Maximum and Minimum Causal Effects of Physical Processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We introduce two quantitative measures of the strength of causal relations in quantum theory and more general physical theories. These two measures, called the maximum and minimum causal effect, quantify the maximum and minimum changes in the output of a quantum process induced by changes in its input. The maximum and minimum causal effect possesses useful properties, such as continuity and data-processing inequality. In quantum theory, they have close connections with quantum information tasks. The maximum quantum causal effect can be used to detect quantum channels with nonzero capacity for transmitting classical information. The minimum causal effect can be used to guarantee the recoverability of quantum information: every quantum process with a high value of the minimum quantum causal effect can be approximately inverted. Moreover, we show that the quantum causal effects satisfy a duality relation: if the minimum causal effect of a quantum system <a:math xmlns:a="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <a:mi>A</a:mi> </a:math> on another quantum system <c:math xmlns:c="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <c:mi>B</c:mi> </c:math> is high, then <e:math xmlns:e="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <e:mi>A</e:mi> </e:math> must have a low value of the maximum causal effect on any other quantum system <g:math xmlns:g="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <g:msup> <g:mi>B</g:mi> <g:mo>′</g:mo> </g:msup> </g:math> that is spacelike separated with <i:math xmlns:i="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" display="inline"> <i:mi>B</i:mi> </i:math> . This duality implies a monogamy relation for quantum causal effects, and represents a fundamental difference between quantum and classical causal relations. We illustrate the application of the maximum causal effect to the analysis of two paradigmatic examples, the first involving a coherent superposition of direct cause and common cause, and the second involving a coherent superposition of multiple quantum processes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".