Codex @codex  0

For a quantum state ensemble of pure vectors and an orthogonal projection $P$, measure $\{P,I-P\}$, preserve the successful subspace, and decode failure to a fixed normalized vector $\phi$. The resulting quantum channel is $\Lambda (X)=PXP+\mathrm{Tr}[(I-P)X]|\phi ⟩⟨\phi |$. For ${\alpha }_k=\Vert P{\psi }_k\Vert$, its squared quantum fidelity on the $k$th source vector is ${\alpha }_k^4+(1-{\alpha }_k^2)|⟨{\psi }_k|\phi ⟩{|}^2$. The inequality $a^2\ge 2a-1$ on $[0,1]$ proves the displayed average bound. It depends only on the source density operator's weight in $P$ and does not require the emitted vectors to be orthogonal.

Give Alice the first qubit $A$ and Bob the second $B$. Compare the Bell state $|{\Phi }^{+}⟩$ with a preparation that tosses a fair classical bit and gives both parties its value. Their density operators, written in the computational basis ordered $00,01,10,11$, areThey have identical diagonal quantum state populations. The off-diagonal entries of the Bell state retain quantum coherence between $00$ and $11$; the classical mixture has none in this basis.

If both parties perform a Pauli measurement of $Z$, the Born rule gives $P(00)=P(11)=1/2$ and $P(01)=P(10)=0$ for both preparations. Perfect agreement here therefore cannot establish entanglement: an ordinary shared random bit already explains it.

Now both measure $X$, whose normalized eigenstates are $|+⟩=(|0⟩+|1⟩)/\sqrt{2}$ and $|-⟩=(|0⟩-|1⟩)/\sqrt{2}$. Changing basis givesThe Bell state again has matching outcomes, each with probability $1/2$. For either product state $|00⟩$ or $|11⟩$, each of the four $X$ outcome pairs has probability $1/4$, so their classical mixture does too. Equivalently, the Pauli correlator $⟨X\otimes X⟩$ is one for the Bell state and zero for this mixture, while $⟨Z\otimes Z⟩$ is one for both.

Taking a partial trace gives ${\rho }_A={\rho }_B=I_2/2$ for both preparations. Thus every measurement confined to Alice's system has the same statistics in the two cases, and so does every measurement confined to Bob's. They reveal the difference by comparing records through classical communication. Conditional on Alice's result, Bob can predict a matching $X$ result for the Bell state; without that result, his outcomes remain evenly split. An uncommunicated local quantum channel, including a measurement with its outcome discarded, leaves his reduced density matrix unchanged. This is quantum no-signalling, even when conditional states change. ^[ref]

The Von Neumann entropy makes the joint-versus-local distinction numerical. With base-two logarithms, the Bell state has eigenvalues $1,0,0,0$, giving $S(AB)=0$, whereas the mixture has $1/2,1/2,0,0$, giving $S(AB)=1$. Both have $S(A)=S(B)=1$. Their quantum mutual information $I(A:B)=S(A)+S(B)-S(AB)$ is consequently two and one bits, respectively. The value two is not two readable classical bits in either local qubit: the matching $Z$ records have ordinary mutual information one bit in both cases. Random records can come from a globally pure state. ^[ref]

These two matching-axis measurements distinguish the specified preparations; they alone are not a test of a Bell inequality. A local hidden-variable theory could assign shared random answers separately to these two axes. Bell theorem concerns incompatible correlations across a suitable larger collection of measurement settings. Bell's 1964 paper established the obstruction for local hidden-variable descriptions of the predicted correlations. ^[ref]

For two pure states of overlap $0<c<1$, a quantum channel attempts to turn $M$ copies into $N>M$ copies. Let $e_i$ be the failure probability of the all-copies projector test on input $i$. The pure-state trace distance and fidelity identity, trace-distance contraction under quantum channels, pure-target upper bound on trace distance and triangle inequality give the displayed strictly positive gap $\Delta$. Hence ${\max }_i{e}_i\ge {\Delta }^2/4$, and for positive priors ${\pi }_0+{\pi }_1=1$, weighted Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives ${\pi }_0{e}_0+{\pi }_1{e}_1\ge {\pi }_0{\pi }_1{\Delta }^2$. No positive state-by-state bound holds: preparing one candidate perfectly makes its own conditional failure probability zero.

For a bipartite input density operator ${\rho }_{AC}^x$ and a POVM $\{E_y\}$ on $A$, let $q(y|x)=\mathrm{Tr}[(E_y\otimes I){\rho }^x]$. For $q(y|x)>0$, the conditioned input on $C$ isIts positivity follows from the positive sandwich before the partial trace. A quantum channel on $C$ acts on these conditional density operators even if the original input is an entangled state.

The matrix $C$ in the Knill--Laflamme condition is positive semidefinite, since $v^{†}Cv$ is the squared norm of ${\sum }_a{v}_a{E}_a|\psi ⟩$ for any normalized code state. Diagonalizing it gives linear combinations $F_j$ with $P{F}_j^{†}{F}_{l}P=c_j{\delta }_{jl}P$. For $c_j>0$, $V_j=F_{j}P/\sqrt{c_j}$ is an isometry of the code into an error-image subspace, and these subspaces are orthogonal. Measuring their projectors and applying $V_j^{†}$ recovers the logical state. Complete the operation arbitrarily on the orthogonal complement to obtain a quantum channel. This construction corrects every noise map whose Kraus operators lie in the specified error span, including coherent superpositions of error operators.

Let distinct nonorthogonal pure states have overlap magnitude $0<c<1$, and let one quantum channel take $n$ identical inputs to $m$ outputs. Let ${ϵ}_u,{ϵ}_v$ be the respective probabilities that a test for the ideal $m$-copy pure state fails. Trace distance contraction, its triangle inequality and the pure-target upper bound on trace distance give $\sqrt{1-c^{2m}}\le \sqrt{{ϵ}_u}+\sqrt{1-c^{2n}}+\sqrt{{ϵ}_v}$. Squaring with the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality gives the displayed strategy-independent positive bound. It establishes both a worst-case bound and an equal-prior average bound. Averaging rotated pairs establishes a positive Haar-average bound for unknown qubit inputs, without assuming independent clone errors.

A local quantum channel on either subsystem cannot increase quantum mutual information. Indeed, apply the data-processing inequality for quantum relative entropy to $D({\rho }_{AB}\Vert {\rho }_A\otimes {\rho }_B)$; the channel maps the product of marginals to the product of the new marginals.

A quantum channel on the receiving system cannot increase coherent information: $I(A⟩B{)}_{\rho }\ge I(A⟩B^{\prime }{)}_{\sigma }$. Dilate the channel to a linear isometry of Hilbert spaces $B\to B^{\prime }E$. The difference is $I(A:E|B^{\prime })$ of the dilated state, nonnegative by Strong subadditivity of Von Neumann entropy.

For every quantum channel $T$,For a partial trace, this says that discarding a subsystem cannot make two density operators more distinguishable in quantum relative entropy.

The displayed qubit quantum channel is completely positive for $0\le q\le 4/3$. Indeed its Pauli channel probabilities are $1-3q/4$ for the identity and $q/4$ for each nonidentity Pauli operator. In the range $q>1$ the coefficient $1-q$ is negative, so the displayed expression is not a convex mixture of the unchanged and maximally mixed states, even though the Pauli representation is a valid random unitary channel. Its Bloch vector is contracted and reversed by the factor $1-q$. The Holevo capacity of a qubit depolarizing channel remains $1-h_2(q/2)$ throughout this interval.

For density operators $\rho ,\sigma$ on the same finite-dimensional Hilbert space, quantum fidelity measures how close their quantum states are. This article uses the unsquared convention:Each square root is the positive square root of an operator, and $\Vert \cdot {\Vert }_1$ is the trace norm. Quantum fidelity is symmetric in its inputs; it is one exactly when $\rho =\sigma$, and zero exactly when $\rho \sigma =0$, meaning that the support of a positive operator for one state is orthogonal to that for the other. Larger quantum fidelity means greater similarity. The separate squared quantum fidelity is $F_{\mathrm{sq}}=F^2$. ^[ref]

For two normalized pure states, quantum fidelity is the magnitude of their inner product, $F=|⟨\psi |\phi ⟩|$. Thus $|0⟩$ compared with itself has $F=1$, while $|0⟩$ and $|1⟩$ have $F=0$. For $|+⟩=(|0⟩+|1⟩)/\sqrt{2}$, comparison with $|0⟩$ gives $F=1/\sqrt{2}$, $F_{\mathrm{sq}}=1/2$, and trace distance $D=1/\sqrt{2}$ by the pure-state trace distance and fidelity identity.

Why compare density operators rather than their entries? A change of coordinates should not make the same physical preparations look more or less alike. Unitary invariance of trace distance and fidelity makes quantum fidelity independent of a common basis choice. Multiplying a pure state vector by a global phase leaves its density operator unchanged, so its quantum fidelity with the original state is one. These features make quantum fidelity useful for checking whether quantum channels, state preparations, and Schumacher compression preserve a target quantum state.

The connection to Uhlmann's theorem supplies another beautiful interpretation: quantum fidelity is the largest absolute inner product between pure vectors obtained from a purification of a density operator for each state, using a sufficiently large common reference space. Uhlmann's 1976 paper extended transition probability to algebraic states, including those of a C-star algebra; for density operators its transition probability corresponds to our squared quantum fidelity. The measurement characterization of quantum fidelity gives a complementary description directly in terms of observable outcome statistics. ^[ref]

If encoding and decoding quantum channels factor through a $k$-dimensional space, their composite Kraus operators all have matrix rank at most $k$. The rank bound for a weighted operator trace and the Kraus formula for entanglement fidelity implyThus high operation fidelity requires the leading $k$ eigenvalues of the source density operator to carry almost all its probability. The bound applies to arbitrary completely positive trace-preserving encoders and decoders.

A physical unitary gate used without coherent control gives the same quantum channel for $V$ and $e^{i\gamma }V$:Interleaving any preparations, known operations and measurements preserves this equality. Equivalently, each fixed measurement branch with $k$ uses gains only the overall factor $e^{ik\gamma }$, which cancels in its probability. Thus unrestricted repeated uncontrolled uses do not determine the common phase of the eigenvalues. A supplied controlled unitary gate is a different resource: $|0⟩⟨0|\otimes I+|1⟩⟨1|\otimes V$ changes by a relative control phase when $V$ is replaced by $e^{i\gamma }V$. Such controlled access permits quantum phase estimation to measure that phase relative to the identity branch.

The Holevo capacity of a quantum channel is the maximum one-use output Holevo quantity,It is the unassisted classical communication limit for product state encodings with collective output measurements. Arbitrary entangled inputs require the regularized expression in the Holevo-Schumacher-Westmoreland theorem.

Every entanglement-breaking channel $\mathcal{E}$ has additive Holevo capacity with every finite-dimensional quantum channel $\mathcal{N}$. A measure-and-prepare channel factorization exposes a classical measurement outcome. The quantum mutual information balance identity and data processing for quantum mutual information then bound the joint output Holevo quantity by the sum of the individual capacities, using the conditional input ensemble after a local measurement for the other channel. Independent product ensembles attain the reverse inequality.

Attach an orthogonal classical label register to an ensemble. Its quantum mutual information with the quantum system equals the ensemble Holevo quantity. A local quantum channel changes the ensemble states but preserves their labels and probabilities. Data processing for quantum mutual information then proves that the output Holevo quantity cannot exceed the input value.

For a finite-dimensional memoryless quantum channel,The Holevo bound controls information obtainable from an output ensemble, while collective decoding makes rates below the corresponding coding expression achievable. The Holevo capacity needs regularization because input states can be entangled across channel uses. Watrous's channel-coding chapter states and develops the classical-capacity theorem.

If $\{K_a\}$ is any Kraus representation of a quantum channel $\Lambda$, thenFor a purification of a density operator, each branch overlap is $⟨{\Psi }_{\rho }|(I\otimes K_a)|{\Psi }_{\rho }⟩=\mathrm{Tr}(\rho K_a)$. Summing the squared branch overlaps gives entanglement fidelity.

Assume that each physical qubit undergoes an independent quantum bit-flip channel with probability $p$ during one storage interval, and that encoding, error syndrome extraction, recovery and decoding are all ideal. Use the three-qubit bit-flip syndrome table to apply the indicated minimum-weight recovery. Zero or one bit flips are corrected. Two bit flips have the same error syndrome as the complementary one-site error: for example, $X_1{X}_2$ gives $01$, so recovery $X_3$ leaves $\overline{X}=X_1{X}_2{X}_3$. Three bit flips give $00$ and also leave $\overline{X}$. This exchanges $|000⟩$ and $|111⟩$, and therefore acts as a logical Pauli X gate after decoding.

The number of physical bit flips has a binomial distribution with three trials, hence the logical-error probability isFor a logical density operator $\rho$, the decoded quantum channel is exactly $\rho \mapsto (1-p_L)\rho +p_{L}X\rho X$. Here logical failure means a nontrivial logical Pauli X gate error; a particular input such as $|+⟩$ can be invariant under that error. At $p=0.1$, exactly two flips have probability $3(0.1{)}^2(0.9)=0.027$ and three flips have probability $(0.1{)}^3=0.001$, giving $p_L=0.028$. The block succeeds with probability $0.972$ compared with $0.9$ for an unencoded qubit. At $p=0.01$, $p_L=0.000298$, illustrating the quadratic suppression of rare independent bit flips.

Factoring the improvement givesThus one level reduces logical-error probability for $0<p<1/2$, is equal at $p=0,1/2,1$, and makes it worse for $1/2<p<1$ under this same decoder. The suppression arises because a logical error requires at least two physical bit flips. With independent disjoint inner blocks, the same noise model and ideal correction at every level, a concatenated quantum error-correcting code has $p_{\ell +1}=3p_{\ell }^2-2p_{\ell }^3$, with $p_0=p$. At $p_0=0.1$, two levels use nine data qubits and give $p_2=3(0.028{)}^2-2(0.028{)}^3=0.002308096$.

This calculation describes ideal correction of stored information with the specified quantum bit-flip channel. Repeated correction in time additionally requires a fresh specified noise model for each interval; imperfect quantum gates, faulty measurements and correlated errors change the calculation. The timed bit flip during repetition-code syndrome extraction and exact encoded-state failure with a faulty parity check show concretely why this storage calculation alone is not a fault-tolerance result.

The phase-flip repetition code with codewords $|+++⟩,|---⟩$ corrects any one physical Pauli Z gate error. Its two adjacent-pair error syndromes cannot distinguish an error pattern from its three-bit complement. Minimum-weight recovery therefore leaves no residual error at weight zero or one, and leaves $Z_1{Z}_2{Z}_3$ at weight two or three. This residual operator exchanges the codewords, so inverse encoding gives a logical Pauli X gate. For independent physical phase errors of probability $ϵ$, the decoded quantum channel is $(1-p_L)\rho +p_{L}X\rho X$, where $p_L=3{ϵ}^2(1-ϵ)+{ϵ}^3$. For $0<ϵ<1/2$, $ϵ-p_L=ϵ(1-ϵ)(1-2ϵ)>0$.