Source-linked AI summary
Experimentally Testable Quantum Advantage in Shallow Circuits
Kishor Bharti, Adán Cabello
TL;DR
Finite-size quantum-advantage tests need explicit bounds against a specified classical model. The paper combines disjoint-player repetition with graph teleportation to construct a two-round test, with perfect quantum success and a finite classical threshold.
Problem
The finite-size question is whether a perfect finite-dimensional quantum strategy can yield a two-round shallow-circuit test with an explicit classical bound that tends to zero as N grows.
Source: S1.1. Finite-size separation problem · p. 8Method
The construction repeats the game with disjoint player sets, then teleports each player’s register to a uniformly random site before revealing the questions.
Source: pp. 1–2Results
The graph-distributed quantum implementation has depth independent of N in each round and succeeds with probability exactly equal to the underlying strategy’s success.
Source: S4.3. Two-round task · p. 13Takeaways & Limitations
Theorem S21 answers the finite-size separation question affirmatively and gives a threshold for each finite experiment.
Source: S1.1. Finite-size separation problem · p. 8The test assumes a trusted verifier and an implementation satisfying the stated circuit restrictions; it is not device independent.
Source: p. 4
Abstract
from arXiv · showhide
Experimental tests of shallow-circuit quantum advantage require explicit classical bounds at finite circuit sizes. We refine the finite-size classical soundness bound of Aasnaess's graph-distributed construction to depend linearly on the number of players. Combined with standard disjoint-player repetition, this gives a two-round test on a single processor for any finite nonlocal game with a finite-dimensional perfect quantum strategy and classical winning probability $\gamma<1$, with arbitrarily small classical success. The method is based on playing $m$ copies with disjoint players and teleporting each player's register to a uniformly random one of $N$ sites before the questions are revealed. Each answer bit of a depth-$D$, fan-in-$K$ classical response with fixed wiring depends on at most $K^D$ question wires, making cross-player dependencies unlikely when $N$ is large. The quantum implementation has constant depth per round and wins with certainty. A classical device wins with probability at most $\gamma^m+O(mK^D/N)$, which vanishes as $O(\log N/N)$ for $m=\lceil\log_{1/\gamma}N\rceil$ at fixed $D$ and $K$. We present an explicit proposal for an experimentally testable quantum advantage with 99 qubits.
Supplemental Material for “Experimentally Testable Quantum Advantage in Shallow Circuits”
The supplement frames a finite-size test for quantum advantage against a declared shallow classical-circuit model, then supplies game definitions and context for the result. It distinguishes this comparison from prior approaches by the assumptions and resources they use.
Supplemental Material for “Experimentally Testable Quantum Advantage in Shallow Circuits”
- The supplement provides protocol details, proofs, and resource estimates, with later sections covering experimental protocols, host choice, error budgets, and statistical tests.It also identifies assumptions, limitations, open questions, and a contextuality construction.Source: Supplemental Material for… · p. 8
S1.1. Finite-size separation problem
- Theorem S21 answers affirmatively whether a finite game with a perfect finite-dimensional quantum strategy and classical value below one can yield an explicit finite-size separation.The target conditions include constant-depth quantum computation in two rounds and a classical bound tending to zero for fixed depth when m = Θ(log N).Source: S1.1. Finite-size separation problem · p. 8
S1.2. Classical comparison and assumptions
- Random-circuit and photonic sampling experiments compare quantum processors with the strongest available classical simulation methods [1–4]; their broad asymptotic interpretation is not a proved lower bound against unrestricted classical computation.Source: S1.2. Classical comparison and… · p. 8
- The stated classical comparison allows arbitrary nonuniform wiring, shared randomness, and pre-question information, but restricts the online response depth and fan-in.“Unconditional” refers to a proved finite-game inequality and circuit causality once that model is fixed, without complexity or cryptographic assumptions.Source: S1.2. Classical comparison and… · p. 8, S1.1. Finite-size separation problem · p. 8
S1.3. Unconditional shallow-circuit separations
- Prior shallow-circuit separations vary in excluded classical classes, noise tolerance, interaction, and quantum-circuit complexity; some obtain stronger noise or gate-class guarantees using tailored constructions.The cited lines distinguish worst-case guarantees from average-score thresholds and summarize noise-robust and stronger-class results [8, 19–21, 28–32].Source: S1.3. Unconditional shallow-circuit… · p. 9
- The shared ancestor count improves the player prefactor in Aasnæss’s bound from quadratic to linear, reducing the repeated-game estimate from O(K^D log²N/N) to O(K^D log N/N), while both vanish.For one-bit GHZ, the published coarse estimate is trivial at b = 3, N = 17, K = 2, and D = 1, 2, whereas the linear count gives nontrivial 99-qubit thresholds; this compares estimates, not optimal classical success.Source: S1.3. Unconditional shallow-circuit… · pp. 9–10
S2.1. Nonlocal games
- A finite game is specified by question and answer sets, a question-tuple distribution, and an acceptance predicate; a finite-dimensional pseudo-telepathy game has quantum value one and classical value γ < 1.Classical strategies use shared randomness independent of the questions and local response distributions; quantum strategies use a shared state and local measurements.Source: S2.1. Nonlocal games · p. 10
S2.2. Local and nonlocal fraction
This material bounds circuit dependencies and establishes exact value amplification by playing copies with disjoint players. It also introduces a decomposition measure relating game success to local behavior.
S2.2. Local and nonlocal fraction
- The resource inequality bounds a behavior’s game success using its nonlocal fraction and the game’s classical value.The definition decomposes a behavior into a local part and an arbitrary conditional residual; for nonsignaling behaviors the measure is the contextual fraction.Source: S2.2. Local and nonlocal fraction · p. 10
S2.3. Classical circuits and lightcones
- A depth-D, fan-in-K circuit gives each output wire at most K^D original input ancestors, so an answer block of at most a wires depends on at most aK^D inputs.The bound follows by induction over circuit layers and a union bound over the answer wires.Source: S2.3. Classical circuits and lightcones · p. 11
- In a range-r local circuit of depth D, every input in an output’s backward lightcone lies within graph distance rD of that output.Each layer moves information by at most r, and the bound follows by induction using the triangle inequality.Source: S2.3. Classical circuits and lightcones · p. 11
S3. EXACT AMPLIFICATION WITH DISJOINT PLAYERS
- For G⊔m, the classical value is γ^m because each disjoint copy’s winning event depends on its independently sampled question tuple.Conditioning on shared randomness makes the strategy deterministic; averaging preserves the bound, and independent optimal base strategies attain it.Source: S3. EXACT AMPLIFICATION WITH DISJOINT… · p. 11
- A finite-dimensional perfect quantum strategy remains perfect on G⊔m by assigning each copy its own tensor factor and applying the base measurements.The repeated game uses b = b0m players and accepts only when every copy is won.Source: S3. EXACT AMPLIFICATION WITH DISJOINT… · p. 11
- For m repeated copies, the listed classical and quantum values are ((3/4)^m, 1) for GHZ, ((8/9)^m, 1) for Magic Square, and ((44/45)^m, 1) for the qutrit 5 × 9 game.The compiled processor need not run independent copies: the product argument is invoked after conditioning on cases with no cross-player lightcone collision.Source: S3. EXACT AMPLIFICATION WITH DISJOINT… · p. 11
S4. GRAPH TELEPORTATION AND EXACT QUANTUM COMPLETENESS
The section fixes a teleportation convention for paths and tracks the resulting local correction frame. Bell measurements can be simultaneous, and applying the corresponding corrected measurement recovers the desired outcome distribution.
S4.1. Teleportation convention
- Every Bell outcome has probability 1/d² under the stated maximally entangled-pair convention.The d² Bell states form an orthonormal basis.Source: S4.1. Teleportation convention · p. 12
- After teleportation, the endpoint state is conjugated by a correction determined by the Bell outcomes, and for fixed dimension the verifier sends a constant-size frame label.Finite products of the defined Weyl operators reduce, up to global phase, to one of d² operators.Source: S4.1. Teleportation convention · pp. 12–13
- All Bell measurements along a teleportation path can be carried out simultaneously because they act on pairwise disjoint registers.Their joint state can be analyzed in path order, composing the correction operators across hops.Source: S4.1. Teleportation convention · pp. 12–13
- Measuring the endpoint with the POVM conjugated by its correction frame reproduces the desired measurement distribution.The same teleportation identity applies when the teleported register is entangled with a reference.Source: S4.1. Teleportation convention · pp. 12–13
S4.2. Hardware layout
The construction distributes each player’s register across a rooted host graph by teleportation, then reveals questions only at independently selected terminals. The quantum operations have bounded depth, while the classical analysis limits cross-player dependencies through fixed circuit wiring and lightcones.
S4.2. Hardware layout
- Each player’s register begins at the root and is teleported along a rooted shortest-path tree to an independently uniform terminal; questions are revealed only after the first-round Bell measurements.The verifier supplies the endpoint frame and places the question-frame input only in that terminal’s bundle before reading the answer there.Source: S4.3. Two-round task · p. 13, S4.2. Hardware layout · p. 13
S4.3. Two-round task
- The graph-distributed game has a bounded-fan-in quantum implementation from a product state, with depth independent of N in each round and success exactly equal to the base strategy’s success.Distinct half-edge registers allow parallel preparation, and bounded host degree keeps path-selected Bell measurements at constant depth.Source: S4.3. Two-round task · pp. 13–14, S4.2. Hardware layout · p. 13
- Preparing Bell pairs only on selected paths reduces per-trial entangled-pair use to the sum of the selected path lengths, which is O(m log N) on a balanced tree.All terminal locations must still exist as distinct physical locations, and idle errors and cross-talk may remain.Source: S4.3. Two-round task · p. 14
S5.1. Classical circuit model
- The classical competitor may use arbitrary nonuniform wiring, randomness, memory, and pre-question computation, but its fresh-question-to-answer circuit is limited to depth D and fan-in K.Its structural wiring is fixed before terminal selection; any selector or routing circuit is charged to depth and fan-in.Source: S5.1. Classical circuit model · p. 14
- Free terminal-dependent rewiring would let a depth-one GHZ response route sparse question bits to another player and win with certainty, so the model charges such selection to the circuit.The example uses a zero frame transcript and returns a = b = 0, c = xA ∨ xB on the promised question tuples.Source: S5.1. Classical circuit model · p. 14
S5.2. Collision probability
- A cross-player collision occurs when one player’s selected question bundle lies in another player’s selected answer block’s backward lightcone.The proof conditions on the target terminal and device random tape; each answer block has at most aK^D fresh-input ancestors, and all source players, including other copies, are counted.Source: S5.1. Classical circuit model · p. 14, S5.2. Collision probability · p. 15
- For range-r local circuits, a source terminal can affect a target answer only when it lies within graph distance rD of the target terminal.The conditional probability for a fixed ordered player pair is at most β_H(rD)/N, where β_H(rD) denotes the relevant neighborhood size.Source: S5.2. Collision probability · p. 15
S5.3. Locality without cross-player collisions
Conditioning on draws without cross-player collisions reduces the classical response to a local strategy for the base game. The resulting soundness analysis counts dependencies across all players, including across repeated copies, and yields vanishing classical success at fixed depth as the host grows.
S5.3. Locality without cross-player collisions
- Conditioned on no cross-player collisions, each answer block depends only on its own player’s fresh question, making the response a deterministic local strategy.The conditioned pre-question data acts as shared randomness independent of the questions.Source: S5.3. Locality without cross-player… · p. 15
- The soundness bound separates good draws, where success is at most γ, from bad draws, where it is at most one.The theorem permits either the general fan-in collision bound or a geometrically local circuit bound.Source: S5.3. Locality without cross-player… · pp. 15–16
- For two GHZ copies, cross-copy question dependencies can raise joint success to 3/4, above the disjoint-game classical value 9/16.The linear player factor in the collision bound retains dependencies from every other player, including those in other copies.Source: S5.3. Locality without cross-player… · p. 16
S6. AMPLIFICATION AND ASYMPTOTIC BOUNDS
- For fixed K and D = o(log N), the classical success bound is N^-1+o(1); at fixed depth it is O(log N/N).The repeated game has classical value γ^m, while the quantum strategy wins with certainty at constant depth per round.Source: S6. AMPLIFICATION AND ASYMPTOTIC BOUNDS · p. 16
- If every supported question tuple has an accepting answer, a deterministic fan-in-two classical solution exists at depth O(log n).The construction aggregates question-symbol flags and then uses a lookup table to select an accepting answer tuple.Source: S6. AMPLIFICATION AND ASYMPTOTIC BOUNDS · p. 17
- The lightcone union bound is minimized at repetition count m = Θ(log(N/KD)) when N/KD grows, and m = Θ(log N) for fixed or sublogarithmic depth.The repetition count m = Θ(log N) is also the scale used to drive the repeated classical value down.Source: S6. AMPLIFICATION AND ASYMPTOTIC BOUNDS · p. 17
S7. GEOMETRICALLY LOCAL CLASSICAL CIRCUITS
For geometrically local classical circuits, the host geometry gives a volume-dependent soundness bound. On paths, the required classical depth is linear in the host size, and a matching-order routing strategy gives a diameter-optimal separation.
S7. GEOMETRICALLY LOCAL CLASSICAL CIRCUITS
- On bounded-degree hosts, the quantum strategy uses graph-local gates, starts from a product state, and wins with probability one at constant depth per round.Source: S7. GEOMETRICALLY LOCAL CLASSICAL… · p. 17
- On a path, success at least γ^m + ε forces range-r classical depth Ω(N), while a range-one strategy solves the task in O(N) depth.The section characterizes this separation as diameter optimal for the task.Source: S7. GEOMETRICALLY LOCAL CLASSICAL… · pp. 17–18
- For every D = o(N), sufficiently large path instances have quantum success one and classical success below any chosen η.The argument makes γ^m ≤ η/2 and the collision term o(1).Source: S7. GEOMETRICALLY LOCAL CLASSICAL… · p. 18
S8. BASE GAMES
The section gives two finite base games for the construction. Both have perfect quantum strategies and classical values below one, while GHZ offers lower classical thresholds and lower resource requirements for the finite instances considered.
S8.1. GHZ game
- The GHZ game has classical value 3/4 and quantum value 1.A deterministic classical strategy must lose at least one of four equally likely questions; a strategy losing exactly one exists.Source: S8.1. GHZ game · p. 18
S8.2. Magic-square game
- The Magic-Square game has classical value 8/9 and quantum value 1.The quantum strategy wins every input pair.Source: S8.2. Magic-square game · p. 19
- For finite instances, GHZ gives lower classical thresholds and uses one qubit per player; the Magic-Square game requires more resources.The Magic-Square game’s classical value 44/45 requires more repetitions than GHZ to reduce the first bound term to the same value.Source: S8.2. Magic-square game · p. 19
S9. EXPERIMENTAL PROTOCOL AND FINITE-DATA CERTIFICATION
The experimental protocol teleports each player’s register to a randomly selected terminal before revealing the questions, then measures and scores all repeated game copies. Finite instances trade installed resources against the classical threshold, and certification uses a lower confidence bound on the directly measured all-copy success.
S9.1. Logical architecture
- Each trial initializes product states, independently draws terminals before revealing questions, prepares GHZ states and Bell pairs on selected paths, and performs simultaneous Bell measurements.In round two, terminals receive the questions and frames, perform the question-selected X or Y measurement, and return one bit per player.Source: S9.1. Logical architecture · p. 20
- A trial counts as a win only when all m copies satisfy the GHZ parity rule; missing outcomes, losses, timeouts, and invalid outputs count as losses.This convention avoids a fair-sampling loophole; postselection would require applying the same declared rule to the classical benchmark and rederiving soundness.Source: S9.1. Logical architecture · p. 20
S9.2. Finite parameter choices
- For m = 2 and N = 512, the classical thresholds are 0.572754, 0.583008, and 0.603516 for online depths D = 1, 2, and 3, respectively.Increasing N suppresses lightcone collisions but increases installed register count; increasing m lowers the base classical value while increasing the collision prefactor.Source: S9.2. Finite parameter choices · p. 20
S9.3. Statistical confidence bounds
- Certification requires the lower confidence bound on measured all-copy success to exceed the selected classical threshold.Hoeffding’s inequality applies to independent, identically distributed trials with a predeclared sample size; dependent trials require a valid dependence-aware bound.Source: S9.3. Statistical confidence bounds · p. 21
- For α = 0.01, the section specifies trial counts for margins ϵ = 0.05, 0.03, and 0.02.A one-sided exact binomial interval may replace the stated Hoeffding-based interval without changing the certification criterion.Source: S9.3. Statistical confidence bounds · p. 21
S9.4. Implementable measurement corrections
The GHZ implementation handles teleportation frames through classical outcome correction, while the proposed 99-qubit test specifies random terminals and delayed questions. Its certification applies to a declared shallow-response circuit model, not unrestricted classical algorithms or device-independent settings.
S9.4. Implementable measurement corrections
- The GHZ terminal can measure X or Y and correct the recorded bit classically, avoiding frame-dependent quantum operations; qutrits instead require a finite menu of conjugated basis measurements.The qutrit measurement menu size is independent of N and m.Source: S9.4. Implementable measurement… · p. 21
S9.5. Scope of certification
- The certification separates the stated bounded-depth response circuits, not unrestricted classical algorithms; reporting a timing interpretation also requires the gate model and clock-cycle convention.The passage notes a classical solution of depth O(log N).Source: S9.5. Scope of certification · p. 21
S10. A 99-QUBIT GHZ EXPERIMENT
- The specified 99-qubit test uses one three-player GHZ game and 17 possible terminals per player, with questions revealed only after the teleportation transcript is recorded.The 99-qubit count excludes platform-specific readout ancillas, routing overhead, and error-correction qubits; the test does not use disjoint-player amplification.Source: S10. A 99-QUBIT GHZ EXPERIMENT · p. 22
S10.1. GHZ questions and acceptance rule
- Randomly selected terminals receive the three GHZ qubits, and settings arrive only after round-one teleportation outcomes have been returned.The GHZ strategy uses X measurements for question 0 and Y measurements for question 1.Source: S10.1. GHZ questions and acceptance rule · p. 22
S10.2. Qubit layout
- The hardware has 96 edge qubits plus three GHZ qubits, totaling 99 registers across three logical player layers.The three layers need not be separate processors, but registers assigned to different players must be distinct.Source: S10.2. Qubit layout · p. 23
S10.3. Host graphs
The host graph can be selected to suit quantum hardware because the classical bound depends on it only through N. The experimental sequence prepares resources, teleports to random terminals, then reveals questions and applies classical frame correction.
S10.3. Host graphs
- For N = 17, the degree-four tree averages 28/17 ≈1.6 hops, versus 42/17 ≈2.5 for the balanced binary tree, while retaining the bounded-degree guarantee of constant quantum depth.The star averages 16/17 hops but loses that guarantee for its measurement-selection circuit as N grows.Source: S10.3. Host graphs · p. 23
S10.4. Experimental sequence
- The trial prepares Bell pairs on selected paths, performs path Bell measurements, records Pauli-frame labels, and reveals each setting only after round-one outcomes are recorded.Question delivery occurs only after the teleportation transcript, which is needed for the classical bound.Source: S10.4. Experimental sequence · pp. 23–24
- At the selected terminal, the GHZ X/Y measurement needs no quantum feed-forward because the Pauli-frame correction is a classical bit flip on the record.A missing outcome, timeout, or failed setting delivery counts as a loss unless a different treatment was fixed in advance and the bound rederived.Source: S10.4. Experimental sequence · p. 24
S10.5. Classical benchmark
The 99-qubit classical thresholds are nontrivial for response depths one and two, and illustrative noise calculations estimate whether candidate host graphs could exceed them. These estimates depend on an explicit error model and are not protocol measurements.
S10.5. Classical benchmark
- 57/68 ≃0.838235 at depth one and 63/68 ≃0.926471 at depth two; both exceed the GHZ value 3/4 because the competitor may use global wiring.For depth D ≥3, the stated threshold is 1.Source: S10.5. Classical benchmark · p. 25
- Smaller one-copy designs are also nontrivial when N > 3·2^D: N = 7 gives threshold 27/28 at depth one, while N = 13 gives 51/52 at depth two.These smaller designs require higher winning probabilities.Source: S10.5. Classical benchmark · p. 25
S10.6. Visibility and error estimates
- The observed visibility must exceed 23/34 ≃0.6765 for depth one or 29/34 ≃0.8529 for depth two; the illustrative target pexp = 0.96 corresponds to V = 0.92.V is the frame-corrected correlator including preparation, teleportation, idling, and readout errors; failed trials count as losses.Source: S10.6. Visibility and error estimates · p. 25
- For V ≥0.92 with V0 = 0.95, the rounded per-teleportation attenuation estimates are 0.4% for the balanced binary tree, 0.64% for the degree-two tree, and 1.1% for the star.These percentages describe correlator attenuation, not general gate infidelity.Source: S10.6. Visibility and error estimates · p. 26
- The illustrative model estimates winning probabilities of 0.879 for the binary tree, 0.908 for the degree-four tree, and 0.935 for the star; all exceed depth one, but only the star exceeds depth two.These are model projections using component rates, not protocol observations, and omit additional idling, routing, leakage, and cross-talk errors.Source: S10.6. Visibility and error estimates · p. 26
S10.7. Finite-data certification
Finite-data certification compares the observed winning frequency with the classical threshold using a one-sided confidence bound. A four-stage calibration sequence proceeds from the bare GHZ game to the full protocol.
S10.7. Finite-data certification
- For p∗ = 0.96, 0.94, and 0.93, the stated sample sizes are 156, 223, and 274 against depth one, versus 2049, 12580, and 184847 against depth two.These are conditional on an observed winning frequency at least p∗ above the relevant threshold, not guarantees for a device with mean success p∗.Source: S10.7. Finite-data certification · p. 27
- Significant temporal drift or inter-trial correlations require a predeclared concentration bound valid for the observed dependence, while leaving the classical threshold unchanged.The stated Hoeffding bound assumes independent, identically distributed trials with the number fixed in advance.Source: S10.7. Finite-data certification · pp. 26–27
S10.8. Calibration sequence
- The proposed calibration progresses from a bare GHZ benchmark, through one-hop teleportation and random multi-hop terminals, to all three 17-vertex layers run together.The stages measure the baseline visibility, test frame correction, compare path-length effects, and then apply the full certification criterion.Source: S10.8. Calibration sequence · p. 27
S10.9. Trial data
The trial record centers certification on unconditional wins, while the 99-qubit proposal specifies thresholds for excluding shallow classical circuits. The section also details resource assumptions, frame-dependent measurements, noise constraints, and open questions.
S10.9. Trial data
- The primary certification statistic is the unconditional frequency of W = 1; trial records also include Bell-measurement transcripts, raw and corrected outputs, and the win/loss bit.Diagnostic records may include path lengths, calibration and timing, leakage, Bell-pair and Bell-measurement diagnostics, and readout confidence.Source: S10.9. Trial data · pp. 27–28
S10.10. Certification with 99 qubits
- A lower confidence bound above 57/68 excludes randomized classical circuits with arbitrary global wiring, fan-in two, and online depth one; above 63/68 also excludes online depth two.These criteria use the stated implementation assumptions.Source: S10.10. Certification with 99 qubits · p. 28
- The 99-qubit proposal uses m = 1, leaving the GHZ classical value at 3/4, while a later m ≥2 repetition would replace it by (3/4)^m and lower the classical threshold.The finite-N collision term raises the m = 1 threshold; the proposal specifies resources, teleportation, delayed questions, and measurements for a finite test.Source: S10.10. Certification with 99 qubits · p. 28
S11.1. Initialization and resource counts
- For fixed base strategies, preparation and measurement circuits have constant size, total width is O_G,∆(mN), and balanced-tree selected paths require O(m log N) edge-entanglement gates.The stated gate counts run in parallel on disjoint registers; exact completeness assumes the fixed strategy's operations are available exactly.Source: S11.1. Initialization and resource… · p. 28
S11.2. Frame-dependent measurements
- After teleportation, the endpoint measures the frame-transformed state using a POVM chosen from the Bell transcript; Pauli measurements can instead absorb the frame into classical outcome relabeling.That relabeling alone does not give a one-round construction for arbitrary measurements.Source: S11.2. Frame-dependent measurements · p. 28
S11.3. Noise and S11.4. Open questions
- The ideal theorem is noiseless: selected paths of length L use Θ(L) Bell measurements, and without encoding constant local noise can drive success down with L.No asymptotic theorem guarantees success above the classical threshold at constant physical noise as N grows; open questions include encoded noise robustness, one-round generality, stronger classical gate classes, and lower-resource qutrit games.Source: S11.3. Noise · p. 29, S11.4. Open questions · p. 29
S12. PERFECT GAMES FROM CONTEXTUALITY
A finite KS extension can turn finite-dimensional projectors into a nonlocal game with a perfect quantum strategy and classical value below one. The qutrit example gives a 5 × 9 game with classical value 44/45, while the construction does not require the initial contextuality to be necessary.
S12. PERFECT GAMES FROM CONTEXTUALITY
- A finite KS extension in dimension d ≥3 supplies a perfect-game construction from finite rank-one state and measurement projectors, with no criticality assumption required.If the initial projectors already contain a KS subset, it can be used directly.Source: S12. PERFECT GAMES FROM CONTEXTUALITY · p. 29, Figure S1 · p. 30
- The extension adds projectors and a bipartite entangled state, so inclusion of the initial projectors does not establish that their original contextuality is necessary for the game.The same extension can be applied to an initially noncontextual collection and is not a quantitative conversion of contextuality violation into circuit advantage.Source: S12. PERFECT GAMES FROM CONTEXTUALITY · p. 29
S12.1. Qutrit example: the KCBS inequality
- The qutrit example starts from a state and five projectors violating the KCBS inequality, then places them in a 33-ray KS set by adding 27 projectors.The resulting game rejects orthogonal output rays, whose probability is zero; complex conjugation is needed because the KS set contains complex rays.Source: S12.1. Qutrit example: the KCBS… · pp. 30–31
- For the uniform distribution over 45 input pairs, the qutrit game has classical value 44/45, and its perfect strategy uses a specified KS set containing the original projectors.The 44/45 value is close to one; the proposed experiment instead uses GHZ, whose classical value is 3/4.Source: S12.1. Qutrit example: the KCBS… · p. 31