Advertisement

On the (Im)possibility of Non-interactive Correlation Distillation

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2976)

Abstract

We study the problem of non-interactive correlation distillation (NICD). Suppose Alice and Bob each has a string, denoted by A = a 0 a 1...a n − 1 and B = b 0 b 1...b n − 1, respectively. Furthermore, for every k=0,1,...,n-1, (a k ,b k ) is independently drawn from a distribution \(\mathcal{N}\), known as the “noise mode”. Alice and Bob wish to “distill” the correlation non-interactively, i.e., they wish to each apply a function to their strings, and output one bit, denoted by X and Y, such that Prob[X = Y] can be made as close to 1 as possible. The problem is, for what noise model can they succeed? This problem is related to various topics in computer science, including information reconciliation and random beacons. In fact, if NICD is indeed possible for some general class of noise models, then some of these topics would, in some sense, become straightforward corollaries.

We prove two negative results on NICD for various noise models. We prove that for these models, it is impossible to distill the correlation to be arbitrarily close to 1. We also give an example where Alice and Bob can increase their correlation with one bit of communication. This example, which may be of its own interest, demonstrates that even the smallest amount of communication is provably more powerful than no communication.

Keywords

Noise Model Impossibility Result Oblivious Transfer Distribution Matrix Perfect Accuracy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Alon, N., Maurer, U., Wigderson, A.: Private communicationGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aumann, Y., Rabin, M.O.: Information theoretically secure communication in the limited storage space model. In: Wiener, M. (ed.) CRYPTO 1999. LNCS, vol. 1666, pp. 65–79. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blahut, R.E.: Theory and practice of error control codes. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1983)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bennett, C.H., Bessette, F., Brassard, G., Salvail, L., Smolin, J.: Experimental quantum cryptography. Journal of Cryptology 5(1), 3–28 (1992)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bennett, C.H., DiVincenzo, D.P., Linsker, R.: Digital recording system with time-bracketed authentication by on-line challenges and method for authenticating recordings. US patent 5764769 (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brassard, G., Salvail, L.: Secret-key reconciliation by public discussion. In: Helleseth, T. (ed.) EUROCRYPT 1993. LNCS, vol. 765, pp. 410–423. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cachin, C., Maurer, U.: Linking information reconciliation and privacy amplification. Journal of Cryptology 10(2), 97–110 (1997)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cachin, C., Maurer, U.: Unconditional security against memory-bounded adversaries. In: Kaliski Jr., B.S. (ed.) CRYPTO 1997. LNCS, vol. 1294, pp. 292–306. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cover, T.M., Thomas, J.A.: Elements of information theory. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester (1991)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ding, Y.Z.: Oblivious transfer in the bounded storage model. In: Kilian, J. (ed.) CRYPTO 2001. LNCS, vol. 2139, pp. 155–177. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lancaster, P., Tismenetsky, M.: The theory of matrices, with applications, 2nd edn. Academic Press, London (1985)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maurer, U.M.: Conditionally-perfect secrecy and a provably secure randomized cipher. Journal of Cryptology 5, 53–66 (1992)zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maurer, U.M.: Secret key agreement by public discussion from common information. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 39, 733–742 (1993)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mossel, E., O’Donnell, R.: Coin Flipping from a Cosmic Source: On Error Correction of Truly Random Bits (manuscript)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rabin, M.: Transaction Protection by Beacons. Journal of Computer and System Sciences 27(2), 256–267 (1983)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Yang, K.: On the (Im)possibility of Non-interactive Correlation Distillation (full version). To appear in ECCCGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ke Yang
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentCarnegie Mellon UniversityPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations