MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2949080538 · doi:10.48550/arxiv.0910.5952

Streaming universal distortion-free entanglement concentration

2009· preprint· en· W2949080538 on OpenAlexaff
Robin Blume-Kohout, Sarah Croke, Daniel Gottesman

Bibliographic record

VenueArXiv.org · 2009
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsPerimeter Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuantum entanglementQubitBlock (permutation group theory)RandomnessMathematicsBinary logarithmDiscrete mathematicsUpper and lower boundsCombinatoricsQuantumPhysicsQuantum mechanicsStatisticsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a streaming (sequential) protocol for universal entanglement concentration at the Shannon bound. Alice and Bob begin with N identical (but unknown) two-qubit pure states, each containing E ebits of entanglement. They each run a reversible algorithm on their qubits, and end up with Y perfect EPR pairs, where Y = NE +- O(\sqrt N). Our protocol is streaming, so the N input systems are fed in one at a time, and perfect EPR pairs start popping out almost immediately. It matches the optimal block protocol exactly at each stage, so the average yield after n inputs is = nE - O(log n). So, somewhat surprisingly, there is no tradeoff between yield and lag -- our protocol optimizes both. In contrast, the optimal N-qubit block protocol achieves the same yield, but since no EPR pairs are produced until the entire input block is read, its lag is O(N). Finally, our algorithm runs in O(log N) space, so a lot of entanglement can be efficiently concentrated using a very small (e.g., current or near-future technology) quantum processor. Along the way, we find an optimal streaming protocol for extracting randomness from classical i.i.d. sources and a more space-efficient implementation of the Schur transform.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArXiv.orgSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207