Causal order as a resource for quantum communication

In theories of communication, it is usually presumed that the involved parties perform actions in a fixed causal order. However, practical and fundamental reasons can induce uncertainties in the causal order. Here we show that a maximal uncertainty in the causal order forbids asymptotic quantum communication, while still enabling the noisy transfer of classical information. Therefore causal order, like shared entanglement, is an additional resource for communication. The result is formulated within an asymptotic setting for processes with no fixed causal order, which sets a basis for a quantum information theory in general quantum causal structures.Comment: 5 pages, 1 figur

Recommender Systems by means of Information Retrieval

In this paper we present a method for reformulating the Recommender Systems problem in an Information Retrieval one. In our tests we have a dataset of users who give ratings for some movies; we hide some values from the dataset, and we try to predict them again using its remaining portion (the so-called "leave-n-out approach"). In order to use an Information Retrieval algorithm, we reformulate this Recommender Systems problem in this way: a user corresponds to a document, a movie corresponds to a term, the active user (whose rating we want to predict) plays the role of the query, and the ratings are used as weigths, in place of the weighting schema of the original IR algorithm. The output is the ranking list of the documents ("users") relevant for the query ("active user"). We use the ratings of these users, weighted according to the rank, to predict the rating of the active user. We carry out the comparison by means of a typical metric, namely the accuracy of the predictions returned by the algorithm, and we compare this to the real ratings from users. In our first tests, we use two different Information Retrieval algorithms: LSPR, a recently proposed model based on Discrete Fourier Transform, and a simple vector space model

Causation does not explain contextuality

Realist interpretations of quantum mechanics presuppose the existence of elements of reality that are independent of the actions used to reveal them. Such a view is challenged by several no-go theorems that show quantum correlations cannot be explained by non-contextual ontological models, where physical properties are assumed to exist prior to and independently of the act of measurement. However, all such contextuality proofs assume a traditional notion of causal structure, where causal influence flows from past to future according to ordinary dynamical laws. This leaves open the question of whether the apparent contextuality of quantum mechanics is simply the signature of some exotic causal structure, where the future might affect the past or distant systems might get correlated due to non-local constraints. Here we show that quantum predictions require a deeper form of contextuality: even allowing for arbitrary causal structure, no model can explain quantum correlations from non-contextual ontological properties of the world, be they initial states, dynamical laws, or global constraints.Comment: 18+8 pages, 3 figure

A quantum causal discovery algorithm

Finding a causal model for a set of classical variables is now a well-established task---but what about the quantum equivalent? Even the notion of a quantum causal model is controversial. Here, we present a causal discovery algorithm for quantum systems. The input to the algorithm is a process matrix describing correlations between quantum events. Its output consists of different levels of information about the underlying causal model. Our algorithm determines whether the process is causally ordered by grouping the events into causally-ordered non-signaling sets. It detects if all relevant common causes are included in the process, which we label Markovian, or alternatively if some causal relations are mediated through some external memory. For a Markovian process, it outputs a causal model, namely the causal relations and the corresponding mechanisms, represented as quantum states and channels. Our algorithm provides a first step towards more general methods for quantum causal discovery.Comment: 11 pages, 10 figures, revised to match published versio

Renormalized entropy of entanglement in relativistic field theory

Entanglement is defined between subsystems of a quantum system, and at fixed time two regions of space can be viewed as two subsystems of a relativistic quantum field. The entropy of entanglement between such subsystems is ill-defined unless an ultraviolet cutoff is introduced, but it still diverges in the continuum limit. This behaviour is generic for arbitrary finite-energy states, hence a conceptual tension with the finite entanglement entropy typical of nonrelativistic quantum systems. We introduce a novel approach to explain the transition from infinite to finite entanglement, based on coarse graining the spatial resolution of the detectors measuring the field state. We show that states with a finite number of particles become localized, allowing an identification between a region of space and the nonrelativistic degrees of freedom of the particles therein contained, and that the renormalized entropy of finite-energy states reduces to the entanglement entropy of nonrelativistic quantum mechanics.Comment: 5 pages, 1 figur

Updating the Born rule

Despite the tremendous empirical success of quantum theory there is still widespread disagreement about what it can tell us about the nature of the world. A central question is whether the theory is about our knowledge of reality, or a direct statement about reality itself. Regardless of their stance on this question, current interpretations of quantum theory regard the Born rule as fundamental and add an independent state-update (or "collapse") rule to describe how quantum states change upon measurement. In this paper we present an alternative perspective and derive a probability rule that subsumes both the Born rule and the collapse rule. We show that this more fundamental probability rule can provide a rigorous foundation for informational, or "knowledge-based", interpretations of quantum theory.Comment: 6+2 pages; 3 figure