Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of qubit efficiency for the existing as well as the proposed protocols

From: Quantum anonymous veto: a set of new protocols

Protocol

Quantum state used

Qubit efficiency (η)

η for 4 voters

RGQAV

n-party GHZ states

\(\{nl(1+\delta_{0}+2\delta_{1}+\delta_{0}\delta_{1})\}^{-1}\)

\(\frac{1}{200}\)

WQAV

n-party GHZ states

\(\{nl(6+\delta_{0}+\delta_{1}+\delta_{0}\delta_{1})\}^{-1}\)

\(\frac{1}{360}\)

QAV1

Based on QKA/QKD scheme used

\(\{(2n-1))nl \}^{-1}\) (BB84 based)

\(\frac{1}{280}\)

QAV2

Bell states

\(\{((n-1)(\delta_{1}+1)+1) nl\}^{-1}\)

\(\frac{1}{280}\)

QAV3

Bell states

\(\{(\frac{(n-1)(\delta_{1}+1)}{2}+4)nl\}^{-1}\)

\(\frac{1}{280}\)

QAV4

Bell states

\(\{nl(4n-3)\}^{-1}\)

\(\frac{1}{520}\)

QAV5

Bell states

\(\{((n-1)(\delta_{1}+1)+1) nl\}^{-1}\)

\(\frac{1}{280}\)

QAV6

Bell states

\(\{((n+1)(1+\delta_{1}) +2)l \}^{-1}\)

\(\frac{1}{24}\)

QAV7

m-qubit entangled state with m ≥ (n − 1)

\(\{m + (n+1)(1+\delta_{1})l +1\}^{-1}\)

\(\frac{1}{24}\)