MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1644115585 · doi:10.26421/qic10.3-4-11

Strong NP-hardness of the quantum separability problem

2010· article· en· W1644115585 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantum Information and Computation · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsSeparable stateCombinatoricsMathematicsQuantum entanglementSeparable spaceBipartite graphDimension (graph theory)InverseSimple (philosophy)QuantumQuantum stateState (computer science)Upper and lower boundsDiscrete mathematicsTRACE (psycholinguistics)Density matrixQuantum discordQuantum mechanicsPhysicsAlgorithmMathematical analysisGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Given the density matrix $\rho$ of a bipartite quantum state, the quantum separability problem asks whether $\rho$ is entangled or separable. In 2003, Gurvits showed that this problem is NP-hard if $\rho$ is located within an inverse exponential (with respect to dimension) distance from the border of the set of separable quantum states. In this paper, we extend this NP-hardness to an inverse polynomial distance from the separable set. The result follows from a simple combination of works by Gurvits, Ioannou, and Liu. We apply our result to show (1) an immediate lower bound on the maximum distance between a bound entangled state and the separable set (assuming $\rm{P}\neq\rm{ NP}$), and (2) NP-hardness for the problem of determining whether a completely positive trace-preserving linear map is entanglement-breaking.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.391

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.233 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it