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.
Knill–Laflamme Recovery and Subsystem Codes — Examples
1 · Prerequisites
- Algebraic Closure, Embeddings, and Separability
- Algebraic Extensions, Extension Degree, and Finite Fields
- Binary Operations, Monoids, Groups and Subgroups
- Channels, Kraus, Choi, and Stinespring Representations
- Classical and Quantum Error-Correcting Codes
- Composition Series, the Jordan–Hölder Theorem and Solvable Groups
- Congruences, the Integers Modulo n and the Chinese Remainder Theorem
- Construction of the Natural Numbers
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Cauchy Sequences
- Construction of the Real Numbers via Dedekind Cuts
- Continuity, IVT, EVT, and Uniform Continuity
- Cosets, Index and Lagrange's Theorem
- Countability and Uncountability
- Cyclic Groups and Direct Products
- Determinants of Matrices over a Commutative Ring
- Diagonalisation and the Minimal Polynomial
- Divisibility, Euclidean Domains, Principal Ideal Domains and Unique Factorisation
- Divisibility, Greatest Common Divisors and Bézout's Identity
- Dual Spaces, Bilinear and Quadratic Forms, and Sylvester's Law of Inertia
- Eigenvalues, Eigenvectors and the Characteristic Polynomial
- Finite Counting, Factorials and Binomial Coefficients
- Foundations of the Real Numbers for Analysis
- Free Modules, Exact Sequences, Projective and Injective Modules
- Group Actions, Orbits, Stabilisers and Cayley's Theorem
- Group Homomorphisms and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Hilbert Space Geometry and Riesz Representation
- Ideals, Quotient Rings and the Isomorphism Theorems for Rings
- Inner Product Spaces, Gram-Schmidt, Projections and Adjoints
- Knill–Laflamme Recovery and Subsystem Codes
- Limits of Real Functions
- Linear Independence, Bases and Dimension
- Linear Transformations, Rank-Nullity and Quotient Spaces
- Matrices, the Matrix of a Linear Map, and Change of Basis
- Measurements, POVMs, and Instruments
- Modules, Submodules, Quotient Modules and the Isomorphism Theorems
- Monotone Sequences, Bolzano-Weierstrass, and Cauchy Completeness
- Normal Subgroups and Quotient Groups
- Order, Zorn's Lemma, and the Axiom of Choice
- Polynomial Rings, the Division Algorithm and Roots
- Primes, Euclid's Lemma and the Fundamental Theorem of Arithmetic
- Registers, Tensor Products, and Partial Trace
- Relations, Functions, and Quotients
- Rings, Subrings, Integral Domains and Fields
- Roots, Rational Powers, and Classical Inequalities
- Sequences and Limits
- Simple Field Extensions and the Construction of the Complex Numbers
- Splitting Fields
- Suprema and Infima
- Sylow's Theorems, p-Groups and Nilpotent Groups
- Symmetric Groups, Cycle Decomposition and the Sign Homomorphism
- Tensor Products of Modules
- The Determinant of a Linear Operator, Cofactors and Cramer's Rule
- The Fundamental Theorem of Algebra
- The Fundamental Theorem of Finite Abelian Groups
- The Galois Correspondence
- The Spectral Theorem, Positive Operators and Singular Value Decomposition
- The ZFC Axioms and the Basic Set Constructions
- Topology of ℝ
- Triangularisation, Generalised Eigenspaces and Jordan Canonical Form
- Vector Spaces, Linear Subspaces, Span and Direct Sums
2 · Summary
The worked example writes the code and two error ranges as explicit isometries, computes the diagonal Knill–Laflamme matrix, and verifies that the two inverse-decoding branches form a trace-preserving recovery map.
3 · Logical flowchart
4 · Definitions, theorems and proofs
None yet.
5 · Examples, counterexamples and false statements
Orthogonal error spaces and a recovery branch
Example
Let , , with standard basis columns and , define and , as well as and . For , define and . The channel has two orthogonal error restrictions and a diagonal Knill–Laflamme matrix.
Facts & Assumptions
Given: The finite-dimensional encoding and the two displayed error operators in the Example.
Quantum code as an isometric encoding and its code projector supplies the isometric encoding and projector convention.
Finite-dimensional quantum channel, Finite Kraus representation, A finite Kraus sum is completely positive, and Trace preservation is Kraus normalization supply the finite channel, Kraus, complete-positivity, and normalization rules.
An explicit syndrome recovery corrects a Knill–Laflamme error family: orthogonal normalized error restrictions admit a CPTP recovery by projection and inverse decoding.
Verification
Both and are unitary, so . The map is therefore a channel.
By the definitions of and , , , and The normalized error restrictions are and , so their ranges are orthogonal and each syndrome has weight .
Define recovery Kraus operators and . Then , so the recovery is trace-preserving.
The only nonzero corrected error products are and . Hence for every the corrected channel returns . This is the orthogonal-syndrome branch of [F3].