Simple and maximally robust processes with no classical common-cause or direct-cause explanation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Guided by the intuition of coherent superposition of causal relations, recent works presented quantum processes without classical common-cause and direct-cause explanation, that is, processes which cannot be written as probabilistic mixtures of quantum common-cause and quantum direct-cause relations (CCDC). In this work, we analyze the minimum requirements for a quantum process to fail to admit a CCDC explanation and present "simple" processes, which we prove to be the most robust ones against general noise. These simple processes can be realized by preparing a maximally entangled state and applying the identity quantum channel, thus not requiring an explicit coherent mixture of common-cause and direct-cause, exploiting the possibility of a process to have both relations simultaneously. We then prove that, although all bipartite direct-cause processes are bipartite separable operators, there exist bipartite separable processes which are not direct-cause. This shows that the problem of deciding weather a process is direct-cause processis notequivalent to entanglement certification and points out the limitations of entanglement methods to detect non-classical CCDC processes. We also present a semi-definite programming hierarchy that can detect and quantify the non-classical CCDC robustnesses of every non-classical CCDC process. Among other results, our numerical methods allow us to show that the simple processes presented here are likely to be also the maximally robust against white noise. Finally, we explore the equivalence between bipartite direct-cause processes and bipartite processes without quantum memory, to present a separable process which cannot be realized as a process without quantum memory.
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 | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".