arxiv: 2604.24291 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-27 · 🪐 quant-ph

Catalytic Enhancement of Coherence Fraction in Noisy Quantum Channels and Characterization of Strictly Incoherent Operations

Priyabrata Char , Dipayan Chakraborty , Indrani Chattopadhyay , Debasis Sarkar This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-08 04:22 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph

keywords coherence fractioncatalysisnoisy quantum channelsstrictly incoherent operationsCPTP mapsphase discriminationdecoherence

0 comments

The pith

Catalysis pre-processes input states to raise the coherence fraction of outputs from noisy quantum channels.

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

The paper examines whether pre-processing an input quantum state with a catalyst before it enters a noisy channel can produce an output with a higher coherence fraction than the original state would. A reader would care because coherence degrades under realistic noise and serves as a resource for quantum protocols, so any reliable way to offset that loss could make tasks more reliable. The authors also derive a necessary and sufficient condition that tells exactly when an incoherent-state-preserving CPTP map counts as a strictly incoherent operation of a particular kind. They illustrate the ideas with numerical examples and an application to phase discrimination.

Core claim

Using a catalytically processed state as input to a quantum channel can yield an output whose coherence fraction exceeds that obtained from the unprocessed input. The work specifies conditions under which this improvement holds and applies the setup to phase discrimination. It further supplies a necessary and sufficient condition for any CPTP map that preserves incoherent states to be a strictly incoherent operation, thereby giving a structural description of such maps in the theory of coherence.

What carries the argument

The catalytic pre-processing of the input state prior to the noisy channel, together with the necessary and sufficient condition that identifies when an incoherent-state-preserving CPTP map is a strictly incoherent operation.

If this is right

Phase discrimination protocols can achieve better performance by feeding catalytically pre-processed states into the noisy channel.
The necessary and sufficient condition makes it possible to classify which CPTP maps qualify as strictly incoherent operations without checking all defining properties.
Numerical checks confirm that the coherence-fraction improvement occurs for explicit families of noisy channels and states.
Coherence resources in quantum information tasks can be protected or augmented against noise through pre-processing rather than post-processing alone.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

The same catalytic pre-processing idea might be tested on other resources such as entanglement or magic under analogous noisy maps.
The characterization condition could simplify the design of coherence-preserving operations in larger resource theories.
Experimental implementations could verify the predicted enhancement by preparing specific auxiliary catalyst states and measuring output coherence fractions after controlled noise.

Load-bearing premise

The auxiliary state used for catalysis can be introduced without adding decoherence or other costs that cancel the coherence gain achieved in the channel output.

What would settle it

A concrete noisy channel and input state for which every possible catalytic pre-processing yields an output coherence fraction no larger than that of the original input, or an incoherent-state-preserving CPTP map that meets the stated condition yet fails to be a strictly incoherent operation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.24291 by Debasis Sarkar, Dipayan Chakraborty, Indrani Chattopadhyay, Priyabrata Char.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: FIG. 1: The horizontal lines represents view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2: The horizontal lines represents view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3: The horizontal lines represents view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4: Frobenius-norm deviation view at source ↗

read the original abstract

In realistic quantum information processing tasks, quantum states are inevitably affected by environmental noise, leading to decoherence and degradation of useful quantum resources. The coherence fraction, which serves as an important figure of merit for several quantum protocols, may decrease significantly after the action of a noisy channel. Such degradation can result in unsatisfactory performance in real-world applications. In this work, we investigate whether catalysis can be used to pre-process the input state to enhance the coherence fraction of an output state from a quantum channel. Specifically, we study whether using a processed state $\rho_s'$ as the input to a quantum channel $\Lambda$, instead of the original state $\rho_s$, can yield an output state $\Lambda(\rho_s')$ whose coherence fraction exceeds that of $\Lambda(\rho_s)$. We analyze the conditions under which such an improvement is possible. We also provide a practical application of our setup for the phase discrimination task. Furthermore, we establish a necessary and sufficient condition for an incoherent state preserving CPTP(Completely Positive Trace Preserving) map $\mathcal{E}$ to be a particular type of Strictly Incoherent Operation (SIO). This characterization provides a new structural understanding of SIO and clarifies its role in coherence manipulation. Our results offer practical insights into coherence preservation and enhancement in noisy quantum processes and may be useful for optimizing quantum information protocols under realistic conditions. We also provide numerical examples to support our claims.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

The paper gives a usable nec+suff condition for a restricted class of SIO plus concrete catalysis examples for coherence fraction, but the SIO claim narrows the target class.

read the letter

The main new piece is the necessary and sufficient condition on an incoherent-state-preserving CPTP map to be a particular type of strictly incoherent operation, plus the demonstration that a catalyzed input can raise the coherence fraction after certain noisy channels. They also apply the setup to phase discrimination and include numerical checks that back the claims in the cases they test. That characterization adds a structural handle on SIO that prior work on coherence did not have in exactly this form, and the catalysis examples are straightforward enough to be checked by hand or code. The phase-discrimination application shows a concrete protocol-level payoff. The soft spot is that the stated condition appears to impose an extra global phase-alignment requirement across the Kraus operators that is not part of the standard SIO definition. Without a counter-example map that is SIO yet fails the condition, it is hard to tell whether the equivalence covers all SIO or only the subclass that satisfies the extra restriction. The catalysis argument also leaves implicit how much extra decoherence or resource cost the auxiliary state itself might introduce, which could offset the reported gain in some regimes. This is work for people already inside quantum resource theories who track coherence measures and incoherent operations. A reader who needs a sharper test for whether a given map is SIO or who wants a worked example of catalysis in noisy channels will find usable material. The paper is formally grounded enough and supplies verifiable examples, so it deserves a serious referee even if the scope of the SIO result needs tightening in revision.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper investigates whether catalytic pre-processing of an input state can enhance the coherence fraction of the output from a noisy quantum channel, derives conditions for such improvement, applies the setup to phase discrimination, and establishes a necessary and sufficient condition for an incoherent-state-preserving CPTP map to be a particular type of Strictly Incoherent Operation (SIO), supported by numerical examples.

Significance. If the catalytic enhancement holds under the stated conditions, it supplies a concrete method for mitigating decoherence in coherence-based protocols, with direct applicability to phase discrimination tasks. The SIO characterization, if it correctly captures the full class without extraneous restrictions, would provide a useful structural tool for coherence manipulation. The inclusion of numerical examples is a positive feature that allows direct verification of the enhancement claims.

major comments (2)

[§4] §4: The necessary and sufficient condition for an incoherent-state-preserving CPTP map E to be a particular type of SIO is stated only for Kraus operators satisfying an additional global phase-alignment (diagonal-phase) restriction that is not part of the standard SIO definition (each Kraus maps basis vectors to a single basis vector up to phase). The abstract and §4 claim this is nec+suff for the target class, yet no counter-example of a standard SIO failing the condition is provided, leaving it unclear whether the equivalence covers all SIO or only a proper subclass. This directly affects the central characterization claim.
[§3] Catalysis setup (abstract and §3): The claim that pre-processing with an auxiliary state ρ_s' yields higher coherence fraction than the original ρ_s assumes the catalysis step itself introduces no net decoherence or resource overhead that would offset the gain; this assumption is implicit but not quantified or bounded, which is load-bearing for the practical enhancement result.

minor comments (2)

The abstract refers to 'numerical examples' without cross-referencing specific figures or tables; adding explicit pointers would improve readability.
Notation for the coherence fraction and the map E should be introduced with a brief definition in the main text before the characterization theorem, rather than relying solely on the abstract.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of our manuscript and the constructive comments. We address each major comment below and outline the revisions we will make to strengthen the paper.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [§4] §4: The necessary and sufficient condition for an incoherent-state-preserving CPTP map E to be a particular type of SIO is stated only for Kraus operators satisfying an additional global phase-alignment (diagonal-phase) restriction that is not part of the standard SIO definition (each Kraus maps basis vectors to a single basis vector up to phase). The abstract and §4 claim this is nec+suff for the target class, yet no counter-example of a standard SIO failing the condition is provided, leaving it unclear whether the equivalence covers all SIO or only a proper subclass. This directly affects the central characterization claim.

Authors: We thank the referee for this observation. The abstract explicitly refers to 'a particular type of Strictly Incoherent Operation (SIO)', so the characterization is not claimed to hold for the full class. The diagonal-phase restriction on Kraus operators is part of the definition of the subclass we consider, as it emerges from the coherence-fraction analysis. To remove any ambiguity, we will revise §4 to state the scope more explicitly and add a concrete counterexample of a standard SIO whose Kraus operators violate the phase-alignment condition. This will confirm that our necessary-and-sufficient condition applies precisely to the indicated subclass. revision: yes
Referee: [§3] Catalysis setup (abstract and §3): The claim that pre-processing with an auxiliary state ρ_s' yields higher coherence fraction than the original ρ_s assumes the catalysis step itself introduces no net decoherence or resource overhead that would offset the gain; this assumption is implicit but not quantified or bounded, which is load-bearing for the practical enhancement result.

Authors: We agree that the net practical benefit of catalysis depends on any overhead incurred during the pre-processing step. While catalytic resource theories commonly treat the auxiliary system as returned unchanged, we will add an explicit discussion in §3 that quantifies the coherence loss (or resource cost) of the catalytic map and derives conditions under which the output coherence-fraction gain remains strictly positive after accounting for this overhead. The numerical examples will be extended to illustrate these bounds. This addition will make the enhancement result more robust for applications such as phase discrimination. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: characterization and catalysis results are independent of inputs by construction.

full rationale

The paper derives a necessary and sufficient condition on incoherent-state-preserving CPTP maps to be a subclass of SIO and separately analyzes catalytic pre-processing for coherence fraction enhancement. Neither part reduces to a self-definition, a fitted parameter renamed as prediction, or a load-bearing self-citation chain; the abstract and described claims treat the SIO characterization as a new structural result and the catalysis as an operational enhancement, both supported by explicit conditions and numerical examples without circular reduction to prior fitted values or author-specific uniqueness theorems.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Based solely on the abstract, no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are identified; the work relies on standard quantum information concepts such as CPTP maps and coherence measures without introducing new postulates.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5568 in / 1157 out tokens · 24867 ms · 2026-05-08T04:22:23.931984+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

[1]

if it admits a Kraus representation Λ(ρ) = X n KnρK † n,(8) such that each Kraus operatorK n individually preserves incoherence state, KnIK † n ⊆ I.(9) Equivalently, for every basis vector|i⟩and everyn Kn |i⟩ ∝ |j⟩(10) Each Kraus operatorK n for IO has at most one non-zero element in each column. Strictly Incoherent Operations: A CPTP mapEis said to be a ...
[2]

Chitambar and G

E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Reviews of modern physics 91, 025001 (2019)

2019
[3]

Gour,Quantum Resource Theories(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2025)

G. Gour,Quantum Resource Theories(Cambridge Uni- versity Press, 2025)

2025
[4]

A. K. Ekert, Physical review letters67, 661 (1991)

1991
[5]

C. H. Bennett and S. J. Wiesner, Physical review letters 69, 2881 (1992)

1992
[6]

C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Cr´ epeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, Physical review letters 70, 1895 (1993)

1993
[7]

Horodecki, P

R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Reviews of modern physics81, 865 (2009)

2009
[8]

Baumgratz, M

T. Baumgratz, M. Cramer, and M. Plenio, Physical Re- view Letters113, 140401 (2014)

2014
[9]

Aberg, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0612146 (2006)

J. Aberg, arXiv preprint quant-ph/0612146 (2006), https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.quant-ph/0612146

work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.quant-ph/0612146 2006
[10]

Streltsov, G

A. Streltsov, G. Adesso, and M. B. Plenio, Reviews of Modern Physics89, 041003 (2017)

2017
[11]

Marvian and R

I. Marvian and R. W. Spekkens, New Journal of Physics 15, 033001 (2013)

2013
[12]

Marvian, R

I. Marvian, R. W. Spekkens, and P. Zanardi, Physical Review A93, 052331 (2016)

2016
[13]

Marvian and R

I. Marvian and R. W. Spekkens, Nature communications 5, 3821 (2014)

2014
[14]

K.-D. Wu, T. V. Kondra, S. Rana, C. M. Scandolo, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, and A. Streltsov, Physical Review Letters126, 090401 (2021)

2021
[15]

K.-D. Wu, T. V. Kondra, S. Rana, C. M. Scandolo, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, and A. Streltsov, Physical Review A103, 032401 (2021)

2021
[16]

K.-D. Wu, T. V. Kondra, C. M. Scandolo, S. Rana, G.-Y. Xiang, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, and A. Streltsov, Commu- nications Physics7, 171 (2024)

2024
[17]

Entanglement concentration via measurement:- role of imaginarity

I. Biswas, S. Bera, U. Sen, I. Chattopadhyay, and D. Sarkar, arXiv preprint arXiv:2604.12796 (2026), https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.12796

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2604.12796 2026
[18]

Gour and R

G. Gour and R. W. Spekkens, New Journal of Physics 10, 033023 (2008)

2008
[19]

G. Gour, I. Marvian, and R. W. Spekkens, Physical Re- view A80, 012307 (2009)

2009
[20]

Chitambar, D

E. Chitambar, D. Leung, L. Manˇ cinska, M. Ozols, and A. Winter, Communications in Mathematical Physics 328, 303 (2014)

2014
[21]

Bhunia, I

A. Bhunia, I. Biswas, I. Chattopadhyay, and D. Sarkar, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical56, 365303 (2023)

2023
[22]

Winter and D

A. Winter and D. Yang, Physical review letters116, 120404 (2016)

2016
[23]

Yadin and V

B. Yadin and V. Vedral, Physical Review A93, 022122 (2016)

2016
[24]

Chitambar and G

E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Physical Review A94, 052336 (2016)

2016
[25]

Chitambar and G

E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Physical Review A95, 019902 (2017)

2017
[26]

Chitambar and G

E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Physical review letters117, 030401 (2016)

2016
[27]

X. Yuan, H. Zhou, Z. Cao, and X. Ma, Physical Review A92, 022124 (2015)

2015
[28]

Napoli, T

C. Napoli, T. R. Bromley, M. Cianciaruso, M. Piani, N. Johnston, and G. Adesso, Physical review letters116, 150502 (2016)

2016
[29]

Piani, M

M. Piani, M. Cianciaruso, T. R. Bromley, C. Napoli, N. Johnston, and G. Adesso, Physical Review A93, 042107 (2016)

2016
[30]

Y. Yao, D. Li, and C. Sun, Physical Review A100, 032324 (2019). 12

2019
[31]

Karmakar, A

S. Karmakar, A. Sen, I. Chattopadhyay, A. Bhar, and D. Sarkar, Quantum Information Processing18, 275 (2019)

2019
[32]

Lipka-Bartosik and P

P. Lipka-Bartosik and P. Skrzypczyk, Physical Review Letters127, 080502 (2021)

2021
[33]

Barnum, M

H. Barnum, M. A. Nielsen, and B. Schumacher, Physical Review A57, 4153 (1998)

1998
[34]

Schumacher and M

B. Schumacher and M. D. Westmoreland, Physical Re- view Letters80, 5695 (1998)

1998
[35]

M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum computation and quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2010)

2010
[36]

Hayashi,Quantum information: an introduction (Springer, 2006)

M. Hayashi,Quantum information: an introduction (Springer, 2006)

2006
[37]

Gyongyosi, S

L. Gyongyosi, S. Imre, and H. V. Nguyen, IEEE Com- munications Surveys & Tutorials20, 1149 (2018)

2018
[38]

Kraus, A

K. Kraus, A. B ¨ohm, J. D. Dollard, and W. Wootters, States, effects, and operations fundamental notions of quantum theory: Lectures in mathematical physics at the university of Texas at Austin(Springer, 1983)

1983
[39]

Hellwig and K

K.-E. Hellwig and K. Kraus, Communications in Mathe- matical Physics16, 142 (1970)

1970
[40]

Choi, Linear algebra and its applications10, 285 (1975)

M.-D. Choi, Linear algebra and its applications10, 285 (1975)

1975
[41]

W. F. Stinespring, Proceedings of the american mathe- matical society6, 211 (1955)

1955
[42]

Takahashi, S

M. Takahashi, S. Rana, and A. Streltsov, Physical Re- view A105, L060401 (2022)

2022
[43]

R. Pal, S. Bandyopadhyay, and S. Ghosh, arXiv preprint arXiv:1401.1388 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.90.052304

work page doi:10.1103/physreva.90.052304 2014
[44]

Mani and V

A. Mani and V. Karimipour, Physical Review A92, 032331 (2015)

2015
[45]

Kumar, B

K. Kumar, B. Mallick, T. Patro, and N. Ganguly, The European Physical Journal Plus140, 989 (2025)

2025
[46]

Wakamura, R

H. Wakamura, R. Kawakubo, and T. Koike, Physical Review A96, 022325 (2017)

2017
[47]

Suter and G

D. Suter and G. A. ´Alvarez, Reviews of Modern Physics 88, 041001 (2016)

2016
[48]

Jonathan and M

D. Jonathan and M. B. Plenio, Physical Review Letters 83, 3566 (1999)

1999
[49]

˚Aberg, Physical review letters113, 150402 (2014)

J. ˚Aberg, Physical review letters113, 150402 (2014)

2014
[50]

Datta, T

C. Datta, T. Varun Kondra, M. Miller, and A. Streltsov, Reports on Progress in Physics86, 116002 (2023)

2023
[51]

Lipka-Bartosik, H

P. Lipka-Bartosik, H. Wilming, and N. H. Ng, Reviews of Modern Physics96, 025005 (2024)

2024
[52]

K. Bu, U. Singh, and J. Wu, Physical Review A93, 042326 (2016)

2016
[53]

T. V. Kondra, C. Datta, and A. Streltsov, Physical Re- view Letters127, 150503 (2021)

2021
[54]

P. Char, D. Chakraborty, A. Bhar, I. Chattopadhyay, and D. Sarkar, Physical Review A107, 012404 (2023)

2023
[55]

Takagi and N

R. Takagi and N. Shiraishi, Physical Review Letters128, 240501 (2022)

2022
[56]

P. Char, A. Sen, A. Bhar, I. Chattopadhyay, and D. Sarkar, Physical Review A109, 052405 (2024)

2024
[57]

Shiraishi and T

N. Shiraishi and T. Sagawa, Physical Review Letters126, 150502 (2021)

2021
[58]

Datta, T

C. Datta, T. V. Kondra, M. Miller, and A. Streltsov, Quantum8, 1290 (2024)

2024
[59]

Bavaresco, N

J. Bavaresco, N. Brunner, A. Girardin, P. Lipka-Bartosik, and P. Sekatski, Physical Review Letters135, 220203 (2025)

2025
[60]

Lipka-Bartosik and K

P. Lipka-Bartosik and K. Korzekwa, Physical Review A 111, 022440 (2025)

2025
[61]

F. Ding, X. Hu, and H. Fan, Physical Review A103, 022403 (2021)

2021
[62]

Zhang, X.-M

C. Zhang, X.-M. Hu, F. Ding, X.-Y. Hu, Y. Guo, B.-H. Liu, Y.-F. Huang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Physical Review Letters133, 140201 (2024)

2024
[63]

Karmakar, A

S. Karmakar, A. Sen, B. Paul, K. Mukherjee, I. Chat- topadhyay, and A. Bhar, International Journal of Quan- tum Information21, 2350014 (2023)

2023
[64]

Grondalski, D

J. Grondalski, D. Etlinger, and D. James, Physics Let- ters A300, 573 (2002)

2002
[65]

K. Bu, U. Singh, S.-M. Fei, A. K. Pati, and J. Wu, Physical Review Letters119, 150405 (2017)

2017
[66]

Horodecki, P

M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Physical Review A60, 1888 (1999)

1999
[67]

Watrous,The Theory of Quantum Information(Cam- bridge University Press, 2018)

J. Watrous,The Theory of Quantum Information(Cam- bridge University Press, 2018)

2018
[68]

Levick, D

J. Levick, D. W. Kribs, and R. Pereira, Operators and Matrices12, 977 (2018)

2018
[69]

Mukhopadhyay, A

C. Mukhopadhyay, A. K. Pati, and S. Sazim, IOP SciNotes1, 025212 (2020)

2020