Paper detail

Self-testing mutually unbiased bases in the prepare-and-measure scenario

Mutually unbiased bases (MUBs) constitute the canonical example of incompatible quantum measurements. One standard application of MUBs is the task known as quantum random access code (QRAC), in which classical information is encoded in a quantum system, and later part of it is recovered by performing a quantum measurement. We analyse a specific class of QRACs, known as the $2^{d} \to 1$ QRAC, in which two classical dits are encoded in a $d$-dimensional quantum system. It is known that among rank-1 projective measurements MUBs give the best performance. We show (for every $d$) that this cannot be improved by employing non-projective measurements. Moreover, we show that the optimal performance can only be achieved by measurements which are rank-1 projective and mutually unbiased. In other words, the $2^{d} \to 1$ QRAC is a self-test for a pair of MUBs in the prepare-and-measure scenario. To make the self-testing statement robust we propose measures which characterise how well a pair of (not necessarily projective) measurements satisfies the MUB conditions and show how to estimate these measures from the observed performance. Similarly, we derive explicit bounds on operational quantities like the incompatibility robustness or the amount of uncertainty generated by the uncharacterised measurements. For low dimensions the robustness of our bounds is comparable to that of currently available technology, which makes them relevant for existing experiments. Lastly, our results provide essential support for a recently proposed method for solving the long-standing existence problem of MUBs.

preprint2020arXivOpen 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.