MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407901096 · doi:10.1109/tit.2025.3544970

Bounding the Graph Capacity With Quantum Mechanics and Finite Automata

2025· article· en· W4407901096 on OpenAlexafffund
Alex Meiburg

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Information Theory · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicQuantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBounding overwatchQuantum finite automataAutomatonDeterministic finite automatonComputer scienceNondeterministic finite automatonTheoretical computer scienceDiscrete mathematicsMathematicsAutomata theoryArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The zero-error capacity of a channel (or “Shannon capacity of a graph”) quantifies how much information can be transmitted with no risk of error. In contrast to the Shannon capacity of a <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">channel</i>, the zero-error capacity has not even been shown to be computable: we have no convergent upper bounds. In this work, we present a new quantity, the zero-error <italic xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">unitary</i> capacity, and show that it can be succinctly represented as the tensor product value of a quantum game. By studying the structure of finite automata, we show that the unitary capacity is within a controllable factor of the zero-error capacity. This allows new upper bounds through the sum-of-squares hierarchy, which converges to the commuting operator value of the game. Under the conjecture that the commuting operator and tensor product value of this game are equal, this would yield an algorithm for computing the zero-error capacity.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.984
Threshold uncertainty score0.573

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.198 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Information TheorySame topicQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureFrench-language works237,207