Information Trade-Offs for Optical Quantum Communication
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent work has precisely characterized the achievable trade-offs between three key information processing tasks-classical communication (generation or consumption), quantum communication (generation or consumption), and shared entanglement (distribution or consumption), measured in bits, qubits, and ebits per channel use, respectively. Slices and corner points of this three-dimensional region reduce to well-known protocols for quantum channels. A trade-off coding technique can attain any point in the region and can outperform time sharing between the best-known protocols for accomplishing each information processing task by itself. Previously, the benefits of trade-off coding that had been found were too small to be of practical value (viz., for the dephasing and the universal cloning machine channels). In this Letter, we demonstrate that the associated performance gains are in fact remarkably high for several physically relevant bosonic channels that model free-space or fiber-optic links, thermal-noise channels, and amplifiers. We show that significant performance gains from trade-off coding also apply when trading photon-number resources between transmitting public and private classical information simultaneously over secret-key-assisted bosonic 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".