pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.23777 · v1 · pith:P5SSXX26new · submitted 2026-06-22 · 🪐 quant-ph · math-ph· math.MP· math.ST· physics.data-an· stat.TH

Connecting Quantum Tomography and Quantum Retrodiction

Sebastian Murk , Ian Tan , Fabian M\"uller , Dominik \v{S}afr\'anek This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 08:04 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🪐 quant-ph math-phmath.MPmath.STphysics.data-anstat.TH
keywords quantum tomographyPetz recovery mapquantum retrodictionmaximum likelihood estimationquantum channelsstatistical inferencerecovery maps
0
0 comments X

The pith

The Petz recovery map for a measurement channel is the gradient update of the log-likelihood in maximum-likelihood tomography.

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

Quantum tomography reconstructs states from measurement data while retrodiction infers past states from outcomes, yet the paper shows both are the same statistical process. The central proof identifies the Petz recovery map with the gradient step that raises the log-likelihood of observed data. Iterating this map therefore raises the likelihood at each step. The same gradient construction yields a generalized Petz map for any quantum channel, giving a unified iterative method for tomography.

Core claim

We prove that the Petz recovery map associated with a measurement channel is precisely the gradient update of the log-likelihood used in maximum-likelihood tomography. Consequently, repeated applications of the Petz map monotonically increase the likelihood. Extending beyond measurement channels, we derive a noncommutative generalization of the Petz map from the gradient of a generalized likelihood for arbitrary quantum channels. The resulting iterative procedure maximizes the likelihood and provides a general framework for quantum tomography.

What carries the argument

The Petz recovery map, identified as the exact gradient of the log-likelihood with respect to the quantum state for the given measurement channel.

Load-bearing premise

The log-likelihood is written in a form whose gradient with respect to the state reproduces the Petz map action exactly for the chosen channel.

What would settle it

An explicit derivative calculation for a two-outcome projective measurement on a single qubit showing that the gradient of the log-likelihood differs from the Petz map output.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.23777 by Dominik \v{S}afr\'anek, Fabian M\"uller, Ian Tan, Sebastian Murk.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Schematic representation of the KM update. The current [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The KM iteration converges locally to the maximum [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. Left: Maximum-likelihood quantum tomography based on iterative application of the weighted Petz map over Pauli bases, with the prior [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Quantum tomography and quantum retrodiction are traditionally viewed as separate inference tasks: tomography reconstructs quantum states from measurement data, whereas retrodiction infers past quantum states from observed outcomes. We show that the two are manifestations of the same underlying principle. We prove that the Petz recovery map associated with a measurement channel is precisely the gradient update of the log-likelihood used in maximum-likelihood tomography. Consequently, repeated applications of the Petz map monotonically increase the likelihood. Extending beyond measurement channels, we derive a noncommutative generalization of the Petz map from the gradient of a generalized likelihood for arbitrary quantum channels. The resulting iterative procedure maximizes the likelihood and provides a general framework for quantum tomography, establishing a direct bridge between retrodiction, recovery maps, and statistical inference.

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

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript proves that the Petz recovery map for a measurement channel equals the gradient update step on the log-likelihood in maximum-likelihood quantum tomography. Repeated application of the map therefore monotonically increases the likelihood. The authors extend the construction to arbitrary quantum channels by introducing a generalized noncommutative likelihood whose gradient yields a corresponding recovery map, thereby supplying a unified iterative procedure for tomography that links retrodiction, recovery maps, and statistical inference.

Significance. If the central identification holds, the work supplies a direct mathematical bridge between quantum retrodiction and maximum-likelihood tomography, with the monotonicity property furnishing a concrete algorithmic consequence. The derivation of the generalized map from the gradient of a noncommutative likelihood is a notable technical contribution that may inform the design of iterative reconstruction methods.

minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract / §2] The abstract states the result for 'a measurement channel' without specifying whether the equality is restricted to projective measurements or holds for general POVMs; a clarifying sentence in §2 would help readers locate the precise channel definition used in the proof.
  2. [§4] Notation for the generalized likelihood in the extension to arbitrary channels is introduced without an explicit comparison table to the classical log-likelihood; adding such a table would improve readability of the noncommutative construction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive evaluation and recommendation to accept the manuscript. The provided summary correctly identifies the central result equating the Petz recovery map with the gradient step in maximum-likelihood tomography, as well as the extension to a generalized noncommutative likelihood for arbitrary channels.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity

full rationale

The paper establishes a mathematical equivalence between the Petz recovery map for a measurement channel and the gradient of a log-likelihood function used in maximum-likelihood tomography. This is presented as a proof of identity for the specific forms chosen, with the monotonicity consequence following directly, and a generalization derived for arbitrary channels via a noncommutative likelihood. No steps reduce by construction to fitted inputs, self-citations, or renamings; the derivation is self-contained as an explicit identification between standard objects in quantum information, with independent content in the proof and extension.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the standard definitions of quantum channels, the Petz recovery map, and the log-likelihood functional as used in quantum information theory; no new free parameters, ad-hoc axioms, or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard properties of completely positive trace-preserving maps and the Petz recovery map as defined in quantum information theory.
    The paper invokes these established objects to identify the recovery map with the likelihood gradient.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5674 in / 1281 out tokens · 30763 ms · 2026-06-26T08:04:46.627362+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

111 extracted references · 43 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    V ogel and H

    K. V ogel and H. Risken, Determination of quasiprobability distributions in terms of probability distributions for the rotated quadrature phase, Phys. Rev. A40, 2847(R) (1989). 5

    1989

  2. [2]

    Leonhardt, Measuring the Quantum State of Light (Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997)

    U. Leonhardt, Measuring the Quantum State of Light (Cam- bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997)

    1997

  3. [3]

    D. F. V . James, P. G. Kwiat, W. J. Munro, and A. G. White, Measurement of qubits, Phys. Rev. A64, 052312 (2001). arXiv:quant-ph/0103121 [quant-ph] (2001)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  4. [4]

    G. M. D’Ariano, M. G. A. Paris, and M. F. Sacchi, Quantum Tomography, Adv. Imaging Electron Phys.128, 205 (2003). arXiv:quant-ph/0302028 [quant-ph] (2003)

    arXiv 2003

  5. [5]

    Hradil, Quantum-state estimation, Phys

    Z. Hradil, Quantum-state estimation, Phys. Rev. A55, R1561(R) (1997). arXiv:quant-ph/9609012 [quant-ph] (1996)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  6. [6]

    Banaszek, G

    K. Banaszek, G. M. D’Ariano, M. G. A. Paris, and M. F. Sacchi, Maximum-likelihood estimation of the density matrix, Phys. Rev. A61, 010304(R) (1999). arXiv:quant-ph/9909052 [quant- ph] (1999)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  7. [7]

    Je ˇzek, J

    M. Je ˇzek, J. Fiur ´aˇsek, and Z. Hradil, Quantum inference of states and processes, Phys. Rev. A68, 012305 (2003). arXiv:quant-ph/0210146 [quant-ph] (2002)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  8. [8]

    Paris and J

    M. Paris and J. ˇReh´aˇcek (Eds.), Quantum State Estimation (Springer Berlin, Heidelberg, 2004)

    2004

  9. [9]

    ˇReh´aˇcek, Z

    J. ˇReh´aˇcek, Z. Hradil, E. Knill, A. I. Lvovsky, Diluted maximum-likelihood algorithm for quantum tomography, Phys. Rev. A75, 042108 (2007). arXiv:quant-ph/0611244 [quant-ph] (2006)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  10. [10]

    Blume-Kohout, Hedged Maximum Likelihood Quantum State Estimation, Phys

    R. Blume-Kohout, Hedged Maximum Likelihood Quantum State Estimation, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 200504 (2010). arXiv:1001.2029 [quant-ph] (2010)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  11. [11]

    Bolduc, G

    E. Bolduc, G. C. Knee, E. M. Gauger, and J. Leach, Projected gradient descent algorithms for quantum state tomography, npj Quantum Inf.3, 44 (2017). arXiv:1612.09531 [quant-ph] (2016)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  12. [12]

    Aditi and S

    K. Aditi and S. Becker, Rigorous maximum-likelihood esti- mation for quantum states, Phys. Rev. A112, 052436 (2025). arXiv:2506.16646 [quant-ph] (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Gaikwad, M

    A. Gaikwad, M. S. Torres, S. Ahmed, and A. F. Kockum, Gradient-descent methods for fast quantum state tomography, Quantum Sci. Technol.10, 045055 (2025). arXiv:2503.04526 [quant-ph] (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    Blume-Kohout, Optimal, reliable estimation of quan- tum states, New J

    R. Blume-Kohout, Optimal, reliable estimation of quan- tum states, New J. Phys.12, 043034 (2010). arXiv:quant- ph/0611080 [quant-ph] (2006)

    arXiv 2010

  15. [15]

    Husz´ar and N

    F. Husz´ar and N. M. T. Houlsby, Adaptive Bayesian quantum tomography, Phys. Rev. A85, 052120 (2012). arXiv:1107.0895 [quant-ph] (2011)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  16. [16]

    Kueng and C

    R. Kueng and C. Ferrie, Near-optimal quantum tomography: estimators and bounds, New J. Phys.17, 123013 (2015). arXiv:1503.00677 [quant-ph] (2015)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  17. [17]

    Granade, J

    C. Granade, J. Combes, and D. G. Cory, Practical Bayesian to- mography, New J. Phys.18, 033024 (2016). arXiv:1509.03770 [quant-ph] (2015)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  18. [18]

    S. S. Straupe, Adaptive quantum tomography, JETP Lett.104, 510 (2016). arXiv:1610.02840 [quant-ph] (2016)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  19. [19]

    J. M. Lukens, K. J. H. Law, A. Jasra, and P. Lougovski, A practical and efficient approach for Bayesian quantum state estimation, New J. Phys.22, 063038 (2020). arXiv:2002.10354 [quant-ph] (2020)

    arXiv 2020

  20. [20]

    J. C. Chapmanet al., Bayesian homodyne and heterodyne tomography, Opt. Express30, 15184 (2022). arXiv:2202.03499 [quant-ph] (2022)

    arXiv 2022

  21. [21]

    Aaronson, Shadow Tomography of Quantum States, arXiv:1711.01053 [quant-ph] (2017)

    S. Aaronson, Shadow Tomography of Quantum States, arXiv:1711.01053 [quant-ph] (2017)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  22. [22]

    Huang, R

    H.-Y . Huang, R. Kueng, and J. Preskill, Predicting many prop- erties of a quantum system from very few measurements, Nat. Phys.16, 1050 (2020). arXiv:2002.08953 [quant-ph] (2020)

    arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Strickeret al., Experimental Single-Setting Quantum State Tomography, PRX Quantum3, 040310 (2022)

    R. Strickeret al., Experimental Single-Setting Quantum State Tomography, PRX Quantum3, 040310 (2022). arXiv:2206.00019 [quant-ph] (2022)

    arXiv 2022

  24. [24]

    Z. Qin, J. M. Lukens, B. T. Kirby, and Z. Zhu, Enhancing quantum state reconstruction with structured classical shadows, npj Quantum Inf.11, 147 (2025). arXiv:2501.03144 [quant-ph] (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Gut ¸˘a, J

    M. Gut ¸˘a, J. Kahn, R. Kueng, and J. A. Tropp, Fast state tomog- raphy with optimal error bounds, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor.53, 204001 (2020). arXiv:1809.11162 [quant-ph] (2018)

    arXiv 2020

  26. [26]

    C. H. Bennett, P. W. Shor, J. A. Smolin, and A. V . Thap- liyal, Universal quantum data compression via nondestructive tomography, Phys. Rev. A73, 032336 (2006). arXiv:quant- ph/0403078 [quant-ph] (2004)

    arXiv 2006

  27. [27]

    Wu, State tomography via weak measurements, Sci

    S. Wu, State tomography via weak measurements, Sci. Rep.3, 1193 (2013). arXiv:1212.3655 [quant-ph] (2012)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  28. [28]

    Grosset al., Quantum State Tomography via Compressed Sensing, Phys

    D. Grosset al., Quantum State Tomography via Compressed Sensing, Phys. Rev. Lett.105, 150401 (2010). arXiv:0909.3304 [quant-ph] (2009)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  29. [29]

    S. T. Flammia, D. Gross, Y .-K. Liu, and J. Eisert, Quantum tomography via compressed sensing: error bounds, sample complexity and efficient estimators, New J. Phys.14, 095022 (2012). arXiv:1205.2300 [quant-ph] (2012)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  30. [30]

    Crameret al., Efficient quantum state tomography, Nat

    M. Crameret al., Efficient quantum state tomography, Nat. Commun.1, 149 (2010). arXiv:1101.4366 [quant-ph] (2011)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  31. [31]

    B. P. Lanyonet al., Efficient tomography of a quantum many- body system, Nat. Phys.13, 1158 (2017). arXiv:1612.08000 [quant-ph] (2016)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  32. [32]

    Ferrie, Self-Guided Quantum Tomography, Phys

    C. Ferrie, Self-Guided Quantum Tomography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 190404 (2014). arXiv:1406.4101 [quant-ph] (2014)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  33. [33]

    R. J. Chapman, C. Ferrie, and A. Peruzzo, Experimental Demonstration of Self-Guided Quantum Tomography, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 040402 (2016). arXiv:1602.04194 [quant-ph] (2016)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  34. [34]

    Lohaniet al., Machine learning assisted quantum state estimation, Mach

    S. Lohaniet al., Machine learning assisted quantum state estimation, Mach. Learn.: Sci. Technol.1, 035007 (2020). arXiv:2003.03441 [quant-ph] (2020)

    arXiv 2020

  35. [35]

    Torlaiet al., Neural-network quantum state tomography, Nat

    G. Torlaiet al., Neural-network quantum state tomography, Nat. Phys.14, 447 (2018). arXiv:1703.05334 [cond-mat.dis- nn] (2017)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  36. [36]

    Xinet al., Local-measurement-based quantum state tomog- raphy via neural networks, npj Quantum Inf.5, 109 (2019)

    T. Xinet al., Local-measurement-based quantum state tomog- raphy via neural networks, npj Quantum Inf.5, 109 (2019). arXiv:1807.07445 [quant-ph] (2018)

    arXiv 2019

  37. [37]

    Carrasquilla, G

    J. Carrasquilla, G. Torlai, R. G. Melko, and L. Aolita, Recon- structing quantum states with generative models, Nat. Mach. Intell.1, 155 (2019). arXiv:1810.10584 [quant-ph] (2018)

    arXiv 2019

  38. [38]

    A. M. Palmieriet al., Experimental neural network en- hanced quantum tomography, npj Quantum Inf.6, 20 (2020). arXiv:1904.05902 [quant-ph] (2019)

    arXiv 2020

  39. [39]

    Petz, Sufficient subalgebras and the relative entropy of states of a von Neumann algebra, Commun

    D. Petz, Sufficient subalgebras and the relative entropy of states of a von Neumann algebra, Commun. Math. Phys.105, 123 (1986)

    1986

  40. [40]

    Petz, Sufficiency of channels over von Neumann algebras, Quart

    D. Petz, Sufficiency of channels over von Neumann algebras, Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser.39, 97 (1988)

    1988

  41. [41]

    Petz, Monotonicity of quantum relative entropy revisited, Rev

    D. Petz, Monotonicity of quantum relative entropy revisited, Rev. Math. Phys.15, 79 (2003). arXiv:quant-ph/0209053 [quant-ph] (2002)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  42. [42]

    Hayden, R

    P. Hayden, R. Jozsa, D. Petz, and A. Winter, Structure of States Which Satisfy Strong Subadditivity of Quantum Entropy with Equality, Commun. Math. Phys.246, 359 (2004). arXiv:quant- ph/0304007 [quant-ph] (2003)

    arXiv 2004

  43. [43]

    Fawzi and R

    O. Fawzi and R. Renner, Quantum Conditional Mutual Informa- tion and Approximate Markov Chains, Commun. Math. Phys. 340, 575 (2015). arXiv:1410.0664 [quant-ph] (2014). 6

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  44. [44]

    M. M. Wilde, Recoverability in quantum information theory, Proc. R. Soc. A471, 20150338 (2015). arXiv:1505.04661 [quant-ph] (2015)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  45. [45]

    Sutter, O

    D. Sutter, O. Fawzi, and R. Renner, Universal recovery map for approximate Markov chains, Proc. R. Soc. A472, 20150623 (2016). arXiv:1504.07251 [quant-ph] (2015)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  46. [46]

    Sutter, M

    D. Sutter, M. Tomamichel, and A. W. Harrow, Strength- ened Monotonicity of Relative Entropy via Pinched Petz Recovery Map, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory62, 2907 (2016). arXiv:1507.00303 [quant-ph] (2015)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  47. [47]

    Sutter, M

    D. Sutter, M. Berta, and M. Tomamichel, Multivariate Trace Inequalities, Commun. Math. Phys.352, 37 (2017). arXiv:1604.03023 [math-ph] (2016)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  48. [48]

    Jungeet al., Universal Recovery Maps and Approximate Sufficiency of Quantum Relative Entropy, Ann

    M. Jungeet al., Universal Recovery Maps and Approximate Sufficiency of Quantum Relative Entropy, Ann. Henri Poincar´e 19, 2955 (2018). arXiv:1509.07127 [quant-ph] (2015)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  49. [49]

    M. S. Leifer and R. W. Spekkens, Towards a formulation of quantum theory as a causally neutral theory of Bayesian in- ference, Phys. Rev. A88, 052130 (2013). arXiv:1107.5849 [quant-ph] (2011)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  50. [50]

    Tsang, Generalized conditional expectations for quantum retrodiction and smoothing, Phys

    M. Tsang, Generalized conditional expectations for quantum retrodiction and smoothing, Phys. Rev. A105, 042213 (2022). arXiv:1912.02711 [quant-ph] (2019)

    arXiv 2022

  51. [51]

    Surace and M

    J. Surace and M. Scandi, State retrieval beyond Bayes’ retrod- iction, Quantum7, 990 (2023). arXiv:2201.09899 [quant-ph] (2022)

    arXiv 2023

  52. [52]

    A. J. Parzygnat and F. Buscemi, Axioms for retrodiction: achieving time-reversal symmetry with a prior, Quantum7, 1013 (2023). arXiv:2210.13531 [quant-ph] (2022)

    arXiv 2023

  53. [53]

    A. J. Parzygnat and J. Fullwood, From Time-Reversal Symme- try to Quantum Bayes’ Rules, PRX Quantum4, 020334 (2023). arXiv:2212.08088 [quant-ph] (2022)

    arXiv 2023

  54. [54]

    Buscemi, J

    F. Buscemi, J. Schindler, and D. ˇSafr´anek, Observational entropy, coarse-grained states, and the Petz recovery map: information-theoretic properties and bounds, New J. Phys.25, 053002 (2023). arXiv:2209.03803 [quant-ph] (2022)

    arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    C. C. Aw, K. Onggadinata, D. Kaszlikowski, and V . Scarani, Quantum Bayesian Inference in Quasiprobability Represen- tations, PRX Quantum4, 020352 (2023). arXiv:2301.01952 [quant-ph] (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  56. [56]

    Scandi, P

    M. Scandi, P. Abiuso, J. Surace, and D. D. Santis, Quantum Fisher information and its dynamical nature, Rep. Prog. Phys. 88, 076001 (2025). arXiv:2304.14984 [quant-ph] (2023)

    arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    G. Bai, F. Buscemi, and V . Scarani, Quantum Bayes’ Rule and Petz Transpose Map from the Minimum Change Principle, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 090203 (2025). arXiv:2410.00319 [quant- ph] (2024)

    arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    M. Liu, V . Scarani, A. Auff`eves, and K. T. Laverick, Retrodic- tive approach to quantum state smoothing, Phys. Rev. A112, L030203 (2025). arXiv:2501.15986 [quant-ph] (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    M. Liu, G. Bai, and V . Scarani, Unifying Quantum Smooth- ing Theories with Extended Retrodiction, arXiv:2510.08447 [quant-ph] (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    M. Liu, V . Scarani, and G. Bai, Proper and Improper Mixed States Serve as Different Prior Beliefs for Quantum State Retro- diction, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 060203 (2026). arXiv:2502.10030 [quant-ph] (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  61. [61]

    I. L. Chuang and M. A. Nielsen, Prescription for experimen- tal determination of the dynamics of a quantum black box, J. Mod. Opt.44, 2455 (1997). arXiv:quant-ph/9610001 [quant- ph] (1996)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  62. [62]

    J. F. Poyatos, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Complete Characteriza- tion of a Quantum Process: The Two-Bit Quantum Gate, Phys. Rev. Lett.78, 390 (1997). arXiv:quant-ph/9611013 [quant-ph] (1996)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  63. [63]

    A. I. Lvovsky and M. G. Raymer, Continuous-variable optical quantum-state tomography, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 299 (2009). arXiv:quant-ph/0511044 [quant-ph] (2005)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  64. [64]

    C. L. Degen, F. Reinhard, and P. Cappellaro, Quantum sensing, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 035002 (2017). arXiv:1611.02427 [quant- ph] (2016)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  65. [65]

    Scaraniet al., The security of practical quantum key dis- tribution, Rev

    V . Scaraniet al., The security of practical quantum key dis- tribution, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 1301 (2009). arXiv:0802.4155 [quant-ph] (2008)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  66. [66]

    Barnum and E

    H. Barnum and E. Knill, Reversing quantum dynamics with near-optimal quantum and classical fidelity, J. Math. Phys.43, 2097 (2002). arXiv:quant-ph/0004088 [quant-ph] (2000)

    arXiv 2097

  67. [67]

    H. K. Ng and P. Mandayam, Simple approach to approximate quantum error correction based on the transpose channel, Phys. Rev. A81, 062342 (2010). arXiv:0909.0931 [quant-ph] (2009)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  68. [68]

    Gily´enet al., Quantum Algorithm for Petz Recovery Chan- nels and Pretty Good Measurements, Phys

    A. Gily´enet al., Quantum Algorithm for Petz Recovery Chan- nels and Pretty Good Measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 220502 (2022). arXiv:2006.16924 [quant-ph] (2020)

    arXiv 2022

  69. [69]

    Zheng, W

    G. Zheng, W. He, G. Lee, and L. Jiang, Near-Optimal Perfor- mance of Quantum Error Correction Codes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 250602 (2024). arXiv:2401.02022 [quant-ph] (2024)

    arXiv 2024

  70. [70]

    J. Chen, M. Song, J. J. X. Chan, and V . Scarani, The Petz recovery map for optical losses, arXiv:2511.05941 [quant-ph] (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  71. [71]

    Liet al., Experimental Tabletop Petz recovery of a photonic qubit, arXiv:2606.12020 [quant-ph] (2026)

    H. Liet al., Experimental Tabletop Petz recovery of a photonic qubit, arXiv:2606.12020 [quant-ph] (2026)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  72. [72]

    Png and V

    W.-H. Png and V . Scarani, Petz recovery maps of single-qubit decoherence channels in an ion trap quantum processor, Phys. Rev. A112, 022613 (2025). arXiv:2504.20399 [quant-ph] (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  73. [73]

    M. Song, H. Kwon, and V . Scarani, Exact and approximate conditions of tabletop reversibility: when is Petz recovery cost- free?, arXiv:2510.26895 [quant-ph] (2025)

    arXiv 2025

  74. [74]

    Singhet al., Realizing the Petz recovery map on an NMR quantum processor, Phys

    G. Singhet al., Realizing the Petz recovery map on an NMR quantum processor, Phys. Rev. A113, 052415 (2026). arXiv:2508.08998 [quant-ph] (2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  75. [75]

    Beigi, N

    S. Beigi, N. Datta, and F. Leditzky, Decoding quantum infor- mation via the Petz recovery map, J. Math. Phys.57, 082203 (2016). arXiv:1504.04449 [quant-ph] (2015)

    arXiv 2016

  76. [76]

    ˚Aberg, Fully Quantum Fluctuation Theorems, Phys

    J. ˚Aberg, Fully Quantum Fluctuation Theorems, Phys. Rev. X 8, 011019 (2018). arXiv:1601.01302 [quant-ph] (2016)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  77. [77]

    Kwon and M

    H. Kwon and M. S. Kim, Fluctuation Theorems for a Quantum Channel, Phys. Rev. X9, 031029 (2019). arXiv:1810.03150 [quant-ph] (2018)

    arXiv 2019

  78. [78]

    C. C. Aw, F. Buscemi, and V . Scarani, Fluctuation theorems with retrodiction rather than reverse processes, A VS Quantum Sci.3, 045601 (2021). arXiv:2106.08589 [cond-mat.stat-mech] (2021)

    arXiv 2021

  79. [79]

    Buscemi and V

    F. Buscemi and V . Scarani, Fluctuation theorems from Bayesian retrodiction, Phys. Rev. E103, 052111 (2021). arXiv:2009.02849 [quant-ph] (2020)

    arXiv 2021

  80. [80]

    C. C. Aw, L. H. Zaw, M. Balanz ´o-Juand´o, and V . Scarani, Role of Dilations in Reversing Physical Processes: Tabletop Reversibility and Generalized Thermal Operations, PRX Quan- tum5, 010332 (2024). arXiv:2308.13909 [quant-ph] (2023)

    arXiv 2024

Showing first 80 references.