Compare Papers
Paper 1
Quantum soundness of testing tensor codes
Zhengfeng Ji, Anand Natarajan, Thomas Vidick, John Wright, Henry Yuen
- Year
- 2021
- Journal
- arXiv preprint
- DOI
- arXiv:2111.08131
- arXiv
- 2111.08131
A locally testable code is an error-correcting code that admits very efficient probabilistic tests of membership. Tensor codes provide a simple family of combinatorial constructions of locally testable codes that generalize the family of Reed-Muller codes. The natural test for tensor codes, the axis-parallel line vs. point test, plays an essential role in constructions of probabilistically checkable proofs. We analyze the axis-parallel line vs. point test as a two-prover game and show that the test is sound against quantum provers sharing entanglement. Our result implies the quantum-soundness of the low individual degree test, which is an essential component of the MIP* = RE theorem. Our proof also generalizes to the infinite-dimensional commuting-operator model of quantum provers.
Open paperPaper 2
On the system loophole of generalized noncontextuality
Victor Gitton, Mischa P. Woods
- Year
- 2022
- Journal
- arXiv preprint
- DOI
- arXiv:2209.04469
- arXiv
- 2209.04469
Generalized noncontextuality is a well-studied notion of classicality that is applicable to a single system, as opposed to Bell locality. It relies on representing operationally indistinguishable procedures identically in an ontological model. However, operational indistinguishability depends on the set of operations that one may use to distinguish two procedures: we refer to this set as the reference of indistinguishability. Thus, whether or not a given experiment is noncontextual depends on the choice of reference. The choices of references appearing in the literature are seldom discussed, but typically relate to a notion of system underlying the experiment. This shift in perspective then begs the question: how should one define the extent of the system underlying an experiment? Our paper primarily aims at exposing this question rather than providing a definitive answer to it. We start by formulating a notion of relative noncontextuality for prepare-and-measure scenarios, which is simply noncontextuality with respect to an explicit reference of indistinguishability. We investigate how verdicts of relative noncontextuality depend on this choice of reference, and in the process introduce the concept of the noncontextuality graph of a prepare-and-measure scenario. We then discuss several proposals that one may appeal to in order to fix the reference to a specific choice, and relate these proposals to different conceptions of what a system really is. With this discussion, we advocate that whether or not an experiment is noncontextual is not as absolute as often perceived.
Open paper