Quick Navigation
Topics
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Quantum Foundations
Hexagons govern three-qubit contextuality
arXiv
Authors: Metod Saniga, Frédéric Holweck, Colm Kelleher, Axel Muller, Alain Giorgetti, Henri de Boutray
Year
2023
Paper ID
52555
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
146
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Split Cayley hexagons of order two are distinguished finite geometries living in the three-qubit symplectic polar space in two different forms, called classical and skew. Although neither of the two yields observable-based contextual configurations of their own, {\it classically}-embedded copies are found to fully encode contextuality properties of the most prominent three-qubit contextual configurations in the following sense: for each set of unsatisfiable contexts of such a contextual configuration there exists some classically-embedded hexagon sharing with the configuration exactly this set of contexts and nothing else. We demonstrate this fascinating property first on the configuration comprising all 315 contexts of the space and then on doilies, both types of quadrics as well as on complements of skew-embedded hexagons. In connection with the last-mentioned case and elliptic quadrics we also conducted some experimental tests on a Noisy Intermediate Scale Quantum (NISQ) computer to substantiate our theoretical findings.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2023 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Split Cayley hexagons of order two are distinguished finite geometries living in the three-qubit symplectic polar space in two different forms, called classical and skew.
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
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
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.