Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Optimization

Geometric Optimization for Tight Entropic Uncertainty Relations

arXiv
Authors: Ma-Cheng Yang, Cong-Feng Qiao

Year

2026

Paper ID

3037

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

104

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Entropic uncertainty relations play a fundamental role in quantum information theory. However, determining optimal (tight) entropic uncertainty relations for general observables remains a formidable challenge and has so far been achieved only in a few special cases. Motivated by Schwonnek et al. \[PRL 119, 170404 (2017)\], we recast this task as a geometric optimization problem over the quantum probability space. This procedure leads to an effective outer-approximation method that yields tight entropic uncertainty bounds for general measurements in finite-dimensional quantum systems with preassigned numerical precision. We benchmark our approach against existing analytical and majorization-based bounds, and demonstrate its practical advantage through applications to quantum steering.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Optimization research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • Entropic uncertainty relations play a fundamental role in quantum information theory.

Paper Tools

Become a member to use research tools

Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.

Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #3037 #69549 REGRID-QAOA: A Resource-Efficie... #69528 QALM: Escaping Local Minima via...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

Community Reactions

Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.

Score: 0
Likes: 0 Dislikes: 0

Sign in to react to this paper.

Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)

Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)

No written reviews yet.