Operational contextuality forms a rapidly developing subfield of quantum information theory. However, the characterization of the quantum mechanical entities that fuel the phenomenon has remained unknown with many partial results existing. Here, we present a resolution to this problem by connecting operational contextuality one-to-one with the no-broadcasting theorem. The connection works both on the level of full quantum theory and subtheories thereof. We demonstrate the connection in various relevant cases, showing especially that for quantum states the possibility of demonstrating contextuality is exactly characterized by non-commutativity, and for measurements this is done by a norm-1 property closely related to repeatability. Moreover, we show how techniques from broadcasting can be used to simplify known foundational results in contextuality.
Operational contextuality forms a rapidly developing subfield of quantum information theory. However, the characterization of the quantum mechanical entities that fuel the phenomenon has remained unknown with many partial results existing. Here, we present a resolution to this problem by connecting operational contextuality one-to-one with the no-broadcasting theorem. The connection works both on the level of full quantum theory and subtheories thereof. We demonstrate the connection in various relevant cases, showing especially that for quantum states the possibility of demonstrating contextuality is exactly characterized by non-commutativity, and for measurements this is done by a norm-1 property closely related to repeatability. Moreover, we show how techniques from broadcasting can be used to simplify known foundational results in contextuality.
Operational contextuality forms a rapidly developing subfield of quantum information theory. However, the characterization of the quantum mechanical entities that fuel the phenomenon has remained unknown with many partial results existing. Here, we present a resolution to this problem by connecting operational contextuality one-to-one with the no-broadcasting theorem. The connection works both on the level of full quantum theory and subtheories thereof. We demonstrate the connection in various relevant cases, showing especially that for quantum states the possibility of demonstrating contextuality is exactly characterized by non-commutativity, and for measurements this is done by a norm-1 property closely related to repeatability. Moreover, we show how techniques from broadcasting can be used to simplify known foundational results in contextuality.
Operational contextuality forms a rapidly developing subfield of quantum information theory. However, the characterization of the quantum mechanical entities that fuel the phenomenon has remained unknown with many partial results existing. Here, we present a resolution to this problem by connecting operational contextuality one-to-one with the no-broadcasting theorem. The connection works both on the level of full quantum theory and subtheories thereof. We demonstrate the connection in various relevant cases, showing especially that for quantum states the possibility of demonstrating contextuality is exactly characterized by non-commutativity, and for measurements this is done by a norm-1 property closely related to repeatability. Moreover, we show how techniques from broadcasting can be used to simplify known foundational results in contextuality.
Abstract No-broadcasting theorem is one of the most fundamental results in quantum information theory; it guarantees that the simplest attacks on any quantum protocol, based on eavesdropping and copying of quantum information, are impossible. Due to the fundamental importance of the no-broadcasting theorem, it is essential to understand the exact boundaries of this limitation. We generalize the standard definition of broadcasting by restricting the set of states which we want to broadcast and restricting the sets of measurements which we use to test the broadcasting. We show that in some of the investigated cases broadcasting is equivalent to commutativity, while in other cases commutativity is not necessary.
Contextuality is a fundamental nonclassical property of quantum theory, which has recently been proven to be a key resource for achieving quantum speed-ups in some leading models of quantum computation. However, which of the forms of contextuality, and how much thereof, are required to obtain a speed-up in an arbitrary model of quantum computation remains unclear. In this Letter, we show that the relation between contextuality and a computational advantage is more complicated than previously thought. We achieve this by proving that generalized contextuality is present even within the simplest subset of quantum operations, the so-called single-qubit stabilizer theory, which offers no computational advantage and was previously believed to be completely noncontextual. However, the contextuality of the single-qubit stabilizer theory can be confined to transformations. Therefore, our result also demonstrates that the commonly considered prepare-and-measure scenarios (which ignore transformations) do not fully capture the contextuality of quantum theory.
Since being defined by Kochen and Specker, and separately by Bell, contextuality has been proposed as one of the key phenomena that distinguishing quantum theory from classical theories. However, with the rise of quantum information contextuality's position as the leading definition of the quantum/classical boundary has been called into question. This is due to the fact that a contextual explanation is required by subtheories that offer no exponential quantum computational advantage over classical computation. In this thesis, submitted in requirement for a PhD in physics with quantum information, we shall explore this unwanted contextuality, and show that generalized contextuality is more prevalent than was previously thought. \n \nFirst we will show that the single-qubit stabilizer subtheory, which was previously thought of as a non-contextual subtheory, requires a generalized contextual ontological model, when transformations are included in the operational description. In addition to this we show that the even smaller single-rebit stabilizer subtheory, a strict subtheory of the single-qubit stabilizer subtheory, must also admit a generalized contextual ontological model, again when transformations are included in the operational description. We then show that both these subtheories require negatively represented quasi-probability representations, re-establishing the link between contextuality and negativity for transformations. We also investigate the representation of transformations in generic quasi-probability representations, showing that under a reasonable assumption almost-all unitaries must be negatively represented by a finite quasi-probability representation. \n \nSecond we will investigate the efficiently simulable n-qubit stabilizer subtheory, which exhibits all forms of contextuality and thus represents the main obstacle to identifying contextuality as a resource for quantum computation. To this end we present an attempt at constructing a model based on a frame-switching Wigner function. This leads us to constructing a contextual ψ-epistemic ontological model of the n-qubit stabilizer formalism. We shall see that this model is outcome deterministic, which is one of the core assumptions in the definition of traditional non-contextuality. This model then will lead us to a result that proves that any ontological model of the n-qubit stabilizer formalism requires at least n-1 generators to be encoded in the ontology of the model. As n-1 generators represents almost full knowledge about the stabilizer state, we therefore posit that ψ-onicity, a more controversial notion of non-classicality, is actually the resource for quantum computation.
The presence of contextuality in quantum theory was first highlighted by Bell, Kochen and Specker, who discovered that for quantum systems of three or more dimensions, measurements could not be viewed as deterministically revealing pre-existing properties of the system. More precisely, no model can assign deterministic outcomes to the projectors of a quantum measurement in a way that depends only on the projector and not the context (the full set of projectors) in which it appeared, despite the fact that the Born rule probabilities associated with projectors are independent of the context. A more general, operational definition of contextuality introduced by Spekkens, which we will term 'probabilistic contextuality', drops the assumption of determinism and allows for operations other than measurements to be considered contextual. Even two-dimensional quantum mechanics can be shown to be contextual under this generalised notion. Probabilistic noncontextuality represents the postulate that elements of an operational theory that cannot be distinguished from each other based on the statistics of arbitrarily many repeated experiments (they give rise to the same operational probabilities) are ontologically identical. In this paper, we introduce a framework that enables us to distinguish between different noncontextuality assumptions in terms of the relationships between the ontological representations of objects in the theory given a certain relation between their operational representations. This framework can be used to motivate and define a 'possibilistic' analogue, encapsulating the idea that elements of an operational theory that cannot be unambiguously distinguished operationally can also not be unambiguously distinguished ontologically. We then prove that possibilistic noncontextuality is equivalent to an alternative notion of noncontextuality proposed by Hardy. Finally, we demonstrate that these weaker noncontextuality assumptions are sufficient to prove alternative versions of known 'no-go' theorems that constrain ψ -epistemic models for quantum mechanics.