through turbulent media

    RE Hufnagel and NR Stanley. “Modulation transfer function associated with image trans- mission through turbulent media” . In:Journal of the Optical Society of America 54.1 (1964), pp. 52–61

    1964

  58. [60]

    Performance Analysis of Satellite- Based QKD Protocols

    Muskan, Ramniwas Meena, and Subhashish Banerjee. “Performance Analysis of Satellite- Based QKD Protocols” . In: Modern Physics Letters A (2026)

    2026

  59. [61]

    Quantum cryptography using larger alphabets

    Helle Bechmann-Pasquinucci and Wolfgang Tittel. “Quantum cryptography using larger alphabets” . In: Physical Review A 61.6 (2000), p. 062308

    2000

  60. [62]

    Security of quantum key distribution using d-level systems

    Nicolas J Cerf, Mohamed Bourennane, Anders Karlsson, and Nicolas Gisin. “Security of quantum key distribution using d-level systems” . In: Physical review letters 88.12 (2002), p. 127902

    2002

  61. [63]

    High- dimensional quantum communication: benefits, progress, and future challenges

    Daniele Cozzolino, Beatrice Da Lio, Davide Bacco, and Leif Katsuo Oxenløwe. “High- dimensional quantum communication: benefits, progress, and future challenges” . In: Ad- vanced Quantum Technologies 2.12 (2019), p. 1900038. 82

    2019

  62. [64]

    High-dimensional coherent one-way quantum key distri- bution

    Kfir Sulimany, Guy Pelc, Rom Dudkiewicz, Simcha Korenblit, Hagai S Eisenberg, Yaron Bromberg, and Michael Ben-Or. “High-dimensional coherent one-way quantum key distri- bution” . In: NPJ Quantum Information 11.1 (2025), p. 16

    2025

  63. [65]

    High-dimensional quantum key distribution using orbital angular momentum of single photons<? pag \break?> from a colloidal quantum dot at room temperature

    Dotan Halevi, Boaz Lubotzky, Kfir Sulimany, Eric G Bowes, Jennifer A Hollingsworth, Yaron Bromberg, and Ronen Rapaport. “High-dimensional quantum key distribution using orbital angular momentum of single photons<? pag \break?> from a colloidal quantum dot at room temperature” . In: Optica Quantum 2.5 (2024), pp. 351–357

    2024

  64. [66]

    High dimensional quantum key distribution with temporal and polarization hybrid encoding

    Dong-Dong Li, Mei-Sheng Zhao, Zhi Li, Yan-Lin Tang, Yun-Qi Dai, Shi-Biao Tang, and Yong Zhao. “High dimensional quantum key distribution with temporal and polarization hybrid encoding” . In: Optical Fiber Technology 68 (2022), p. 102828

    2022

  65. [67]

    Decoy State Quantum Key Distribution

    X. Ma H.-K. Lo and K. Chen. “Decoy State Quantum Key Distribution” . In: Physical Review Letters 94 (2005), p. 230504

    2005

  66. [68]

    Practical Decoy State for Quantum Key Distribution

    X. Ma et al. “Practical Decoy State for Quantum Key Distribution” . In: Physical Review A 72 (2005), p. 012326

    2005

  67. [69]

    Atmospheric Quantum Channels with Weak and Strong Turbulence

    A. Semenov D. Vasylyev and W. Vogel. “Atmospheric Quantum Channels with Weak and Strong Turbulence” . In: Physical Review Letters 117 (2017), p. 090501

    2017

  68. [70]

    Analysis of a high-dimensional extended B92 protocol

    Hasan Iqbal and Walter O Krawec. “Analysis of a high-dimensional extended B92 protocol” . In: Quantum Information Processing 20.10 (2021), p. 344

    2021

  69. [71]

    Free-space quantum links under diverse weather conditions

    D Vasylyev, AA Semenov, W Vogel, K Günthner, A Thurn, Ö Bayraktar, and Ch Mar- quardt. “Free-space quantum links under diverse weather conditions” . In: Physical Review A 96.4 (2017), p. 043856

    2017

  70. [72]

    Satellite-based links for quantum key distribution: beam effects and weather dependence

    Carlo Liorni, Hermann Kampermann, and Dagmar Bruß. “Satellite-based links for quantum key distribution: beam effects and weather dependence” . In: New Journal of Physics 21.9 (2019), p. 093055

    2019

  71. [73]

    Analysis for Satellite- Based High-Dimensional Extended B92 and High-Dimensional BB84 Quantum Key Distri- bution

    Arindam Dutta, Muskan, Subhashish Banerjee, and Anirban Pathak. “Analysis for Satellite- Based High-Dimensional Extended B92 and High-Dimensional BB84 Quantum Key Distri- bution” . In: Advanced Quantum Technologies 7.11 (2024), p. 2400149

    2024

  72. [74]

    Optimizing the decoy-state BB84 QKD protocol parameters

    Thomas Attema, Joost W Bosman, and Niels MP Neumann. “Optimizing the decoy-state BB84 QKD protocol parameters” . In: Quantum Information Processing 20.4 (2021), p. 154

    2021

  73. [75]

    Satellite-based quantum key distribution in the presence of bypass channels

    Masoud Ghalaii, Sima Bahrani, Carlo Liorni, Federico Grasselli, Hermann Kampermann, Lewis Wooltorton, Rupesh Kumar, Stefano Pirandola, Timothy P Spiller, Alexander Ling, et al. “Satellite-based quantum key distribution in the presence of bypass channels” . In: PRX Quantum 4.4 (2023), p. 040320

    2023

  74. [76]

    Statistical fluctuation analysis for decoy-state quantum secure direct communication

    Jooyoun Park, Bumil Kim, and Jun Heo. “Statistical fluctuation analysis for decoy-state quantum secure direct communication” . In: Quantum Information Processing 22.2 (2023), p. 112

    2023

  75. [77]

    Numerical finite-key analysis of quantum key distribution

    Darius Bunandar, Luke CG Govia, Hari Krovi, and Dirk Englund. “Numerical finite-key analysis of quantum key distribution” . In: npj Quantum Information 6.1 (2020), p. 104

    2020

  76. [78]

    Numerical calculations of the finite key rate for general quantum key distribution protocols

    Ian George, Jie Lin, and Norbert Lütkenhaus. “Numerical calculations of the finite key rate for general quantum key distribution protocols” . In: Physical Review Research 3.1 (2021), p. 013274

    2021

  77. [79]

    Characterization of quantumness of non- Gaussian states under the influence of Gaussian channel: R. Meena, S. Banerjee

    Ramniwas Meena and Subhashish Banerjee. “Characterization of quantumness of non- Gaussian states under the influence of Gaussian channel: R. Meena, S. Banerjee” . In: Quan- tum Information Processing 22.8 (2023), p. 298. 83

    2023

  78. [80]

    Finite key effects in satellite quantum key distribution

    Jasminder S Sidhu, Thomas Brougham, Duncan McArthur, Roberto G Pousa, and Daniel KL Oi. “Finite key effects in satellite quantum key distribution” . In: npj Quantum Infor- mation 8.1 (2022), p. 18

    2022

  79. [81]

    Strategies for achieving high key rates in satellite-based QKD

    Sebastian Ecker, Bo Liu, Johannes Handsteiner, Matthias Fink, Dominik Rauch, Fabian Steinlechner, Thomas Scheidl, Anton Zeilinger, and Rupert Ursin. “Strategies for achieving high key rates in satellite-based QKD” . In: npj Quantum Information 7.1 (2021), p. 5

    2021

  80. [82]

    Feasibility of satellite-to-ground continuous- variable quantum key distribution

    Daniele Dequal, Luis Trigo Vidarte, Victor Roman Rodriguez, Giuseppe Vallone, Paolo Vil- loresi, Anthony Leverrier, and Eleni Diamanti. “Feasibility of satellite-to-ground continuous- variable quantum key distribution” . In: npj Quantum Information 7.1 (2021), p. 3

    2021

Showing first 80 references.