Abstract:While quantum computing has strong potential in data-driven fields, the privacy issue of sensitive or valuable information involved in the quantum algorithm should be considered. Differential privacy (DP), which is a fundamental privacy tool widely used in the classical scenario, has been extended to the quantum domain, i.e., quantum differential privacy (QDP). QDP may become one of the most promising approaches toward privacy-preserving quantum computing since it is not only compatible with classical DP mechanisms but also achieves privacy protection by exploiting unavoidable quantum noise in noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices. This paper provides an overview of the various implementations of QDP and their performance in terms of privacy parameters under the DP setting. Specifically, we propose a taxonomy of QDP techniques, categorizing the literature on whether internal or external randomization is used as a source to achieve QDP and how these implementations are applied to each phase of the quantum algorithm. We also discuss challenges and future directions for QDP. By summarizing recent advancements, we hope to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date review for researchers venturing into this field.

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

This paper attempts to solve the privacy protection problem in quantum computing, especially the privacy issues when handling sensitive or valuable information in quantum algorithms. As the potential of quantum computing in data - driven fields gradually emerges, how to ensure the data privacy involved has become an important issue. Differential Privacy (DP) as a classical privacy protection method has been extended to the quantum field, namely Quantum Differential Privacy (QDP). QDP is not only compatible with the classical DP mechanism, but also can utilize the inevitable quantum noise in NISQ devices to achieve privacy protection. Specifically, this paper aims to: 1. **Provide an overview of QDP**: Summarize and classify different QDP implementation methods and evaluate their performance in terms of privacy parameters. 2. **Propose a taxonomy of QDP techniques**: Classify according to whether internal or external randomization is used as the source of implementing QDP and how these implementations are applied to various stages of quantum algorithms. 3. **Discuss challenges and future directions**: Explore the challenges faced by QDP in quantum computing and point out directions for future research. Through these works, the paper hopes to provide the latest and comprehensive review for researchers involved in this field. ### Summary of Mathematical Formulas - **Definition of (ϵ, δ)-QDP**: For any pair of neighboring quantum states ρ and σ with a distance of \(d\), and all possible measurement results \(O\), a noisy quantum algorithm \(A = (\phi, E, \{M_i\}_{i \in O})\) satisfies \((\epsilon, \delta)\)-QDP if the following condition is met: \[ \sum_{i \in O} \text{Tr}[M_i E(\rho)] \leq \exp(\epsilon(d)) \cdot \sum_{i \in O} \text{Tr}[M_i E(\sigma)] + \delta \] where the above inequality holds with a probability of at least \(1 - \delta\). When \(\delta = 0\), we say that \(A\) satisfies \(\epsilon\)-QDP. - **Quantum privacy loss**: For a quantum algorithm \(A = (\phi, E, \{M_i\}_{i \in O})\) and a pair of neighboring quantum states ρ and σ, the privacy loss is defined as: \[ L_A(\rho \| \sigma) = \ln \left( \frac{\sum_{i \in O} \text{Tr}[M_i E(\rho)]}{\sum_{i \in O} \text{Tr}[M_i E(\sigma)]} \right) \] - **Privacy parameters after the quantum depolarizing channel**: According to Theorem 3, for a quantum algorithm \(A = (\phi, E_N\circ E, M)\) with a depolarizing channel, it satisfies \(\epsilon\)-QDP, where: \[ \epsilon \leq \ln \left( \frac{1 - p}{p \cdot d \cdot D} + 1 \right) \] Here, \(p\) is the depolarizing error probability, \(D\) is the dimension of the quantum system, and \(d\) is the distance between quantum states. Through these formulas and definitions, the paper explores in detail how to achieve effective privacy protection in quantum computing.

Bridging Quantum Computing and Differential Privacy: Insights into Quantum Computing Privacy

Differential Privacy Preserving Distributed Quantum Computing

Differential Privacy in Quantum Computation

Differential Privacy Preserving Quantum Computing via Projection Operator Measurements

Tuning Quantum Computing Privacy through Quantum Error Correction

Quantum Differential Privacy: An Information Theory Perspective

Quantum differential privacy under noise channels

A unifying framework for differentially private quantum algorithms

Differential Privacy Amplification in Quantum and Quantum-inspired Algorithms

Detecting Violations of Differential Privacy for Quantum Algorithms

Federated Quantum Machine Learning with Differential Privacy

Harnessing Inherent Noises for Privacy Preservation in Quantum Machine Learning

Optimal Mechanisms for Quantum Local Differential Privacy

Differential Privacy in Privacy-Preserving Big Data and Learning: Challenge and Opportunity

Universal and holistic privacy protection in quantum computing: a novel approach through quantum circuit equivalence homomorphic encryption

Quantum Pufferfish Privacy: A Flexible Privacy Framework for Quantum Systems

Advancing Differential Privacy: Where We Are Now and Future Directions for Real-World Deployment

Quantum Local Differential Privacy and Quantum Statistical Query Model

Wasserstein Differential Privacy

When Deep Learning Meets Differential Privacy: Privacy,Security, and More

Differential privacy in deep learning: Privacy and beyond