Understanding the interplay of entanglement and nonlocality: motivating and developing a new branch of entanglement theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A standard approach to quantifying resources is to determine which operations on the resources are freely available, and to deduce the partial order over resources that is induced by the relation of convertibility under the free operations. If the resource of interest is the nonclassicality of the correlations embodied in a quantum state, i.e., e n t a n g l e m e n t , then the common assumption is that the appropriate choice of free operations is Local Operations and Classical Communication (LOCC). We here advocate for the study of a different choice of free operations, namely, Local Operations and Shared Randomness (LOSR), and demonstrate its utility in understanding the interplay between the entanglement of states and the nonlocality of the correlations in Bell experiments. Specifically, we show that the LOSR paradigm (i) provides a resolution of the anomalies of nonlocality , wherein partially entangled states exhibit more nonlocality than maximally entangled states, (ii) entails new notions of genuine multipartite entanglement and nonlocality that are free of the pathological features of the conventional notions, and (iii) makes possible a resource-theoretic account of the self-testing of entangled states which generalizes and simplifies prior results. Along the way, we derive some fundamental results concerning the necessary and sufficient conditions for convertibility between pure entangled states under LOSR and highlight some of their consequences, such as the impossibility of catalysis for bipartite pure states. The resource-theoretic perspective also clarifies why it is neither surprising nor problematic that there are mixed entangled states which do not violate any Bell inequality. Our results motivate the study of LOSR-entanglement as a new branch of entanglement theory.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.030 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".