Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:quant-ph/0502092 · Physical Review A

Mean king’s problem with mutually unbiased bases and orthogonal Latin squares

A. Hayashi, M. Horibe, T. Hashimoto

Published May 31, 2005• 49 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The mean king's problem with maximal mutually unbiased bases (MUB's) in general dimension $d$ is investigated. It is shown that a solution of the problem exists if and only if the maximal number $(d+1)$ of orthogonal Latin squares exists. This implies that there is no solution in $d=6$ or $d=10$ dimensions even if the maximal number of MUB's exists in these dimensions.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.71.052331

Related papers

Solution to the mean king’s problem with mutually unbiased bases for arbitrary levels

Gen Kimura, Hajime Tanaka, Masanao Ozawa

The mean king's problem with mutually unbiased bases is reconsidered for arbitrary $d$-level systems. Hayashi et al. [Phys. Rev. A 71, 052331 (2005)] related the problem to the existence of a maximal set of $d\ensuremath{-}1$ mutually orthogonal Latin squares, in their restricted setting that allows only measurements of projection-valued measures. However, we then cannot find a solution to the problem when, e.g., $d=6$ or $d=10$. In contrast to their result, we show that the king's problem always has a solution for arbitrary levels if we also allow positive operator-valued measures. In constructing the solution, we use orthogonal arrays in combinatorial design theory.

arXiv:quant-ph/0604096•Physical Review A•May 5, 2006•30 citations

Mutually Unbiased Bases and Orthogonal Latin Squares -- version 3

Stefan Joka

In this paper, we prove that the existence of a complete set of mutually unbiased bases (MUBs) in N-dimensional Hilbert space implies the existence of a complete set of mutually orthogonal Latin squares (MOLSs) of order N. In particular, we prove that a complete set of MUBs does not exist in dimension six (the first dimension which is not a power of prime).

quant-pharXiv:2511.03537•Nov 6, 2025•0 citations

On the connection between mutually unbiased bases and orthogonal Latin squares

Tomasz Paterek, M Pawłowski, M Grassl +1 more

We offer a piece of evidence that the problems of finding the number of mutually unbiased bases (MUB) and mutually orthogonal Latin squares (MOLS) might not be equivalent. We study a particular procedure that has been shown to relate the two problems and generates complete sets of MUB in power-of-prime dimensions and three MUB in dimension six. For these cases, every square from an augmented set of MOLS has a corresponding MUB. We show that this no longer holds for certain composite dimensions.

arXiv:0910.1439•Physica Scripta•Sep 1, 2010•19 citations

On the connection between mutually unbiased bases and orthogonal Latin squares

Tomasz Paterek, M Paw Lowski, Markus Grassl +1 more

We offer a piece of evidence that the problems of finding the number of mutually unbiased bases (MUB) and mutually orthogonal Latin squares (MOLS) might not be equivalent. We study a particular procedure that has been shown to relate the two problems and generates complete sets of MUB in power-of-prime dimensions and three MUB in dimension six. For these cases, every square from an augmented set of MOLS has a corresponding MUB. We show that this no longer holds for certain composite dimensions.

•Aug 18, 2016•11 citations

On the Maximal Number of Real Mutually Unbiased Bases

Paweł Wocjan

In this note I point out that (1) pairs of real mutually unbiased bases (i.e., orthonormal bases of R^d) can only exist in dimensions 2 or d where d is a multiple of 4 and that (2) triples of real mutually unbiased bases can only exist for dimensions d that are also squares. For the case d=2^{2m} the maximal number of real MUBs is given by (d+2)/2 (this follows from known results on extremal euclidean line-sets). In the case d=s^2 where s is an even number that is not a power of 2, we have the lower bound N_MOLS(s)+2, where N_MOLS(s) denotes the maximal number of mutually orthogonal Latin square of order s, provided that there exists a Hadamard matrix of size s. It is not known how good this bound is. Moreover, I observe that the question of deciding if there always two real MUBs is equivalent to the Hadamard conjecture.

•Feb 3, 2005•1 citation

Mutually Unbiased Bases and Orthogonal Latin Squares

Tomasz Paterek, Borivoje Dakić, Časlav Brukner

On first sight, the number of mutually unbiased bases (MUBs) in d dimensions and the number of mutually orthogonal Latin squares (MOLS) of order d seem to be closely related. A careful look however reveals the connections cannot be really strong. In this talk a few similarities and differences between MUBs and MOLS are presented. The first similarity involves their maximal numbers. There are at most d + 1 MUBs and also d + 1 squares in an augmented set of MOLS. This number is attained if d is a power of a prime and we give an algorithm which relates MUBs and MOLS in these dimensions [1]. Another similarity follows from considerations of composite d. One can think about a Hilbert space of a composite dimension as describing several subsystems of prime-power dimensions. Since we can always build MUBs in the global space as tensor products of MUBs for the subspaces, there are at least M + 1 of them for the whole system, where M is the smallest prime-power factor of d. A similar construction exists for MOLS: squares of composite orders can be built as direct products of squares of prime-power orders. The corresponding lower bound on the number of MOLS is called the MacNeish’s bound. In general, both the MacNeish’s bound and the number of MUBs which follows from the tensor product construction are known not to be tight. However, the simplest example today involves dimension d = 676 for MUBs [2], whereas MacNeish’s bound is not tight already for d = 10. We therefore checked whether the connection [1] also works for d = 10, and found it no longer links all MOLS to MUBs [3]. The general results of Ref. [4] reveal in this context that the connection fails whenever MacNeish’s bound is not tight. The last (apparent) similarity to be presented is related to incomplete sets of MOLS and MUBs. There is a Latin square of order 4 which does not have an orthogonal mate (so called bachelor Latin square) and connection [1] links it with a set of MUBs which also cannot be extended. It might be tempting to conjecture that every unextendible augmented set of MOLS has a corresponding unextendible set of MUBs. We already disproved such conjecture for the connection [1] and now we briefly describe that there is no other connection for which the conjecture would hold true. One can see this in at least two ways [5]. The first involves bachelor Latin square of order 5. It was recently shown that bachelor Latin squares exist for all orders d > 3 [6]. If there is a strong relation between MOLS and MUBs, there should correspondingly exist a set of 3 MUBs in all dimensions d > 3. To the contrary, it is known that for d = 5 every set of 3 MUBs can be extended to a complete set of 6 MUBs [7]. The second way is more dramatic. It turns out that for d = 6 there exists a set of two MUBs which cannot be extended any further (and six is the smallest dimension in which this happens). Since an augmented set of MOLS contains at least 3 elements, the strong relation is excluded. For more arguments against a close connection between MOLS and MUBs see Ref. [8].

•Apr 14, 2008•0 citations
The mean king's problem with maximal mutually unbiased bases (MUB's) in general dimension ddd is investigated. It is shown that a solution of the problem exists if and only if the maximal number (d+1)(d+1)(d+1) of orthogonal Latin squares exists. This implies that there is no solution in d=6d=6d=6 or d=10d=10d=10 dimensions even if the maximal number of MUB's exists in these dimensions.
The mean king's problem with mutually unbiased bases is reconsidered for arbitrary ddd-level systems. Hayashi et al. [Phys. Rev. A 71, 052331 (2005)] related the problem to the existence of a maximal set of $d\ensuremath{-}1$ mutually orthogonal Latin squares, in their restricted setting that allows only measurements of projection-valued measures. However, we then cannot find a solution to the problem when, e.g., d=6d=6d=6 or d=10d=10d=10. In contrast to their result, we show that the king's problem always has a solution for arbitrary levels if we also allow positive operator-valued measures. In constructing the solution, we use orthogonal arrays in combinatorial design theory.
In this note I point out that (1) pairs of real mutually unbiased bases (i.e., orthonormal bases of R^d) can only exist in dimensions 2 or d where d is a multiple of 4 and that (2) triples of real mutually unbiased bases can only exist for dimensions d that are also squares. For the case d=2^{2m} the maximal number of real MUBs is given by (d+2)/2 (this follows from known results on extremal euclidean line-sets). In the case d=s^2 where s is an even number that is not a power of 2, we have the lower bound N_MOLS(s)+2, where N_MOLS(s) denotes the maximal number of mutually orthogonal Latin square of order s, provided that there exists a Hadamard matrix of size s. It is not known how good this bound is. Moreover, I observe that the question of deciding if there always two real MUBs is equivalent to the Hadamard conjecture.
On first sight, the number of mutually unbiased bases (MUBs) in d dimensions and the number of mutually orthogonal Latin squares (MOLS) of order d seem to be closely related. A careful look however reveals the connections cannot be really strong. In this talk a few similarities and differences between MUBs and MOLS are presented. The first similarity involves their maximal numbers. There are at most d + 1 MUBs and also d + 1 squares in an augmented set of MOLS. This number is attained if d is a power of a prime and we give an algorithm which relates MUBs and MOLS in these dimensions [1]. Another similarity follows from considerations of composite d. One can think about a Hilbert space of a composite dimension as describing several subsystems of prime-power dimensions. Since we can always build MUBs in the global space as tensor products of MUBs for the subspaces, there are at least M + 1 of them for the whole system, where M is the smallest prime-power factor of d. A similar construction exists for MOLS: squares of composite orders can be built as direct products of squares of prime-power orders. The corresponding lower bound on the number of MOLS is called the MacNeish’s bound. In general, both the MacNeish’s bound and the number of MUBs which follows from the tensor product construction are known not to be tight. However, the simplest example today involves dimension d = 676 for MUBs [2], whereas MacNeish’s bound is not tight already for d = 10. We therefore checked whether the connection [1] also works for d = 10, and found it no longer links all MOLS to MUBs [3]. The general results of Ref. [4] reveal in this context that the connection fails whenever MacNeish’s bound is not tight. The last (apparent) similarity to be presented is related to incomplete sets of MOLS and MUBs. There is a Latin square of order 4 which does not have an orthogonal mate (so called bachelor Latin square) and connection [1] links it with a set of MUBs which also cannot be extended. It might be tempting to conjecture that every unextendible augmented set of MOLS has a corresponding unextendible set of MUBs. We already disproved such conjecture for the connection [1] and now we briefly describe that there is no other connection for which the conjecture would hold true. One can see this in at least two ways [5]. The first involves bachelor Latin square of order 5. It was recently shown that bachelor Latin squares exist for all orders d > 3 [6]. If there is a strong relation between MOLS and MUBs, there should correspondingly exist a set of 3 MUBs in all dimensions d > 3. To the contrary, it is known that for d = 5 every set of 3 MUBs can be extended to a complete set of 6 MUBs [7]. The second way is more dramatic. It turns out that for d = 6 there exists a set of two MUBs which cannot be extended any further (and six is the smallest dimension in which this happens). Since an augmented set of MOLS contains at least 3 elements, the strong relation is excluded. For more arguments against a close connection between MOLS and MUBs see Ref. [8].