Paper detail

Communication complexity and the reality of the wave-function

In this review, we discuss a relation between quantum communication complexity and a long-standing debate in quantum foundation concerning the interpretation of the quantum state. Is the quantum state a physical element of reality as originally interpreted by Schrodinger? Or is it an abstract mathematical object containing statistical information about the outcome of measurements as interpreted by Born? Although these questions sound philosophical and pointless, they can be made precise in the framework of what we call classical theories of quantum processes, which are a reword of quantum phenomena in the language of classical probability theory. In 2012, Pusey, Barrett and Rudolph (PBR) proved, under an assumption of preparation independence, a theorem supporting the original interpretation of Schrodinger in the classical framework. Recently, we showed that these questions are related to a practical problem in quantum communication complexity, namely, quantifying the minimal amount of classical communication required in the classical simulation of a two-party quantum communication process. In particular, we argued that the statement of the PBR theorem can be proved if the classical communication cost of simulating the communication of n qubits grows more than exponentially in 'n'. Our argument is based on an assumption that we call probability equipartition property. This property is somehow weaker than the preparation independence property used in the PBR theorem, as the former can be justified by the latter and the asymptotic equipartition property of independent stochastic sources. The equipartition property is a general and natural hypothesis that can be assumed even if the preparation independence hypothesis is dropped. In this review, we further develop our argument into the form of a theorem.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author3 topics

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.