Voting is a game with a no-go theorem. New proofs of Arrow's impossibility theorem are given based on quantum information theory. We show that the Arrowian dictator is equivalent to the perfect cloning circuit. We present \textit{Gedankenexperiment} of voting and Bell-like inequalities of voting. We provide the thermodynamic interpretation of voting with Landauer's principle.
Voting is a game with a no-go theorem. New proofs of Arrow's impossibility theorem are given based on quantum information theory. We show that the Arrowian dictator is equivalent to the perfect cloning circuit. We present \textit{Gedankenexperiment} of voting and Bell-like inequalities of voting. We provide the thermodynamic interpretation of voting with Landauer's principle.
In the realm of algorithmic economics, voting systems are evaluated and compared by examining the properties or axioms they satisfy. While this pursuit has yielded valuable insights, it has also led to seminal impossibility results such as Arrow's and Gibbard-Satterthwaite's Impossibility Theorems, which pose challenges in designing ideal voting systems. Enter the domain of quantum computing: recent advancements have introduced the concept of quantum voting systems, which have many potential applications including in security and blockchain. Building on recent works that bypass Arrow's Impossibility Theorem using quantum voting systems, our research extends Quantum Condorcet Voting (QCV) to counter the Gibbard-Satterthwaite Impossibility Theorem in a quantum setting. To show this, we introduce a quantum-specific notion of truthfulness, extend ideas like incentive compatibility and the purpose of onto to the quantum domain, and introduce new tools to map social welfare functions to social choice functions in this domain.
We study Arrow's Impossibility Theorem in the quantum setting. Our work is based on the work of Bao and Halpern, in which it is proved that the quantum analogue of Arrow's Impossibility Theorem is not valid. However, we feel unsatisfied about the proof presented in Bao and Halpern's work. Moreover, the definition of Quantum Independence of Irrelevant Alternatives (QIIA) in Bao and Halpern's work seems not appropriate to us. We give a better definition of QIIA, which properly captures the idea of the independence of irrelevant alternatives, and a detailed proof of the violation of Arrow's Impossibility Theorem in the quantum setting with the modified definition.
Abstract This chapter discusses the principles of quantum information. The quantum mechanical equivalent of the Shannon noisy-channel communication theorem is obtained, along with some profound statements about the behavior of quantum information during generalised quantum measurements. The latter are very important in studies of quantum entanglement, but also in exploring the connections between thermodynamics, information theory, and quantum physics. This chapter also discusses equalities and inequalities related to entropy, the Holevo bound, capacity of a bosonic channel, information gained through measurements, relative entropy and thermodynamics, entropy increase due to erasure, and Landauer's erasure and data compression.
Quantum voting, inspired by quantum game theory, provides a framework in which the quantum majority rule (QMR) constitution of Bao and Yunger Halpern [Phys. Rev. A 95, 062306 (2017)] violates the quantum analogue of Arrow's impossibility theorem. We evaluate this QMR constitution analytically on classical profile data and implement its final measurement stage as a quantum circuit, running on both noiseless simulators and noisy IBM quantum hardware to map how realistic noise deforms the resulting societal ranking distribution. Moderate-high single-qubit noise does not change the qualitative behavior of QMR, whereas strong noise shifts the distribution toward other dominant winners than the classical one. We quantify this behavior using winner-agreement rates, Condorcet-winner flip rates, and Jensen-Shannon divergence between societal ranking distributions. In a second, exploratory component, we demonstrate an explicitly entanglement-based variant of the QMR constitution that serves as a testbed for multi-voter quantum correlations under noise, which we refer to as the QMR2-inspired variant. There, GHZ-type and separable superpositions over opposite rankings have the same expectation values but respond very differently to noise. Taken together, these two components connect the abstract QMR constitution to concrete implementations on noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices and highlight design considerations for future quantum voting protocols.
Quantum information theory is a wide area of investigation, which includes two main subjects: quantum computation and quantum communication. The success of quantum computation theory is due to a positive result: Shor's algorithm. The algorithm provides factorization of integers in a much more efficient way with respect to what is achieved not only by present-day computers, but even by the most powerful conceivable computers based on classical physics. On the other hand, the success of quantum communication is due to the intrinsic security of ideal quantum cryptographic protocols, and thus relies on a negative result, that is the impossibility of reading quantum information without scrambling it in an unrecoverable way. The no information without disturbance property spawns other no-go theorems, which represent some of the most famous and classic results in quantum information theory. Among these results one can certainly list the no-cloning theorem, stating the impossibility of copying quantum information. This impossibility is clearly a consequence of the impossibility of extracting information without disturbing it. Indeed, if we could copy exactly the state of a system, reproducing it on another system of the same type, then we would also be able to iterate this process, and produce as many copies as we want. We could then extract all the information we are interested in from the copies, keeping the original intact. This argument is so simple, but hides a very deep point about quantum information, and more generally about any type of information that can be purified. Suppose indeed that there exists a measurement allowing us to determine the state of a system, with absolute precision. We could then use such a measurement on the system, and once we know its exact state, we can in principle re-prepare the same state as many times as we want. If copying the state is forbidden within a theory, we must then conclude that, in that theory, measuring the state is forbidden, too! This is exactly the case in theories with purification, and in particular in quantum theory. In quantum theory, determining the state of a system is impossible. We can only have some information about what state our system is prepared in. The information may be accurate, but it will never be certain. This could be practically the case in classical theory, too.