Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
203,203 studies31 sourcesUpdated 39 min ago
PreprintCC BY 4.0arXiv

The I3322 quantum value is attained spatially but not in finite dimension

Abstract

Let S be the common tensor-product and commuting-operator supremum of the I3322 Bell functional in the Collins-Gisin normalization. Starting from a certified value window and Bellman/path equivalence, we prove that no finite-dimensional quantum strategy attains S, whereas a spatial strategy on ℓ2(ℤ)⊗ℓ2(ℤ) does. The finite-dimensional statement includes mixed states and binary POVMs. Consequently Cq(3,3;2,2) is not closed and Cqs(3,3;2,2)∖ Cq(3,3;2,2) is nonempty. We also establish the dimension complexity D(ε)=Θ(log(1/ε)): approaching S requires and suffices local dimension logarithmic in inverse error. The constructive upper bound is D(ε)≤ 23.9010650log(1/ε) for all sufficiently small ε, with natural logarithms; the lower constants are existential. The proofs use critical Bellman storage, spectral transport and normalizable orbit measures. A finite weighted-flow argument supplies the unrestricted quantitative lower bound without identifying distinct joint spectral components. This revision replaces an unsupported step in the earlier lower argument and records additional proof corrections. Prior numerical certification and independent concurrent attainment results are credited. Exact arithmetic and Lean 4 check specified numerical, scalar and finite accounting facts; the complete analytic proof is not formalized.

Related

  1. The quantum supremum of the I3322 Bell inequality is not attained in finite dimension
    Jef Pauwels
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textQuantum physics & quantum informationarXiv
  2. Certified exact identification of the I3322 quantum value
    Artus Krohn-Grimberghe
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textQuantum physics & quantum informationarXiv
  3. Spatially developing drag reduction across a finite oscillating wall
    Marco Galli, Nicolò Scaiola, Ferdinand F. J. Schrijer +1
    arXivPreprintCC BY 4.0Full textFluid dynamicsarXiv
  4. Finite-Size Effects on Symmetry Restoration in a Rotating Scalar System with Spatially Dependent Thermal Self-Energy
    Jorge David Castaño-Yepes, Larry A. Cerón-Suárez
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textHigh-energy & particle physicsarXiv
  5. Complex coordinates forced by finite orthogonality hypergraphs in dimension three
    Mirko Navara, Karl Svozil
    arXivPreprintarXiv licenceFull textCombinatorics & discrete mathematicsQuantum physics & quantum informationarXiv
BibTeX
@misc{douglas2026i3322,
  title = {{The I3322 quantum value is attained spatially but not in finite dimension}},
  author = {Seth Douglas},
  howpublished = {arXiv},
  year = {2026},
  month = sep,
  doi = {10.48550/arxiv.2609.05555},
  eprint = {2609.05555},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url = {https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.05555},
  note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY  - UNPB
TI  - The I3322 quantum value is attained spatially but not in finite dimension
AU  - Seth Douglas
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/09/11
PB  - arXiv
DO  - 10.48550/arxiv.2609.05555
UR  - https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.05555
AB  - Let S be the common tensor-product and commuting-operator supremum of the I_3322 Bell functional in the Collins-Gisin normalization. Starting from a certified value window and Bellman/path equivalence, we prove that no finite-dimensional quantum strategy attains S, whereas a spatial strategy on ℓ^2(ℤ)⊗ℓ^2(ℤ) does. The finite-dimensional statement includes mixed states and binary POVMs. Consequently C_q(3,3;2,2) is not closed and C_qs(3,3;2,2)∖ C_q(3,3;2,2) is nonempty. We also establish the dimension complexity D(ε)=Θ(log(1/ε)): approaching S requires and suffices local dimension logarithmic in inverse error. The constructive upper bound is D(ε)≤ 23.9010650log(1/ε) for all sufficiently small ε, with natural logarithms; the lower constants are existential. The proofs use critical Bellman storage, spectral transport and normalizable orbit measures. A finite weighted-flow argument supplies the unrestricted quantitative lower bound without identifying distinct joint spectral components. This revision replaces an unsupported step in the earlier lower argument and records additional proof corrections. Prior numerical certification and independent concurrent attainment results are credited. Exact arithmetic and Lean 4 check specified numerical, scalar and finite accounting facts; the complete analytic proof is not formalized.
ER  -