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.
Exact recovery implies the Knill–Laflamme condition
Statement
Let be a finite Kraus representation of a channel from to , and let be an isometry with and . If the code is exactly correctable in the sense of Exact recovery of an encoded quantum code, then there are scalars such that for all .
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The finite-dimensional encoding, Kraus channel, and an exact decoded recovery channel .
Exact recovery of an encoded quantum code: exactness means is the identity channel on .
Finite-dimensional quantum channel and Finite Kraus representation specify the CPTP channel and finite operator-sum conventions.
Kraus and Choi characterizations of complete positivity: every finite-dimensional completely positive map has a finite Kraus representation.
Trace preservation is Kraus normalization: a trace-preserving finite Kraus map satisfies .
Kraus operators in an identity-channel representation are scalar: every operator in a finite Kraus representation of the identity channel is a scalar multiple of the identity.
The adjoint is characterised by and Adjoints satisfy , , , and : adjoints satisfy the pairing identity and reverse compatible compositions.
Proof
By [A3], choose a finite Kraus representation . Composing its Kraus operators with the errors and the encoding gives the Kraus family for . By exactness [A1], this family represents the identity channel.
Apply [F1] to the finite Kraus family in step 1.1. For each there is a scalar with .
Trace preservation of gives by [A4]. Therefore, for every ,
Put . Since , by step 3.1. This is the Knill–Laflamme condition for every pair of errors.
Depends on
- The adjoint $T^*:W\to V$ is characterised by $\langle Tv,w\rangle_W=\langle v,T^*w\rangle_V$
- Real and complex inner product spaces, with the inner product linear in the first argument
- Exact recovery of an encoded quantum code
- Finite Kraus representation
- Finite-dimensional quantum channel
- Quantum code as an isometric encoding and its code projector
- Kraus operators in an identity-channel representation are scalar
- Adjoints satisfy $(S+T)^*=S^*+T^*$, $(\lambda T)^*=\overline\lambda T^*$, $(ST)^*=T^*S^*$, and $T^{**}=T$
- Every linear map between finite-dimensional inner product spaces has a unique adjoint
- Kraus and Choi characterizations of complete positivity
- Trace preservation is Kraus normalization
Used by
Dependency tree · two levels
34 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
- John Preskill, Quantum Information, Chapter 7: Quantum Error Correction (working draft, March 2026) (standard reference, not scraped)
- David W. Kribs, Raymond Laflamme, David Poulin, and Maia Lesosky, Operator Quantum Error Correction (standard reference, not scraped)