<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Sébastien Designolle | LIP6 - Équipe QI</title><link>https://qi.lip6.fr/fr/people/sebastien-designolle/</link><atom:link href="https://qi.lip6.fr/fr/people/sebastien-designolle/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><description>Sébastien Designolle</description><generator>Hugo Blox Builder (https://hugoblox.com)</generator><language>fr</language><copyright>© 2022 LIP6 Quantum Information Team</copyright><lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Can outcome communication explain Bell nonlocality?</title><link>https://qi.lip6.fr/fr/publication/5326156-can-outcome-communication-explain-bell-nonlocality/</link><pubDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://qi.lip6.fr/fr/publication/5326156-can-outcome-communication-explain-bell-nonlocality/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;A central aspect of quantum information is that correlations between spacelike separated observers sharing entangled states cannot be reproduced by local hidden variable (LHV) models, a phenomenon known as Bell nonlocality. If one wishes to explain such correlations by classical means, a natural possibility is to allow communication between the parties. In particular, LHV models augmented with two bits of classical communication can explain the correlations of any two-qubit state. Would this still hold if communication is restricted to measurement outcomes? While in certain scenarios with a finite number of inputs the answer is yes, we prove that if a model must reproduce all projective measurements, then for any qubit-qudit state the answer is no. In fact, a qubit-qudit under projective measurements admits an LHV model with outcome communication if and only if it already admits an LHV model without communication. On the other hand, we also show that when restricted sets of measurements are considered (for instance, when the qubit measurements are in the upper hemisphere of the Bloch ball), outcome communication does offer an advantage. This exemplifies that trivial properties in standard LHV scenarios, such as deterministic measurements and outcome-relabelling, play a crucial role in the outcome communication scenario.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Measurement incompatibility and quantum steering via linear programming</title><link>https://qi.lip6.fr/fr/publication/5241520-measurement-incompatibility-and-quantum-steering-via-linear-programming/</link><pubDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://qi.lip6.fr/fr/publication/5241520-measurement-incompatibility-and-quantum-steering-via-linear-programming/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;The problem of deciding whether a set of quantum measurements is jointly measurable is known to be equivalent to determining whether a quantum assemblage is unsteerable. This problem can be formulated as a semidefinite program (SDP). However, the number of variables and constraints in such a formulation grows exponentially with the number of measurements, rendering it intractable for large measurement sets. In this work, we circumvent this problem by transforming the SDP into a hierarchy of linear programs that compute upper and lower bounds on the incompatibility robustness with a complexity that grows polynomially in the number of measurements. The hierarchy is guaranteed to converge and it can be applied to arbitrary measurements &amp;ndash; including non-projective POVMs &amp;ndash; in arbitrary dimensions. While convergence becomes impractical in high dimensions, in the case of qubits our method reliably provides accurate upper and lower bounds for the incompatibility robustness of sets with several hundred measurements in a short time using a standard laptop. We also apply our methods to qutrits, obtaining non-trivial upper and lower bounds in scenarios that are otherwise intractable using the standard SDP approach. Finally, we show how our methods can be used to construct local hidden state models for states, or conversely, to certify that a given state exhibits steering; for two-qubit quantum states, our approach is comparable to, and in some cases outperforms, the current best methods.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item><item><title>Sébastien Designolle - Not specified</title><link>https://qi.lip6.fr/fr/seminars/2023-11-09-sebastien-designolle/</link><pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://qi.lip6.fr/fr/seminars/2023-11-09-sebastien-designolle/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="not-specified"&gt;Not specified&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ce séminaire, donné par Sébastien Designolle, aura lieu le 09 November 2023, à 15:0.
Il aura lieu en salle Not specified.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Vous trouverez un plan du campus &lt;a href="https://sciences.sorbonne-universite.fr/vie-de-campus-sciences/accueil-vie-pratique/plan-du-campus" target="_blank" rel="noopener"&gt;ici&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2 id="résumé"&gt;Résumé&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Not specified&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>