Channel covariance, twirling, contraction and some upper bounds on the quantum capacity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Evaluating the quantum capacity of quantum channels is an important but difficult problem, even for channels of low input and output dimension. Smith and Smolin showed that the quantum capacity of the Clifford-twirl of a qubit amplitude damping channel (a qubit depolarizing channel) has a quantum capacity that is at most the coherent information of the qubit amplitude damping channel evaluated on the maximally mixed input state. We restrict our attention to obtaining upper bounds on the quantum capacity using a generalization of Smith and Smolin's degradable extension technique. Given a degradable channel $\cN$ and a finite projective group of unitaries $\cV$, we show that the $\cV$-twirl of $\cN$ has a quantum capacity at most the coherent information of $\cN$ maximized over a $\cV$-contracted space of input states. As a consequence, degradable channels that are covariant with respect to diagonal Pauli matrices have quantum capacities that are their coherent information maximized over just the diagonal input states. As an application of our main result, we supply new upper bounds on the quantum capacity of some unital and non-unital channels -- $d$-dimensional depolarizing channels, two-qubit locally symmetric Pauli channels, and shifted qubit depolarizing channels.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".