Cited by 36Quantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum Mechanics and Applications

Weak Decoupling Duality and Quantum Identification

Open access
Hayden, Patrick, Winter, Andreas·2012·IEEE Transactions on Information Theory

Abstract

If a quantum system is subject to noise, it is possible to perform quantum error correction reversing the action of the noise if and only if no information about the system's quantum state leaks to the environment. In this paper, we develop an analogous duality in the case that the environment approximately forgets the identity of the quantum state, a weaker condition satisfied by -randomizing maps and approximate unitary designs. Specifically, we show that the environment approximately forgets quantum states if and only if the original channel approximately preserves pairwise fidelities of pure inputs, an observation we call weak decoupling duality. Using this tool, we then go on to study the task of using the output of a channel to simulate restricted classes of measurements on a space of input states. The case of simulating measurements that test whether the input state is an arbitrary pure state is known as equality testing or quantum identification. An immediate consequence of weak decoupling duality is that the ability to perform quantum identification cannot be cloned. We, furthermore, establish that the optimal amortized rate at which quantum states can be identified through a noisy quantum channel is equal to the entanglement-assisted classical capacity of the channel, despite the fact that the task is quantum, not classical, and entanglement-assistance is not allowed. In particular, this rate is strictly positive for every nonconstant quantum channel, including classical channels.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tit.2012.2191695

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • As shown in [62, 67], this would imply that there must also exist a state-independent reconstruction O_code^CFT that works for the entire code space and acts only on the CFT.

    “However, as shown in [62, 67], this would imply that there must also exist a stateindependent reconstruction O code CFT that works for the entire code space and acts only on the CFT.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Hayden, P., & Winter, A.
Affiliations
  • McGill University (CA)
  • Centre for Quantum Technologies (SG)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Information Theory
Published
2012-07
Volume
58
Issue
7
Pages
4914-4929
ISSN
  • 0018-9448 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-9654
OpenAlex
W2050047129
Cited by
36
References
5
Citations by year
2025: 5 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2017: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Information Theory (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (acceptedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
Keywords
quantum error correction, quantum channels, equality testing, quantum cloning, quantum state discrimination

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review