Entanglement cost for infinite-dimensional physical systems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We prove that the entanglement cost equals the regularized entanglement of formation for any infinite-dimensional quantum state $ρ_{AB}$ with finite quantum entropy on at least one of the subsystems $A$ or $B$. This generalizes a foundational result in quantum information theory that was previously formulated only for operations and states on finite-dimensional systems. The extension to infinite-dimensional systems is nontrivial because the conventional tools for establishing both the direct and converse bounds, i.e., strong typicality, monotonicity, and asymptotic continuity, are no longer directly applicable. To address this problem, we construct a new entanglement dilution protocol for infinite-dimensional states implementable by local operations and a finite amount of one-way classical communication (one-way LOCC), using weak and strong typicality multiple times. We also prove the optimality of this protocol among all protocols, even under infinite-dimensional separable operations, by developing an argument based on alternative forms of monotonicity and asymptotic continuity of the entanglement of formation for infinite-dimensional states. Along the way, we derive a new integral representation for the quantum entropy of infinite-dimensional states, which we believe to be of independent interest. Our results allow us to fully characterize an important operational entanglement measure -- the entanglement cost -- for all infinite-dimensional physical systems.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".