Advertisement

Classical-Quantum Channel Coding (Message Transmission)

  • Masahito Hayashi
Chapter
Part of the Graduate Texts in Physics book series (GTP)

Abstract

Communication systems such as the Internet have become part of our daily lives. In any data-transmission system, data are always exposed to noise, and therefore it might be expected that information will be transmitted incorrectly. In practice, however, such problems can be avoided entirely. How is this possible? For explaining this, let us say that we send some information that is either 0 or 1. Now, let us say that the sender and receiver agree that the former will send “000” instead of “0” and “111” instead of “1.” If the receiver receives “010” or “100,” he or she can deduce that the sender in fact sent 0. On the other hand, if the receiver receives a “110” or “101,” he or she can deduce that a 1 was sent. Therefore, we can reduce the chance of error by introducing redundancies into the transmission. However, in order to further reduce the chance of an error in this method, it is necessary to indefinitely increase the redundancy. Therefore, it had been commonly believed that in order to reduce the error probability, one had to increase the redundancy indefinitely. However, in 1948, Shannon (Bell Syst Tech J 27:623–656, 1948) showed that by using a certain type of encoding scheme, it is possible to reduce the error probability indefinitely without increasing the redundancy beyond a fixed rate. This was a very surprising result since it was contrary to naive expectations at that time. The distinctive part of Shannon’s method was to treat communication in the symbolic form of 0s and 1s and then to approach the problem of noise using encoding. In practical communication systems such as optical fibers and electrical wires, codes such as 0 and 1 are sent by transforming them into a physical medium. In particular, in order to achieve the theoretical optimal communication speed, we have to treat the physical medium of the communication as a microscopic object, i.e., quantum-mechanical object. In this quantum-mechanical scenario, it is most effective to treat the encoding process not as a transformation of the classical bits, e.g., 0s, 1s, and so on, but as a transformation of the message into a quantum state. Furthermore, the measurement and decoding process can be thought of as a single step wherein the outcome of the quantum-mechanical measurement directly becomes the recovered message.

Keywords

Error Probability Quantum Channel Channel Capacity Quantum Correlation Channel Code 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    C.E. Shannon, A mathematical theory of communication. Bell Syst. Tech. J. 27, 623–656 (1948)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A.S. Holevo, Bounds for the quantity of information transmitted by a quantum communication channel. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 9, 3–11 (1973) (in Russian). (English translation: Probl. Inf. Transm. 9, 177–183 (1975))Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A.S. Holevo, On the capacity of quantum communication channel. Problemly Peredachi Informatsii 15, 4, 3–11 (1979) (in Russian). (English translation: Probl. Inf. Transm. 15, 247–253 (1979).)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    A.S. Holevo, The capacity of the quantum channel with general signal states. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 44, 269 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    B. Schumacher, M.D. Westmoreland, Sending classical information via noisy quantum channels. Phys. Rev. A 56, 131 (1997)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    T. Ogawa, H. Nagaoka, Strong converse to the quantum channel coding theorem. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 45, 2486–2489 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Hayashi, Exponential decreasing rate of leaked information in universal random privacy amplification. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 57, 3989–4001 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Fujiwara, H. Nagaoka, Operational capacity and pseudoclassicality of a quantum channel. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 44, 1071–1086 (1998)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    M. Fujiwara, M. Takeoka, J. Mizuno, M. Sasaki, Exceeding classical capacity limit in quantum optical channel. Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 167906 (2003)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    A.S. Holevo, On quantum communication channels with constrained inputs. quant-ph/9705054 (1997)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    M. Hayashi, H. Nagaoka, General formulas for capacity of classical-quantum channels. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 49, 1753–1768 (2003)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    M. Ohya, D. Petz, N. Watanabe, On capacities of quantum channels. Prob. Math. Stat. 17, 179–196 (1997)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    B. Schumacher, M.D. Westmoreland, Optimal signal ensembles. Phys. Rev. A 63, 022308 (2001)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    M.A. Naǐmark, Comptes Rendus (Doklady) de l’Acadenie des Sience de l’URSS, 41, 9, 359 (1943)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    L.B. Levitin, On quantum measure of information, in Proceedings 4th All-Union Conference on Information Transmission and Coding Theory, pp. 111–115 (Tashkent, 1969) (in Russian). English translation: Information, Complexity and Control in Quantum Physics, eds. by A. Blaquiere, S. Diner, G. Lochak (Springer, Berlin, 1987), pp. 15–47Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    G. Lindblad, Completely positive maps and entropy inequalities. Commun. Math. Phys. 40, 147–151 (1975)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Uhlmann, Relative entropy and the Wigner-Yanase-Dyson-Lieb concavity in an interpolation theory. Commun. Math. Phys. 54, 21–32 (1977)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    E. Lieb, M.B. Ruskai, A fundamental property of quantum mechanical entropy. Phys. Rev. Lett. 30, 434–436 (1973)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    E. Lieb, M.B. Ruskai, Proof of the strong subadditivity of quantum mechanical entropy. J. Math. Phys. 14, 1938–1941 (1973)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    H. Nagaoka, Strong converse theorems in quantum information theory, in Proceedings ERATO Conference on Quantum Information Science (EQIS) 2001, vol. 33 (2001). (also appeared as Chap. 3 of Asymptotic Theory of Quantum Statistical Inference, ed. by M. Hayashi)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R.L. Stratonovich, A.G. Vantsjan, Probl. Control Inf. Theory 7, 161–174 (1978)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    P. Hausladen, R. Jozsa, B. Schumacher, M. Westmoreland, W. Wooters, Classical information capacity of a quantum channel. Phys. Rev. A 54, 1869–1876 (1996)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    T. Cover, J. Thomas, Elements of Information Theory (Wiley, New York, 1991)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    I. Csiszár, J. Körner, Information Theory: Coding Theorems for Discrete Memoryless Systems (Academic, 1981)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Winter, Coding Theorems of Quantum Information Theory, Ph.D. Dissertation, Universität Bielefeld (2000); quant-ph/9907077 (1999)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    A. Winter, Coding theorem and strong converse for quantum channels. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 45, 2481–2485 (1999)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    M. Hayashi, Universal coding for classical-quantum channel. Commun. Math. Phys. 289(3), 1087–1098 (2009)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    I. Bjelakovic, H. Boche, Classical capacities of averaged and compound quantum channels. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 55(7), 3360–3374 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    T.S. Han, Information-Spectrum Methods in Information Theory (Springer, Berlin, 2002) (originally appeared in Japanese in 1998)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    S. Verdú, T.S. Han, A general formula for channel capacity. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 40, 1147–1157 (1994)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Y. Polyanskiy, H.V. Poor, S. Verdu, Channel coding rate in the finite blocklength regime. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 56(5), 2307–2359 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    T. Ogawa, H. Nagaoka, Making good codes for classical-quantum channel coding via quantum hypothesis testing. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 53, 2261–2266 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    M.V. Burnashev, A.S. Holevo, On reliability function of quantum communication channel. Prob. Inf. Trans. 34, 97–107 (1998)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    M. Hayashi, Error exponent in asymmetric quantum hypothesis testing and its application to classical-quantum channel coding. Phys. Rev. A 76, 062301 (2007)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    M. Dalai, Lower bounds on the probability of error for classical and classical-quantum channels. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 59(12), 8027–8056 (2013)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    C.H. Bennett, I. Devetak, P.W. Shor, J.A. Smolin, Inequalities and separations among assisted capacities of quantum channels. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 150502 (2006)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    A. Fujiwara, Quantum birthday problems: geometrical aspects of quantum randomcoding. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 47, 2644–2649 (2001)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Graduate School of MathematicsNagoya UniversityNagoyaJapan

Personalised recommendations