Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-6-luna)
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.

Data processing for finite quantum mutual information

Statement

Let A,B,A′,B′ be nonzero finite-dimensional complex inner-product spaces, let ρAB be a density operator on A⊗B, and let Φ:A→A′ and Ψ:B→B′ be quantum channels. Then

I(A′:B′)(Φ⊗Ψ)(ρ)≤I(A:B)ρ,

where quantum mutual information is I(X:Y)ω=S(ωX)+S(ωY)−S(ωXY) as in Finite quantum mutual, conditional, and conditional mutual information.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The spaces, state, and channels in the Statement.

[F1]

Finite quantum mutual, conditional, and conditional mutual information: I(X:Y)=S(X)+S(Y)−S(XY) for finite bipartite states.

[F2]

Strong subadditivity of finite-dimensional quantum entropy: for every finite tripartite state ωXYZ, S(XY)+S(YZ)≥S(Y)+S(XYZ).

[F3]

Every finite-dimensional channel has a finite isometric dilation: each finite-dimensional channel has an isometric dilation V with output obtained by tracing its finite environment.

[F5]

Partial traces of a finite bipartite state are states: partial traces of finite-dimensional density operators are density operators.

[F6]

Ordered tensor registers, their inner product, and wire permutations and Finite wire permutations are unitary basis permutations: factors may be reordered by a unitary wire permutation, preserving the state and its entropy.

[F7]

Order, continuity, range, and the product, quotient, and reciprocal laws for the natural logarithm: the natural logarithm product law used in the entropy identities underlying strong subadditivity.

Proof

1.1givenF1F3F4algebrachoose

First apply Φ to A. Choose a Stinespring isometry V:A→A′⊗E from [F3], and form ρ~A′EB:=(V⊗IB)ρAB(V∗⊗IB). This is a state: a spectral decomposition of ρAB in [F4] shows that its nonzero eigenvalues remain the same under the isometric embedding. Its A′E marginal is VρAV∗ and has the same positive eigenvalues as ρA, while its A′EB joint state has the same positive eigenvalues as ρAB. Thus [F1] gives I(A′E:B)ρ~=I(A:B)ρ.

2.1F1F2F3F5F6F7step 1.1algebra

Reorder A′EB to EA′B by the unitary permutation in [F6]. Apply [F2] to the ordered tripartite state ρ~EA′B, with A′=Y, to obtain S(EA′)+S(A′B)≥S(A′)+S(EA′B). Rearranging by [F1] gives I(EA′:B)≥I(A′:B). The entropy identities and their logarithm product law are supplied by [F7]. The A′B marginal is (Φ⊗id⁡B)(ρ) by [F3] and the partial-trace convention; hence applying Φ cannot increase mutual information.

3.1givenF1F2F3F5F6F7step 2.1algebra∎

Repeat step 1.1–2.1 with Ψ acting on the second register, now taking the first register to be A′. This gives I(A′:B′)(Φ⊗Ψ)(ρ)≤I(A′:B)(Φ⊗id⁡B)(ρ). Combine this with step 2.1 to obtain the claimed inequality. The entropy-law prerequisite remains [F7].

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

60 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