MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

No-Broadcasting Theorem for Quantum Asymmetry and Coherence and a Trade-off Relation for Approximate Broadcasting

2019· article· en· W2904538430 on OpenAlexafffund
Iman Marvian, Robert W. Spekkens

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicQuantum Mechanics and Applications
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
FundersInstitut Périmètre de physique théoriqueOntario Ministry of Research, Innovation and ScienceGovernment of Canada
KeywordsAsymmetryQuantumBounded functionPhysicsCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Continuous symmetryQuantum capacityQuantum mechanicsQuantum dynamicsQuantum operationStatistical physicsMathematicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Symmetries of both closed- and open-system dynamics imply many significant constraints. These generally have instantiations in both classical and quantum dynamics (Noether's theorem, for instance, applies to both sorts of dynamics). We here provide an example of such a constraint which has no counterpart for a classical system, that is, a uniquely quantum consequence of symmetric dynamics. Specifically, we demonstrate the impossibility of broadcasting asymmetry (symmetry breaking) relative to a continuous symmetry group, for bounded-size quantum systems. The no-go theorem states that if two initially uncorrelated systems interact by symmetric dynamics and asymmetry is created at one subsystem, then the asymmetry of the other subsystem must be reduced. We also find a quantitative relation describing the trade-off between the subsystems. These results cannot be understood in terms of additivity of asymmetry, because, as we show here, any faithful measure of asymmetry violates both subadditivity and superadditivity. Rather, they must be understood as a consequence of an (intrinsically quantum) information-disturbance principle. Our result also implies that if a bounded-size quantum reference frame for the symmetry group, or equivalently, a bounded-size reservoir of coherence (e.g., a clock with coherence between energy eigenstates in quantum thermodynamics) is used to implement any operation that is not symmetric, then the quantum state of the frame or reservoir is necessarily disturbed in an irreversible fashion, i.e., degraded.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.861
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.265 · 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

Citations61
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicQuantum Mechanics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207