PBR Paper, Calculation of Outcome Probabilities

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the PBR proof as presented in their paper on arXiv, specifically focusing on the calculation of measurement outcome probabilities detailed in Appendix A, section A7. Participants express confusion regarding the mathematical transitions and definitions used in the proof.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the equality presented in A7, particularly the definition and origin of the variables z and their role in the calculation.
  • Another participant proposes that the tensor states are treated as vectors in a real n-dimensional space, suggesting that the z's represent orthonormal basis elements in this context.
  • A different participant expresses confusion about a specific transition in the mathematical steps, indicating a potential oversight in the notation used in the paper.
  • A later reply indicates that further research clarified the participant's understanding, particularly regarding the notation used for the inner product.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not appear to reach a consensus, as there are multiple interpretations of the mathematical expressions and definitions presented in the paper. Confusion and differing understandings remain evident.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the clarity of definitions and notation within the paper, particularly concerning the variables z and the inner product notation. These aspects contribute to the ongoing confusion and lack of resolution in understanding the calculations.

msumm21
Messages
247
Reaction score
28
I'm trying to understand the PBR proof as explained in their paper on arXiv (http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.3328). I'm having trouble following the calculation of the probability of measurement outcomes on page 6 (A7). Specifically, going from the first line to the second line of A7, they seem to equate [itex]\langle x_1...x_n|H^{\otimes n}[/itex] with [itex](\Sigma_z (-1)^{x\cdot z}\langle z |)/\sqrt{2^n}[/itex]. I don't understand that equality, probably because I don't understand what the [itex]z[/itex]'s are or where they came from. Doesn't seem to be defined in the paper -- later in the paper it says [itex]z[/itex] is the sum over [itex]i[/itex] of [itex]z_i[/itex], but the [itex]z_i[/itex]'s don't appear to be defined.

If someone could clarify it would be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think I might see what it is now. It looks like they are treating tensor states like [itex]|\psi_{x_1}\rangle \otimes \ldots\otimes |\psi_{x_n}\rangle[/itex] as vectors in [itex]\mathbb{R}^n[/itex] with coordinates [itex](x_1,...,x_n)[/itex] (which works out here despite the fact that the tensor space is really [itex]2^n[/itex] dimensional because all the states of the component systems are either (complex) multiples of |0> or |1>, no combinations thereof). Then the z's are the typical orthonormal basis elements of this n-dimensional space, and similarly the quantum state is "encoded" as an element of this basis denoted x, and the usual n-dimensional dot product is used. The math seems to work out if you assume this.
 
I'm catching up on a huge backlog of papers I've been meaning to read for ages and only reached the PBR paper yesterday. I'm stuck on Appendix A, the stuff labelled A7. Maybe I don't understand how the inner product on the tensor product space works, but I can't see how they got from line 4 to line 5. According to my understanding it looks like a plus and some parentheses have gone missing.
 
Scratch that, I googled a bit and now it makes sense :) It also helped when I bothered to read a few lines lower that they are using |z| for what most people would have written as |z|^2.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 120 ·
5
Replies
120
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K