A three-player coherent state embezzlement game
Bibliographic record
Abstract
© 2020 Verein zur Forderung des Open Access Publizierens in den Quantenwissenschaften. All rights reserved. We introduce a three-player nonlocal game, with a finite number of classical questions and answers, such that the optimal success probability of 1 in the game can only be achieved in the limit of strategies using arbitrarily highdimensional entangled states. Precisely, there exists a constant 0 < c ≤ 1 such that to succeed with probability 1 - " in the game it is necessary to use an entangled state of at least W("-c) qubits, and it is sufficient to use a state of at most O("-1) qubits. The game is based on the coherent state exchange game of Leung et al. (CJTCS 2013). In our game, the task of the quantum verifier is delegated to a third player by a classical referee. Our results complement those of Slofstra (arXiv:1703.08618) and Dykema et al. (arXiv:1709.05032), who obtained twoplayer games with similar (though quantitatively weaker) properties based on the representation theory of finitely presented groups and C*-algebras respectively.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".