Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Calibrated hypergraph states: I calibrated hypergraph and multi qudit state monads

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper shows that calibrated hypergraphs and multi-qudit states each organize into a graded $\Omega$ monad, so that a single structure-preserving map can later turn hypergraph data into quantum states.

desk verdict Solid categorical scaffolding for a new class of hypergraph states, with one genuine but fixable gap: the multi-qudit state monad as written relies on an unstated strictification of the Hilbert tensor product. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.18967 v1 pith:HH66B5T4 submitted 2025-01-31 quant-ph math-phmath.MP

Roberto Zucchini This is my paper · ORCID
classification quant-phmath-phmath.MP MSC 05C6581P9981Q99
keywords calibratedhypergraphstatesgradedmonadsProcategoriesmulti-quditquantuminformationcategorytheorystabilizer
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper establishes that calibrated hypergraphs and multi-qudit quantum states can each be organized into a graded $\Omega$ monad: a category modelled on the finite von Neumann ordinals and equipped with an associative, unital way to join objects. The central result verifies the same monad axioms for both sides, so that combining hypergraphs by disjoint union and combining states by tensor product obey the same formal rules. This provides the categorical foundation the author's guiding principle calls for, and it sets up the calibrated hypergraph state map as a structure-preserving morphism between these monads in the companion paper. If correct, the framework gives a uniform way to build quantum states from hypergraph data and to compare that construction with earlier weighted hypergraph states.

What carries the argument

The central object is the graded $\Omega$ monad: a concrete Pro category, meaning a strict monoidal category whose objects are monoidal powers of a single generator and which is isomorphic to the category $\Omega$ of finite von Neumann ordinals, equipped with an associative and unital graded multiplication $\smile$ and a unit. The multiplication takes an element on $l$ units and one on $m$ units to an element on $l+m$ units, and the axioms (2.3.1)--(2.3.3) require associativity, unitality, and compatibility with relabelling maps. This machinery does the work of making 'combining hypergraphs' and 'tensoring states' the same kind of operation, so that the later state map can be a monad morphism: covariant, multiplicative, and unit-preserving.

What would settle it

Pick a specific calibrated hypergraph on two vertices and a specific one-qudit state, and check the monad axioms (2.3.1)--(2.3.3) by direct computation: associativity of $\smile$ and compatibility of relabelling with the multiplication. If any concrete instance violates these identities, the central theorem is false.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that calibrated hypergraphs and multi-qudit states are not merely analogous: they are instances of the same categorical structure, the graded $\Omega$ monad. Concretely, Propositions 3.2.9 and 4.2.3 verify the monad axioms (2.3.1)--(2.3.3) for the calibrated hypergraph category $\mathrm{GC}_\Omega$ and the multi-qudit state category $\mathrm{HE}_\Omega$, and the same structure is exhibited for bare hypergraphs, weighted hypergraphs, and multi-cdit configurations. The paper also shows (Theorem 1.3.1) that graded $\Omega$ monads embed into the established category of graded monads, justifying the name. This is the foundation the author's guiding principle calls for: a categorical framework constraining hypergraph states enough to make their general structure determinable, and it prepares the calibrated hypergraph state map as a special morphism of these monads in the companion paper.

Load-bearing premise

The argument depends on the assumption that organizing hypergraphs and multi-qudit states into these compositional categories is the right way to constrain hypergraph states enough to work out their general structure; if that assumption fails, the framework is consistent but does not deliver the promised insight.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The calibrated hypergraph category $\mathrm{GC}_\Omega$ and the multi-qudit state category $\mathrm{HE}_\Omega$ satisfy the monad axioms, so their elements combine associatively and compatibly with relabelling of vertices and qudits.
  • The state-assignment map is designed to be a morphism of graded $\Omega$ monads satisfying covariance, multiplicativity, and unit preservation, expressed in relations (1.4.1)--(1.4.3).
  • Weighted hypergraph states are recovered as a special case: every weighted hypergraph state equals a calibrated hypergraph state, and in the qubit case the calibrated construction reduces to the weighted one up to sign (Theorems 1.4.3 and 1.4.4).
  • Calibrated hypergraph states are claimed to be locally maximally entangleable stabilizer states (Theorem 1.4.2), the class expected of hypergraph states.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the monad structure is as general as claimed, the same scaffolding could be used to classify hypergraph states by the morphisms between these monads, giving a new invariant for entanglement classes.
  • The calibrated hypergraph monad can be read as a free construction whose algebra maps are exactly hypergraph state maps, suggesting testable characterizations of which phase functions can arise from monad morphisms.
  • A natural next check is whether the calibrated construction yields genuinely new locally maximally entangleable states for Galois rings that are not fields; the author leaves the question of new entanglement classes open, and the monad framework offers a concrete way to search for examples.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a categorical framework for hypergraph states, organized as Part I of a two-part study. It defines graded Ω monads: concrete Pro categories equipped with a strict monoidal isofunctor from the finite-ordinal category Ω and an associative, unital monadic multiplication. It then constructs three hypergraph monads—the bare hypergraph monad GΩ, the calibrated hypergraph monad GCΩ, and the weighted hypergraph monad GWΩ—and two multi-dit monads: the configuration monad EΩ and the multi-qudit state monad HEΩ. The central claim is that calibrated hypergraphs and multi-qudit states each form graded Ω monads, proven as Propositions 3.2.9 and 4.2.3 respectively. The actual calibrated hypergraph state map is deferred to the companion paper, Part II.

Significance. If the central claims hold, the paper provides a genuinely original categorical foundation for hypergraph states, with carefully worked-out monadic structure for calibrated and weighted hypergraphs and for multi-qudit state spaces. The proofs for the hypergraph monads are detailed and explicit, and the extensive worked examples materially help the reader. The construction is definitional rather than circular: the authors verify their proposed axioms rather than deriving conclusions from an assumed conclusion. The paper also honestly delineates what is deferred to Part II, so the present contribution is best evaluated as a foundational Part I. The main value is in the compositional framework and the concrete monad constructions, not yet in new entanglement classification results.

major comments (1)
  1. [§4.2, Def. 4.2.1 and Prop. 4.2.3] The associativity and unitality axioms for the multi-qudit monad HEΩ are not well-typed as written. In Def. 4.2.1 the monadic multiplication is defined by |ξ>⌣|η> = |ξ>⊗|η>, but the ordinary Hilbert-space tensor product is not strictly associative: (H⊗K)⊗L and H⊗(K⊗L) are canonically isomorphic, not equal. Consequently, with a fixed bracketing of tensor powers, the two sides of (2.3.1), namely |ξ>⌣(|η>⌣|ζ>) and (|ξ>⌣|η>)⌣|ζ>, generally live in different concrete Hilbert spaces, so the equality asserted in (4.2.13) is not defined without choosing a strictification. The same issue affects the unitality axiom (4.2.14), since |ξ>⊗|0> is canonically identified with |ξ> rather than equal to it in fdHilb. Prop. 4.2.2 papers over this by asserting equality H1^{⊗(l+m)} = H1^{⊗l}⊗H1^{⊗m}, but that equality is precisely the strictness that fdHilb lacks. This is load-bearing for the abstract claim that multi-qudit states form a graded Ω monad. The fix is local: work in an explicit strictified concrete model of finite-dimensional Hilbert spaces, or state the graded Ω monad axioms up to coherent isomorphism, and then re-verify (2.3.1)–(2.3.3) in that model. The set-based hypergraph monads of §3 are not affected by this issue.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3.3, Example 3.3.3] In eq. (3.3.17), the three displayed entries all read μ(pH,ρq)X0; the second and third should presumably be μ(pH,ρq)X1 and μ(pH,ρq)X2, respectively.
  2. [§3.1, Example 3.1.2] In eq. (3.1.6), the left-hand side is printed as "H ⌣ H", but the example is computing H ⌣ K; this should be corrected.
  3. [§3.3] Several propositions in Section 3.3 (Props. 3.3.1–3.3.5) have proofs left entirely to the reader. Since GWΩ is used later for comparison with the calibrated construction, it would be helpful to provide at least the verification of Prop. 3.3.5 or to state explicitly that full proofs are available on request.
  4. [§3.2] The sentence "Props. 3.2.1, 3.2.1 together entail..." should read "Props. 3.2.1, 3.2.2 together entail...", and the opening of Section 3.2 contains the typo "graded varOmega monad" for "graded Ω monad".
  5. [§4.2, Prop. 4.2.2] The notation in Prop. 4.2.2 should make explicit that the equality in (4.2.5)–(4.2.7) depends on the strictification or coherence convention chosen for tensor powers; as noted in the major comment, this is not a purely notational issue.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the monad constructions are definitions followed by direct verification of the stated axioms, with no fitted input, self-citation chain, or definitional equivalence.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are that calibrated hypergraphs and multi-qudit states organize into graded Ω monads. These claims are established by direct verification of the monad axioms (2.3.1)-(2.3.3) in Propositions 3.1.2, 3.2.9, 3.3.5, 4.1.2 and 4.2.3. No parameter is fitted to data, no result is assumed from a later section, and no external uniqueness theorem is imported. The 'guiding principle' stated in the abstract and Section 1.5 is explicitly a methodological choice, not a theorem, and the paper acknowledges it as such. The calibration data are introduced by definitions (e.g., Definitions 3.2.3-3.2.8), and then the monadic structure is checked against those definitions; choosing definitions so that a construction works is design, not circular reasoning. The paper contains no self-citations. The limitation flagged in Section 1.5 that genuinely new entanglement classes are not determined in this work is an honest scope statement, not a circular step. A possible technical concern about the strictness of the Hilbert tensor product in Proposition 4.2.3 concerns whether the equality in axiom (2.3.1) holds literally or only up to coherent isomorphism; that is a correctness or well-formedness issue, not circularity, because the claimed monad structure is not assumed as an input. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained with respect to the paper's stated goals, and there is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central result is a pure existence theorem: certain sets and functions satisfy the graded Ω monad axioms. The construction depends on choices of finite commutative monoids A and M and the definition of calibration, none of which are fitted to data. No free numerical parameters appear. The paper rests on standard category theory and the stated guiding principle.

assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption A constructive theory of hypergraph states should be based on a categorical framework for hypergraphs and multi-qudit states, constraining the states enough to determine their structure.
    Stated in the abstract and Section 1.5 as the guiding principle; it is a methodological commitment, not a proven theorem. If the categorical constraints are not sufficient to determine the state map, the program's goal is not met.
  • domain assumption The multi-qudit Hilbert space is obtained by basis encoding: HErls = H1^{⊗l} with orthonormal basis |x> for x in R^l, where R is a finite commutative monoid.
    Introduced in Section 4.2; this standard assumption links classical configurations to quantum states. It is necessary for HEΩ to be a graded Ω monad.
  • ad hoc to paper Calibrations are defined as M-valued functions on the exponent monoid A^X (Def. 3.2.3).
    This is a design choice with no independent justification in this paper; it is selected so that push-forward operations and the monadic multiplication are compatible. The construction of the state map in Part II is the only prospective validation.
invented entities (1)
  • Calibration (ρ_X : A^X → M)
    purpose: A generalization of hyperedge weights that records how much each exponent function contributes, enabling the future state map to be a monad morphism.
    The calibration is introduced by definition (Def. 3.2.3). No independent empirical or mathematical evidence is provided in this paper; its utility depends on the companion paper's construction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Calibrated hypergraph states: I calibrated hypergraph and multi qudit state monads." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HH66B5T4

@misc{pith2026250118967,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Calibrated hypergraph states: I calibrated hypergraph and multi qudit state monads},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HH66B5T4}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.18967}
}
abstract

Hypergraph states are a special kind of multipartite states encoded by hypergraphs. They play a significant role in quantum error correction, measurement--based quantum computation, quantum non locality and entanglement. In a series of two papers, we introduce and study calibrated hypergraph states, a broad generalization of weighted hypergraph states codified by hypergraphs equipped with calibrations, an ample extension of weightings. We propose as a guiding principle that a constructive theory of hypergraph states must be based on a categorical framework for hypergraphs on one hand and multi qudit states on the other constraining hypergraph states enough to render the determination of their general structure possible. In this first paper, we introduce graded $\varOmega$ monads, concrete Pro categories isomorphic to the Pro category $\varOmega$ of finite von Neumann ordinals and equipped with an associative and unital graded multiplication, and their morphisms, maps of $\varOmega$ monads compatible with their monadic structure. We then show that both calibrated hypergraphs and multi qudit states naturally organize in graded $\varOmega$ monads. In this way, we lay the foundation for the construction of calibrated hypergraph state map as a special morphism of these $\varOmega$ monads in the companion paper.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Implementation and representation of qudit multi-controlled unitaries and hypergraph states by N-body angular momentum couplings

    quant-ph 2025-06 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A representation of qudit multi-controlled unitaries and hypergraph states in terms of N-body angular momentum couplings, with a concrete cross-Kerr optical implementation for qutrits and a new class of angular moment...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

62 extracted references · 38 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Berge, Graphs and hypergraphs, North-Holland Mathematical Library 6 (1973)

    C. Berge, Graphs and hypergraphs, North-Holland Mathematical Library 6 (1973)

    work page 1973

  2. [2]

    Ouvrard, Hypergraphs: an introduction and review , arXiv:2002.05014 [cs.DM]

    X. Ouvrard, Hypergraphs: an introduction and review , arXiv:2002.05014 [cs.DM]

    arXiv 2002

  3. [3]

    Schlingemann, Cluster states, algorithms and graphs , Quant

    D. Schlingemann, Cluster states, algorithms and graphs , Quant. Inf. Comput. 4 (4) (2004), 287 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0305170]

    arXiv 2004

  4. [4]

    M. Hein, J. Eisert and H. J. Briegel. Multi-party entanglement in graph states , Phys. Rev. A 69 (2004), 062311 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0307130]

    arXiv 2004

  5. [5]

    Schlingemann and R

    D. Schlingemann and R. F. Werner, Quantum error-correcting codes associated with graphs, Phys. Rev. A 65 (2001), 012308 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0012111]

    arXiv 2001

  6. [6]

    Error Thresholds for Arbitrary Pauli Noise

    J. Bausch and F. Leditzky, Error thresholds for arbitrary Pauli noise , SIAM J. Comput. 50 (4) (2021), 1410 , [arXiv:1910.00471 [quant-ph]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    Raussendorf and H

    R. Raussendorf and H. J. Briegel, A one-way quantum computer , Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001), 5188

    work page 2001

  8. [8]

    Graph States for Quantum Secret Sharing

    D. Markham and B. C. Sanders, Graph states for quantum secret sharing , Phys. Rev. A 78 (2008), 042309 , [arXiv:0808.1532 [quant-ph]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2008

Show all 62 references
  1. [9]

    Scarani, A

    V. Scarani, A. Acín, E. Schenck and M. Aspelmeyer, Nonlocality of cluster states of qubits, Phys. Rev. A 71 (2005), 042325 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0405119]

    2005 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Gühne, G

    O. Gühne, G. Tóth, P. Hyllus, H. J. Briegel, Bell inequalities for graph states , Phys. Rev. Lett. 95 (2005), 120405 , REFERENCES 92 [arXiv:quant-ph/0410059]

    2005 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Baccari, R

    F. Baccari, R. Augusiak, I. Šupić, J. Tura and A. Acín, Scalable Bell inequalities for qubit graph states and robust self-testing , Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020), 020402 , [arXiv:1812.10428 [quant-ph]]

    2020 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Kruszynska, A

    C. Kruszynska, A. Miyake, H. J. Briegel and W. Dúr Entanglement purification protocols for all graph states , Phys. Rev. A 74 (2006), 052316 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0606090]

    2006 arXiv

  5. [13]

    G. Tóth, O. Gühne, Entanglement detection in the stabilizer formalism , Phys. Rev. A 72 (2008), 022340 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0501020]

    2008 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Jungnitsch, T

    B. Jungnitsch, T. Moroder and O. Gühne, Entanglement witnesses for graph states: general theory and examples , Phys. Rev. A 84 (2011), 032310 , [arXiv:1106.1114 [quant-ph]]

    2011 arXiv

  7. [15]

    M. Hein, W. Dür, J. Eisert, R. Raussendorf, M. Van den Nes t, H.-J. Briegel, Entangle- ment in graph states and its applications , Proc. Internat. School Phys. Enrico Fermi (2008), 115 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0602096]

    2008 arXiv

  8. [16]

    R. Qu, J. Wang, Z.-S. Li and Y.-R. Bao, Encoding hypergraphs into quantum states , Phys. Rev. A 87 (2013), 022311 , [arXiv:1211.3911 [quant-ph]]

    2013 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Rossi, M

    M. Rossi, M. Huber, D. Bruß and C. Macchiavello Quantum hypergraph states , New J. Phys. 15 (2013), 113022 , [arXiv:1211.5554 [quant-ph]]

    2013 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Wagner, H

    T. Wagner, H. Kampermann and D. Bruß, Analysis of quantum error correction with symmetric hypergraph states , J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 51 (2018), 125302 , [arXiv:1711.00295 [quant-ph]]. REFERENCES 93

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Gachechiladze, O

    M. Gachechiladze, O. Gühne, and A. Miyake, Changing the circuit-depth complexity of measurement-based quantum computation with hypergraph st ates, Phys. Rev. A 99 (2019), 052304 , [arXiv:1805.12093 [quant-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Takeuchi, T

    Y. Takeuchi, T. Morimae and M. Hayashi, Quantum computational universality of hy- pergraph states with Pauli-X and Z basis measurements , Sci. Rep. 9 (2019), 13585 , [arXiv:1809.07552 [quant-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Morimae, Y

    T. Morimae, Y. Takeuchi and M. Hayashi, Verification of hypergraph states , Phys. Rev. A 96 (2017), 062321 , [arXiv:1701.05688 [quant-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Zhu and M

    H.-J. Zhu and M. Hayashi, Efficient verification of hypergraph states , Phys. Rev. Applied 12 (2019), 054047 , [arXiv:1806.05565 [quant-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Gachechiladze, C

    M. Gachechiladze, C. Budroni and O. Gühne, Extreme violation of local realism in quan- tum hypergraph states , Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016), 070401 , [arXiv:1507.03570 [quant-ph]]

    2016 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Gühne, M

    O. Gühne, M. Cuquet, F. E. S. Steinhoff, T. Moroder, M. Ros si, D. Bruß, B. Kraus and C. Macchiavello, Entanglement and nonclassical properties of hypergraph st ates, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 47 (2014), 335303 , [arXiv:1404.6492 [quant-ph]]

    2014 arXiv

  17. [25]

    M. Ghio, D. Malpetti, M. Rossi, D. Bruß and C. Macchiavell o, Multipartite entanglement detection for hypergraph states , J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 51 (2017), 045302 , [arXiv:1703.00429 [quant-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Gachechiladze, Quantum hypergraph states and the theory of multiparticle e ntangle- ment, Ph

    M. Gachechiladze, Quantum hypergraph states and the theory of multiparticle e ntangle- ment, Ph. D. Thesis, University of Siegen University of Siegen Thesis Archive (2019)

    2019

  19. [27]

    Ashikhmin and E

    A. Ashikhmin and E. Knill, Nonbinary quantum stabilizer codes , REFERENCES 94 IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 47 (7) (2001), 3065 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0005008]

    2001 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Gheorghiu, Standard form of qudit stabilizer groups , Phys

    V. Gheorghiu, Standard form of qudit stabilizer groups , Phys. Lett. A 378 (2014), 505 , [arXiv:1101.1519 [quant-ph]]

    2014 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Y. Wang, Z. Hu, B. C. Sanders and S. Kais, Qudits and high-dimensional quantum computing, Front. Phys. 8 (2020), 589504 , [arXiv:2008.00959 [quant-ph]]

    2020 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Helwig, Absolutely maximally entangled qudit graph states , arXiv:1306.2879 [quant-ph]

    W. Helwig, Absolutely maximally entangled qudit graph states , arXiv:1306.2879 [quant-ph]

    arXiv

  23. [31]

    A. Keet, B. Fortescue, D. Markham and B. C. Sanders, Quantum secret sharing with qudit graph states , Phys. Rev. A 82 (2010), 062315 , [arXiv:1004.4619 [quant-ph]]

    2010 arXiv

  24. [32]

    F. E. S. Steinhoff, C. Ritz, N. Miklin and O. Gühne, Qudit hypergraph states , Phys. Rev. A 95 (2017), 052340 , [arXiv:1612.06418 [quant-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Xiong, Y.-Z

    F.-L. Xiong, Y.-Z. Zhen, W.-F. Cao, K. Chen and Z.-B. Chen , Qudit hypergraph states and their properties , Phys. Rev. A 97 (2018), 012323 , [arXiv:1701.07733 [quant-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  26. [34]

    S. Y. Looi, L. Yu, V. Gheorghiu and R. B. Griffiths, Quantum error correcting codes using qudit graph states , Phys. Rev. A 78 (2008), 042303 , [arXiv:0712.1979 [quant-ph]]

    2008 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Gottesman, Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction , Ph

    D. Gottesman, Stabilizer codes and quantum error correction , Ph. D. thesis, California Institute of Technology, arXiv:quant-ph/9705052

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    H. J. García, I. L. Markov and A. W. Cross, On the geometry of stabilizer states , REFERENCES 95 Quantum Inf. Comput. 14 no. 7-8 (2014), 683 , [arXiv:1711.07848 [quant-ph]]

    2014 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Kruszynska and B

    C. Kruszynska and B. Kraus, Local entanglability and multipartite entanglement , Phys. Rev. A [ 79 (2009), 052304 , [arXiv:0808.3862 [quant-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Van den Nest, J

    M. Van den Nest, J. Dehaene and B. De Moor, Graphical description of the action of local Clifford transformations on graph states , Phys. Rev. A 69 (2004), 022316 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0308151]

    2004 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Van den Nest, J

    M. Van den Nest, J. Dehaene and B. De Moor, An efficient algorithm to recognize local Clifford equivalence of graph states , Phys. Rev. A 70 (2004), 034302 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0405023]

    2004 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Van den Nest, J

    M. Van den Nest, J. Dehaene and B. De Moor, Local unitary versus local Clifford equiv- alence of stabilizer states , Phys. Rev. A 71 (2005), 062323 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0411115]

    2005 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Bravyi, D

    S. Bravyi, D. Fattal and D. Gottesman, GHZ extraction yield for multipartite stabilizer states, J. Math. Phys. 47 (2006), 062106 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0504208]

    2006 arXiv

  34. [42]

    D. W. Lyons, D. J. Upchurch, S. N. Walck and C D. Yetter, Local unitary symmetries of hypergraph states , J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 48 (2015), 095301 , [arXiv:1410.3904 [quant-ph]]

    2015 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Hostens, J

    E. Hostens, J. Dehaene and B. De Moor, Stabilizer states and Clifford operations for systems of arbitrary dimensions, and modular arithmetic , Phys. Rev. A 71 (2005), 042315 , [arXiv:quant-ph/0408190]

    2005 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Bahramgiri and S

    M. Bahramgiri and S. Beigi, Graph states under the action of local Clifford group in REFERENCES 96 non-binary case, arXiv:quant-ph/0610267

    arXiv

  37. [45]

    Ionicioiu and T

    R. Ionicioiu and T. P. Spiller, Encoding graphs into quantum states: an axiomatic ap- proach, Phys. Rev. A 85 (2012), 062313 , [arXiv:1110.5681 [quant-ph]]

    2012 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Mac Lane, Categories for the working mathematician , Grad

    S. Mac Lane, Categories for the working mathematician , Grad. Texts in Math. 5, Springer (1978)

    1978

  39. [47]

    Fong and D

    B. Fong and D. I. Spivak, An Invitation to applied category theory , Cambridge University Press (2019)

    2019

  40. [48]

    MacLane Categorical algebra, Bull

    S. MacLane Categorical algebra, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 71 (1965), 40

    1965

  41. [49]

    J. M. Boardman and R. M. Homotopy-everything H-spaces, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 74 (1968), 1117

    1968

  42. [50]

    J. P. May, The geometry of iterated loop space , Lect. Notes Math. 271, Springer (1972)

    1972

  43. [51]

    Markl, S

    M. Markl, S. Shnider and J. Stasheff Operads in algebra, topology and physics , Math. Surveys Monogr. Amer. Math. Soc. 96 (2002)

    2002

  44. [52]

    Melliès, Parametric monads and enriched adjunctions , Preprint available at the author’s homepage (2012)

    P.-A. Melliès, Parametric monads and enriched adjunctions , Preprint available at the author’s homepage (2012)

    2012

  45. [53]

    Katsumata, Parametric effect monads and semantics of effect systems , Proc

    S. Katsumata, Parametric effect monads and semantics of effect systems , Proc. POPL 14, ACM (2014), 633

    2014

  46. [54]

    Melliès, The parametric continuation monad , Math

    P.-A. Melliès, The parametric continuation monad , Math. Struct. in Comp. Science 27 (5) (2017), 651

    2017

  47. [55]

    Fujii, A 2-categorical study of graded and indexed monads , arXiv:1904.08083 [math.CT]

    S. Fujii, A 2-categorical study of graded and indexed monads , arXiv:1904.08083 [math.CT]

    1904 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Wan, Finite fields and Galois rings , World Scientific (2011)

    Z.-X. Wan, Finite fields and Galois rings , World Scientific (2011) . REFERENCES 97

    2011

  49. [57]

    Bini and F

    G. Bini and F. Flamini, Finite commutative rings and their applications , SECS 680, Springer (2002)

    2002

  50. [58]

    M. R. Kibler, Galois fields and Galois rings made easy , Elsevier (2017)

    2017

  51. [59]

    D. I. Spivak, Higher-dimensional models of networks , arXiv:0909.4314 [cs.NI]

    arXiv

  52. [60]

    Gabriel, Unzerlegbare Darstellungen, Manuscripta Math

    P. Gabriel, Unzerlegbare Darstellungen, Manuscripta Math. 6 (1972), 71

    1972

  53. [61]

    Barr and C

    M. Barr and C. Wells, Category theory for computing science , TAC reprints 22 (2012), 1

    2012

  54. [62]

    Kock, Monads on symmetric monoidal closed categories, , Arch

    A. Kock, Monads on symmetric monoidal closed categories, , Arch. Math. 21 (1970), 1

    1970

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.