Jun 22 2017 03:02 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Reflections on the information paradigm in quantum and gravitational physics

Jun 15 2017 17:29 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Quantifying genuine multipartite correlations and their pattern complexity

Jun 15 2017 17:29 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Contextual advantage for state discrimination

Jun 14 2017 03:30 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Preprint Déjà Vu: an FAQ

Jun 08 2017 11:53 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Self-testing properties of the elegant Bell inequality

May 25 2017 19:35 UTC

May 24 2017 14:59 UTC

Blake Stacey scited The grasshopper problem

May 24 2017 14:56 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Noncontextual wirings

May 24 2017 14:56 UTC

Blake Stacey scited The contextual fraction as a measure of contextuality

May 19 2017 21:48 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Operational framework for quantum measurement simulability

May 19 2017 21:44 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Local Lorentz covariance in finite-dimensional Local Quantum Physics

May 11 2017 03:15 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Notwithstanding Bohr, the Reasons for QBism

Apr 19 2017 00:19 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Quantum measurements with prescribed symmetry

Apr 15 2017 18:13 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Magic informationally complete POVMs with permutations

Apr 12 2017 18:20 UTC

Blake Stacey commented on Magic informationally complete POVMs with permutations

This is why I am confused (it is probably just a reading comprehension error on my part): If the POVM is IC, it must have at least $d^2$ elements. If it is a minimal IC-POVM, it must have exactly $d^2$ elements. But if it is minimal, IC and equiangular, then the angle is fixed by the requirement that the elements sum to the identity. Suppose that the trace of $\Pi_i \Pi_j$ is $\alpha$ whenever $i \neq j$. Summing this over all $j$ yields $1 + (d^2-1)\alpha$. But the projectors $\Pi_i$ themselves must sum to $dI$, so the value of $\alpha$ is fixed to $1/(d+1)$.

Apr 12 2017 00:34 UTC

Blake Stacey commented on Magic informationally complete POVMs with permutations

Clarification request: Are all the IC-POVMs in this paper minimal? That is, does the number of elements in each POVM equal the square of the dimension? If so, I am confused about the quoted value of the inner product between projectors for the equiangular IC-POVM in dimension 5.

Mar 27 2017 13:28 UTC

Blake Stacey scited Negativity Bounds for Weyl-Heisenberg Quasiprobability Representations

Mar 20 2017 17:32 UTC

Mar 14 2017 03:06 UTC

Blake Stacey scited SICs: Extending the list of solutions

Jan 30 2017 02:15 UTC

Blake Stacey scited On discrete structures in finite Hilbert spaces

Jan 27 2017 04:05 UTC

Blake Stacey scited The Penrose dodecahedron and the Witting polytope are identical in CP(3)

Jan 27 2017 04:03 UTC

I agree with Steve Flammia's comment. The field norm is a nice generalization of the standard norm. (I haven't yet thought about whether there might be a physics motivation for it, rather than a purely mathematical one, but that's not important right now.) To avoid confusion, some phrase like "equiangular with respect to the field norm" or "field-norm equiangular" should be used.