Quantum-channel capacity of very noisy channels

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 57, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 830-839

  DiVincenzo, David P ^a   Shor, Peter W ^b   Smolin, John A ^a  

^a IBM T J WATSON RESEARCH CENTER   (United States)

^b LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000286896     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.57.830     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. P. W. Shor, Phys. Rev. A 52, 2493 (1995).PLRAAN
2. C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 722 (1996).PRLTAO
3. C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824 (1996).PLRAAN
4. E. Knill and R. Laflamme, Phys. Rev. A 55, 900 (1997).PLRAAN
5. B. Schumacher, Phys. Rev. A 54, 2614 (1996).PLRAAN
6. B. Schumacher and M. A. Nielsen, Phys. Rev. A 54, 2629 (1996).PLRAAN
7. A. R. Calderbank and P. W. Shor, Phys. Rev. A 54, 1098 (1996); PLRAAN
8. A. R. CalderbankP. W. Shorquant-ph/9512032.
9. A. M. Steane, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 452, 2551 (1996); PRLAAZ
10. A. M. Steanequant-ph/9601029.
11. A. M. Steane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 793 (1996).PRLTAO
12. A. Ekert and C. Macchiavello, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2585 (1996).PRLTAO
13. R. Laflamme, C. Miquel, J. P. Paz, and W. H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 198 (1996); PRLTAO
14. R. LaflammeC. MiquelJ. P. PazW. H. Zurekquant-ph/9602019.
15. D. Gottesman, Phys. Rev. A 54, 1862 (1996).PLRAAN
16. A. R. Calderbank, E. M. Rains, P. W. Shor, and N. J. A. Sloane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 405 (1996).PRLTAO
17. P. W. Shor and J. A. Smolin, quant-ph/9604006.
18. A. R. Calderbank, E. M. Rains, P. W. Shor, and N. J. A. Sloane, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory (to be published);
19. A. R. Calderbank, E. M. Rains, P. W. Shor, andN. J. A. Sloanequant-ph/9608006.
20. P. W. Shor and R. Laflamme, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 1600 (1997).PRLTAO
21. C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, and J. A. Smolin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3217 (1997).PRLTAO
22. R. Cleve, Phys. Rev. A 55, 4054 (1997).PLRAAN
23. E. M. Rains, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory (to be published);
24. E. M. Rainsquant-ph/9611001.
25. Quantum hash coding is a protocol for which a vanishingly small fraction of errors are not corrected. The distance (Formula presented) for a typical hash code can be obtained by the following counting procedure: There are (Formula presented) likely error patterns to be assigned to (Formula presented) possible hash strings. It is highly likley that there will be cases where two error patterns are at random assigned to the same hash. A smaller set of error patterns can be assigned uniquely to hashes with a low probability of collision, provided that this number is smaller than (Formula presented) (coming from the usual birthday-paradox reasoning). This fixes the distance between such errors according to (Formula presented). Thus the distance scales as the block size, being approximately (Formula presented).
26. C. E. Shannon, Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27, 379 (1948); BSTJAN
27. Bell Syst. Tech. J.C. E. Shannon27, 623 (1948).
28. H. Barnum, M. A. Nielsen, and B. Schumacher, quant-ph/9702049.
29. Of course, even more exotic codes exist, ones that do not conform to the additive code classification at all. The only nonadditive codes of which we are aware are in 42425. We cannot rule out the possibility that a nonadditive code achieves the best possible capacity for depolarizing channels. Only the code in 25 is directly relevant the depolarizing channel discussed in most of this paper.
30. D. W. Leung, M. A. Nielsen, I. L. Chuang, and Y. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. A 56, 2567 (1997).PLRAAN
31. E. M. Rains, R. H. Hardin, P. W. Shor, and N. J. A. Sloane, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 953 (1997).PRLTAO
32. P. W. Shor, in Proceedings of the Symposium on the Foundations of Computer Science (IEEE Press, Los Alamitos, CA, 1996);
33. P. W. Shorquant-ph/9605011.
34. D. P. DiVincenzo and P. W. Shor, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 3260 (1996).PRLTAO
35. D. Aharonov and M. Ben-Or, quant-ph/9611025.
36. E. Knill and R. Laflamme, quant-ph/9608012;
37. E. Knill, R. Laflamme, and W. H. Zurek, quant-ph/9610011.
38. J. Preskill, quant-ph/9705031.
39. S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. A 55, 1613 (1997).PLRAAN
40. E. M. Rains, quant-ph/9612015.
41. C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crépeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895 (1993).PRLTAO
42. R. Jozsa, J. Mod. Opt. 41, 2315 (1994).JMOPEW
43. A. E. Allahverdyan and D. B. Saakian, quant-ph/9702034.
44. We did not search all possible cat-in-cat codes up to 25 qubits, but the next best code we identified was a (Formula presented) inside a (Formula presented) cat code which had a threshold at (Formula presented). The (Formula presented) inside a (Formula presented) code was much worse, having a threshold at (Formula presented), worse even than the regular hashing result for which (Formula presented) and the threshold is at (Formula presented).
45. D. Bruss, D. P. DiVincenzo, A. Ekert, C. Fuchs, C. Macchiavello, and A. Smolin, quant-ph/9705038.