MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2280756743 · doi:10.1063/1.4965876

The fidelity of density operators in an operator-algebraic framework

2016· article· en· W2280756743 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mathematical Physics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersCanadian Network for Research and Innovation in Machining Technology, Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsVon Neumann algebraVon Neumann architectureFidelityOperator algebraContext (archaeology)Operator (biology)Operator theoryAlgebra over a fieldTRACE (psycholinguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Josza’s definition of fidelity [R. Jozsa, J. Mod. Opt. 41(12), 2315–2323 (1994)] for a pair of (mixed) quantum states is studied in the context of two types of operator algebras. The first setting is mainly algebraic in that it involves unital C∗-algebras A that possess a faithful trace functional τ. In this context, the role of quantum states (that is, density operators) in the classical quantum-mechanical framework is assumed by positive elements ρ ∈ A for which τ(ρ) = 1. The second setting is more operator theoretic: by fixing a faithful normal semifinite trace τ on a semifinite von Neumann algebra M, we define and consider the fidelity of pairs of positive operators in M of unit trace. The main results of this paper address monotonicity and preservation of fidelity under the action of certain trace-preserving positive linear maps of A or of the predual M∗. Our results in the von Neumann algebra setting are novel in that we focus on the Schrödinger picture rather than the Heisenberg picture, and they also yield a new proof of a theorem of Molnár [Rep. Math. Phys. 48(3), 299–303 (2001)] on the structure of fidelity-preserving quantum channels on the trace-class operators.

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 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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.491
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mathematical PhysicsSame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207