MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Tripartite Entanglement versus Tripartite Nonlocality in Three-Qubit Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger-Class States

2009· article· en· W2078963000 on OpenAlexaff
Shohini Ghose, Neil Sinclair, Shantanu Debnath, Pranaw Rungta, R. Stock

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity of CalgaryWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum nonlocalityQuantum entanglementQubitClass (philosophy)PhysicsMultipartite entanglementGreenberger–Horne–Zeilinger stateQuantum mechanicsW stateSquashed entanglementQuantumComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We analyze the relationship between tripartite entanglement and genuine tripartite nonlocality for three-qubit pure states in the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger class. We consider a family of states known as the generalized Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger states and derive an analytical expression relating the three-tangle, which quantifies tripartite entanglement, to the Svetlichny inequality, which is a Bell-type inequality that is violated only when all three qubits are nonlocally correlated. We show that states with three-tangle less than 1/2 do not violate the Svetlichny inequality. On the other hand, a set of states known as the maximal slice states does violate the Svetlichny inequality, and exactly analogous to the two-qubit case, the amount of violation is directly related to the degree of tripartite entanglement. We discuss further interesting properties of the generalized Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger and maximal slice states.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.276 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations105
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207