Quantum Information Decoupling Beyond Finite Dimensions

Hayata Yamasaki

Quantum Information Decoupling Beyond Finite Dimensions

T0 review · 0 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-01 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Quantum information decoupling and state merging are established for arbitrary separable, possibly infinite-dimensional systems, with finite entropy replacing finite dimensionality as the operative condition.

desk verdict A serious, largely convincing extension of decoupling and state merging to separable infinite-dimensional systems under a finite-entropy condition; the long proof chain is coherent and the flagged gaps are real but honestly acknowledged. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.26123 v1 pith:COH6UK5K submitted 2026-07-28 quant-ph

Hayata Yamasaki This is my paper · ORCID

classification quant-ph MSC 81P4581P6894A17 PACS 03.67.-a

keywords quantumdecouplinginfinite-dimensionalsystemsseparableHilbertspacesfiniteentropystatemergingsandwichedRényiconditionalmutualinformationfinite-rankprojections

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 aims to remove finite-dimensional assumptions from quantum decoupling, a core primitive underlying communication, error correction, and information recovery. It shows that Haar-random-unitary decoupling can be made to work on infinite-dimensional systems by first projecting the many-copy input onto a finite-dimensional subspace with near-unit success probability, and by routing all auxiliary components into the discarded system at negligible cost. Under the assumption that the manipulated system has finite quantum entropy, the resulting protocol achieves the same optimal first-order rates as in finite dimensions: the projected-input dimension grows like exp(n H(A)) and the discarded dimension like exp(n I(A:R)/2). As an application, it constructs an infinite-dimensional quantum-state-merging protocol that recovers the finite-dimensional rates for quantum communication and total cost. If correct, this identifies finite entropy, not finite dimensionality, as the condition that makes these operational interpretations universal.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing construction is the high-probability finite-rank projection on n-copy IID states. Fixing a block length, the paper cuts each block to a finite-dimensional 'common' eigenspace, then, instead of requiring every block to pass, retains all weakly typical common–rare patterns: about the right fraction of blocks is common and the rare blocks are themselves compressed by weak typicality into a finite-rank subspace. A fixed number of common blocks is extracted from every pattern, producing one common, pattern-independent finite-dimensional subsystem on which the same Haar-random unitary can act; all remaining blocks, rare components, and residual copies are placed in the discarded s

What would settle it

Try to construct a sequence of finite-rank projections Π_n on (ρ^A)^⊗n for a state with H(A)_ρ < ∞ such that δ_{Π_n} → 0 but liminf (1/n) log rank Π_n is strictly less than H(A)_ρ. The converse bound Proposition 18 forbids this; exhibiting such a sequence would disprove the claimed optimality of the projected-input dimension rate.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is a construction that lifts Haar-random-unitary decoupling to infinite-dimensional input systems despite the absence of a normalized Haar measure on the infinite unitary group. The paper builds, for every copy number n, a finite-rank projection on the n-copy input space whose success probability tends to one, isolating a finite-dimensional common subsystem on which the same random unitary acts while absorbing all other components into the discarded system. For states with H(A)_ρ < ∞, this yields an infinite-dimensional IID partial-trace decoupling protocol with projected-input dimension rate H(A)_ρ and discarded-system dimension rate 1/2 I(A:R)_ρ, and matching converse

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the manipulated system has finite von Neumann entropy, H(A)_ρ < ∞; the paper does not claim its rates hold without this condition.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Infinite-dimensional continuous-variable systems, such as bosonic modes, can be decoupled at the same first-order rates as finite-dimensional systems, provided the manipulated system has finite entropy.
Infinite-dimensional IID quantum state merging, a mother protocol for distributed quantum information processing, achieves the same communication and total-cost rates as in finite dimensions: q = I(A:R)/2 and q−e = H(A|B).
The one-shot relative-entropy decoupling bounds hold when the reference and output systems are arbitrary separable, possibly infinite-dimensional, not only when they are finite-dimensional.
For partial-trace decoupling with a finite-dimensional reference, the achievable asymptotic error exponent is optimal up to the critical rate identified in the paper.
The converse bounds imply that no protocol within the stated formulation can beat the rates H(A)_ρ and I(A:R)_ρ/2, so the achievability result is tight at first order.

Reading between the lines

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

The same high-probability projection technique may plausibly extend other finite-dimensional quantum information protocols to continuous-variable settings, with finite energy or finite entropy replacing dimension assumptions.
If mother-protocol resource reductions generalize, the state-merging result could yield infinite-dimensional versions of channel coding, channel simulation, and entanglement-assisted communication at the same first-order rates.
A practical test would be to implement the spectral-cutoff construction on a two-mode squeezed or displaced thermal state and check numerically that the dimension exponents approach H(A) and I(A:R)/2 as the copy number grows.
The repair of the operator-concavity step suggests that any finite-dimensional decoupling derivation relying on that step should be reexamined, although the repaired bound differs only by an asymptotically negligible factor in the IID regime.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

You should know two things. First, this paper does what it claims: it takes one-shot relative-entropy decoupling beyond finite-dimensional references/outputs, and then pushes IID partial-trace decoupling and fully quantum state merging to separable infinite-dimensional inputs under only H(A) < ∞, recovering the known optimal rates. Second, I read through the central construction looking for a load-bearing flaw and did not find one. The common–rare pattern projection is intricate but internally consistent: fixed common blocks give the finite-dimensional Haar-randomization subsystem, rare blocks are weakly typical projected, residual copies are subexponential, and the n → ∞ then m → ∞ order is handled correctly. I agree with the reader's ACCEPT verdict at moderate confidence.

What is genuinely new: the one-shot bound (Theorem 10/Corollary 12) for infinite-dimensional R and E, the IID achievability and converse (Theorems 17 and 19), and the state-merging protocol (Theorem 20) with q = (1/2)I(A:R) and q − e = H(A|B). The paper also earns credit for Remark 7, which points to a concrete error in Ref. [19]'s operator-concavity step and supplies a corrected argument via regularized logarithms and Jensen's trace inequality. The added C_|A| factor is shown to be O(1) after tensor powers, so the asymptotic exponent is unaffected.

Soft spots, in proportion: the proof chain is long and depends on external operator-theoretic lemmas, with no machine-checked verification, so residual risk is real though not alarming. The finite-entropy assumption H(A) < ∞ at Eq. (369) is the operative restriction; it is clearly stated, physically motivated as an energy constraint, and never hidden. Missing converses for the error exponent and for state-merging cost are explicitly flagged in Remarks 13 and 21, and Remark 21's discussion of the ∞−∞ obstruction in converse arguments is honest and technically sensible. The equality-case handling in Theorem 17 (when (1/2)I(A:R) = H(A)) is a bit terse but valid. Self-citation appears only where the cited result is part of the same research program, not as padding.

Who this is for: anyone working on continuous-variable or infinite-dimensional quantum information theory, decoupling-based coding theorems, or operational interpretations of entropic quantities. It deserves a serious referee. I would send it to peer review rather than desk reject, and I would cite it in my own work on infinite-dimensional entanglement and decoupling.

Referee Report

0 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper develops a decoupling framework for separable, possibly infinite-dimensional quantum systems. For finite-dimensional input A and arbitrary separable reference/output systems R,E, it proves one-shot relative-entropy decoupling bounds (Theorem 10, Corollary 12) in terms of sandwiched Rényi conditional entropies. For infinite-dimensional IID inputs, it assumes only H(A)_ρ < ∞ and constructs finite-rank projections whose success probability tends to one while restricting Haar-randomization to a finite-dimensional subsystem. This yields achievable IID partial-trace decoupling rates lim (1/n)log|A^n_Π| = H(A)_ρ and lim (1/n)log|M_n| = (1/2)I(A:R)_ρ (Theorem 17), with matching converse bounds for arbitrary projections and unitaries (Theorem 19). The paper then constructs an infinite-dimensional IID quantum state merging protocol with rates q = (1/2)I(A:R)_ψ and q−e = H(A|B)_ψ (Theorem 20). Missing converses for the infinite-dimensional error exponent and for state-merging cost are explicitly disclosed in Remarks 13 and 21.

Significance. If correct, this is a substantial advance: it replaces finite-dimensionality with the finite-entropy condition on the manipulated system as the operative hypothesis, and it extends decoupling and the fully quantum Slepian–Wolf protocol to arbitrary separable systems without imposing restrictions on the reference system. The proof chain is long and technically detailed, but it is also unusually explicit about its assumptions: the key finite-entropy condition is stated at Eq. (369), and the main limitations are flagged in Remarks 13 and 21 rather than hidden. The paper also identifies and repairs a genuine error in the prior one-shot decoupling analysis (Remark 7) and supplies a corrected Jensen-operator-inequality argument. The rate converse in Theorem 19 is stronger than strictly needed, since it does not assume the projections commute with the input marginal. The absence of a matching state-merging converse under only H(A)<∞ is acknowledged as an open problem, so the stated claims are appropriately scoped.

minor comments (3)

[§IV.D, after Eq. (810)] The phrase 'in Theorem 15, we will control this contribution' reads as though Theorem 15 has not yet been proved; since Theorem 15 appears earlier, it should be 'Theorem 15 controls this contribution via Eqs. (657)–(658)' or similar.
[§I.B / Remark 13] The expression 'optimal up to the known critical rate' is used in the abstract and again in Corollary 12/Remark 13. Since the critical rate is defined only through a comparison with Ref. [19], it would help the self-contained reader to state the threshold explicitly or to give the precise equation in Ref. [19] where it is defined.
[§III.C, Remark 7] The counterexample to Eq. (273) depends on the generalized-logarithm convention log 0 = 0. This convention is stated earlier, but it would be useful to repeat it in the remark so the contradiction is immediately transparent to a reader skimming the discussion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the rate claims are established by a standard achievability/converse structure, and the paper's assumptions and open limitations are explicit.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks. The central claims are not produced by fitting: the finite-rank projections and dimension choices in Proposition 14 are protocol design parameters, while Theorem 17 shows that these choices achieve vanishing decoupling error, and Theorem 19 independently proves matching lower bounds for any valid protocol without assuming that the projections commute with the input. The appearance of H(A)_ρ and I(A:R)_ρ both in the construction and in the target rates is the normal structure of an entropic coding theorem, not a circular reduction, because the entropies are not fitted constants and the converse is not derived from the achievability construction. The one-shot bound Theorem 10 rests on external trace inequalities and a repaired Jensen argument, and Remark 7 explicitly identifies rather than silently inherits the issue in Ref. [19]. The finite-entropy condition H(A)_ρ < ∞ is an explicit input assumption, not a derived conclusion. Missing converses are openly acknowledged in Remarks 13 and 21, which strengthens rather than weakens the non-circularity assessment. Self-citations appear only in background and outlook passages and are not load-bearing. No step reduces to its own inputs by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new physical entities are postulated. All free parameters are proof-theoretic choices—target rates, typicality widths, diagonal-sequence slack, and Rényi order—rather than fits to data. The axioms are standard operator-theoretic background or the explicit finite-entropy domain assumption.

free parameters (5)

q = q ∈ [0, H(A)_ρ], later q_j = 1/2 I(A:R)_ρ + 4ε_j
Target discarded-system rate chosen by the protocol designer in Proposition 14; not fitted to data but load-bearing for the final rate.
η_m, ξ_m = positive typicality widths, sent to 0 as m → ∞
Hand-chosen widths for common–rare pattern typicality and rare-block typicality in Theorem 15; they must vanish in the double limit.
ε_j = positive sequence with ε_j → 0 and 4ε_j < H(A)_ρ − 1/2 I(A:R)_ρ
Diagonal-sequence slack in Theorem 17, introduced ad hoc to force the relevant Rényi exponents positive.
s = s ∈ (0,1], optimized via infimum in Theorem 10
Rényi order parameter in the one-shot decoupling bound; the theorem optimizes over it. Not fitted to data.
block lengths m_j = strictly increasing integers chosen in the diagonal argument
The double limit m → ∞ then n → ∞ is taken along m_j; the rates depend on this ordering.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption All Hilbert spaces are complex and separable.
Used throughout Section II.A; excludes nonseparable settings such as some QFT Hilbert spaces.
standard math Standard operator inequalities: Jensen's operator inequality, operator monotonicity of log, data processing, concavity of entropy.
Invoked in Propositions 6, 9, 10, and Theorem 19.
standard math Finite-dimensional optimal trace inequality and its infinite-dimensional extension for Ξ from Refs. [78,79].
Proposition 4 relies on these externally proved bounds, including finite-rank approximation lemmas.
standard math Sandwiched Rényi relative entropy domain conditions and order-one limits from Refs. [103,104,107].
Used to define eH_{1+s} and to prove Lemma 3 relating Rényi conditional entropy to conditional entropy as s ↓ 0.
standard math Finite entropy is equivalent to existence of a Hamiltonian satisfying the Gibbs hypothesis, per Ref. [96].
Used to interpret H(A)_ρ < ∞ as an energy constraint; not proven in this paper.
standard math Purification and Uhlmann's theorem on separable Hilbert spaces.
Used in Section V to construct Bob's decoding operation from approximate decoupling.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum Information Decoupling Beyond Finite Dimensions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/COH6UK5K

@misc{pith2026260726123,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum Information Decoupling Beyond Finite Dimensions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/COH6UK5K}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.26123}
}

read the original abstract

Quantum information decoupling is a pillar of quantum information theory, underlying quantum communication, error correction, and information recovery. However, its existing formulations rely on random unitary operations tied to finite-dimensional assumptions on quantum systems. Here we establish a decoupling framework for arbitrary separable, possibly infinite-dimensional systems. For finite-dimensional inputs and arbitrary separable reference/output systems, we derive error bounds on one-shot decoupling for completely positive maps in terms of sandwiched R\'enyi conditional entropies. For partial-trace decoupling with finite-dimensional references, the error exponent is optimal up to the known critical rate. To handle infinite-dimensional inputs, we assume finite entropy of the manipulated system. We construct finite-rank projections on independent and identically distributed (IID) states to restrict randomization to a projected finite-dimensional subspace, while ensuring high success probability by including auxiliary components in the discarded subsystem at asymptotically negligible cost. This leads to an infinite-dimensional IID partial-trace decoupling protocol achieving optimal asymptotic dimension rates. As an application, we construct an infinite-dimensional quantum-state-merging protocol, a mother protocol of quantum information theory. Under finite entropy of Alice's marginal, it achieves the same quantum-communication and total-cost rates as in finite dimensions, governed by mutual information and conditional entropy. These results show that the operational interpretation of entropic quantities through these achievable rates constitutes a universal principle beyond finite dimensions. More broadly, our framework provides foundational tools for exploring quantum information regardless of whether we model the physical world using finite- or infinite-dimensional spaces.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

115 extracted references · 15 linked inside Pith

[19]

Berta, H.-C

M. Berta, H.-C. Cheng, and Y. Yao, Tight any-shot quantum decoupling (2026), arXiv:2602.17430v1 [quant-ph]

arXiv 2026
[1]

M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum computation and quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2010). 106

2010
[2]

M. M. Wilde,Quantum information theory(Cambridge university press, 2013)

2013
[3]

Watrous,The theory of quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2018)

J. Watrous,The theory of quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2018)

2018
[4]

K. Goto, Y. Hamada, K. Kato, T. Mori, Y. Nakata, M. Watanabe, H. Yamasaki, M. Yamazaki, and T. Yoda, Rethinking quantum information in gravity and fields (2026), arXiv:2606.30853 [hep-th]

arXiv 2026
[5]

Horodecki, J

M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, and A. Winter, Partial quantum information, Nature436, 673 (2005)

2005
[6]

Horodecki, J

M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, and A. Winter, Quantum state merging and negative information, Communications in Mathematical Physics269, 107 (2007)

2007
[7]

Abeyesinghe, I

A. Abeyesinghe, I. Devetak, P. Hayden, and A. Winter, The mother of all protocols: Restructuring quantum information’s family tree, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences465, 2537 (2009)

2009

Show all 115 references

[8]

Berta, Single-shot quantum state merging (2009), arXiv:0912.4495 [quant-ph]

M. Berta, Single-shot quantum state merging (2009), arXiv:0912.4495 [quant-ph]

2009 arXiv
[9]

Dupuis, The decoupling approach to quantum information theory (2010), arXiv:1004.1641 [quant-ph]

F. Dupuis, The decoupling approach to quantum information theory (2010), arXiv:1004.1641 [quant-ph]

2010 arXiv
[10]

Dupuis, M

F. Dupuis, M. Berta, J. Wullschleger, and R. Renner, One-shot decoupling, Communications in Mathematical Physics 328, 251 (2014)

2014
[11]

Sharma, Random coding exponents galore via decoupling (2015), arXiv:1504.07075 [quant-ph]

N. Sharma, Random coding exponents galore via decoupling (2015), arXiv:1504.07075 [quant-ph]

2015 arXiv
[12]

M. M. Mojahedian, S. Beigi, A. Gohari, M. H. Yassaee, and M. R. Aref, A correlation measure based on vector-valuedl p -norms, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory65, 7985 (2019)

2019
[13]

Dupuis, Privacy amplification and decoupling without smoothing, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory69, 7784 (2023)

F. Dupuis, Privacy amplification and decoupling without smoothing, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory69, 7784 (2023)

2023
[14]

Wakakuwa and Y

E. Wakakuwa and Y. Nakata, One-shot randomized and nonrandomized partial decoupling, Communications in Mathe- matical Physics386, 589 (2021)

2021
[15]

Colomer and A

P. Colomer and A. Winter, Decoupling by local random unitaries without simultaneous smoothing, and applications to multi-user quantum information tasks, Communications in Mathematical Physics405, 281 (2024)

2024
[16]

Cheng, F

H.-C. Cheng, F. Dupuis, and L. Gao, Joint state-channel decoupling and one-shot quantum coding theorem (2024), arXiv:2409.15149 [quant-ph]

2024 arXiv
[17]

Li and Y

K. Li and Y. Yao, Operational interpretation of the sandwiched R´ enyi divergence of order 1/2 to 1 as strong converse exponents: K. li, y. yao, Communications in Mathematical Physics405, 22 (2024)

2024
[18]

He and S

X. He and S. Sandeep Pradhan, Quantum soft covering with relative entropy criterion, International Journal of Quantum Information (2026)

2026
[20]

Szehr, F

O. Szehr, F. Dupuis, M. Tomamichel, and R. Renner, Decoupling with unitary approximate two-designs, New Journal of Physics15, 053022 (2013)

2013
[21]

Cleve, D

R. Cleve, D. Leung, L. Liu, and C. Wang, Near-linear constructions of exact unitary 2-designs, Quantum Info. Comput. 16, 721–756 (2016)

2016
[22]

Brown and O

W. Brown and O. Fawzi, Decoupling with random quantum circuits, Communications in mathematical physics340, 867 (2015)

2015
[23]

Nakata, C

Y. Nakata, C. Hirche, C. Morgan, and A. Winter, Decoupling with random diagonal unitaries, Quantum1, 18 (2017)

2017
[24]

A. W. Harrow and S. Mehraban, Approximate unitary t-designs by short random quantum circuits using nearest-neighbor and long-range gates, Communications in Mathematical Physics401, 1531 (2023)

2023
[25]

Anshu, V

A. Anshu, V. K. Devabathini, and R. Jain, Quantum communication using coherent rejection sampling, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 120506 (2017)

2017
[26]

Majenz, M

C. Majenz, M. Berta, F. Dupuis, R. Renner, and M. Christandl, Catalytic decoupling of quantum information, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 080503 (2017)

2017
[27]

Anshu and R

A. Anshu and R. Jain, Efficient methods for one-shot quantum communication, npj Quantum Information8, 97 (2022)

2022
[28]

Li and Y

K. Li and Y. Yao, Reliability function of quantum information decoupling via the sandwiched R´ enyi divergence, Commu- nications in Mathematical Physics405, 160 (2024)

2024
[29]

Cheng and L

H.-C. Cheng and L. Gao, Tight one-shot analysis for convex splitting with applications in quantum information theory, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory71, 8573 (2025)

2025
[30]

Gour, Convex split lemma without inequalities (2025), arXiv:2502.06526 [quant-ph]

G. Gour, Convex split lemma without inequalities (2025), arXiv:2502.06526 [quant-ph]

2025 arXiv
[31]

Boileau and J

J.-C. Boileau and J. M. Renes, Optimal state merging without decoupling, inTheory of Quantum Computation, Com- munication, and Cryptography, edited by A. Childs and M. Mosca (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2009) pp. 76–84

2009
[32]

Bjelakovi´ c, H

I. Bjelakovi´ c, H. Boche, and G. Janßen, Universal quantum state merging, Journal of Mathematical Physics54, 032204 (2013)

2013
[33]

Sharma, A strong converse for the quantum state merging protocol (2014), arXiv:1404.5940 [quant-ph]

N. Sharma, A strong converse for the quantum state merging protocol (2014), arXiv:1404.5940 [quant-ph]

2014 arXiv
[34]

Leditzky, M

F. Leditzky, M. M. Wilde, and N. Datta, Strong converse theorems using R´ enyi entropies, Journal of Mathematical Physics57(2016)

2016
[35]

Yamasaki and M

H. Yamasaki and M. Murao, Quantum state merging for arbitrarily small-dimensional systems, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory65, 3950 (2019)

2019
[36]

Yamasaki and M

H. Yamasaki and M. Murao, Spread quantum information in one-shot quantum state merging (2019), arXiv:1903.03619 [quant-ph]

2019 arXiv
[37]

Yamasaki, Entanglement theory in distributed quantum information processing (2019), arXiv:1903.09655 [quant-ph]

H. Yamasaki, Entanglement theory in distributed quantum information processing (2019), arXiv:1903.09655 [quant-ph]

2019 arXiv
[38]

Anshu, M

A. Anshu, M. Berta, R. Jain, and M. Tomamichel, Partially smoothed information measures, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory66, 5022 (2020)

2020
[39]

J. Yeh, J. Wang, and P. Hayden, Alpha-bit state merging (2025), arXiv:2510.07418 [quant-ph]. 107

2025
[40]

Oppenheim and A

J. Oppenheim and A. Winter, Uncommon information (the cost of exchanging a quantum state) (2005), arXiv:quant- ph/0511082 [quant-ph]

2005
[41]

Oppenheim, State redistribution as merging: introducing the coherent relay (2008), arXiv:0805.1065 [quant-ph]

J. Oppenheim, State redistribution as merging: introducing the coherent relay (2008), arXiv:0805.1065 [quant-ph]

2008 arXiv
[42]

Yang and J

D. Yang and J. Eisert, Entanglement combing, Phys. Rev. Lett.103, 220501 (2009)

2009
[43]

Dutil and P

N. Dutil and P. Hayden, One-shot multiparty state merging (2010), arXiv:1011.1974 [quant-ph]

2010 arXiv
[44]

Wakakuwa, A

E. Wakakuwa, A. Soeda, and M. Murao, A coding theorem for bipartite unitaries in distributed quantum computation, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory63, 5372 (2017)

2017
[45]

Wakakuwa, A

E. Wakakuwa, A. Soeda, and M. Murao, Complexity of causal order structure in distributed quantum information pro- cessing: More rounds of classical communication reduce entanglement cost, Phys. Rev. Lett.122, 190502 (2019)

2019
[46]

Anshu, R

A. Anshu, R. Jain, and N. A. Warsi, A generalized quantum Slepian–Wolf, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 64, 1436 (2018)

2018
[47]

Yamasaki and M

H. Yamasaki and M. Murao, Distributed encoding and decoding of quantum information over networks, Advanced Quan- tum Technologies2, 1800066 (2019)

2019
[48]

Y. Lee, R. Takagi, H. Yamasaki, G. Adesso, and S. Lee, State exchange with quantum side information, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 010502 (2019)

2019
[49]

Y. Lee, H. Yamasaki, G. Adesso, and S. Lee, One-shot quantum state exchange, Phys. Rev. A100, 042306 (2019)

2019
[50]

Y. Lee, H. Yamasaki, and S. Lee, Quantum state rotation: Circularly transferring quantum states of multiple users, Phys. Rev. A103, 062613 (2021)

2021
[51]

Y. Lee, J. Bae, H. Yamasaki, and S. Lee, Improved bounds on quantum uncommon information, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical58, 055304 (2025)

2025
[52]

Devetak, A

I. Devetak, A. W. Harrow, and A. Winter, A family of quantum protocols, Phys. Rev. Lett.93, 230504 (2004)

2004
[53]

Devetak, A

I. Devetak, A. W. Harrow, and A. J. Winter, A resource framework for quantum Shannon theory, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory54, 4587 (2008)

2008
[54]

Hayden, M

P. Hayden, M. Horodecki, A. Winter, and J. Yard, A decoupling approach to the quantum capacity, Open Systems & Information Dynamics15, 7 (2008)

2008
[55]

Berta, M

M. Berta, M. Christandl, and R. Renner, The quantum reverse Shannon theorem based on one-shot information theory, Communications in Mathematical Physics306, 579 (2011)

2011
[56]

Datta and M.-H

N. Datta and M.-H. Hsieh, The apex of the family tree of protocols: optimal rates and resource inequalities, New Journal of Physics13, 093042 (2011)

2011
[57]

Dupuis, O

F. Dupuis, O. Szehr, and M. Tomamichel, A decoupling approach to classical data transmission over quantum channels, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory60, 1562 (2014)

2014
[58]

Wakakuwa and Y

E. Wakakuwa and Y. Nakata, One-shot triple-resource trade-off in quantum channel coding, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory69, 2400 (2023)

2023
[59]

Wakakuwa, Y

E. Wakakuwa, Y. Nakata, and M.-H. Hsieh, One-Shot Hybrid State Redistribution, Quantum6, 724 (2022)

2022
[60]

Nakata, E

Y. Nakata, E. Wakakuwa, and H. Yamasaki, One-shot quantum error correction of classical and quantum information, Phys. Rev. A104, 012408 (2021)

2021
[61]

Hayden and J

P. Hayden and J. Preskill, Black holes as mirrors: quantum information in random subsystems, Journal of high energy physics2007, 120 (2007)

2007
[62]

del Rio, A

L. del Rio, A. Hutter, R. Renner, and S. Wehner, Relative thermalization, Phys. Rev. E94, 022104 (2016)

2016
[63]

L. d. Rio, J. ˚Aberg, R. Renner, O. Dahlsten, and V. Vedral, The thermodynamic meaning of negative entropy, Nature 474, 61 (2011)

2011
[64]

O. Hahn, R. Takagi, G. Ferrini, and H. Yamasaki, Classical simulation and quantum resource theory of non-Gaussian optics, Quantum9, 1881 (2025)

2025
[65]

Dias and R

B. Dias and R. K¨ onig, Classical simulation of non-gaussian bosonic circuits, Phys. Rev. A110, 042402 (2024)

2024
[66]

P. S. Turner and R. Blume-Kohout, The curious nonexistence of gaussian 2-designs, Communications in Mathematical Physics326, 755 (2014)

2014
[67]

J. T. Iosue, K. Sharma, M. J. Gullans, and V. V. Albert, Continuous-variable quantum state designs: Theory and applications, Phys. Rev. X14, 011013 (2024)

2024
[68]

Conrad, J

J. Conrad, J. T. Iosue, A. G. Burchards, and V. V. Albert, Continuous-variable designs and design-based shadow tomog- raphy from random lattices, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 060802 (2025)

2025
[69]

P. M. Hayden, M. Horodecki, and B. M. Terhal, The asymptotic entanglement cost of preparing a quantum state, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General34, 6891 (2001)

2001
[70]

C. H. Bennett, H. J. Bernstein, S. Popescu, and B. Schumacher, Concentrating partial entanglement by local operations, Phys. Rev. A53, 2046 (1996)
[71]

C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Mixed-state entanglement and quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. A54, 3824 (1996)

1996
[72]

Yamasaki, K

H. Yamasaki, K. Kuroiwa, P. Hayden, and L. Lami, Entanglement cost for infinite-dimensional physical systems, Com- munications in Mathematical Physics406, 277 (2025)

2025
[73]

Hiai and D

F. Hiai and D. Petz, The proper formula for relative entropy and its asymptotics in quantum probability, Communications in mathematical physics143, 99 (1991)

1991
[74]

Ogawa and H

T. Ogawa and H. Nagaoka, Strong converse and Stein’s lemma in quantum hypothesis testing, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory46, 2428 (2000)

2000
[75]

F. G. Brand˜ ao and M. B. Plenio, A generalization of quantum Stein’s lemma, Communications in mathematical physics 295, 791 (2010). 108

2010
[76]

Hayashi and H

M. Hayashi and H. Yamasaki, The generalized quantum Stein’s lemma and the second law of quantum resource theories, Nature Physics , 1988– (2025)

1988
[77]

Lami, A solution of the generalized quantum Stein’s lemma, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory71, 4454 (2025)

L. Lami, A solution of the generalized quantum Stein’s lemma, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory71, 4454 (2025)

2025
[78]

Gour, Optimal trace inequalities for single-shot quantum information (2026), arXiv:2604.14617 [quant-ph]

G. Gour, Optimal trace inequalities for single-shot quantum information (2026), arXiv:2604.14617 [quant-ph]

2026 arXiv
[79]

Cheng, L

H.-C. Cheng, L. Gao, C. Hirche, H.-W. Huang, and P.-C. Liu, Sharp estimates of quantum covering problems via a novel trace inequality (2025), arXiv:2507.07961 [quant-ph]

2025 arXiv
[80]

Hansen and G

F. Hansen and G. K. Pedersen, Jensen’s operator inequality, Bulletin of the London Mathematical Society35, 553 (2003)

2003
[81]

Uhlmann, The “transition probability’ in the state space of a∗-algebra, Reports on Mathematical Physics9, 273 (1976)

A. Uhlmann, The “transition probability’ in the state space of a∗-algebra, Reports on Mathematical Physics9, 273 (1976)

1976
[82]

C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Cr´ epeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen channels, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 1895 (1993)

1993
[83]

M. Shirokov, Close-to-optimal continuity bound for the von neumann entropy and other quasi-classical applications of the Alicki–Fannes–Winter technique, Letters in Mathematical Physics113, 121 (2023)

2023
[84]

Shirokov, The Alicki–Fannes–Winter technique in the quasi-classical settings: advanced version and its applications, Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics46, 2632 (2025)

M. Shirokov, The Alicki–Fannes–Winter technique in the quasi-classical settings: advanced version and its applications, Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics46, 2632 (2025)

2025
[85]

J. B. Conway,A course in operator theory, Vol. 21 (American Mathematical Society, 2020)

2020
[86]

Umegaki, Conditional expectation in an operator algebra, iv (entropy and information), inKodai Mathematical Seminar Reports, Vol

H. Umegaki, Conditional expectation in an operator algebra, iv (entropy and information), inKodai Mathematical Seminar Reports, Vol. 14 (Department of Mathematics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, 1962) pp. 59–85

1962
[87]

Araki, Relative entropy for states of von neumann algebras, Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences11, 809 (1975)

H. Araki, Relative entropy for states of von neumann algebras, Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences11, 809 (1975)

1975
[88]

Araki, Relative entropy for states of von neumann algebras ii, Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences13, 173 (1977)

H. Araki, Relative entropy for states of von neumann algebras ii, Publications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences13, 173 (1977)

1977
[89]

Jozsa, Fidelity for mixed quantum states, Journal of Modern Optics41, 2315 (1994)

R. Jozsa, Fidelity for mixed quantum states, Journal of Modern Optics41, 2315 (1994)

1994
[90]

A. E. Rastegin, Relative error of state-dependent cloning, Phys. Rev. A66, 042304 (2002)

2002
[91]

Gilchrist, N

A. Gilchrist, N. K. Langford, and M. A. Nielsen, Distance measures to compare real and ideal quantum processes, Phys. Rev. A71, 062310 (2005)

2005
[92]

A. E. Rastegin, Sine distance for quantum states (2006), arXiv:quant-ph/0602112 [quant-ph]

2006 arXiv
[93]

Tomamichel, R

M. Tomamichel, R. Colbeck, and R. Renner, Duality between smooth min- and max-entropies, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory56, 4674 (2010)

2010
[94]

K. M. R. Audenaert, Comparisons between quantum state distinguishability measures, Quantum Info. Comput.14, 31–38 (2014)

2014
[95]

Fuchs and J

C. Fuchs and J. van de Graaf, Cryptographic distinguishability measures for quantum-mechanical states, IEEE Transac- tions on Information Theory45, 1216 (1999)

1999
[96]

M. E. Shirokov, Entropy characteristics of subsets of states. i, Izvestiya: Mathematics70, 1265 (2006)

2006
[97]

A. Winter, Tight uniform continuity bounds for quantum entropies: conditional entropy, relative entropy distance and energy constraints, Communications in Mathematical Physics347, 291 (2016)

2016
[98]

A. A. Kuznetsova, Conditional entropy for infinite-dimensional quantum systems, Theory of Probability & Its Applications 55, 709 (2011)

2011
[99]

A. S. Holevo and M. E. Shirokov, Mutual and coherent information for infinite-dimensional quantum channels, Problems of information transmission46, 201 (2010)

2010
[100]

M¨ uller-Lennert, F

M. M¨ uller-Lennert, F. Dupuis, O. Szehr, S. Fehr, and M. Tomamichel, On quantum R´ enyi entropies: A new generalization and some properties, Journal of Mathematical Physics54(2013)

2013
[101]

M. M. Wilde, A. Winter, and D. Yang, Strong converse for the classical capacity of entanglement-breaking and hadamard channels via a sandwiched R´ enyi relative entropy, Communications in Mathematical Physics331, 593 (2014)

2014
[102]

Jakˇ si´ c, Y

V. Jakˇ si´ c, Y. Ogata, Y. Pautrat, and C.-A. Pillet, Entropic fluctuations in quantum statistical mechanics—an introduction, inQuantum Theory from Small to Large Scales: Lecture Notes of the Les Houches Summer School: Volume 95, August 2010, edited by J. Frohlich, M. Salmhof...

2010
[103]

Berta, V

M. Berta, V. B. Scholz, and M. Tomamichel, R´ enyi divergences as weighted non-commutative vector-valued l p-spaces, inAnnales Henri Poincar´ e, Vol. 19 (Springer, 2018) pp. 1843–1867

2018
[104]

Jenˇ cov´ a, R´ enyi relative entropies and noncommutativelp-spaces, inAnnales Henri Poincar´ e, Vol

A. Jenˇ cov´ a, R´ enyi relative entropies and noncommutativelp-spaces, inAnnales Henri Poincar´ e, Vol. 19 (Springer, 2018) pp. 2513–2542

2018
[105]

Jenˇ cov´ a, R´ enyi relative entropies and noncommutativelp-spaces ii, inAnnales Henri Poincar´ e, Vol

A. Jenˇ cov´ a, R´ enyi relative entropies and noncommutativelp-spaces ii, inAnnales Henri Poincar´ e, Vol. 22 (Springer,
[106]

J. Gu, Z. Yin, and H. Zhang, Interpolation of quasi noncommutativel p-spaces (2019), arXiv:1905.08491 [math.OA]

2019 arXiv
[107]

Mosonyi, The strong converse exponent of discriminating infinite-dimensional quantum states, Communications in Mathematical Physics400, 83 (2023)

M. Mosonyi, The strong converse exponent of discriminating infinite-dimensional quantum states, Communications in Mathematical Physics400, 83 (2023)

2023
[108]

K. M. Audenaert, On the asymmetry of the relative entropy, Journal of Mathematical Physics54(2013)

2013
[109]

Lindblad, Expectations and entropy inequalities for finite quantum systems, Communications in Mathematical Physics 39, 111 (1974)

G. Lindblad, Expectations and entropy inequalities for finite quantum systems, Communications in Mathematical Physics 39, 111 (1974)

1974
[110]

Tao,Analysis II: Fourth Edition, Texts and Readings in Mathematics (Springer Nature Singapore, 2022)

T. Tao,Analysis II: Fourth Edition, Texts and Readings in Mathematics (Springer Nature Singapore, 2022)

2022
[111]

A. A. Mele, Introduction to Haar Measure Tools in Quantum Information: A Beginner’s Tutorial, Quantum8, 1340 (2024). 109

2024
[112]

Hayashi, Optimal sequence of quantum measurements in the sense of Stein’s lemma in quantum hypothesis testing, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General35, 10759 (2002)

M. Hayashi, Optimal sequence of quantum measurements in the sense of Stein’s lemma in quantum hypothesis testing, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General35, 10759 (2002)

2002
[113]

Durrett,Probability: theory and examples, Vol

R. Durrett,Probability: theory and examples, Vol. 49 (Cambridge university press, 2019)

2019
[114]

T. M. Cover and J. A. Thomas,Elements of Information Theory(Wiley-Interscience, 2006)

2006
[115]

Fekete, ¨Uber die verteilung der wurzeln bei gewissen algebraischen gleichungen mit ganzzahligen koeffizienten, Math- ematische Zeitschrift17, 228 (1923)

M. Fekete, ¨Uber die verteilung der wurzeln bei gewissen algebraischen gleichungen mit ganzzahligen koeffizienten, Math- ematische Zeitschrift17, 228 (1923)

1923

Pith tools

Reviewed August 1, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [19]

Berta, H.-C

M. Berta, H.-C. Cheng, and Y. Yao, Tight any-shot quantum decoupling (2026), arXiv:2602.17430v1 [quant-ph]

arXiv 2026

[2] [1]

M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang,Quantum computation and quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2010). 106

2010

[3] [2]

M. M. Wilde,Quantum information theory(Cambridge university press, 2013)

2013

[4] [3]

Watrous,The theory of quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2018)

J. Watrous,The theory of quantum information(Cambridge university press, 2018)

2018

[5] [4]

K. Goto, Y. Hamada, K. Kato, T. Mori, Y. Nakata, M. Watanabe, H. Yamasaki, M. Yamazaki, and T. Yoda, Rethinking quantum information in gravity and fields (2026), arXiv:2606.30853 [hep-th]

arXiv 2026

[6] [5]

Horodecki, J

M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, and A. Winter, Partial quantum information, Nature436, 673 (2005)

2005

[7] [6]

Horodecki, J

M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, and A. Winter, Quantum state merging and negative information, Communications in Mathematical Physics269, 107 (2007)

2007

[8] [7]

Abeyesinghe, I

A. Abeyesinghe, I. Devetak, P. Hayden, and A. Winter, The mother of all protocols: Restructuring quantum information’s family tree, Proceedings of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences465, 2537 (2009)

2009