Two instances of random access code in the quantum regime
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We consider two classes of quantum generalisations of random access code (RAC) and study the bounds for probabilities of success for such tasks. It provides a useful framework for the study of certain information processing tasks with constrained resources. The first class is based on a RAC with quantum inputs and output known as the no-signalling quantum RAC (NS-QRAC) box (Grudka et al 2015 Phys. Rev. A 92 052312), where unbounded entanglement and constrained classical communication are allowed. We show that it can be seen as quantum teleportation with constrained classical communication and provide a lower quantum bound for the success probability. We consider two modifications to the NS-QRAC scenario: the first, where unbounded entanglement and constrained quantum communication is allowed and the second, where bounded entanglement and unconstrained classical communication is allowed. We find a monogamy relation for the transmission fidelities, which—in contrast to the usual communication schemes—involves multiple senders and a single receiver. We provide an upper bounds for the latter and a lower one for the former. The second class is based on a RAC with a quantum channel and shared entanglement (Tavakoli et al 2021 PRX Quantum 2 040357). We study the set of tasks where two inputs made of two digits of d-base are encoded over a qudit and a maximally entangled state. We show that such tasks can be seen as quantum dense-coding with constrained quantum communication and explicit protocols, which give lower quantum bounds for the tasks’ efficiency, in dimensions d = 2 , 3 , 4 . The employed encoding utilises Gray codes.
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 | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".