MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1678454200 · doi:10.26421/qic6.2-3

The computational power of the W and GHZ states

2006· article· en· W1678454200 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueQuantum Information and Computation · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultipartiteImpossibilityState (computer science)Mathematical proofQuantum entanglementContext (archaeology)Quantum stateLOCCQuantum computerCluster stateMathematicsPower (physics)Symmetry (geometry)QuantumDiscrete mathematicsComputer scienceQuantum mechanicsPhysicsAlgorithmLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is well understood that the use of quantum entanglement significantly enhances the computational power of systems. Much of the attention has focused on Bell states and their multipartite generalizations. However, in the multipartite case it is known that there are several inequivalent classes of states, such as those represented by the W-state and the GHZ-state. Our main contribution is a demonstration of the special computational power of these states in the context of paradigmatic problems from classical distributed computing. Concretely, we show that the W-state is the only pure state that can be used to exactly solve the problem of leader election in anonymous quantum networks. Similarly we show that the GHZ-state is the only one that can be used to solve the problem of distributed consensus when no classical post-processing is considered. These results generalize to a family of W- and GHZ-like states. At the heart of the proofs of these impossibility results lie symmetry arguments.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.529
Threshold uncertainty score0.341

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.203 · 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