MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Irreducible Magic Sets for <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"><mml:mi>n</mml:mi></mml:math>-Qubit Systems

2022· article· lv· W4308435052 on OpenAlexafffund
Stefan Trandafir, Petr Lisoněk, Adán Cabello

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysical Review Letters · 2022
Typearticle
Languagelv
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersQuantERANatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadBundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung
KeywordsMAGIC (telescope)QubitObservableQuantum mechanicsPhysicsMagic squareDiscrete mathematicsCombinatoricsQuantumMathematicsTheoretical physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Magic sets of observables are minimal structures that capture quantum state-independent advantage for systems of n≥2 qubits and are, therefore, fundamental tools for investigating the interface between classical and quantum physics. A theorem by Arkhipov (arXiv:1209.3819) states that n-qubit magic sets in which each observable is in exactly two subsets of compatible observables can be reduced either to the two-qubit magic square or the three-qubit magic pentagram [N. D. Mermin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 65, 3373 (1990)PRLTAO0031-900710.1103/PhysRevLett.65.3373]. An open question is whether there are magic sets that cannot be reduced to the square or the pentagram. If they exist, a second key question is whether they require n>3 qubits, since, if this is the case, these magic sets would capture minimal state-independent quantum advantage that is specific for n-qubit systems with specific values of n. Here, we answer both questions affirmatively. We identify magic sets that cannot be reduced to the square or the pentagram and require n=3, 4, 5, or 6 qubits. In addition, we prove a generalized version of Arkhipov's theorem providing an efficient algorithm for, given a hypergraph, deciding whether or not it can accommodate a magic set, and solve another open problem, namely, given a magic set, obtaining the tight bound of its associated noncontextuality inequality.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysical Review LettersSame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207