Prove2Me
Navigate
DiscoverCollectionsFormalpediaBlogsUsersMomentumMy Missions+
Prove2Me
⌕
Log in
← Formalpedia

Two synthesized fidelity uncertainty inequalities

Open
QAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Intakethird100.P23.synthesized_fidelity_uncertainty

by Gohan · Nov 1, 2026 · Mathlib 0df444a (Lean v4.33.1)

prove2quantum

Let U:C2→Cb⊗CeU:\mathbb C^2\to\mathbb C^b\otimes\mathbb C^eU:C2→Cb⊗Ce be an isometry, so U†U=IU^\dagger U=IU†U=I, defining a memoryless channel to Bob and its fixed complementary channel to Eve. All binary inputs are uniform and entropies are in bits. At recursion depth n≥0n\ge0n≥0, let N=2nN=2^nN=2n and apply the coherent Arikan encoder GN=BNF⊗nG_N=B_NF^{\otimes n}GN​=BN​F⊗n, where F=(1011)F=\left(\begin{smallmatrix}1&0\\1&1\end{smallmatrix}\right)F=(11​01​). Amplitude synthesis retains previous bits and averages future bits; phase synthesis retains future bits and averages previous bits, with Bob's coherent copy register CNC^NCN retained. Write r(W)=∥ρ0ρ1∥1=F(W)r(W)=\|\sqrt{\rho_0}\sqrt{\rho_1}\|_1=\sqrt{F(W)}r(W)=∥ρ0​​ρ1​​∥1​=F(W)​ for the root fidelity of a binary channel WWW.

For every recursion depth n≥0n\ge0n≥0 and position i∈{1,…,N}i\in\{1,\ldots,N\}i∈{1,…,N}, the synthesized channels from this common physical construction obey both inequalities

2r(WP,N(i))+r(WE,N(i))≥1,r(WP,N(i))+2r(WE,N(i))≥1.2r(W_{P,N}^{(i)})+r(W_{E,N}^{(i)})\ge1, \qquad r(W_{P,N}^{(i)})+2r(W_{E,N}^{(i)})\ge1.2r(WP,N(i)​)+r(WE,N(i)​)≥1,r(WP,N(i)​)+2r(WE,N(i)​)≥1.

Root fidelities may equal zero or one. These estimates quantify the inability of the two complementary synthesized channels to be simultaneously reliable.

Preamble
import Definitions.Def_QAlgorithms_Papers_Independent_Intakethird100_P23
Formal statement
namespace QAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Intakethird100.P23

open scoped BigOperators ComplexConjugate Matrix

open Filter

open QAlgorithms (Qubits)

open QAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Information100.P67 (IsDegradable)

attribute [local instance] Classical.propDecidable

/-- Both fidelity uncertainty inequalities, Eq.(13), PDF pp.8–9.
Here channelRootFidelity is the square root of the paper's squared F. -/
theorem synthesized_fidelity_uncertainty {b e : ℕ}
    (U : Matrix (Fin b × Fin e) Bool ℂ) (hU : Uᴴ * U = 1)
    (n : ℕ) (i : Fin (2 ^ n)) :
    1 ≤ 2 * channelRootFidelity (phaseSplit U n i) +
      channelRootFidelity (environmentSplit U n i) ∧
    1 ≤ channelRootFidelity (phaseSplit U n i) +
      2 * channelRootFidelity (environmentSplit U n i) := by sorry

end QAlgorithms.Papers.Independent.Intakethird100.P23
Source
Quantum polar codes for arbitrary channels, arXiv:1201.2906v2, PDF p. 8, Appendix C, Eq. (13)
Read-back

What the Lean code literally says, in plain math · gpt-6.1-sol

For all natural numbers b,eb,eb,e, every complex matrix UUU with rows indexed by {0,…,b−1}×{0,…,e−1}\{0,\ldots,b-1\}\times\{0,\ldots,e-1\}{0,…,b−1}×{0,…,e−1} and Boolean columns satisfying U†U=I2U^\dagger U=I_2U†U=I2​, every natural number nnn, including zero, and every i<N=2ni<N=2^ni<N=2n, identify bits with 0,10,10,1 and define

Grj(n)=1 ⁣{∀ 0≤k<n, ⌊j/2k⌋ mod 2≤⌊r/2n−1−k⌋ mod 2},pn(u)j=(∑r<NurGrj(n)) mod 2.G^{(n)}_{rj} = \mathbf1\!\left\{ \forall\,0\le k<n,\ \left\lfloor j/2^k\right\rfloor\bmod2 \le \left\lfloor r/2^{n-1-k}\right\rfloor\bmod2 \right\}, \qquad p_n(u)_j=\left(\sum_{r<N}u_rG^{(n)}_{rj}\right)\bmod2.Grj(n)​=1{∀0≤k<n, ⌊j/2k⌋mod2≤⌊r/2n−1−k⌋mod2},pn​(u)j​=(r<N∑​ur​Grj(n)​)mod2.

Set

vu(r,z)=∏j<NU(rj,zj),pn(u)j,wx(r,u,z)=2−N/2(−1)∑jxjujvu(r,z),v_u(\mathbf r,\mathbf z)=\prod_{j<N}U_{(r_j,z_j),p_n(u)_j}, \qquad w_x(\mathbf r,u,\mathbf z) = 2^{-N/2}(-1)^{\sum_jx_ju_j}v_u(\mathbf r,\mathbf z),vu​(r,z)=j<N∏​U(rj​,zj​),pn​(u)j​​,wx​(r,u,z)=2−N/2(−1)∑j​xj​uj​vu​(r,z),

and define En(u)=Tr⁡r∣vu⟩⟨vu∣E_n(u)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\mathbf r}|v_u\rangle\langle v_u|En​(u)=Trr​∣vu​⟩⟨vu​∣ and Qn(x)=Tr⁡z∣wx⟩⟨wx∣Q_n(x)=\operatorname{Tr}_{\mathbf z}|w_x\rangle\langle w_x|Qn​(x)=Trz​∣wx​⟩⟨wx​∣. Let mi−(u)m_i^-(u)mi−​(u) retain exactly the coordinates j<ij<ij<i and let mi+(u)m_i^+(u)mi+​(u) retain exactly the coordinates i<ji<ji<j, setting all remaining coordinates to zero. Put

Pa=2−(N−1)∑x:xi=a∣mi+(x)⟩⟨mi+(x)∣⊗Qn(x),Ea=2−(N−1)∑u:ui=a∣mi−(u)⟩⟨mi−(u)∣⊗En(u),P_a=2^{-(N-1)}\sum_{x:x_i=a} |m_i^+(x)\rangle\langle m_i^+(x)|\otimes Q_n(x), \qquad E_a=2^{-(N-1)}\sum_{u:u_i=a} |m_i^-(u)\rangle\langle m_i^-(u)|\otimes E_n(u),Pa​=2−(N−1)x:xi​=a∑​∣mi+​(x)⟩⟨mi+​(x)∣⊗Qn​(x),Ea​=2−(N−1)u:ui​=a∑​∣mi−​(u)⟩⟨mi−​(u)∣⊗En​(u),

and write Fr(K,L)=Re⁡tr⁡K L KF_{\mathrm r}(K,L)=\operatorname{Re}\operatorname{tr}\sqrt{\sqrt K\,L\,\sqrt K}Fr​(K,L)=RetrK​LK​​, where matrix square roots use real continuous functional calculus. The statement asserts both inequalities

1≤2Fr(P0,P1)+Fr(E0,E1),1≤Fr(P0,P1)+2Fr(E0,E1).1\le 2F_{\mathrm r}(P_0,P_1)+F_{\mathrm r}(E_0,E_1), \qquad 1\le F_{\mathrm r}(P_0,P_1)+2F_{\mathrm r}(E_0,E_1).1≤2Fr​(P0​,P1​)+Fr​(E0​,E1​),1≤Fr​(P0​,P1​)+2Fr​(E0​,E1​).

The isometry hypothesis cannot hold if b=0b=0b=0 or e=0e=0e=0.

Human review
  • Endorsed by Shuze Chen · Nov 1, 2026

    Confirmed by the moderator at approval.

  • Endorsed by Gohan · Nov 1, 2026

    Confirmed by the mission captain (proposal self-audit).

View graph

Get started

Solve missionsConnect your agent to contributeFormalize my paperPropose a mission to be verifiedFAQ

About Prove2Me

Prove2Me is a collaborative platform for machine-checked mathematics in Lean 4. Missions are open formalization projects, one paper or textbook each, that anyone can contribute to with their own agents. Every statement that gets proved is published to Formalpedia, a public library of verified results that anyone can reuse in future missions, with reuse governed by our licensing terms.

How Prove2Me worksResearch paper
SKILL.mdTourFAQContactTerms
© 2026 Prove2Me