Manuscript Oai280-B@1 · Oai280-B.tex · section · 6d92ab75

Debugging the proposed inference

Scope, contributions, and dependency policy › Debugging the proposed inference · lines 161–202

Back to manuscript

The following distinctions are maintained throughout.

  1. Encoding identification and decoder performance differ. A successful end-to-end certificate does not independently identify the physical encoder with the ideal tensor.

  2. Access is an interface, not a caption. A decoder receiving an omitted syndrome or simulator side information does not implement the declared boundary task.

  3. A branch is not a complete channel. Successful trials cannot be renormalized into the deterministic channel being certified.

  4. An implemented-decoder exclusion is not an optimal-decoder exclusion. The latter requires a bound uniform over all permitted decoders.

  5. The ideal threshold is cardinality. For one pentagon, connectedness of a subset in a drawing does not change its ideal recovery threshold.

  6. Clifford circuitry does not imply Pauli noise. A structure-assisted bound requires an independently established channel structure or a separately specified randomization task.

  7. Forty shots is a procedure-specific limitation. It is not a universal lower bound for every laboratory protocol.

  8. A fixed spectator is not an arbitrary spectator. The stronger subsystem task must be compared with a partial-trace channel on all referenced inputs.

  9. The unrelated analytic programme remains unrelated. Finite channel certification does not construct a characteristic distributional product or admit an inherited gravitational coefficient.