MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942008046 · doi:10.1142/s0129055x21500136

LOCC protocols with bounded width per round optimize convex functions

2021· review· en· W2942008046 on OpenAlexafffund
Debbie Leung, Andreas Winter, Nengkun Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in Mathematical Physics · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Information and Cryptography
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundGeneralitat de CatalunyaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsLOCCMultipartiteProtocol (science)Computer scienceDimension (graph theory)Upper and lower boundsQuantum stateMathematicsQuantum entanglementDiscrete mathematicsTheoretical computer scienceCombinatoricsQuantumBipartite graphPhysicsQuantum mechanicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We start with the task of discriminating finitely many multipartite quantum states using LOCC protocols, with the goal to optimize the probability of correctly identifying the state. We provide two different methods to show that finitely many measurement outcomes in every step are sufficient for approaching the optimal probability of discrimination. In the first method, each measurement of an optimal LOCC protocol, applied to a [Formula: see text]-dimensional local system, is replaced by one with at most [Formula: see text] outcomes, without changing the probability of success. In the second method, we decompose any LOCC protocol into a convex combination of a number of “slim protocols” in which each measurement applied to a [Formula: see text]-dimensional local system has at most [Formula: see text] outcomes. To maximize any convex functions in LOCC (including the probability of state discrimination or fidelity of state transformation), an optimal protocol can be replaced by the best slim protocol in the convex decomposition without using shared randomness. For either method, the bound on the number of outcomes per measurement is independent of the global dimension, the number of parties, the depth of the protocol, how deep the measurement is located, and applies to LOCC protocols with infinite rounds, and the “measurement compression” can be done “top-down” — independent of later operations in the LOCC protocol. The second method can be generalized to implement LOCC instruments with finitely many classical outcomes: if the instrument has [Formula: see text] coarse-grained final measurement outcomes, global input dimension [Formula: see text] and global output dimension [Formula: see text] for [Formula: see text] conditioned on the [Formula: see text]th outcome, then one can obtain the instrument as a convex combination of no more than [Formula: see text] slim protocols; that is, [Formula: see text] bits of shared randomness suffice.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.010
Open science0.0050.009
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.105
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations5
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReviews in Mathematical PhysicsSame topicQuantum Information and CryptographyFrench-language works237,207