analiza aiqbench
This research clarifies a critical misconception in modeling biological spin systems by proving that uniform dephasing channels never reach an entanglement-breaking state at any finite rate. The study exposes how numerical cutoffs artificially manufacture thresholds where none physically exist, distinguishing between the decay of coherent information and true loss of quantum resources. By providing closed-form solutions to avoid these computational artifacts, the work refines theoretical frameworks for decoherence in complex biological environments.
Markovian dephasing has no entanglement-breaking threshold, and a fixed tolerance will report one anyway
arXiv:2604.08587v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: When modelling decoherence in a biological spin system it is tempting to seek a critical rate beyond which the channel is entanglement-breaking (EB) and quantum resources are gone. We show that for the two channel families in which such a model would be posed, no critical rate exists. For uniform dephasing at rate $\gamma$ the partial transpose of the Choi state has eigenvalue $-e^{-\gamma}/d$, so the channel is non-PPT -- hence not EB -- at every finite $\gamma$. Adding amplitude damping changes nothing: the qubit map's partial transpose stays negative at all finite rates. What does vanish at a finite rate is the coherent information, exactly where the qubit map turns antidegradable: the root of $c^{2}=p$, $\gamma_{\Ic}=0.668$ at $\kappa=0.1$. Antidegradability survives tensor products, so the single-letter and regularised thresholds coincide: of the three properties usually conflated here, two share one finite boundary and the third has none. Our main object is the numerical mechanism that manufactures a threshold where there is none. A quantity that decays exponentially to zero without reaching it, tested against a fixed absolute cutoff, yields a "threshold" set by the cutoff: the PPT test gives $\gamma=5.49$ at $\epsilon=10^{-10}$ and $6.58$ at $10^{-12}$, sliding by $0.55$ per decade. We reported the first number in three now-retracted preprints. Preparing this paper we made the same error three more times -- most seriously in $\gamma_{\Ic}$ itself, which a bisection against a $10^{-7}$ cutoff placed at $0.62$ -- and we document all four instances, with the closed forms and code that avoid them.
Abstract:When modelling decoherence in a biological spin system it is tempting to seek a critical rate beyond which the channel is entanglement-breaking (EB) and quantum resources are gone. We show that for the two channel families in which such a model would be posed, no critical rate exists. For uniform dephasing at rate $\gamma$ the partial transpose of the Choi state has eigenvalue $-e^{-\gamma}/d$, so the channel is non-PPT -- hence not EB -- at every finite $\gamma$. Adding amplitude damping changes nothing: the qubit map's partial transpose stays negative at all finite rates. What does vanish at a finite rate is the coherent information, exactly where the qubit map turns antidegradable: the root of $c^{2}=p$, $\gamma_{\Ic}=0.668$ at $\kappa=0.1$. Antidegradability survives tensor products, so the single-letter and regularised thresholds coincide: of the three properties usually conflated here, two share one finite boundary and the third has none. Our main object is the numerical mechanism that manufactures a threshold where there is none. A quantity that decays exponentially to zero without reaching it, tested against a fixed absolute cutoff, yields a "threshold" set by the cutoff: the PPT test gives $\gamma=5.49$ at $\epsilon=10^{-10}$ and $6.58$ at $10^{-12}$, sliding by $0.55$ per decade. We reported the first number in three now-retracted preprints. Preparing this paper we made the same error three more times -- most seriously in $\gamma_{\Ic}$ itself, which a bisection against a $10^{-7}$ cutoff placed at $0.62$ -- and we document all four instances, with the closed forms and code that avoid them.
Neurons and Cognition (q-bio.NC); Biological Physics (physics.bio-ph); Quantum Physics (quant-ph)
arXiv:2604.08587 [q-bio.NC]
(or arXiv:2604.08587v3 [q-bio.NC] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2604.08587 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 352 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

Inside D-Wave’s Dual-Rail Qubit Roadmap and the New Haven Bet on Logical Qubits
Quantum Zeitgeist · 11 oct. 2026

What is Quantum Error Correction? Complete 2026 Beginner’s Guide
Quantum Zeitgeist · 29 mai 2026
Coupling Structure Determines Communication Regimes in Discrete Quantum Convolutional Channels
arXiv · 16 sept. 2026
News Archive 2026
Quantum Computing Report · 25 iul. 2026