How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Recursive Bad-Rectangle Probability
Statement
Let and be integers and let . For each integer , suppose every level- rectangle has at most level- children, the family has full depth (every root-to-leaf path has exactly child edges), the leaves are single elementary locations, and sibling elementary-location sets are pairwise disjoint. A level-zero rectangle is bad exactly when its location faults, and a parent is bad only if at least children are bad. Put , the number of -subsets of an -element set, and define and . Under independent local faults of rate , is a uniform upper bound for the probability that a level- rectangle is bad. Moreover, and . If , then super-exponentially in . No independence of child badness is inferred without the disjoint-location hypothesis.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: A finite independent local fault model, a full-depth rooted hierarchy with one elementary location per leaf and pairwise disjoint sibling location sets, and a parent bad only when at least of at most children are bad. Prove the recurrence and closed form.
Independent Local Quantum Fault Model: Elementary fault indicators are mutually independent and each has probability .
Good and Bad Concatenated Rectangles: A parent has at most disjoint child rectangles and is bad only if at least children are bad.
Disjoint Fault-Location Events Are Independent: Events determined by disjoint child location sets are independent.
Proof
Define a dominating event for each rectangle : at a leaf it is the event that its location faults, and at a parent it is the event that at least children satisfy their events . By finite induction, actual badness implies , using the stated one-sided badness rule. Each depends only on the fault indicators in . At level zero its probability is by [F1]. For a level- parent, is the union over the at most child subsets of the events that all their occur.
Suppose every level- event has probability at most . For each fixed , these events depend on pairwise disjoint location sets, so they are independent by [F3], and their intersection has probability at most . The indicator of a finite union is at most the sum of its event indicators. Summing probabilities over the at most choices of , and also using that a probability is at most one, gives . Induction from step 1.1 proves that bounds every and hence every actual bad probability at its level. Its defining recursion also gives .
Set . The asserted closed form holds at , since . If it holds at , then , because . Induction proves the formula for every .
The condition is equivalent to . For and , the exponent tends to infinity, so the closed-form upper bound tends to zero.
Depends on
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
8 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- D. Aharonov and M. Ben-Or, Fault-Tolerant Quantum Computation With Constant Error (standard reference, not scraped)
- John Preskill, Quantum Computation, Chapter 7: Quantum Error Correction (standard reference, not scraped)