arXiv reader

Classical Capacity of Single-Mode Bosonic Gaussian Channels

Gerardo Adesso, Ludovico Lami and Vittorio Giovannetti

arXiv
2610.22308v1 · PDF · 15 October 2026
Categories
quant-ph, math-ph, math.MP
Licence
CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

The classical capacity of a noisy optical channel is the maximum rate at which information can be transmitted reliably, given a constraint on the mean input energy. For the ubiquitous bosonic Gaussian channels, which include standard models of loss and noise in fibre and free-space optical links, determining this rate requires addressing whether entanglement between channel uses or non-Gaussian signals can outperform Gaussian encodings. More precisely, the question is whether the energy-constrained Holevo information is additive across arbitrarily many channel uses and coincides with its Gaussian counterpart. We answer these fundamental questions in the affirmative for every single-mode bosonic Gaussian channel at every input energy. Namely, we prove that independently prepared Gaussian states with Gaussian-distributed random displacements achieve the capacity, including in the low-energy regime where squeezing the signals competes with encoding information in their displacement. Our proof connects an entanglement inequality to a sharp, additive lower bound on output entropy. We then characterise communication above capacity: under a strict total photon-number cutoff, the probability of correct decoding decreases exponentially with the number of channel uses, and we derive explicit bounds on the decay exponent. When only the mean photon number is constrained, a simple energy-rescaling formula determines exactly the entire asymptotic rate–error trade-off: the capacity at mean photon number N and allowed average decoding error \epsilon equals the vanishing-error capacity at mean photon number N/(1-\epsilon). Together, these results identify the ultimate limits of classical communication for some of the most fundamental models of optical communication.

Items 32

Theorem

Theorem 1 (Output entropy from second moments)

6ZB9

Let \Phi_1,\dots,\Phi_m be single-mode Gaussian channels in the canonical form (?). For every state \rho of m modes with finite mean energy, possibly entangled and non-Gaussian,

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} S\bigl((\Phi_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\Phi_m)(\rho)\bigr) \geq \sum_{j = 1}^m\varepsilon_j\bigl(2\langle x_j^2\rangle_\rho,2\langle p_j^2\rangle_\rho\bigr) \, . \end{aligned}

Here \varepsilon_j is the function \varepsilon defined in (?), evaluated with the parameters k_j,y_j,\xi_j of the j^{\,\text{th}} channel. Equality holds for every product of squeezed vacua \gamma_{u_j}. Furthermore, for all z_j,w_j>0 such that z_jw_j \geq 1, the bound is tight under the corresponding upper bounds on the second moments:

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \sum_{j = 1}^m\varepsilon_j(z_j,w_j) = \min\Big\{ &S\bigl((\Phi_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\Phi_m)(\rho)\bigr):\\ &2\langle x_j^2\rangle_\rho \leq z_j,\ 2\langle p_j^2\rangle_\rho \leq w_j\ \,\forall\, j\Big\}\, . \end{aligned}

The minimum can be attained with all the moment constraints saturated.

Used by Proof
Proof of Theorem 1

Write z_j = 2\operatorname{Tr}[\rho x_j^2] and w_j = 2\operatorname{Tr}[\rho p_j^2]. We first obtain lower bounds that are affine in these moments. The two auxiliary ingredients used in the proof, Proposition 8 and Lemma 9, are established in Appendix ?. For each channel, choose a squeezed vacuum \gamma_{u_j}, with u_j\neq1/\xi_j, independently of the actual input \rho. Lemma 9 constructs a dilation by a symplectic unitary on the input mode A_j and two auxiliary modes B_j,E_j, initially in vacuum. After a local squeezing of the receiver A_j, the resulting unitary \widetilde V_{j,u_j} sends \gamma_{u_j}\otimes\lvert0\rangle\!\langle0\rvert_{B_jE_j} to a two-mode squeezed vacuum on A_jB_j and vacuum on E_j. Apply the product of these unitaries to \rho_A and the auxiliary vacuum, then trace out E = E_1\ldots E_m:

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \Omega_{AB} \coloneqq \operatorname{Tr}_E\Bigg[&\left(\bigotimes\nolimits_j\widetilde V_{j,u_j}\right)\big(\rho_A\otimes\lvert0\rangle\!\langle0\rvert_{BE}\big)\left(\bigotimes\nolimits_j\widetilde V_{j,u_j}\right)^\dag\Bigg] \, . \end{aligned}

Here A = A_1\ldots A_m, B = B_1\ldots B_m, and |0\rangle_{BE} is the joint vacuum of the 2m auxiliary modes. The state \Omega_{AB} has finite energy, but in general will be mixed and potentially non-Gaussian.

Its marginal on A is unitarily equivalent to (\Phi_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\Phi_m)(\rho), so it has the same entropy.

We apply the mixed-state form of the many-pair entropy inequality, Proposition 8, to \Omega_{AB}. Lemma 9 chooses the coefficients of each quadratic observable so that its expectation depends on only one input quadrature moment. Substituting its identity (9) into (8), for u_j<1/\xi_j on every mode, gives

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} &S\big((\Phi_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\Phi_m)(\rho)\big)\\ &\quad\geq\sum_{j = 1}^m\left[h_j(u_j,1/u_j) + \left.\frac{d}{dv}h_j(v,1/v)\right|_{v = u_j}(z_j - u_j)\right] \, . \end{aligned}

Here h_j is the function h defined in (?), evaluated with the parameters k_j,y_j,\xi_j of the j^{\,\text{th}} channel. Each summand is the tangent to the squeezed-vacuum output entropy as a function of its position second moment. On any mode we may instead choose u_j>1/\xi_j, obtaining the tangent to w\mapsto h_j(1/w,w) at w = 1/u_j, evaluated at w_j. The many-pair inequality is essential here: separate bounds on the marginal output entropies would not give this lower bound on their joint entropy.

We can now choose u_j so that the affine corrections vanish. If z_j<1/\xi_j, take u_j = z_j; if w_j<\xi_j, take u_j = 1/w_j. These cases are mutually exclusive because z_jw_j \geq 1, and the resulting summand is exactly \varepsilon_j(z_j,w_j). Otherwise both z_j\geq1/\xi_j and w_j\geq\xi_j, so take u_j\to1/\xi_j. The seed entropy tends to S_{\min,j} and its derivative tends to zero, giving the same conclusion. This derivative limit also holds when k_j + y_j = 1: the output symplectic eigenvalue minus one vanishes quadratically in u_j - 1/\xi_j, which compensates for the logarithmic divergence of the entropy derivative. Taking these scalar limits mode by mode proves (1).

For a product of squeezed vacua the interval in (?) collapses to a single point on each mode, so equality holds in (1). To prove (1), every feasible state satisfies

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} S\big((\Phi_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\Phi_m)(\rho)\big) &\geq \sum_j\varepsilon_j\big(2\langle x_j^2\rangle_\rho,2\langle p_j^2\rangle_\rho\big)\\ &\geq \sum_j\varepsilon_j(z_j,w_j), \end{aligned}

where the second inequality uses that each \varepsilon_j is nonincreasing in both arguments. Let \hat u_j be the minimiser in (?) for the j^{\,\text{th}} channel. The product \bigotimes_j\gamma_{\hat u_j} attains this value and obeys the constraints. Moreover, displacing its j^{\,\text{th}} mode to have first moments \sqrt{(z_j - \hat u_j)/2} and \sqrt{(w_j - 1/\hat u_j)/2} makes both constraints equalities, while leaving every output entropy unchanged.

Theorem

Theorem 2 (Moment-resolved Gaussian optimality)

ZRQ2

Let \Phi_1,\dots,\Phi_m be single-mode Gaussian channels in the canonical form (?). For every ensemble (p_i,\rho_i)_i of states of m modes with finite mean energy, possibly entangled and non-Gaussian, whose average has second moments z_j = 2\langle x_j^2\rangle and w_j = 2\langle p_j^2\rangle,

\chi\big(\Phi_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\Phi_m;(p_i,\rho_i)_i\big) \leq \sum_{j = 1}^m\big[h_j(z_j,w_j) - \varepsilon_j(z_j,w_j)\big].

Here h_j and \varepsilon_j are the functions defined in (?) and (?), respectively, evaluated with the parameters k_j,y_j,\xi_j of \Phi_j. For all admissible (z_j,w_j), equality is attained by a product of Gaussian ensembles with these second moments.

Proof of Theorem 2

Apply Theorem 1 to every signal state in the ensemble. Since \varepsilon_j is convex and second moments are affine in the state, Jensen’s inequality bounds the average signal output entropy from below by \sum_j\varepsilon_j(z_j,w_j). Subtracting this from the upper bound on the average output entropy proves (2). The product of the Gaussian displacement ensembles constructed after (?) attains equality, because its average covariance matrix is diagonal and every displaced signal has output entropy \sum_j\varepsilon_j(z_j,w_j).

Corollary

Corollary 3 (Capacities and water-filling)

3Z17

For arbitrary single-mode Gaussian channels \Phi_1,\dots,\Phi_m,

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \chi(\Phi_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\Phi_m,E) = \max_{\substack{N_j\geq0\\ \sum_jN_j\leq E}} \sum_{j=1}^m \chi_{\mathrm{G}}(\Phi_j,N_j). \end{aligned}

Here \chi_{\mathrm{G}}(\Phi,N) is obtained by restricting the optimisation in Eq. (?) to Gaussian signal ensembles. For each \Phi, the function N\mapsto\chi_{\mathrm{G}}(\Phi,N) is concave. In particular:

  1. for every single-mode Gaussian channel \Phi,

    \chi(\Phi^{\otimes n},nN)=n\,\chi_{\mathrm{G}}(\Phi,N),

    and hence

    C(\Phi,N)=\chi_{\mathrm{G}}(\Phi,N)

    at every input energy;

  2. for any two finite products \Phi and \Psi of single-mode Gaussian channels,

    \chi(\Phi\otimes\Psi,E) = \max_{\substack{E_1,E_2\geq0\\E_1+E_2\leq E}} \big[\chi(\Phi,E_1)+\chi(\Psi,E_2)\big];
  3. the classical capacity of \Phi_1\otimes\cdots\otimes\Phi_m at total energy E per use is given by the water-filling formula (3).

Corollary

Corollary 4 (Memory channels)

3TW9

If Y_xY_p=Y_pY_x, the n-use channel is equivalent, through a passive transformation that preserves the total photon number, to a product of single-mode channels with noise \operatorname{diag}(y_{x,l},y_{p,l}), where y_{x,l} and y_{p,l} are the eigenvalues of Y_x and Y_p on a common eigenvector. The capacity of this block, when independently repeated with energy E per block, is given by Eq. (3) over these normal modes.

Proposition

Proposition 5 (Tight Gaussian reference)

YTGX

Fix a single-mode Gaussian channel in the canonical form (?) and N>0. Let \sigma_* be the centred Gaussian average output of an optimal ensemble at energy N, and let \lambda = \partial_N C(\Phi,N). Then, for every n-mode input \rho with finite energy,

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} D\Bigl(\Phi^{\otimes n}(\rho)\Big\|\sigma_*^{\otimes n}\Bigr) \leq nC(\Phi,N) + \lambda\big(\operatorname{Tr}[\rho H_n] - nN\big). \end{aligned}

In particular, the supremum of the left-hand side over \operatorname{Tr}[\rho H_n] \leq nN equals nC(\Phi,N).

Theorem

Theorem 6 (Exact nonzero-error classical capacity)

1VKH

Under the mean-input-energy constraint, with both energy and decoding error averaged over equiprobable messages, every single-mode Gaussian channel \Phi satisfies

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} C_\epsilon(\Phi,N) = C\!\left(\Phi,\frac{N}{1 - \epsilon}\right), \qquad N\geq0,\quad 0\leq\epsilon<1. \end{aligned}
Proposition

Proposition 7 (Exponential strong converse under a photon-number cutoff)

PR4O

For every single-mode Gaussian channel \Phi, every E>0, and every R>C(\Phi,E), there exist a>0 and n_0 such that every M_n-message code with \ln M_n \geq nR, whose codewords are all supported on the span of n-mode Fock states with total photon number at most \lfloor nE\rfloor, satisfies

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} p_{\rm succ}^{(n)}<e^{-an},\qquad n \geq n_0. \end{aligned}

The encodings may be non-Gaussian and entangled across all channel uses, and the decoder may be collective. The vanishing-error capacity under this cutoff equals C(\Phi,E). At E = 0, all inputs are vacuum and p_{\rm succ}^{(n)} = 1/M_n.

Proof of Proposition 7

Choose E_1>E so close that C(\Phi,E_1)<R and then choose \eta>0 with 2\eta<R - C(\Phi,E_1). Proposition 15 gives \kappa>0. Choose

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} 0<a<\min\left\{\kappa,\frac{R - C(\Phi,E_1) - 2\eta}{2}\right\}. \end{aligned}

If a code had p \ge e^{-an}, then z \le e^{-n(\kappa - a/2)}\to0 uniformly over such codes. For large n, 1 - 4z>0, so substituting \ln M \ge nR, \ln p \ge - an, and \ln\Gamma \le n\eta in (13) would imply

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} C(\Phi,E_1) \ge R - 2a - 2\eta - o(1), \end{aligned}

contrary to the choice of a. This proves exponential decay for all sufficiently large n. At E = 0, every input is vacuum and p = 1/M directly.

Proposition

Proposition 8 (Affine entropy bound)

IXCP

Let A = A_1\ldots A_m and B = B_1\ldots B_m be two collections of modes, with annihilation operators a_j,b_j. For each j, let \nu_j,t_j,s_j>0 satisfy

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \frac{t_js_j(2\nu_j + 1)}{\sqrt{\nu_j(\nu_j + 1)}} - t_j^2 - s_j^2 = \ln(1 + 1/\nu_j) \, . \end{aligned}

Then every state \rho_{AB} with finite mean energy satisfies

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} S(\rho_A) \geq \sum_{j = 1}^m\bigg\{&g(\nu_j) + \left(s_j\sqrt{\nu_j + 1} - t_j\sqrt{\nu_j}\right)^2\\ &- \operatorname{Tr}\Big[\rho_{AB}\big(t_ja_j^\dag - s_jb_j\big)\big(t_ja_j - s_jb_j^\dag\big)\Big]\bigg\}\, . \end{aligned}

Equality holds for \rho_{AB} = \bigotimes_j \lvert\Psi_{\nu_j}\rangle\!\langle\Psi_{\nu_j}\rvert.

Used by Proof, Proof
Proof of Proposition 8

For pure states this is the cited inequality, after changing its squeezing parameter to \sqrt{\nu_j/(\nu_j + 1)} and rescaling the two coefficients. Indeed, positivity of the left-hand side of (8) is equivalent to \sqrt{\nu_j/(\nu_j + 1)}<t_j/s_j<\sqrt{(\nu_j + 1)/\nu_j}. Any ratio in this interval can be normalised by a common positive rescaling, and (8) makes the entropy prefactor equal to one. The two possible mode orders in the original statement are included because exchanging the modes and coefficients changes (?) only by a constant, which cancels against its reference expectation.

For a mixed state, apply the pure-state inequality to its spectral decomposition and average, using entropy concavity and linearity of the quadratic expectations. Every eigenvector of nonzero weight has finite energy. Moreover, (t_ja_j^\dag - s_jb_j)(t_ja_j - s_jb_j^\dag)\leq2t_j^2a_j^\dag a_j + 2s_j^2(b_j^\dag b_j + \mathds{1}) as quadratic forms, so all expectations are finite and the countable averages are legitimate. The stated equality follows from the reference expectations above.

Lemma

Lemma 9 (Quadrature-dependent expectation)

MHY0

Let \Phi be as in (?), fix u>0 with u\neq1/\xi, and let 2\nu + 1 be the symplectic eigenvalue of the covariance matrix of \Phi(\gamma_u), so that g(\nu) = h(u,1/u). There exist a symplectic unitary V on three modes ABE and a squeezing unitary U_r on A such that:

  1. V is a Stinespring dilation of \Phi, meaning that

    \begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \Phi(\rho) &= \operatorname{Tr}_{BE}\Big[V\big(\rho_A\otimes\lvert0\rangle\!\langle0\rvert_{BE}\big)V^\dag\Big]\, ; \end{aligned}

    and

  2. defining \widetilde V_u \coloneqq (U_r\otimes\mathds{1}_{BE})V, it holds that

    \begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \widetilde{V}_u\big(\gamma_u\otimes\lvert0\rangle\!\langle0\rvert_{BE}\big)\widetilde V_u^\dag &= \lvert\Psi_\nu\rangle\!\langle\Psi_\nu\rvert_{AB}\otimes \lvert0\rangle\!\langle0\rvert_E\, . \end{aligned}

Here A labels both the input and the receiver. There also exist t,s>0 satisfying (8) with parameter \nu, for which every input \rho with finite second moments obeys

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \operatorname{Tr}\!\Big[&\widetilde{V}_u \big(\rho_A\!\otimes\lvert0\rangle\!\langle0\rvert_{BE}\big)\widetilde{V}_u^\dag\big(ta^\dag \!-\! sb\big)\big(ta \!-\! sb^\dag\big)\Big] - \left(s\sqrt{\nu \!+\!1} \!- t\sqrt\nu\right)^2\\ &= \begin{cases} -\left.\dfrac{d}{dv}h(v,1/v)\right|_{v = u}\big(2\operatorname{Tr}[\rho x^2] - u\big),&u<1/\xi,\\[2mm] -\left.\dfrac{d}{dw}h(1/w,w)\right|_{w = 1/u}\big(2\operatorname{Tr}[\rho p^2] - 1/u\big),&u>1/\xi. \end{cases} \end{aligned}

The annihilation operators a,b refer to output modes A,B. All choices depend only on the channel and u, independently of \rho.

Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 9

We order the quadratures as

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} R_{ABE} = (x_A,p_A,x_B,p_B,x_E,p_E)^{\mathsf T} , \end{aligned}

and write \omega = \left(\begin{smallmatrix}0&1\\-1&0\end{smallmatrix}\right), \Omega_3 = \omega^{\oplus3}, and \sigma_z = \operatorname{diag}(1,-1). The unitary V corresponds to a real symplectic matrix T, defined by the relation V^\dag R_{ABE}V = TR_{ABE}. Following [BUCCO, Sec. 5.3], we see that, in order for V to be a Stinespring dilation of \Phi, we may choose the first two rows, corresponding to system A, as follows in terms of the X and Y matrices of the channel:

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} T &= \begin{pmatrix} X&\cos(\theta)\,\sqrt Y&-\sin(\theta)\,\sqrt Y\,\sigma_z \\ J & K & L \\ *&*&* \end{pmatrix}, \end{aligned}

where the angle \theta\in[0,\pi/2] is chosen so that(Note that the definition after Eq. (5.48) in [BUCCO] has a typo; it should feature \cos(2\theta_j) instead of \sin(2\theta_j).)

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \cos(2\theta) &= \frac{1-\det X}{\sqrt{\det Y}} = \frac{1 - \varsigma k}{y}\, . \end{aligned}

Complete positivity ensures that this choice of \theta is possible. We are not interested, for now, in the last two (E) rows of T; however, we need to choose the blocks J, K, L so that (?) is satisfied.

Let U_r be represented by the symplectic matrix

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} S_r \coloneqq \operatorname{diag}(r,r^{-1}),\qquad r \coloneqq \left(\frac{k/u + y\xi}{ku + y/\xi}\right)^{1/4} \, , \end{aligned}

in the sense that U_r^\dag R_A U_r = S_r R_A. Then, S_r(XV_uX^{\mathsf T} + Y)S_r^{\mathsf T} = (2\nu + 1)\mathds{1}_2. Moreover, (2\nu + 1)^2 = k^2 + y^2 + ky(\xi u + 1/(\xi u))>(k + y)^2\geq1, so \nu>0. Since the symplectic matrix representing \widetilde{V}_u is (S_r\oplus\mathds{1}_4)T, we thus need to impose that

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} &(S_r\oplus\mathds{1}_4)T(V_u\oplus\mathds{1}_4)T^{\mathsf T}(S_r\oplus\mathds{1}_4) \\ &\quad = \begin{pmatrix} (2\nu + 1)\mathds{1}_2&2\sqrt{\nu(\nu + 1)}\,\sigma_z&0\\ 2\sqrt{\nu(\nu + 1)}\,\sigma_z&(2\nu + 1)\mathds{1}_2&0\\ 0&0&\mathds{1}_2 \end{pmatrix}. \end{aligned}

Its first two rows, multiplied on the right by (S_r^{-1}\oplus\mathds{1}_4)T^{-\mathsf T}\Omega_3, give the identity

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} &\begin{pmatrix}S_r&0&0\end{pmatrix}T(V_u\oplus\mathds{1}_4)\Omega_3\\ &\ = (2\nu \!+\! 1)\omega\begin{pmatrix}S_r&0&0\end{pmatrix}T + 2\sqrt{\nu(\nu \!+\! 1)}\,\sigma_z\omega\begin{pmatrix}J&K&L\end{pmatrix}, \end{aligned}

where we used T^{-\mathsf T} = -\Omega_3T\Omega_3 and S_r^{-1}\omega = \omega S_r. Since (\sigma_z\omega)^2 = \mathds{1}_2, this shows that

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} &\begin{pmatrix}J&K&L\end{pmatrix}\\ &\, = \frac{\sigma_z}{2\sqrt{\nu(\nu \!+\! 1)}}\Big[ (2\nu \!+\! 1) S_r\begin{pmatrix} X & \cos(\theta) \sqrt{Y} & -\sin(\theta) \sqrt{Y} \sigma_z\end{pmatrix} \\ &\, \quad + \omega S_r\begin{pmatrix} X & \cos(\theta) \sqrt{Y} & -\sin(\theta) \sqrt{Y} \sigma_z\end{pmatrix} (V_u\oplus\mathds{1}_4)\Omega_3\Big]. \end{aligned}

To check that this choice actually permits the desired completion, note that the first two rows of (S_r\oplus\mathds{1}_4)T have symplectic products \omega and give covariance matrix (2\nu + 1)\mathds{1}_2 on the input \gamma_u\otimes\lvert0\rangle\!\langle0\rvert_{BE}. Together with (V_u\oplus\mathds{1}_4)\Omega_3(V_u\oplus\mathds{1}_4)=\Omega_3, these identities determine the cross terms when substituting (?). In the symplectic product of the two-term expression in square brackets with its transpose, the two square terms give (2\nu + 1)^2\omega and \omega, while each mixed term gives -(2\nu + 1)^2\omega. Hence

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \begin{pmatrix}J&K&L\end{pmatrix}\Omega_3\begin{pmatrix}J&K&L\end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf T} &= \frac{1 - (2\nu + 1)^2}{4\nu(\nu + 1)}\,\sigma_z\omega\sigma_z = \omega \, . \end{aligned}

For the covariance matrix products, the mixed terms before multiplication by the coefficient 2\nu + 1 are both -\mathds{1}_2. The same substitution therefore gives the other three identities:

\begin{aligned} \begin{pmatrix}S_r&0&0\end{pmatrix}T\Omega_3\begin{pmatrix}J&K&L\end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf T} &= 0, \\ \begin{pmatrix}J&K&L\end{pmatrix}(V_u\oplus\mathds{1}_4)\begin{pmatrix}J&K&L\end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf T} &= (2\nu + 1)\mathds{1}_2, \\ \begin{pmatrix}S_r&0&0\end{pmatrix}T(V_u\oplus\mathds{1}_4)\begin{pmatrix}J&K&L\end{pmatrix}^{\mathsf T} &= 2\sqrt{\nu(\nu + 1)}\,\sigma_z \, . \end{aligned}

Due to (?)–(?), the first four rows of T, corresponding to modes A and B, span a symplectic subspace. Hence, choosing a canonical pair in its symplectic complement completes T to a symplectic matrix. Note that we still have some freedom in choosing T, as we can multiply the sub-matrix obtained by collecting the last two (E) rows by a local symplectic matrix on the third mode.

Due to (?)–(?), the two matrices in (?) coincide in the 4\times 4 top left entries, i.e. in the whole AB block. Since this is the covariance matrix of a pure Gaussian state, AB is uncorrelated with E. The full output is pure as well, because the input is pure and T is symplectic, so the state of E is also pure. By Williamson’s theorem, we can transform it into the vacuum by applying a symplectic unitary on E (without changing the first four rows). This establishes (?).

The first two columns of (?) give

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} J &= \frac{\sigma_z\big((2\nu + 1)S_rX + \omega S_rXV_u\omega\big)}{2\sqrt{\nu(\nu + 1)}}, \end{aligned}

Since k>0 and r>0, the two diagonal entries of S_rX = \sqrt{k}\operatorname{diag}(r,\varsigma/r) are nonzero. We can therefore multiply by its inverse to obtain

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \sigma_zJ(S_rX)^{-1} &= \frac{(2\nu + 1)\mathds{1}_2 - \varsigma\operatorname{diag}\big((r^2u)^{-1},r^2u\big)}{2\sqrt{\nu(\nu + 1)}} \, . \end{aligned}

Since r^4u^2 - 1 = y(\xi u^2 - \xi^{-1})/(ku + y/\xi), the two positive numbers r^2u and (r^2u)^{-1} are reciprocal and unequal. Exactly one diagonal entry of the last matrix belongs to \left(\sqrt{\nu/(\nu + 1)},\sqrt{(\nu + 1)/\nu}\right): the second for u<1/\xi, and the first for u>1/\xi. Choose t/s to equal that entry. Then

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} tS_rX - s\sigma_z J\ \propto\ \begin{cases} \operatorname{diag}(1,0),&u<1/\xi,\\ \operatorname{diag}(0,1),&u>1/\xi, \end{cases} \end{aligned}

The proportionality factor is nonzero: the two diagonal entries in (?) are different, so choosing t/s to equal one of them makes exactly one diagonal entry of t\mathds{1}_2 - s\sigma_zJ(S_rX)^{-1} vanish, and multiplying by the invertible diagonal matrix S_rX preserves this property. The strict interval makes the left-hand side of (8) positive before normalisation, so a common positive rescaling of t,s imposes that equation.

To evaluate the quadratic observable, we write its two quadrature combinations in terms of the input quadratures. The definition of T gives

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \widetilde V_u^\dag\begin{pmatrix}tx_A - sx_B\\tp_A + sp_B\end{pmatrix}\widetilde V_u &= (tS_rX - s\sigma_zJ)R_A\\ &\quad + \big(t\cos(\theta)S_r\sqrt Y - s\sigma_zK\big)R_B\\ &\quad - \big(t\sin(\theta)S_r\sqrt Y\sigma_z + s\sigma_zL\big)R_E \, . \end{aligned}

On the input \rho_A\otimes\lvert0\rangle\!\langle0\rvert_{BE}, each cross term between an input quadrature on A and an auxiliary quadrature on either B or E has zero expectation, because the vacuum first moments vanish. This remains true when \rho is not centred. The terms involving only B,E are independent of \rho, as is the scalar term in (?); they therefore cancel when subtracting the expectation obtained with input \gamma_u. By (?), that expectation is \left(s\sqrt{\nu + 1}-t\sqrt\nu\right)^2, and (?) now gives

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \operatorname{Tr}\!\Big[&\widetilde{V}_u\big(\rho_A\!\otimes\lvert0\rangle\!\langle0\rvert_{BE}\big)\widetilde{V}_u^\dag\big(ta^\dag\!-\!sb\big)\big(ta\!-\!sb^\dag\big)\Big] - \left(s\sqrt{\nu\!+\!1}\!-t\sqrt\nu\right)^2\\ &= \begin{cases} c\big(2\operatorname{Tr}[\rho x^2] - u\big),&u<1/\xi,\\[2mm] c\big(2\operatorname{Tr}[\rho p^2] - 1/u\big),&u>1/\xi. \end{cases} \end{aligned}

Here c>0 is one quarter of the square of the nonzero entry of tS_rX - s\sigma_zJ, and is independent of \rho.

For u<1/\xi, keep V,U_r,t,s fixed and apply the mixed-state one-pair case of Proposition 8 to the AB marginal obtained from \gamma_v. Its receiver entropy is h(v,1/v), so

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} h(v,1/v) \geq h(u,1/u) - c(v - u),\qquad v>0 \, , \end{aligned}

with equality at v = u. Differentiability at this interior point therefore gives c = -\left.\frac{d}{dv}h(v,1/v)\right|_{v = u}. For u>1/\xi, the same argument with the input \gamma_{1/w} gives the difference c\big(2\operatorname{Tr}[\rho p^2] - 1/u\big) and identifies c = -\left.\frac{d}{dw}h(1/w,w)\right|_{w = 1/u}. This establishes (9) and therefore completes the proof.

Proposition

Proposition 10 (Memory-channel strong converse and error trade-off)

AO96

Fix finite memory strength s, thermal occupancy T \geq 0, and 0<\eta<1 in the chain model of Ref. [LPM2009]. For every E>0 and R>C_{\rm mem}(E), codes of rate at least R whose inputs are supported on the subspace spanned by Fock states with total photon number at most \lfloor nE\rfloor have exponentially vanishing success along the growing sequence of blocks. The cutoff capacity equals C_{\rm mem}(E). Under a mean-energy constraint and average error 0 \leq \epsilon<1, Eq. (?) holds.

Proof of Proposition 10

The passive normal-mode transformation preserves total photon number. It reduces each block to \bigotimes_{j = 1}^n\Phi_{\theta_j}, with \theta_j = \pi j/(n + 1). These channels need not be identical. Each has a dilation on three modes: prepare a two-mode squeezed vacuum purifying the thermal environment, squeeze the environmental input by s\cos\theta, and couple it to the signal with a beam splitter of transmissivity \eta. If r_T = \tfrac12\operatorname{arcosh}(2T + 1), the dilation matrices satisfy

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \sup_{\theta\in[0,\pi]}\max\{\|S_\theta\|_\infty,\|S_\theta^{-1}\|_\infty\} \leq e^{|s|+r_T}. \end{aligned}

This remains valid at T = 0, with an unused vacuum purification mode.

All estimates in Appendix ? are consequently uniform in n and in the normal-mode parameters. To see this explicitly, the Husimi moment argument uses only a common upper bound on the operator norms of the block-diagonal symplectic matrices and their inverses. A common smoothing covariance matrix and the radial input identity therefore give a single function \ell(s',L) for the whole product, allowing arbitrary correlated inputs. Here s'>0 is the moment parameter, distinct from the memory strength. The small-subset quadratic estimate uses the same uniform coefficient operator norm. The image projectors and transformed input Hamiltonians still commute site by site, and the polynomial degree, subset counting, and receiver Fock dimensions are unchanged. Thus the approximation error and projective-norm bounds have constants independent of the block length.

Let

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} C_n(E_1) = \frac1n\max_{\sum_jN_j \leq nE_1} \sum_{j = 1}^n C(\Phi_{\theta_j},N_j). \end{aligned}

Corollary 3 bounds the Holevo information of every auxiliary ensemble selected by the positive filter by nC_n(E_1). As proved above, C_n(E_1)\to C_{\rm mem}(E_1). The limiting function is finite, concave, and continuous for E_1>0. Choose E_1>E with C_{\rm mem}(E_1)<R and apply the same filter inequality and contradiction as in Proposition 7, replacing C(\Phi,E_1) by C_n(E_1). Its convergence and the uniform approximation constants give one positive exponential decay rate for all sufficiently large blocks. This establishes a converse for growing blocks, without replacing them by repetitions of a fixed block.

For cutoff achievability, take a bounded normal-mode allocation with strict energy slack, as in the preceding achievability proof. The average input is a product of centred Gaussian states whose covariance matrices range over a compact set. Their photon-number generating functions are finite on a common neighbourhood of zero, with uniformly bounded second derivatives of their logarithms. Their first derivatives are their mean photon numbers. A Chernoff bound therefore makes the average weight above nE exponentially small. Random coding can simultaneously make this weight and the decoding error vanish. Projecting each codeword onto the cutoff and replacing its discarded weight by vacuum changes average success by a vanishing amount. Letting the energy slack tend to zero proves cutoff achievability at C_{\rm mem}(E).

Finally, Proposition 12 applies to an arbitrary block channel, so the uniform cutoff converse gives the upper bound in Eq. (?). Diluting the reliable codes at energy N'<N/(1 - \epsilon) with vacuum gives the lower bound. Continuity permits N'\uparrow N/(1 - \epsilon). At N = 0 all inputs are vacuum and both sides vanish; at \epsilon = 0 the preceding capacity result applies.

Fact

Fact 11 (Gaussification and Gaussian channels)

GSN1

For every Gaussian channel \Phi between finitely many modes and every input state \rho with finite second moments,

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \big(\Phi(\rho)\big)_{\mathrm{G}} = \Phi(\rho_{\mathrm{G}}) \, . \end{aligned}
Proof of Fact 11

The affine transformation of first moments and covariance matrices under \Phi is the same for \rho and \rho_{\mathrm{G}}. Since \Phi(\rho_{\mathrm{G}}) is Gaussian, uniqueness of the Gaussian state with the resulting moments proves (11).

Proposition

Proposition 12 (Transferring photon-number bounds to mean energy)

IAZ4

For a fixed channel \Phi, let B_n(M,E) be the supremum of the decoding success probability for M-message codes whose inputs are supported on the span of n-mode Fock states with total photon number at most \lfloor nE\rfloor. Every code with average energy at most nN satisfies

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} p_{\rm succ} \leq \min\!\left\{1, \left(\sqrt{B_n(M,E)} + \sqrt{\delta_n}\right)^2\right\}, \end{aligned}

where \delta_n = \min\{1,nN/(\lfloor nE\rfloor + 1)\}.

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 12

We prove the bound without dephasing the codewords. Put \Pi = \mathds{1}_{H_n \leq \lfloor nE\rfloor} and Q = \mathds{1} - \Pi, and let \{\Lambda_m\}_{m = 1}^M be the decoder POVM. Apply the adjoint channel to its effects, defining T_m = (\Phi^{\otimes n})^\dag(\Lambda_m). Then 0 \leq T_m \leq \mathds{1} and \sum_mT_m = \mathds{1}. Define

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} p_L = \frac1M\sum_m\operatorname{Tr}\big[T_m\Pi\rho_m\Pi\big],\qquad p_H = \frac1M\sum_m\operatorname{Tr}\big[T_m Q\rho_m Q\big]. \end{aligned}

Cauchy–Schwarz for the Hilbert–Schmidt inner product, followed by Cauchy–Schwarz over messages, bounds the cross term by \sqrt{p_Lp_H}. Hence

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} p_{\rm succ} \leq p_L + p_H + 2\sqrt{p_Lp_H} = \left(\sqrt{p_L} + \sqrt{p_H}\right)^2. \end{aligned}

In particular, p_H \leq \operatorname{Tr}\big[Q\bar\rho\big] \leq \delta_n by the energy constraint. Replace each input by the normalised state

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \rho'_m = \Pi\rho_m\Pi + \operatorname{Tr}[Q\rho_m]|0\rangle\langle0|^{\otimes n}. \end{aligned}

These form a valid code supported on \operatorname{ran}\Pi. Its success with the same decoder is at least p_L, so p_L \leq B_n(M,E). Equation (12) follows. The argument allows arbitrary entangled inputs and coherences between the two sectors.

Lemma

Lemma 13 (Energy-preserving positive filter)

1BXS

Fix E<E_1. Let 0 \le G \le \mathds{1} be a finite-rank operator on the joint Stinespring output such that

  1. G V^{\otimes n}P_{n,E} = V^{\otimes n}P_{n,E};

  2. \operatorname{ran}G\subseteq V^{\otimes n}\operatorname{ran}P_{n,E_1}.

Suppose A has finite local support, \left\lVertA - G\right\rVert_\infty \le \epsilon, and \left\lVertA\right\rVert_\pi \le \Gamma. For an M-message photon-number-cutoff code of success p>0, put z = \epsilon/\sqrt p. If z<1/4, then

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} n C(\Phi,E_1) \ge {}&(1 - 4z)\ln M + 2\ln p - 2\ln\Gamma + 2\ln(1 - z)\\ &-(1 + 2z)h_2\left(\frac{2z}{1 + 2z}\right). \end{aligned}
Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 13

A receiver-side Naimark isometry makes the decoder effects orthogonal projections Q_m. Conjugate G and A, and compose the channel isometry, with that local isometry; their bounds and input-energy interpretation are unchanged. Let \lambda_m = \left\lVertGQ_mG\right\rVert_\infty. The identity action of G on the original input image implies that \lambda_m is at least the success of the original mth codeword, including for mixed codewords. For \lambda_m>0, choose a normalised top eigenvector \lvert\psi_m\rangle of GQ_mG. It belongs to \operatorname{ran}G and therefore corresponds to a genuine input supported on \operatorname{ran}P_{n,E_1}. Also \lambda_m \le 1. Set Z = \sum_m\lambda_m \ge Mp and q_m = \lambda_m/Z; zero terms are omitted. Writing H(X)_q = -\sum_mq_m\ln q_m for the label entropy, we have H(X)_q \ge - \ln\max_mq_m \ge \ln M + \ln p.

On two classical-label copies and the dilated output define

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \lvert\psi\rangle& = \sum_m\sqrt{q_m}\lvertm\rangle_X\lvertm\rangle_{X'}\lvert\psi_m\rangle,\\ \lvert\theta\rangle& = \sum_m\frac{\sqrt{q_m}}{\lambda_m} \lvertm\rangle_X\lvertm\rangle_{X'}Q_mG\lvert\psi_m\rangle. \end{aligned}

The eigenvector equations give G\lvert\theta\rangle = \lvert\psi\rangle and \left\lVert\theta\right\rVert^2 = \sum_mq_m/\lambda_m \le 1/p. Consequently \left\lVertA\lvert\theta\rangle - \lvert\psi\rangle\right\rVert \le z and v \coloneqq \left\lVertA\lvert\theta\rangle\right\rVert \ge 1 - z. The normalised vector \lvert\varphi\rangle = A\lvert\theta\rangle/v has trace distance (with the factor 1/2) at most 2z from \lvert\psi\rangle.

Orthogonality of the decoder projectors implies

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \theta_{XX'F} \le \mathds{1}_X\otimes\theta_{X'F}, \qquad\operatorname{Tr}\big[\theta_{X'F}\big] = \left\lVert\theta\right\rVert^2 \le 1/p. \end{aligned}

For a decomposition A = \sum_lc_lX_l\otimes Y_l with local contractions, c_l \ge 0, and \sum_lc_l \le \Gamma (or arbitrarily close), apply vector Cauchy–Schwarz. For each contraction X_l and positive T, one has \operatorname{Tr}_B\big[(X_l\otimes \mathds{1})T(X_l^\dag\otimes \mathds{1})\big] \leq \operatorname{Tr}_B[T]. Together these give

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \varphi_{XX'F} \le \mathds{1}_X\otimes\mu_{X'F},\qquad \operatorname{Tr}\big[\mu_{X'F}\big] \le \frac{\Gamma^2}{p v^2}. \end{aligned}

More explicitly, one may take \mu = v^{-2}\Gamma\sum_lc_l(\mathds{1}_{X'}\otimes Y_l) \theta_{X'F}(\mathds{1}_{X'}\otimes Y_l^\dag). Operator domination bounds the max-relative entropy, and hence the relative entropy, against \mathds{1}_X\otimes\mu/\operatorname{Tr}\big[\mu\big]. Positivity of the marginal relative entropy then gives S(X|X'F)_\varphi \ge - \ln\operatorname{Tr}\big[\mu\big]. With S(A|B) = S(AB) - S(B), pure-state conditional-entropy duality therefore yields

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} S(X|B)_\varphi \le 2\ln\Gamma - \ln p - 2\ln v. \end{aligned}

The conditional-entropy continuity bound with finite X [Winter2016] gives

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} S(X|B)_\psi \le S(X|B)_\varphi + 4z\ln M + (1 + 2z)h_2\left(\frac{2z}{1 + 2z}\right). \end{aligned}

The XB marginal of \psi is a genuine channel ensemble with all inputs supported on \operatorname{ran}P_{n,E_1}. Subtract its conditional entropy from H(X)_q and use (?), v \ge 1 - z, to obtain (13). The approximant has finite receiver and environment support. Conditional entropy continuity depends only on \dim X = M; the genuine channel ensemble also has finite energy. No finite-dimensional assumption on the full bosonic output is needed.

Lemma

Lemma 14

ADON

For a fixed d-mode symplectic unitary W, there is s_0>0 depending only on W, and a finite function \ell_W(s,L) for every L \ge 0 and 0<s<s_0, such that

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \sup_{\rho:\,\operatorname{supp}\rho\subseteq\operatorname{ran}\mathds{1}_{\{H_{dn}^{\rm phys}\leq nL\}}} \operatorname{Tr}\big[W^{\otimes n}\rho W^{\dag\otimes n}e^{sH_{dn}^{\rm phys}}\big] \le e^{n\ell_W(s,L)}. \end{aligned}

The function is independent of n and of correlations in \rho.

Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 14

Let S be the symplectic matrix of W, \kappa_S = \left\lVertS\right\rVert_\infty^2, and choose c \ge (\kappa_S - 1)/2. Put A = c\mathds{1} + (\mathds{1} - SS^{\mathsf{T}})/2 \ge 0 and a_S = \left\lVertA\right\rVert_\infty. Let Q_\rho denote the heterodyne (Husimi) probability distribution of \rho. Its real outcome vector Z is normalised so that the vacuum has covariance matrix \mathds{1}, and

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \mathbb{E}_{Q_\rho}e^{u|Z|^2/2} = \operatorname{Tr}\big[\rho(1 - u)^{-(H_{dn}^{\rm phys} + dn)}\big],\qquad 0<u<1. \end{aligned}

Adding independent centred Gaussian noise with covariance matrix c\mathds{1} to the output Husimi distribution gives the distribution of S^{\oplus n}Z + \zeta, where \zeta is independent Gaussian with covariance matrix A^{\oplus n}. This characteristic-function identity is valid for arbitrary, possibly non-Gaussian, inputs. Set

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} u = 1 - e^{-s},\qquad v = \frac{u}{1 + cu},\qquad t = \frac{v\kappa_S}{1 - va_S}. \end{aligned}

For sufficiently small s>0, va_S<1 and t<1. Conditional Gaussian integration and S^{\mathsf{T}}(\mathds{1} - vA)^{-1}S \le \kappa_S(1 - va_S)^{-1}\mathds{1} give

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \mathbb{E} e^{v|S^{\oplus n}Z + \zeta|^2/2} \leq (1 - va_S)^{-dn}\mathbb{E}_{Q_\rho}e^{t|Z|^2/2}. \end{aligned}

Undoing the classical smoothing contributes (1 - cv)^{dn}, while converting the output Husimi moment into the photon moment contributes e^{-dns}. The resulting bound is

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \ell_W(s,L)& = -ds + d\ln(1 - cv) - d\ln(1 - va_S)\\ &\quad - (L + d)\ln(1 - t). \end{aligned}

The remaining input Husimi moment is at most (1 - t)^{-n(L + d)} by the radial identity and the input cutoff. All uses of positivity concern Husimi distributions, not Wigner functions. The nonnegative integrals may initially be read in the extended sense; the finite input bound proves their integrability.

Proposition

Proposition 15

NYML

Fix 0<E<E_1<\infty. For every \eta>0 there exist \kappa>0, finite-rank positive contractions G_n, and finite-local-support operators A_n such that

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} G_nV^{\otimes n}P_{n,E}& = V^{\otimes n}P_{n,E},\\ \operatorname{ran}G_n&\subseteq V^{\otimes n}\operatorname{ran}P_{n,E_1},\\ \left\lVertA_n - G_n\right\rVert_\infty& \le e^{-\kappa n},\qquad \left\lVertA_n\right\rVert_\pi \le e^{\eta n} \end{aligned}

for all sufficiently large n.

Used by Proof
Proof of Proposition 15

Choice of output and spectral cutoffs. Choose a sufficiently small positive moment parameter s for both U and U^\dag. By Lemma 14, choose F_0 so large that sF_0>\ell_U(s,E_1). Let

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} P = P_{B, \le \lfloor nF_0\rfloor}\otimes P_{F, \le \lfloor nF_0\rfloor}. \end{aligned}

Its complement is contained in \{H_{dn}^{\rm phys}>nF_0\}. On its range, H_{dn}^{\rm phys} \le 2nF_0. Because K^{(n)} \le U^{\otimes n}H_{dn}^{\rm phys}U^{\dag\otimes n} and the two operators commute, Lemma 14 also implies

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \left\lVertP e^{sK^{(n)}}P\right\rVert_\infty \le e^{n\ell_{U^\dag}(s,2F_0)}. \end{aligned}

Fix T>\max\{1,E_1\} large enough that sT>\ell_{U^\dag}(s,2F_0) + 2. Here P_{B, \le L} and P_{F, \le L} project onto at most L total photons in the receiver and environment, respectively. These cutoffs are fixed before choosing polynomial degrees.

Energy polynomial and exact filter. Choose small constants t_0,t_1>0, put D_i = \lfloor t_i n\rfloor, and set b = (E + E_1)/(2T). Define

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} q_n(x) = \sum_{j = 0}^{\lfloor D_1b\rfloor} \binom{D_1}{j}(x/T)^j(1 - x/T)^{D_1 - j}. \end{aligned}

On [0,T] it is a binomial lower-tail probability and lies in [0,1]. Hoeffding’s inequality yields, conservatively for large n,

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} |q_n(x) - 1|& \le \epsilon_1\quad(0 \le x \le E),\\ |q_n(x)|& \le \epsilon_1\quad(E_1 \le x \le T),\\ \epsilon_1& = e^{-D_1(E_1 - E)^2/(8T^2)}. \end{aligned}

Let f_n(x) equal 1 for 0 \le x \le E, equal q_n(x) for E<x<E_1, and equal 0 for x \ge E_1. Define

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} G_n = \Pi^{(n)}f_n(K^{(n)}/n). \end{aligned}

This is a finite-rank positive contraction with the exact identity and energy-support properties in the proposition. It is not required to be a projection or a Gaussian operator. Since the range of G_n is contained in the image of P_{n,E_1}, the direct moment bound gives \left\lVert(\mathds{1} - P)G_n\right\rVert_\infty^2 \leq e^{-n[sF_0 - \ell_U(s,E_1)]}. Using self-adjointness and \left\lVertG_n - PG_nP\right\rVert_\infty \leq 2\left\lVert(\mathds{1} - P)G_n\right\rVert_\infty yields

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \left\lVertG_n - PG_nP\right\rVert_\infty \le 2e^{-n[sF_0 - \ell_U(s,E_1)]/2}. \end{aligned}

Image polynomial. Write \Delta_j = \mathds{1} - \Pi_j and L_n = \sum_j\Delta_j. A NOR polynomial approximates one when all \Delta_j vanish and zero otherwise. The approximation of [Sherstov2020, Theorem 4.5], used in [BeigiTomamichel2026, Lemma 3 and Fact 2], applies to commuting projections on arbitrary Hilbert spaces: it gives a real polynomial p_n of degree at most D_0 with

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} p_n(0)& = 1,\qquad\max_{j\in\{0,\ldots,n\}}|p_n(j)| \le 1,\\ \max_{j\in\{1,\ldots,n\}}|p_n(j)|& \le \epsilon_0 \coloneqq e^{-cD_0^2/n} \end{aligned}

for a universal c>0 and D_0 \ge 3, as holds for all sufficiently large n. Its Newton expansion is

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} p_n(L_n) = \sum_{s' = 0}^{D_0}a_{s'}\sum_{|S'| = s'}\prod_{j\in S'}\Delta_j, \qquad |a_{s'}| \le 2^{s'}. \end{aligned}

In particular \left\lVertp_n(L_n) - \Pi^{(n)}\right\rVert_\infty \le \epsilon_0.

The approximant and its operator-norm error. Set

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} A_n = P p_n(L_n)q_n(K^{(n)}/n)P. \end{aligned}

It has finite local output support. Outside [0,T], |q_n(x)| \le (1 + 2x/T)^{D_1} \le e^{2D_1x/T} for x \ge 0. Thus (Proof) gives

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \left\lVertq_n(K^{(n)}/n)\mathds{1}_{\{K^{(n)}>nT\}}P\right\rVert_\infty \le \epsilon_2 \coloneqq e^{-n[sT - \ell_{U^\dag}(s,2F_0) - 4t_1]/2}. \end{aligned}

Choose t_1<1/4. The exponent is then strictly positive. On the complementary spectral interval q_n is bounded by one and differs from f_n by at most \epsilon_1. All functions of K^{(n)} commute with p_n(L_n) and \Pi^{(n)}. Consequently

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \left\lVertA_n - G_n\right\rVert_\infty \le 2e^{-n[sF_0 - \ell_U(s,E_1)]/2} + \epsilon_1 + \epsilon_2 + \epsilon_0(1 + \epsilon_2). \end{aligned}

For fixed positive t_0,t_1 this is exponentially small.

Projective-norm estimate. It remains to show that the exponent of \left\lVertA_n\right\rVert_\pi can be arbitrarily small; using a local Fock dimension proportional to n at every site would not suffice. We instead use the total photon number on each small subset. There is a constant A_U such that, on any subset J of v sites,

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \left\lVert\left(\sum_{j\in J}K_j\right)^r P^{\rm phys}_{J, \le L}\right\rVert_\infty \le [A_U(L + dv + 2r + 2)]^r. \end{aligned}

To justify this, write \sum_{j\in J}K_j = \sum_{j\in J}c_j^\dag c_j where P^{\rm phys}_{J, \le L} is the total photon-number cutoff on these sites and the c_j are fixed Bogoliubov linear combinations of the physical modes. The coefficient matrix is block diagonal with a fixed squared operator norm q_U, so the column \mathcal{C}_J = (c_j)_{j\in J} obeys \left\lVert\mathcal{C}_J P^{\rm phys}_{J, \le L}\right\rVert_\infty^2 \le q_U(2L + dv). Each c_j changes the photon number by at most one. The adjoint row on vectors of photon number at most L + 1 therefore has norm at most \sqrt{q_U(2L + dv + 4)}, giving \left\lVert(\sum_{j\in J}K_j)P^{\rm phys}_{J, \le L}\right\rVert_\infty \le q_U(2L + dv + 2). One may take q_U \leq \kappa_S = \|S\|_\infty^2, since conversion between quadratures and the doubled annihilation–creation vector is unitary. Iterating, with at most two additional photons per power, proves (?) with A_U = 2\kappa_S. The same largest singular value applies to S^{-1}, because S is symplectic.

Expand q_n(x) = \sum_{r = 0}^{D_1}b_rx^r and use the multinomial expansion of (K^{(n)})^r. Each resulting term, together with a term of (?), has the form

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \frac{r!}{n^r\prod_jm_j!}\, \left(\prod_jK_j^{m_j}\right)\left(\prod_{j\in S'}\Delta_j\right), \qquad\sum_jm_j = r. \end{aligned}

It is supported on at most D_0 + D_1 sites. All its factors commute and are nonnegative. For r = 0 it is a contraction. For r \geq 1, positivity of the terms in the multinomial expansion gives the joint spectral inequality

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \frac{r!}{\prod_jm_j!}\prod_jK_j^{m_j} \leq \left(\sum_{j:m_j>0}K_j\right)^r. \end{aligned}

Since the \Delta product is a commuting contraction, (?) bounds the norm of every compressed term (?) by \beta_0^r, with a constant \beta_0 depending on U,F_0,d but independent of n,r,m,S', provided (D_0 + D_1)/n \le 1. Here the physical total cutoff on the supporting subset is at most 2nF_0; one may take \beta_0 = A_U(2F_0 + d + 4). All unbounded-operator comparisons are understood as quadratic-form comparisons, followed by finite photon-number compression. The \Delta_j need not preserve physical photon number: their commutation with the K_j supplies the positive-operator comparison.

For clarity, the compression by P does not preserve small support, but its cost across B:F is only polynomial. On a supporting subset J use

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} P_{B, \le L} = \sum_{a = 0}^L P_{B_J, = a}\otimes P_{B_{J^c}, \le L - a}, \qquad L = \lfloor nF_0\rfloor, \end{aligned}

and the analogous environment identity on both sides of the local term. This produces at most (L + 1)^4 terms. The receiver subset has dimension at most \binom{L + v}{v}, where v = |J|. The elementary finite-dimensional inequality \left\lVertZ\right\rVert_\pi \le (\dim B_J)^2\left\lVertZ\right\rVert_\infty bounds each term; its remaining factors are local projections of norm at most one. Therefore the projective-norm cost per compressed local term is at most

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} (L + 1)^4\binom{L + D_0 + D_1}{D_0 + D_1}^{\!2}\beta_0^r. \end{aligned}

There are \binom{n + r - 1}{r} \le \binom{n + D_1}{D_1} multinomial index tuples. The coefficient sum of (?), expanded in x, is at most (1 + 2/T)^{D_1} \le 3^{D_1}. Finally, \sum_{s' = 0}^{D_0}2^{s'}\binom{n}{s'} \le 2^{D_0}e^{nh_2(D_0/n)} when D_0 \le n/2. These estimates give

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \left\lVertA_n\right\rVert_\pi \le {}&(L + 1)^4 \binom{L + D_0 + D_1}{D_0 + D_1}^{\!2}\binom{n + D_1}{D_1}\\ &\times(3\max\{1,\beta_0\})^{D_1}2^{D_0}e^{nh_2(D_0/n)}. \end{aligned}

Put t = t_0 + t_1 and recall the thermal entropy function g defined in Eq. (?). It follows that

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \limsup_{n\to\infty}&\frac1n\ln\left\lVertA_n\right\rVert_\pi\\ \le {}&2t g(F_0/t) + h_2(t_0) + t_0\ln2\\ &+(1 + t_1)h_2\left(\frac{t_1}{1 + t_1}\right) + t_1\ln(3\max\{1,\beta_0\}). \end{aligned}

The right-hand side tends to zero as t_0,t_1\downarrow0. Choose them positive and small enough that it is less than \eta. Equation (?) still has a strictly positive exponential rate. Absorb fixed prefactors by decreasing that rate to obtain (15).

Proposition

Proposition 16 (Computable filter exponent)

ZTRT

For codes at rate at least R supported on the subspace spanned by Fock states with total photon number at most \lfloor nE\rfloor, with E>0,

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \liminf_{n\to\infty} - \frac1n\ln p_{\rm succ}^{(n)} \geq \mathcal{E}_{\rm filt}(R,E), \end{aligned}

where [t]_+ \coloneqq \max\{t,0\} and, for any fixed Gaussian dilation,

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \mathcal{E}_{\rm filt}(R,E) = \sup_{E_1,s,F_0,T,t_0,t_1} \left[\min\left\{2\kappa,\frac{R - C(\Phi,E_1) - 2B}{2}\right\}\right]_+. \end{aligned}

The supremum runs over the admissible parameters just specified. It is strictly positive whenever R>C(\Phi,E).

Proof of Proposition 16

The construction with Eq. (?) gives \|A_n - G_n\|_\infty \leq e^{-n\kappa + o(n)} and \|A_n\|_\pi \leq e^{nB + o(n)}. For any positive a<\min\{2\kappa,[R - C(\Phi,E_1) - 2B]/2\}, a code with p \geq e^{-an} would have z \leq e^{-n(\kappa - a/2) + o(n)}\to0. The filter inequality would then give C(\Phi,E_1) \geq R - 2a - 2B - o(1), a contradiction. Taking the supremum proves the exponent bound. For positivity, first choose E_1 with C(\Phi,E_1)<R, fix valid s,F_0,T, and then take t_0,t_1 small enough that 2B<R - C(\Phi,E_1). Every term defining \kappa remains positive.

Proposition

Proposition 17 (Explicit photon-tail bound)

G406

For every Gaussian channel in canonical form (?) and E \geq 0, codes supported on the subspace spanned by Fock states with total photon number at most \lfloor nE\rfloor obey

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} p_{\rm succ}^{(n)} \leq 4\exp[-n\mathcal{E}_{\rm ph}(R_n,E)], \end{aligned}

where Eq. (?) gives a computable bound with \mathcal{E}_{\rm ph}(R,E)>0 whenever R>U(\Phi,E).

Lemma

Lemma 18 (Output photon-number moments)

FRC5

For every n-mode state \rho supported on the subspace spanned by Fock states with total photon number at most \lfloor nE\rfloor and every s\in\mathcal{S},

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \operatorname{Tr}\big[\Phi^{\otimes n}(\rho)e^{sH_n}\big] \leq e^{nL_\Phi(s,E)}. \end{aligned}

Moreover, L_\Phi(0,E) = 0 and \partial_sL_\Phi(0,E) = N_{\rm out}(E).

Proof of Lemma 18

Use real heterodyne outcomes Z\in\mathbb{R}^{2n}, normalised so that a coherent amplitude \alpha corresponds to (\sqrt2\,\mathrm{Re}\,\alpha,\sqrt2\,\mathrm{Im}\,\alpha). A Gaussian input with covariance matrix V has heterodyne covariance matrix (V + \mathds{1})/2, consistently with \hbar = 1. For an arbitrary state, the radial Husimi identity is

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \mathbb{E}_{Q_\rho}e^{u|Z|^2/2} = \operatorname{Tr}\big[\rho(1 - u)^{-(H_n + n)}\big],\qquad 0 \leq u<1. \end{aligned}

It follows by integrating the coherent-state Fock expansion; angular integration removes off-diagonal terms, and each radial integral is a gamma integral. Thus the right-hand side is at most (1 - u)^{-n(E + 1)} under the input cutoff. No independence between input modes is assumed.

Temporarily smooth the output Husimi distribution by adding a centred classical Gaussian of covariance matrix c\mathds{1}_{2n}, with c = (v - 1)/2 and v \geq \max\{1,k - y_p\}. Its characteristic function is that of the output Wigner distribution multiplied by e^{-v|\zeta|^2/4}. The Gaussian channel action shows that this smoothed distribution is exactly the law of

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} Z_v&=X^{\oplus n}Z+G,\\ \operatorname{Cov}(G)&=A_v^{\oplus n},\\ A_v&=\frac{Y + (v - k)\mathds{1}}{2}\geq0 \, , \end{aligned}

where Z has the input Husimi distribution and G is independent. This identity is valid for all input states, including entangled ones.

Put t = q_s/(1 + cq_s). Gaussian integration over the smoothing noise gives, for \sigma = \Phi^{\otimes n}(\rho),

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \operatorname{Tr}\big[\sigma e^{sH_n}\big] = e^{-ns}(1 + cq_s)^{-n} \mathbb{E} e^{t|Z_v|^2/2}. \end{aligned}

Integration over G, conditional on Z, gives

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \mathbb{E}[e^{t|Z_v|^2/2}\mid Z] & = \det(\mathds{1} - tA_v)^{-n/2}\\ &\quad\times\exp\!\left[\frac t2 Z^{\mathsf{T}} \bigl(X^{\mathsf{T}}(\mathds{1} - tA_v)^{-1}X\bigr)^{\oplus n}Z\right]. \end{aligned}

Since XX^{\mathsf{T}} = k\mathds{1}, its quadratic form is at most u_s|Z|^2/2. Indeed, t k/[1 - t\lambda_{\max}(A_v)] = u_s<1. Apply Eq. (Proof). Substitution into Eq. (?) cancels the auxiliary smoothing parameter, because

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \det(\mathds{1} - tA_v) = \frac{(1 - a_+q_s)(1 - a_-q_s)}{(1 + cq_s)^2}. \end{aligned}

The result is Eq. (18). These nonnegative integrals can first be interpreted in the extended sense; the finite upper bound proves their integrability. Finally, direct differentiation gives

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} \partial_sL_\Phi(0,E) = \frac{a_++a_-}{2} + k(E + 1) - 1 = N_{\rm out}(E). \end{aligned}
Proposition

Proposition 19 (Exponential converse for the optimal signal family)

JPK3

For the codes (?), the function r_\alpha in Eq. (?) satisfies r_\alpha\to C(\Phi,N) as \alpha\downarrow1 and

\begin{aligned}\hspace{0pt} p_{\rm succ}^{(n)} \leq \exp\!\left[-n\frac{\alpha - 1}{\alpha}(R_n - r_\alpha)\right] \end{aligned}

for all \alpha\in(1,2] in its domain. Hence every fixed rate above C(\Phi,N) has a strictly positive exponential converse bound for this signal family.

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2610.22308v1 by Gerardo Adesso, Ludovico Lami and Vittorio Giovannetti, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2610/2610.22308.jsonl.