This series consists of weekly discussion sessions on foundations of quantum Theory and quantum information theory. The sessions start with an informal exposition of an interesting topic, research result or important question in the field. Everyone is strongly encouraged to participate with questions and comments.
We describe a protocol for distilling maximally entangled bipartite states between random pairs of parties (``random entanglement'') from those sharing a tripartite W state, and show that this may be done at a higher rate than distillation of bipartite entanglement between specified pairs of parties (``specified entanglement'').
Quantum mechanics is a non-classical probability calculus -- but hardly the most general one imaginable. In this talk, I'll discuss some familiar non-classical properties of quantum-probabilistic models that turn out to be features of {em all} non-classical models. These include a generic no-cloning theorem obtained in recent work with Howard Barnum, Jon Barrett and Matt Leifer.
Entanglement is one of the most studied features of quantum mechanics and in particular quantum information. Yet its role in quantum information is still not clearly understood. Results such as (R. Josza and N. Linden, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 459, 2011 (2003)) show that entanglement is necessary, but stabilizer states and the Gottesman-Knill theorem (for example) imply that it is far from sufficient. I will discuss three aspects of entanglement.
My field is the foundations of quantum mechanics, in particular Bohmian mechanics, a non-relativistic theory that is empirically equivalent to standard quantum mechanics while solving all of its paradoxes in an elegant and simple way, essentially by assuming that particles have trajectories.
In this talk I will present several new results from joint work with Dmitry Gavinsky, Oded Regev and Ronald de Wolf, relating to the model of one-way communication and the simultaneous model of communication. I will describe several separations between various resources (entanglement versus event coin, quantum communication versus classical communication), showing in particular that quantum communication cannot simulate a public coin and that entanglement can be much more powerful than a public coin, even if communication is quantum.
In order to predict the future state of a quantum system, we generally do not need to know the past state of the entire universe, but only the state of a finite neighborhood of the system. This locality is best expressed as a restriction on how information "flows" between systems. In this talk I will describe some recent work, inspired by quantum cellular automata, about the information strucutre of local quantum dynamics.
In this talk, I will outline a quantum generalization of causal networks that are used to analyze complex probabilistic inference problems involving large numbers of correlated random variables. I will review the framework of classical causal networks and the graph theoretical constructions that are abstracted from them, including entailed conditional independence, d-separation and Markov equivalence.
The modern view of representing a quantum observable as a semispectral measure as opposed to the traditional approach of using only spectral measures has added a great deal to our understanding of the mathematical structures and conceptual foundations of quantum mechanics.
Adiabatic Quantum Computation is not only a possibly more robust alternative to standard quantum computation. Since it considers a continuous-time evolution of the system, it also provides a natural bridge towards studying the dynamics of interacting many-particle quantum systems, quantum phase transitions and other issues in fundamental physics. After a brief review of adiabatic quantum computation, I will show our recent results on the dynamics of entanglement and fidelity for the search and Deutsch algorithms including several variations and optimization.
Clifton, Bub, and Halvorson claim to be able to derive quantum mechanics from information-theoretic axioms. However, their derivation relies on the auxiliary assumption that the relevant probabilities for measurement outcomes can be represented by the observables (self-adjoint operators) and states of a C*-algebra. There are legitimate probability theories that are not so representable --- in particular, the nonlocal boxes of Popescu and Rohrlich.