Papers › Robust self-testing of two-qubit states
Robust self-testing of two-qubit states
Tim Coopmans, Jędrzej Kaniewski, Christian Schaffner
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
It is well-known that observing nonlocal correlations allows us to draw conclusions about the quantum systems under consideration. In some cases this yields a characterisation which is essentially complete, a phenomenon known as self-testing. Self-testing becomes particularly interesting if we can make the statement robust, so that it can be applied to a real experimental setup. For the simplest self-testing scenarios the most robust bounds come from the method based on operator inequalities. In this work we elaborate on this idea and apply it to the family of tilted CHSH inequalities. These inequalities are maximally violated by partially entangled two-qubit states and our goal is to estimate the quality of the state based only on the observed violation. For these inequalities we have reached a candidate bound and while we have not been able to prove it analytically, we have gathered convincing numerical evidence that it holds. Our final contribution is a proof that in the usual formulation, the CHSH inequality only becomes a self-test when the violation exceeds a certain threshold. This shows that self-testing scenarios fall into two distinct classes depending on whether they exhibit such a threshold or not.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections