{"record_type":"pith_number_record","schema_url":"https://pith.science/schemas/pith-number/v1.json","pith_number":"pith:1996:LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ","short_pith_number":"pith:LPJSWRPU","schema_version":"1.0","canonical_sha256":"5bd32b45f4ed20a929f439c8d5f4006271e16a501544b549eac4ce6058df2370","source":{"kind":"arxiv","id":"quant-ph/9605044","version":2},"attestation_state":"computed","paper":{"title":"Unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment is impossible","license":"","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"quant-ph","authors_text":"Dominic Mayers (Princeton University)","submitted_at":"1996-05-30T20:43:57Z","abstract_excerpt":"The claim of quantum cryptography has always been that it can provide protocols that are unconditionally secure, that is, for which the security does not depend on any restriction on the time, space or technology available to the cheaters. We show that this claim does not hold for any quantum bit commitment protocol. Since many cryptographic tasks use bit commitment as a basic primitive, this result implies a severe setback for quantum cryptography. The model used encompasses all reasonable implementations of quantum bit commitment protocols in which the participants have not met before, inclu"},"verification_status":{"content_addressed":true,"pith_receipt":true,"author_attested":false,"weak_author_claims":0,"strong_author_claims":0,"externally_anchored":false,"storage_verified":false,"citation_signatures":0,"replication_records":0,"graph_snapshot":true,"references_resolved":false,"formal_links_present":false},"canonical_record":{"source":{"id":"quant-ph/9605044","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"metadata":{"license":"","primary_cat":"quant-ph","submitted_at":"1996-05-30T20:43:57Z","cross_cats_sorted":[],"title_canon_sha256":"1275f4c185ad7f46817463424c3363d766371df7d8bcfd5296fda556903abccd","abstract_canon_sha256":"85f066b72bb2bff4839fc44034dc0176740e89a6fb52224982683afd2b091820"},"schema_version":"1.0"},"receipt":{"kind":"pith_receipt","key_id":"pith-v1-2026-05","algorithm":"ed25519","signed_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.075172Z","signature_b64":"2EmvvR6Bzm2hhGt9DFDc3Er888A0+c7V+fqnSwKf1q5eQgUiCNLxcNFxdHNxHa0Z5Yrg65eJy1XN0VWS5SrfAg==","signed_message":"canonical_sha256_bytes","builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1","receipt_version":"0.3","canonical_sha256":"5bd32b45f4ed20a929f439c8d5f4006271e16a501544b549eac4ce6058df2370","last_reissued_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074774Z","signature_status":"signed_v1","first_computed_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074774Z","public_key_fingerprint":"8d4b5ee74e4693bcd1df2446408b0d54"},"graph_snapshot":{"paper":{"title":"Unconditionally secure quantum bit commitment is impossible","license":"","headline":"","cross_cats":[],"primary_cat":"quant-ph","authors_text":"Dominic Mayers (Princeton University)","submitted_at":"1996-05-30T20:43:57Z","abstract_excerpt":"The claim of quantum cryptography has always been that it can provide protocols that are unconditionally secure, that is, for which the security does not depend on any restriction on the time, space or technology available to the cheaters. We show that this claim does not hold for any quantum bit commitment protocol. Since many cryptographic tasks use bit commitment as a basic primitive, this result implies a severe setback for quantum cryptography. The model used encompasses all reasonable implementations of quantum bit commitment protocols in which the participants have not met before, inclu"},"claims":{"count":0,"items":[],"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"source":{"id":"quant-ph/9605044","kind":"arxiv","version":2},"verdict":{"id":null,"model_set":{},"created_at":null,"strongest_claim":"","one_line_summary":"","pipeline_version":null,"weakest_assumption":"","pith_extraction_headline":""},"integrity":{"clean":true,"summary":{"advisory":0,"critical":0,"by_detector":{},"informational":0},"endpoint":"/pith/quant-ph/9605044/integrity.json","findings":[],"available":true,"detectors_run":[],"snapshot_sha256":"c28c3603d3b5d939e8dc4c7e95fa8dfce3d595e45f758748cecf8e644a296938"},"references":{"count":0,"sample":[],"resolved_work":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57","internal_anchors":0},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"author_claims":{"count":0,"strong_count":0,"snapshot_sha256":"258153158e38e3291e3d48162225fcdb2d5a3ed65a07baac614ab91432fd4f57"},"builder_version":"pith-number-builder-2026-05-17-v1"},"aliases":[{"alias_kind":"arxiv","alias_value":"quant-ph/9605044","created_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074831+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"arxiv_version","alias_value":"quant-ph/9605044v2","created_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074831+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"doi","alias_value":"10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/9605044","created_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074831+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_12","alias_value":"LPJSWRPU5UQK","created_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074831+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_16","alias_value":"LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPU","created_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074831+00:00"},{"alias_kind":"pith_short_8","alias_value":"LPJSWRPU","created_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074831+00:00"}],"events":[],"event_summary":{},"paper_claims":[],"inbound_citations":{"count":1,"internal_anchor_count":1,"sample":[{"citing_arxiv_id":"2608.10674","citing_title":"Optimal fidelity estimation when one state is pure via algorithmic Uhlmann transform","ref_index":21,"is_internal_anchor":true}]},"formal_canon":{"evidence_count":0,"sample":[],"anchors":[]},"links":{"html":"https://pith.science/pith/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ","json":"https://pith.science/pith/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ.json","graph_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ/graph.json","events_json":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ/events.json","paper":"https://pith.science/paper/LPJSWRPU"},"agent_actions":{"view_html":"https://pith.science/pith/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ","download_json":"https://pith.science/pith/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ.json","view_paper":"https://pith.science/paper/LPJSWRPU","resolve_alias":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/resolve?arxiv=quant-ph/9605044&json=true","fetch_graph":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ/graph.json","fetch_events":"https://pith.science/api/pith-number/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ/events.json","actions":{"anchor_timestamp":"https://pith.science/pith/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ/action/timestamp_anchor","attest_storage":"https://pith.science/pith/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ/action/storage_attestation","attest_author":"https://pith.science/pith/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ/action/author_attestation","sign_citation":"https://pith.science/pith/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ/action/citation_signature","submit_replication":"https://pith.science/pith/LPJSWRPU5UQKSKPUHHENL5AAMJ/action/replication_record"}},"created_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074831+00:00","updated_at":"2026-07-04T16:02:40.074831+00:00"}