Paper detail

On Hastings' counterexamples to the minimum output entropy additivity conjecture

Hastings recently reported a randomized construction of channels violating the minimum output entropy additivity conjecture. Here we revisit his argument, presenting a simplified proof. In particular, we do not resort to the exact probability distribution of the Schmidt coefficients of a random bipartite pure state, as in the original proof, but rather derive the necessary large deviation bounds by a concentration of measure argument. Furthermore, we prove non-additivity for the overwhelming majority of channels consisting of a Haar random isometry followed by partial trace over the environment, for an environment dimension much bigger than the output dimension. This makes Hastings' original reasoning clearer and extends the class of channels for which additivity can be shown to be violated.

preprint2009arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.