Polar coding to achieve the Holevo capacity of a pure-loss optical channel
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the low-energy high-energy-efficiency regime of classical optical communications - relevant to deep-space optical channels - there is a big gap between reliable communication rates achievable via conventional optical receivers and the ultimate (Holevo) capacity. Achieving the Holevo capacity requires not only optimal codes but also receivers that make collective measurements on long (modulated) codeword waveforms, and it is impossible to implement these collective measurements via symbol-by-symbol detection along with classical postprocessing [1], [2]. Here, we apply our recent results on the classical-quantum polar code [3] - the first near-explicit, linear, symmetric-Holevo-rate achieving code - to the lossy optical channel, and we show that it almost closes the entire gap to the Holevo capacity in the low photon number regime. In contrast, Arikan's original polar codes, applied to the DMC induced by the physical optical channel paired with any conceivable structured optical receiver (including optical homodyne, heterodyne, or direct-detection) fails to achieve the ultimate Holevo limit to channel capacity. However, our polar code construction (which uses the quantum fidelity as a channel parameter rather than the classical Bhattacharyya quantity to choose the “good channels” in the polar-code construction), paired with a quantum successive-cancellation receiver - which involves a sequence of collective non-destructive binary projective measurements on the joint quantum state of the received codeword waveform - can attain the Holevo limit, and can hence in principle achieve higher rates than Arikan's polar code and decoder directly applied to the optical channel. However, even a theoretical recipe for construction of an optical realization of the quantum successive-cancellation receiver remains an open question.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it