pith. sign in

arxiv: 2403.02988 · v3 · submitted 2024-03-05 · 🪐 quant-ph

An Operational Framework for Nonclassicality in Quantum Communication Networks

Brian Doolittle , Felix Leditzky , Eric Chitambar This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 03:31 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph
keywords nonclassicalityquantum communication networksentanglementvariational quantum optimizationclassical boundsbroadcast networksquantum resources
0
0 comments X

The pith

Entanglement is necessary for nonclassicality when a single sender broadcasts to multiple receivers.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces an operational framework that computes linear bounds on the input-output probabilities achievable by any classical network under given communication limits and shared randomness. It then applies variational quantum optimization to maximize violations of those bounds, thereby certifying measurable nonclassical advantages. The resulting analysis shows that entanglement between communication-constrained parties is enough to produce such violations, while pure quantum communication without entanglement suffices in networks with multiple senders. The same analysis establishes that entanglement becomes necessary once the topology reduces to a single sender broadcasting to multiple receivers. The framework is designed to run on quantum hardware or in deployed networks to locate resource-efficient advantages.

Core claim

The framework computes linear bounds for classical strategies and maximizes their violation using tailored variational quantum optimization. Applying it shows entanglement between communication-constrained parties is sufficient for nonclassicality, quantum communication suffices without entanglement in multi-sender networks, and thus entanglement is necessary for nonclassicality in single-sender broadcast to multiple receivers.

What carries the argument

Linear bounds on input/output probabilities of classical networks with limited communication and globally shared randomness, maximized via variational quantum optimization tailored to the network.

If this is right

  • Entanglement between communication-constrained parties suffices for nonclassicality.
  • In networks with multiple senders, quantum communication with no entanglement-assistance suffices for nonclassicality.
  • The framework can be scaled on quantum computers to optimize noisy quantum networks for communication advantages.
  • The framework can be deployed in the field to certify nonclassicality under realistic constraints.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Designers could use the same bounding technique to compare the cost of distributing entanglement versus adding quantum channels in larger topologies.
  • The framework might be adapted to certify nonclassicality from other resources such as quantum discord when entanglement is unavailable.
  • Running the optimization on small experimental networks could identify the minimal entanglement or channel resources needed for a target advantage.

Load-bearing premise

The linear bounds computed by the framework are the tightest possible over all classical strategies with the stated communication constraints and globally shared randomness.

What would settle it

A classical strategy that matches or exceeds the quantum-optimized probability in the single-sender broadcast scenario without using entanglement would falsify the necessity claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2403.02988 by Brian Doolittle, Eric Chitambar, Felix Leditzky.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Classical communication channels with input x ∈ X, output y ∈ Y, and input-output correlations Py|x. (a) A encodes x into a d-dimensional quantum state ρ A x ∈ D(Hd), sends it over a quantum channel, and B applies the POVM {ΠB y }y∈Y to obtain y. (b) A encodes x into a message m ∈ {0, . . . , d − 1}, sends it over a classical channel, and B decodes the message to obtain y. The globally shared randomness so… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Directed acyclic graph (DAG) depicting the causal structure of a communication network. Double-lined arrows show classical communication and single-lined arrows show quantum communication. (a) Classical network with classical devices (gray). (b) Quantum network with preparation (green), processing (red), and measurement (blue) devices. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: DAGs for basic quantum resource configurations. the input of the next. Given the DAG Net(X⃗→d⃗ Y⃗), the set of all quantum network behaviors is defined as Q Net ≡ Conv  {P ∈ PY| ⃗ X⃗ | P⃗y|⃗x satisfies Eq. (8)}  (9) where QNet is convex due to the presence of GSR. 2.1.5 Entanglement-Assisted Communication Net￾works Entanglement can assist both classical and quantum communication networks. Entanglement is… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: A qualitative view of a classical network polytope CNet (gray region), the set of nonclassical quantum behaviors (purple region), and the probability polytope PY| ⃗ X⃗ (outer pentagon) where the vertices correspond to deterministic behaviors. An orange dash-dotted line depicts a simulation game where the orange star corresponds to the minimum simulation error. The purple star shows the maximal quantum viol… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Quantum circuit models for quantum network devices and classical communication. (a) Interference Network DAG x1 x2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Parameterized quantum circuits for network DAGs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A classical computer performs variational optimization of a parameterized quantum circuit. (b) Update the settings by taking a step of size η along the path of steepest ascent as ⃗θi+1 = ⃗θi + η∇Gain ⃗θi  . (c) Append the tuple ( ⃗θi+1, Gain ⃗θi+1 ) to LOG. 3. Return the tuple ( ⃗θ ⋆ , Gain ⃗θ ⋆  ) that has the min￾imum cost in LOG. Remark. In practice, we use the Adam [60] optimizer to dynamically adju… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Classical bipartite signaling scenario DAGs in which a sender device A and a receiver device B. (a) QC (b) EACC (c) EAQC x1 ρ A x Π B y|x2 x2 y ρ A x x1 ρ Λ Π A a|x1 Π B y|a,x2 x2 y ρ Λ 1 ρ Λ 2 a x1 ρ Λ E A x1 Π B y|a,x1 x2 y ρ Λ 1 ρ Λ 2 ρ A x1 |0⟩ U(θ⃗A x1 ) U(θ⃗B x2 ) y |0⟩ a |0⟩ U(θ⃗A x1 ) |0⟩ U(θ⃗Λ) |0⟩ U(θ⃗B a,x2 ) y |0⟩ |0⟩ U(θ⃗Λ) U(θ⃗A x1 ) U(θ⃗B x2 ) y |0⟩ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Point-to-point and prepare and measure DAGs and variational ansatz circuits. (a) Quantum communication, (b) entanglement-assisted classical communication, and (c) entanglement-assisted quantum communication. In figure (b) the classical measurement result a is used to condition the applied measurement. (a) QC (b) EACC (c) EAQC x1 ρ A x1 Π A′ y1|x1 Π B y2|x2 y1 x2 y2 ρ A x1 x1 ρ Λ Π A a,y1|x1 Π B y2|a,x2 y1 … view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Bell scenario with communication DAGs and variational ansatz circuits. (a) Quantum communication, (b) entanglement-assisted classical communication, and (c) entanglement-assisted quantum communication. In figure (b) the classical measurement result a is used to condition the applied measurement. 11 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The behaviors in the set Q X→2 Y EA are able to achieve the maximal possible violation for each non￾classicality witness. In general, EAQC resources can achieve the maximal score since entanglement plus one qubit communication allows for the transmission of two bits due to dense coding [63]. Interestingly, a trit (d = 3) of classical communication is sufficient to achieve the maximal possible violation fo… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Prepare-and-measure network violations (top) and noise robustness (bottom) using QC, EACC, and EAQC resource configurations. The x-axis shows each nonclassicality witness listed in Table. 8 and the y-axis shows the maximal violation or noise robustness achieved by optimizing the variational ansätze in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Bell scenarios with communication violations (left) and noise robustness (right). The x-axis shows each of the three-input facet inequality from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Multiaccess network DAGs. a) Classical communication. b) Entanglement-assisted senders using classical communication. c) Classical communication using global entanglement assistance. d) Quantum communication. e) Entanglement-assisted senders using quantum communication. f) Quantum communication using global entanglement assistance. and comparing two inputs. 3.2.1 Multiaccess Network Nonclassicality Witnes… view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Max violations (top) and noise robustness (bottom) for MA(3, 3→ 2,2 2) multiaccess network. Each column corresponds to a facet inequality listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Multiaccess network violations (left) and noise robustness (right). The upper plot on each side shows the violations or noise robustness of classicality in MA(3, 3 → {2,3} 2) multiaccess networks shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Broadcast network DAGs. a) Classical communication CBC. b) Classical communication using entanglement-assisted receivers CBC ERx. c) Classical communication with global entanglement assistance CBC GEA. d) Entanglement-assisted classical communication CBC EA. e) Quantum communication QBC. f) Quantum communication using entanglement-assisted receivers QBC ERx. g) Quantum communication using global entanglem… view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Minimal variational ansatz for maximal violation of the F b BC4 facet inequality by the entanglement-assisted broadcast network QBC4 ERx. All rotations are defined as Ry(θ⃗) = e−iθσ⃗ y/2 . tings for each of the unitaries are as follows: ⃗θ A ⃗x =  (0, π 2 ), (0, 3π 2 ), (π, 3π 2 ), (π, π 2 )  , (54) ⃗θ B1 =  3π 2 , π 2 , π 2 , π 4  , ⃗θ B2 =  θ⃗B2 0 , π, π 4 , π 2  , (55) where ⃗θ B2 0 ≈ −2.49809186… view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_19.png] view at source ↗
Figure 20
Figure 20. Figure 20: Classical multipoint network DAGs. (a) Interference (IF) network, (b) compressed interference (CIF) network, (c) hourglass (HG) network, and (d) butterfly (BF) network. (a) QC (b) ERx QC (c) ETx QC x1 x2 ρA1 x1 ρA2 x2 EB ΠC1 y1 ΠC2 y2 y1 y2 x1 x2 ρA1 x1 ρA2 x2 ρΛ EB ΠC1 y1 ΠC2 y2 y1 y2 x1 x2 EA1 x1 EA2 x2 ρΛ EB ΠC1 y1 ΠC2 y2 y1 y2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_20.png] view at source ↗
Figure 21
Figure 21. Figure 21: Quantum resource configurations for multipoint network DAGs in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_21.png] view at source ↗
Figure 22
Figure 22. Figure 22: Quantum violation of classicality in 3, 3→d⃗ 3, 3 multipoint networks. For the interference (IF), compressed interference (CIF), butterfly (BF), hourglass (HG), multiaccess (MA), and broadcast (BC) networks we consider quantum communication (QC), entanglement-assisted receiver quantum communication (ERx QC), and entanglement-assisted transmitter quantum communication (ETx QC) resource configurations as sh… view at source ↗
Figure 23
Figure 23. Figure 23: Noise robustness of 3, 3→d⃗ 3, 3 multipoint networks. For the interference (IF), compressed interference (CIF), butterfly (BF), hourglass (HG), multiaccess (MA), and broadcast (BC) networks we consider quantum communication (QC), entanglement-assisted receiver quantum communication (ERx QC), and entanglement-assisted transmitter quantum communication (ETx QC) resource configurations as shown in [PITH_FUL… view at source ↗
Figure 24
Figure 24. Figure 24: VQO could be used to automatically establish and maintain protocols on quantum networking hardware. low dimensions. We believe that resolving these con￾jectures is feasible in the near future. Overall, the maximum violation and noise robust￾ness of a nonclassicality witness is distinct for each network and resource configuration. Therefore, the communication advantage provided by quantum re￾sources is con… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum resources, such as entanglement or quantum communication, offer significant communication advantages in information processing. We develop an operational framework for realizing these communication advantages in resource-constrained quantum networks. The framework computes linear bounds on the input/output probabilities of classical networks with limited communication and globally shared randomness. Since the violation of these classical bounds witnesses nonclassicality, a measurable communication advantage, the framework maximizes the violation of the classical bound using variational quantum optimization methods tailored to the communication network and quantum resources. This operational framework for nonclassicality can be scaled on quantum computers or deployed in the field to optimize noisy quantum networks for communication advantages. Applying this framework, we investigate the nonclassicality of communication networks that are assisted by quantum resources. We find that entanglement between communication-constrained parties is sufficient for nonclassicality to be found, whereas in networks with multiple senders, quantum communication with no entanglement-assistance is sufficient for nonclassicality to be found. As a result, entanglement is necessary for nonclassicality when a single sender broadcasts to multiple receivers.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper develops an operational framework that derives linear bounds on input/output probabilities for classical communication networks under limited communication and globally shared randomness; violations of these bounds certify nonclassicality. It then employs variational quantum optimization, tailored to the network topology and available quantum resources, to maximize such violations. Applying the framework to several assisted networks, the authors report that entanglement suffices for nonclassicality in some topologies, while quantum communication without entanglement suffices in others, leading to the conclusion that entanglement is necessary for nonclassicality in the single-sender broadcast-to-multiple-receivers case.

Significance. If the necessity result can be placed on rigorous footing, the framework would supply a concrete, scalable method for certifying and optimizing measurable communication advantages in resource-constrained quantum networks, with direct relevance to near-term devices. The separation of entanglement-assisted versus unassisted quantum communication advantages across topologies would also sharpen resource requirements for quantum network design.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (final sentence) and the single-sender broadcast results: the necessity claim that entanglement is required rests on the observation that variational quantum optimization finds no violation of the classical bound when entanglement is withheld. Because variational methods supply no global-optimality certificate, a reported violation of zero only shows that the chosen ansatz and optimizer did not locate a violating strategy; it does not establish that none exists under the stated classical constraints and shared randomness.
  2. [Framework and results] Framework description and results sections: the classical linear bounds are obtained from an exact method (linear programming over the communication constraints), while the quantum search is performed variationally. This asymmetry means the 'no nonclassicality without entanglement' statement for the broadcast network is not a rigorous non-existence result and is therefore not load-bearing for the necessity conclusion in its current form.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract and introduction could more explicitly separate the sufficient conditions (entanglement or quantum communication) from the necessity claim, which currently appears only in the final sentence.
  2. Notation for the classical bound (e.g., the linear functional being optimized) and the variational objective should be unified between the main text and any figures or tables that report numerical values.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed review and valuable feedback on our manuscript. We address the concerns regarding the rigor of the necessity claim for entanglement in the single-sender broadcast case. We agree that the variational optimization does not provide a global optimality guarantee, and we will revise the manuscript to clarify this limitation and adjust our conclusions accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (final sentence) and the single-sender broadcast results: the necessity claim that entanglement is required rests on the observation that variational quantum optimization finds no violation of the classical bound when entanglement is withheld. Because variational methods supply no global-optimality certificate, a reported violation of zero only shows that the chosen ansatz and optimizer did not locate a violating strategy; it does not establish that none exists under the stated classical constraints and shared randomness.

    Authors: We concur with the referee's assessment. The variational quantum optimization employed in our work does not certify global optimality, meaning that the absence of a detected violation without entanglement does not rigorously demonstrate that no violating strategy exists. In the revised manuscript, we will modify the abstract's final sentence and the discussion in the results section to present this as a numerical finding from our optimization procedure rather than a proof of necessity. We will explicitly note the limitations of variational methods in establishing non-existence. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Framework and results] Framework description and results sections: the classical linear bounds are obtained from an exact method (linear programming over the communication constraints), while the quantum search is performed variationally. This asymmetry means the 'no nonclassicality without entanglement' statement for the broadcast network is not a rigorous non-existence result and is therefore not load-bearing for the necessity conclusion in its current form.

    Authors: We acknowledge this important point about the methodological asymmetry. The classical bounds are indeed computed exactly via linear programming, whereas the quantum strategies are explored variationally. Consequently, we will revise the framework description and results sections to avoid claiming a rigorous non-existence result. The text will be updated to highlight that our conclusions on the necessity of entanglement are supported by numerical evidence but require further analytical confirmation for rigor. This revision will ensure the claims are appropriately qualified. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: classical bounds derived directly from network model; quantum search is independent

full rationale

The framework first computes linear bounds on input/output probabilities from the explicit classical network model (limited communication + globally shared randomness). These bounds are then used as fixed targets for a separate variational quantum optimization step that searches for violations. The reported sufficiency/necessity statements are conclusions drawn from the presence or absence of detected violations, not reductions of the bounds themselves to fitted parameters or self-citations. No self-definitional steps, fitted-input-as-prediction, or load-bearing self-citation chains appear in the derivation. The chain is self-contained against the stated model assumptions.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The framework rests on standard domain assumptions about classical network models and the definition of nonclassicality via bound violation; no free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Classical networks achieve at most the linear bounds computed from communication constraints and shared randomness
    This is the definition used to witness nonclassicality by violation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5710 in / 1128 out tokens · 27359 ms · 2026-05-24T03:31:00.548510+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 81 canonical work pages · 33 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    The Quantum Internet

    H. J. Kimble. “The quantum internet”. Nature 453, 1023–1030 (2008). arXiv:0806.4195

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  2. [2]

    Quantum networking and internetworking

    Rodney Van Meter. “Quantum networking and internetworking”. IEEE Network26, 59– 64 (2012)

    work page 2012

  3. [3]

    Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead

    Stephanie Wehner, David Elkouss, and Ronald Hanson. “Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead”. Science362 (2018)

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    Quan- tum internet—applications, functionalities, en- abling technologies, challenges, and research di- rections

    Amoldeep Singh, Kapal Dev, Harun Siljak, Hem Dutt Joshi, and Maurizio Magarini. “Quan- tum internet—applications, functionalities, en- abling technologies, challenges, and research di- rections”. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tu- torials 23, 2218–2247 (2021). arXiv:2101.04427

    work page arXiv 2021

  5. [5]

    Quantum Communication Complexity (A Survey)

    Gilles Brassard. “Quantum communication complexity”. Foundations of Physics 33, 1593–1616 (2003). arXiv:quant-ph/0101005. 26

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  6. [6]

    Non-locality and Communication Complexity

    Harry Buhrman, Richard Cleve, Serge Massar, and Ronald de Wolf. “Nonlocality and commu- nication complexity”. Rev. Mod. Phys.82, 665– 698 (2010). arXiv:0907.3584

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  7. [7]

    Entanglement-assisted capacity of a quantum channel and the reverse Shannon theorem

    C.H. Bennett, P.W. Shor, J.A. Smolin, and A.V. Thapliyal. “Entanglement-assisted capacity of a quantum channel and the reverse shannon theo- rem”. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 48, 2637–2655 (2002). arXiv:quant-ph/0106052

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  8. [8]

    Compression of sources of probability distributions and density operators

    Andreas Winter. “Compression of sources of probability distributions and density opera- tors” (2002). arXiv:quant-ph/0208131

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  9. [9]

    Quantum Reverse Shannon Theorem

    Charles H. Bennett, Igor Devetak, Aram W. Harrow, Peter W. Shor, and Andreas Winter. “The quantum reverse shannon theorem and re- source tradeoffs for simulating quantum chan- nels”. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 60, 2926–2959 (2014). arXiv:0912.5537

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  10. [10]

    Zero-error channel capacity and simulation assisted by non-local correlations

    Toby S. Cubitt, Debbie Leung, William Matthews, and Andreas Winter. “Zero-error channel capacity and simulation assisted by non-local correlations”. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 57, 5509–5523 (2011). arXiv:1003.3195

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  11. [11]

    Bounds for the quantity of information transmitted by a quantum communication channel

    Alexander Semenovich Holevo. “Bounds for the quantity of information transmitted by a quantum communication channel”. Prob- lemy Peredachi Informatsii 9, 3–11 (1973). url: www.mathnet.ru/eng/ppi903

    work page 1973

  12. [12]

    Classical information storage in an $n$-level quantum system

    Péter E. Frenkel and Mihály Weiner. “Classical information storage in an n-level quantum sys- tem”. Communications in Mathematical Physics 340, 563–574 (2015). arXiv:1304.5723

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  13. [13]

    Testing dimension and non-classicality in communication networks

    Joseph Bowles, Nicolas Brunner, and Marcin Pawłowski. “Testing dimension and nonclassical- ity in communication networks”. Phys. Rev. A 92, 022351 (2015). arXiv:1505.01736

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  14. [14]

    On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox

    John S Bell. “On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox”. Physics Physique Fizika1, 195 (1964)

    work page 1964

  15. [15]

    Bell nonlocality

    Nicolas Brunner, Daniel Cavalcanti, Stefano Pironio, Valerio Scarani, and Stephanie Wehner. “Bell nonlocality”. Rev. Mod. Phys.86, 419– 478 (2014). arXiv:1303.2849

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  16. [16]

    Classical simulation of quantum entanglement without local hidden variables

    Serge Massar, Dave Bacon, Nicolas J. Cerf, and Richard Cleve. “Classical simulation of quantum entanglement without local hidden variables”. Phys. Rev. A63, 052305 (2001). arXiv:quant- ph/0009088

    work page arXiv 2001

  17. [17]

    Bell Inequalities with Auxiliary Communication

    D. Bacon and B. F. Toner. “Bell inequalities with auxiliary communication”. Phys. Rev. Lett.90, 157904 (2003). arXiv:quant-ph/0208057

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  18. [18]

    The Communication Cost of Simulating Bell Correlations

    B. F. Toner and D. Bacon. “Communication cost of simulating bell correlations”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 187904 (2003). arXiv:quant-ph/0304076

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  19. [19]

    Simulating Quantum Correlations with Finite Communication

    Oded Regev and Ben Toner. “Simulating quantum correlations with finite communica- tion”. SIAM Journal on Computing39, 1562– 1580 (2010). arXiv:0708.0827

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  20. [20]

    Bell Inequalities with Communication Assistance

    Katherine Maxwell and Eric Chitambar. “Bell in- equalities with communication assistance”. Phys. Rev. A89, 042108 (2014). arXiv:1405.3211

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  21. [21]

    Bell scenarios with communication

    J B Brask and R Chaves. “Bell scenarios with communication”. Journal of Physics A: Math- ematical and Theoretical 50, 094001 (2017). arXiv:1607.08182

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  22. [22]

    Bell inequalities with one bit of communication

    Emmanuel Zambrini Cruzeiro and Nicolas Gisin. “Bell inequalities with one bit of communication”. Entropy21, 171 (2019). arXiv:1812.05107

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  23. [23]

    Advantage of hardy’s nonlocal correlation in reverse zero-error channel coding

    Mir Alimuddin, Ananya Chakraborty, Govind Lal Sidhardh, Ram Krishna Patra, Samrat Sen, Snehasish Roy Chowdhury, Sahil Gopalkrishna Naik, and Manik Banik. “Advantage of hardy’s nonlocal correlation in reverse zero-error channel coding”. Phys. Rev. A 108, 052430 (2023). arXiv:2303.06848

    work page arXiv 2023

  24. [24]

    On entan- glement assistance to a noiseless classical chan- nel

    Péter E. Frenkel and Mihály Weiner. “On entan- glement assistance to a noiseless classical chan- nel”. Quantum6, 662 (2022). arXiv:2103.08567

    work page arXiv 2022

  25. [25]

    No-hypersignaling principle

    Michele Dall’Arno, Sarah Brandsen, Alessandro Tosini, Francesco Buscemi, and Vlatko Vedral. “No-hypersignaling principle”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 020401 (2017). arXiv:1609.09237

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    Communi- cation of partial ignorance with qubits

    Teiko Heinosaari and Oskari Kerppo. “Communi- cation of partial ignorance with qubits”. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical52, 395301 (2019). arXiv:1903.04899

    work page arXiv 2019

  27. [27]

    Communication tasks in opera- tional theories

    Teiko Heinosaari, Oskari Kerppo, and Leevi Leppäjärvi. “Communication tasks in opera- tional theories”. Journal of Physics A: Math- ematical and Theoretical 53, 435302 (2020). arXiv:2003.05264

    work page arXiv 2020

  28. [28]

    Criteria for nonclassicality in the prepare-and-measure sce- nario

    Davide Poderini, Samuraí Brito, Ranieri Nery, Fabio Sciarrino, and Rafael Chaves. “Criteria for nonclassicality in the prepare-and-measure sce- nario”. Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043106 (2020)

    work page 2020

  29. [29]

    Certify- ing the classical simulation cost of a quantum channel

    Brian Doolittle and Eric Chitambar. “Certify- ing the classical simulation cost of a quantum channel”. Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 043073 (2021). arXiv:2102.12543

    work page arXiv 2021

  30. [30]

    Correlations in entanglement-assisted prepare-and-measure sce- narios

    Armin Tavakoli, Jef Pauwels, Erik Wood- head, and Stefano Pironio. “Correlations in entanglement-assisted prepare-and-measure sce- narios”. PRX Quantum 2, 040357 (2021). arXiv:2103.10748

    work page arXiv 2021

  31. [31]

    Classical cost of trans- mitting a qubit

    Martin J. Renner, Armin Tavakoli, and Marco Túlio Quintino. “Classical cost of trans- mitting a qubit”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 120801 (2023). arXiv:2207.02244. 27

    work page arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    Nonsignaling quantum random access code boxes

    Andrzej Grudka, Michał Horodecki, Ryszard Horodecki, and Antoni Wójcik. “Nonsignaling quantum random access-code boxes”. Phys. Rev. A 92, 052312 (2015). arXiv:1403.1295

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  33. [33]

    Quantum Random Access Codes using Single $d$-level Systems

    Armin Tavakoli, Alley Hameedi, Breno Marques, and Mohamed Bourennane. “Quantum random access codes using singled-level systems”. Phys. Rev.Lett. 114, 170502(2015). arXiv:1504.08105

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  34. [34]

    Random access test as an identifier of nonclassicality

    TeikoHeinosaariandLeeviLeppäjärvi. “Random access test as an identifier of nonclassicality”. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theo- retical 55, 174003 (2022). arXiv:2112.03781

    work page arXiv 2022

  35. [35]

    Entanglement-assisted quantum communication with simple measure- ments

    Amélie Piveteau, Jef Pauwels, Emil Håkans- son, Sadiq Muhammad, Mohamed Bourennane, and Armin Tavakoli. “Entanglement-assisted quantum communication with simple measure- ments”. Nature Communications 13 (2022). arXiv:2205.09602

    work page arXiv 2022

  36. [36]

    Two instances of random access code in the quantum regime

    Nitica Sakharwade, Michał Studziński, Michał Eckstein, and Paweł Horodecki. “Two instances of random access code in the quantum regime”. New Journal of Physics 25, 053038 (2023). arXiv:2208.14422

    work page arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    Witnessing nonclassical- ity in a causal structure with three observable variables

    Pedro Lauand, Davide Poderini, Ranieri Nery, George Moreno, Lucas Pollyceno, Rafael Rabelo, and Rafael Chaves. “Witnessing nonclassical- ity in a causal structure with three observable variables”. PRX Quantum 4, 020311 (2023). arXiv:2211.13349

    work page arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    Varia- tional quantum optimization of nonlocality in noisy quantum networks

    Brian Doolittle, Thomas R. Bromley, Nathan Killoran, and Eric Chitambar. “Varia- tional quantum optimization of nonlocality in noisy quantum networks”. IEEE Transactions on Quantum EngineeringPages 1–28 (2023). arXiv:2205.02891

    work page arXiv 2023

  39. [39]

    qnetvo: the quantum network variational optimizer

    Brian Doolittle and Tom Bromley. “qnetvo: the quantum network variational optimizer” (2022). url: github.com/ChitambarLab/qNetVO

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    Nonclassicality in noisy quantum networks

    Brian Doolittle. “Nonclassicality in noisy quantum networks”. Phd thesis. Univer- sity of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. (2023). url: hdl.handle.net/2142/121945

    work page 2023

  41. [41]

    Adaptive circuit learn- ing for quantum metrology

    Ziqi Ma, Pranav Gokhale, Tian-Xing Zheng, Sisi Zhou, Xiaofei Yu, Liang Jiang, Peter Maurer, and Frederic T. Chong. “Adaptive circuit learn- ing for quantum metrology”. In 2021 IEEE In- ternational Conference on Quantum Computing and Engineering (QCE). Pages 419–430. (2021). arXiv:2010.08702

    work page arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    Infer- ring quantum network topology using local mea- surements

    Daniel T. Chen, Brian Doolittle, Jeffrey Larson, Zain H. Saleem, and Eric Chitambar. “Infer- ring quantum network topology using local mea- surements”. PRX Quantum4, 040347 (2023). arXiv:2212.07987

    work page arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    Simple information-processing tasks with unbounded quantum advantage

    Teiko Heinosaari, Oskari Kerppo, Leevi Leppäjärvi, and Martin Plávala. “Simple information-processing tasks with unbounded quantum advantage”. Phys. Rev. A 109, 032627 (2024)

    work page 2024

  44. [44]

    Bell nonlocality in networks

    Armin Tavakoli, Alejandro Pozas-Kerstjens, Ming-Xing Luo, and Marc-Olivier Renou. “Bell nonlocality in networks”. Reports on Progress in Physics 85, 056001 (2022). arXiv:2104.10700

    work page arXiv 2022

  45. [45]

    Quantifying Bell non-locality with the trace distance

    S. G. A. Brito, B. Amaral, and R. Chaves. “Quantifying bell nonlocality with the trace distance”. Phys. Rev. A 97, 022111 (2018). arXiv:1709.04260

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  46. [46]

    Lectures on polytopes

    G.M. Ziegler. “Lectures on polytopes”. Grad- uate Texts in Mathematics. Springer New York (2012)

    work page 2012

  47. [47]

    Classifying 50 years of Bell inequalities

    Denis Rosset, Jean-Daniel Bancal, and Nicolas Gisin. “Classifying 50 years of bell inequalities”. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theo- retical 47, 424022 (2014). arXiv:1404.1306

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  48. [48]

    “Porta” (1997)

    Thomas Christof and Andreas Löbel. “Porta” (1997). url: http://porta.zib.de/

    work page 1997

  49. [49]

    Supplementary code for operational nonclassicality in quan- tum communication networks

    Brian Doolittle. “Supplementary code for operational nonclassicality in quan- tum communication networks” (2024). url: github.com/ChitambarLab/nonclassicality- in-quantum-communication-networks- supplemental-code

    work page 2024

  50. [50]

    Non-locality breaking qubit channels

    Rajarshi Pal and Sibasish Ghosh. “Non-locality breaking qubit channels: the case for chsh inequality”. Journal of Physics A: Mathe- matical and Theoretical 48, 155302 (2015). arXiv:1306.3151

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  51. [51]

    Channel activation of chsh nonlocality

    Yujie Zhang, Rodrigo Araiza Bravo, Virginia O Lorenz, and Eric Chitambar. “Channel activation of chsh nonlocality”. New Journal of Physics22, 043003 (2020). arXiv:1911.06349

    work page arXiv 2020

  52. [52]

    PennyLane: Automatic differentiation of hybrid quantum-classical computations

    Ville Bergholm, Josh Izaac, Maria Schuld, Christian Gogolin, Shahnawaz Ahmed, Vishnu Ajith, M Sohaib Alam, Guillermo Alonso- Linaje, B AkashNarayanan, Ali Asadi, et al. “Pennylane: Automatic differentiation of hy- brid quantum-classical computations” (2018). arXiv:1811.04968

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  53. [53]

    Quan- tum computation and quantum information

    Michael A. Nielsen and Isaac L. Chuang. “Quan- tum computation and quantum information”. Cambridge University Press (2009)

    work page 2009

  54. [54]

    Learning representations by back-propagating errors

    David E Rumelhart, Geoffrey E Hinton, and Ronald J Williams. “Learning representations by back-propagating errors”. Nature323, 533– 536 (1986)

    work page 1986

  55. [55]

    Evaluating analytic gradients on quantum hardware

    Maria Schuld, Ville Bergholm, Christian Gogolin, Josh Izaac, and Nathan Killoran. “Evaluating analytic gradients on quantum 28 hardware”. Phys. Rev. A 99, 032331 (2019). arXiv:1811.11184

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  56. [56]

    Estimating the gradient and higher- order derivatives on quantum hardware

    Andrea Mari, Thomas R. Bromley, and Nathan Killoran. “Estimating the gradient and higher- order derivatives on quantum hardware”. Phys. Rev. A103, 012405 (2021). arXiv:2008.06517

    work page arXiv 2021

  57. [57]

    General parameter-shift rules for quantum gradients

    David Wierichs, Josh Izaac, Cody Wang, and Cedric Yen-Yu Lin. “General parameter-shift rules for quantum gradients”. Quantum 6, 677 (2022). arXiv:2107.12390

    work page arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Generalized quantum circuit differentia- tion rules

    Oleksandr Kyriienko and Vincent E. Elfv- ing. “Generalized quantum circuit differentia- tion rules”. Phys. Rev. A104, 052417 (2021). arXiv:2108.01218

    work page arXiv 2021

  59. [59]

    An overview of gradient descent optimization algorithms

    Sebastian Ruder. “An overview of gradi- ent descent optimization algorithms” (2016). arXiv:1609.04747

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  60. [60]

    Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization

    Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. “Adam: A method for stochastic optimization” (2014). arXiv:1412.6980

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  61. [61]

    Variational quantum algorithms

    M. Cerezo, Andrew Arrasmith, Ryan Babbush, Simon C. Benjamin, Suguru Endo, Keisuke Fujii, Jarrod R. McClean, Kosuke Mitarai, Xiao Yuan, Lukasz Cincio, and Patrick J. Coles. “Variational quantum algorithms”. Nature Reviews Physics3, 625–644 (2021). arXiv:2012.09265

    work page arXiv 2021

  62. [62]

    The communication value of a quantum channel

    Eric Chitambar, Ian George, Brian Doolittle, and Marius Junge. “The communication value of a quantum channel”. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 69, 1660–1679 (2023). arXiv:2109.11144

    work page arXiv 2023

  63. [63]

    Communication via one- and two-particle oper- ators on einstein-podolsky-rosen states

    Charles H. Bennett and Stephen J. Wiesner. “Communication via one- and two-particle oper- ators on einstein-podolsky-rosen states”. Phys. Rev. Lett.69, 2881–2884 (1992)

    work page 1992

  64. [64]

    Device-independent tests of classical and quantum dimensions

    Rodrigo Gallego, Nicolas Brunner, Christopher Hadley, and Antonio Acín. “Device-independent tests of classical and quantum dimensions”. Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 230501 (2010). arXiv:1010.5064

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  65. [65]

    Quantum Random Access Codes with Shared Randomness

    Andris Ambainis, Debbie Leung, Laura Mancin- ska, and Maris Ozols. “Quantum random ac- cess codes with shared randomness” (2008). arXiv:0810.2937

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  66. [66]

    Semi-device-independent security of one-way quantum key distribution

    Marcin Pawłowski and Nicolas Brunner. “Semi- device-independent security of one-way quan- tum key distribution”. Phys. Rev. A 84, 010302 (2011). arXiv:1103.4105

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  67. [67]

    Semi-device independent random number expansion without entanglement

    Hong-Wei Li, Zhen-Qiang Yin, Yu-Chun Wu, Xu-Bo Zou, Shuang Wang, Wei Chen, Guang- Can Guo, and Zheng-Fu Han. “Semi-device- independent random-number expansion without entanglement”. Phys. Rev. A84, 034301 (2011). arXiv:1108.1480

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  68. [68]

    Semi- device-independent certification of entanglement in superdense coding

    George Moreno, Ranieri Nery, Carlos de Gois, Rafael Rabelo, and Rafael Chaves. “Semi- device-independent certification of entanglement in superdense coding”. Phys. Rev. A 103, 022426 (2021). arXiv:2102.02709

    work page arXiv 2021

  69. [69]

    Self-testing quantum states and measurements in the prepare-and-measure scenario

    Armin Tavakoli, J ędrzej Kaniewski, Tamás Vértesi, Denis Rosset, and Nicolas Brunner. “Self-testing quantum states and measurements in the prepare-and-measure scenario”. Phys. Rev. A 98, 062307 (2018). arXiv:1801.08520

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  70. [70]

    “hy- perbits

    Marcin Pawłowski and Andreas Winter. ““hy- perbits”: The information quasiparticles”. Phys. Rev. A85, 022331 (2012). arXiv:1106.2409

    work page arXiv 2012

  71. [71]

    Adaptive advantage in entanglement-assisted communica- tions

    Jef Pauwels, Stefano Pironio, Emmanuel Zam- brini Cruzeiro, and Armin Tavakoli. “Adaptive advantage in entanglement-assisted communica- tions”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 120504 (2022). arXiv:2203.05372

    work page arXiv 2022

  72. [72]

    Quantum nonlocality as an axiom

    Sandu Popescu and Daniel Rohrlich. “Quantum nonlocality as an axiom”. Foundations of Physics 24, 379–385 (1994)

    work page 1994

  73. [73]

    Proposed ex- periment to test local hidden-variable theories

    John F. Clauser, Michael A. Horne, Abner Shi- mony, and Richard A. Holt. “Proposed ex- periment to test local hidden-variable theories”. Phys. Rev. Lett.23, 880–884 (1969)

    work page 1969

  74. [74]

    Train- ing variational quantum algorithms is np- hard

    Lennart Bittel and Martin Kliesch. “Train- ing variational quantum algorithms is np- hard”. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 120502 (2021). arXiv:2101.07267

    work page arXiv 2021

  75. [75]

    Bellscenario.jl

    Brian Doolittle. “Bellscenario.jl” (2020). url: github.com/ChitambarLab/BellScenario.jl

    work page 2020

  76. [76]

    Xporta.jl

    Brian Doolittle and Benoît Legat. “Xporta.jl” (2020). url: github.com/JuliaPolyhedra/XPORTA.jl

    work page 2020

  77. [77]

    Polyhedra.jl

    Benoît Legat, Robin Deits, Gustavo Goretkin, Twan Koolen, Joey Huchette, Daisuke Oyama, and Marcelo Forets. “Polyhedra.jl” (2021). url: github.com/JuliaPolyhedra/Polyhedra.jl

    work page 2021

  78. [78]

    Parallelizing the dual revised simplex method

    Qi Huangfu and JA Julian Hall. “Parallelizing the dual revised simplex method”. Mathematical Programming Computation10, 119–142 (2018). arXiv:1503.01889

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  79. [79]

    JuMP: A Modeling Language for Mathematical Optimization

    Iain Dunning, Joey Huchette, and Miles Lubin. “Jump: A modeling language for mathematical optimization”. SIAM Review59, 295–320 (2017). arXiv:1508.01982. 29 A Linear Nonclassicality Witnesses for Bipartite Scenarios 2≥= Fa3→4   1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1   3≥Fc4→4 =   1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1   4≥Fe4→4 =   2 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  80. [80]

    (Bottom) Complete set of six facet inequalities for the multiaccess network polytopeCMA(3,3 → {2,3}

    [13]. (Bottom) Complete set of six facet inequalities for the multiaccess network polytopeCMA(3,3 → {2,3}

    work page

Showing first 80 references.