A generalized
Grothendieck inequality
and entanglement in
XOR games
arXiv: quant-ph/0901.2009
Jop Briët1, Harry Buhrman1,2 and Ben Toner1,3
1
2
University of
Amsterdam
3
BQP Solutions
Pty Ltd.
Research supported by NWO (Vici grant), IST (QAP) and BSIK/BRICKS
XOR games
Alice
}
1
±
{
αi
Bob
j
i
Verifier
π,V
βj
{±1}
XOR games
Alice
}
1
±
{
αi
Verifier
•The verifier picks questions i,j
distribution π(i,j)
Bob
j
i
π,V
βj
{±1}
{1,...,r} according to probability
XOR games
Alice
}
1
±
{
αi
Bob
j
i
Verifier
•The verifier picks questions i,j
π,V
βj
{±1}
{1,...,r} according to probability
distribution π(i,j)
•He computes function V(i,j) {±1}, sends i to Alice and j to Bob
XOR games
Alice
}
1
±
{
αi
Bob
j
i
Verifier
•The verifier picks questions i,j
π,V
βj
{±1}
{1,...,r} according to probability
distribution π(i,j)
•He computes function V(i,j) {±1}, sends i to Alice and j to Bob
•Alice answers αi
{±1} and Bob βj {±1}
XOR games
Alice
}
1
±
{
αi
Bob
j
i
βj
Verifier
•The verifier picks questions i,j
π,V
{±1}
{1,...,r} according to probability
distribution π(i,j)
•He computes function V(i,j) {±1}, sends i to Alice and j to Bob
•Alice answers αi
{±1} and Bob βj {±1}
•Alice and Bob win if αiβj = V(i,j)
V(i,j).(αiβj) = +1
XOR games
Alice
}
1
±
{
αi
Bob
j
i
Verifier
π,V
βj
{±1}
XOR games
2
(2d
)!
G
= ai · bj
⊗ Bj |ψ#
Alice
}
1
±
{
αi
Bob
j
i
Verifier
ai $→
A
π,V i
bj $→ Bj
βj
{±1}
•We can quantify how well Alice and Bob can play game G(π,V) by
the correlation bias
ω(G) :=
∗
max
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
!
π(i, j)V (i, j) αi βj
i,j
!
(Deterministic strategies are optimal)
|ψ& ∈ C
Non-local XOR games
|ψ& ∈ C
Alice
|ψ& ∈ C
αi
•Alice and Bob share
Bob
j
i
{A1,...,Ar}
}
1
±
{
d×d
{B1,...,Br}
n×n
Verifier
βj
π,V
∗
ω2"n/2# (G)
>
1
∗
ω
(G)
d
entangled state ψ Cdxd
{±1}
.
.
α
is
the
outcome
of
a
{±1}-valued
measurement
of observable Ai
• i
on Alice’s part
ψ (αu , βv |uv) =
π(u,ofv)V
a·b
a∈Ru b∈R
β
is
the
outcome
of
a
{±1}-valued
measurement
ofv observable Bj
• j
on Bob’s part of ψ
(Projective measurements and pure states are optimal)
|ψ& ∈ C
= KG (2d2 )!
|ψ# = ai · bj
|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
Non-local XOR games
|ψ& ∈ C
Alice
|ψ& ∈ C
αi
Bob
j
i
{A1,...,Ar}
}
1
±
{
d×d
{B1,...,Br}
n×n
ai $→ Ai
bVerifier
j $→ Bj
π,V
∗
βj
{±1}
ω2"n/2# (G)
>
1
∗
!
ω
(G)
Bij|ψ⟫
•Measurements
j] = ⟫ψ|A
i α
ω(G)give
:= expectation
max d E[αiβπ(i,
j)V (i, j)
βj
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
i,j
.
.
The
d-dimensional
non-local
correlation
bias:
•
!=
π(u,
v)V
(α
,
β
|uv)
a·b
u
v
∗
ωd (G) :=
max
{Ai },{Bj },|ψ#∈Cd×d
π(i, j)V
j)b∈R
!ψ|A
⊗ Bj |ψ#
a∈R(i,
v i
u
i,j
(Projective
measurements and pure states are optimal)
!
!
Example: CHSH game
•Questions: i,j
π(0,0) = 1/4
π(0,1) = 1/4
π(1,0) = 1/4
π(1,1) = 1/4
{0,1}
V(0,0) = 1
V(0,1) = 1
V(1,0) = 1
V(1,1) = -1
Example: CHSH game
•Questions: i,j
π(0,0) = 1/4
π(0,1) = 1/4
π(1,0) = 1/4
π(1,1) = 1/4
{0,1}
V(0,0) = 1
V(0,1) = 1
V(1,0) = 1
V(1,1) = -1
= α0β0
= α0β1
= α1β0
= α1β1
Example: CHSH game
•Questions: i,j
π(0,0) = 1/4
π(0,1) = 1/4
π(1,0) = 1/4
π(1,1) = 1/4
{0,1}
V(0,0) = 1
V(0,1) = 1
V(1,0) = 1
V(1,1) = -1
= α0β0
}
= α0β1
= α1β0
= α1β1
At most 3 equations
can simultaneously
be satisfied
•Classically, the players win with probability ≤ 3/4
(correlation bias ≤ 1/2)
ω(G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) αi βj
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
i,j
CHSH
with
entanglement
!
ω (G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) !ψ|A ⊗ B |ψ#
∗
d
{Ai },{Bj
},|ψ#∈Cd×d
i
j
•Players can do better if they share a Bell state
i,j
#
1 "
√ |00# + |11#
2
ωd∗(M) =
max
Ai ,Bj ,|ψ#∈Cd×d
!
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ# ≤
max
ai ,bj ∈S2d2 −1
!
i,j
1.676 ≤ KG ≤ 1.782
$
maxAi ,Bj ,|ψ#∈Cd×d i,j Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
ωd∗ (M)
$
=
ω(M)
maxαi ,βj ∈{±1} i,j Mij αi βj
ωd∗ (M)
=
maxAi ,Bj
$
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
$
Mij ai · bj
ω(G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) αi βj
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
i,j
CHSH
with
entanglement
!
ω (G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) !ψ|A ⊗ B |ψ#
∗
d
{Ai },{Bj
},|ψ#∈Cd×d
i
j
•Players can do better if they share a Bell state
i,j
#
1 "
√ |00# + |11#
2
carry
out
the
same
! protocol:
•Both
ωd∗(M) =
max
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ# ≤ max
Performi,jR(-π/16) on qubit a ,b ∈S
•QuestionA ,B0:,|ψ#∈C
•Question 1: Perform R(3π/16) on qubit
1.676 basis
≤ KG ≤ 1.782
•Measure in computational
i
j
d×d
i
j
2d2 −1
$
!
i,j
maxAi ,Bj ,|ψ#∈Cd×d i,j Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
ωd∗ (M)
$
=
ω(M)
maxαi ,βj ∈{±1} i,j Mij αi βj
ωd∗ (M)
=
maxAi ,Bj
$
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
$
Mij ai · bj
ω(G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) αi βj
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
i,j
CHSH
with
entanglement
!
ω (G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) !ψ|A ⊗ B |ψ#
∗
d
{Ai },{Bj
},|ψ#∈Cd×d
i
j
•Players can do better if they share a Bell state
i,j
#
1 "
√ |00# + |11#
2
carry
out
the
same
! protocol:
•Both
ωd∗(M) =
max
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ# ≤ max
Performi,jR(-π/16) on qubit a ,b ∈S
•QuestionA ,B0:,|ψ#∈C
•Question 1: Perform R(3π/16) on qubit
1.676 basis
≤ KG ≤ 1.782
•Measure in computational
i
j
d×d
i
j
2d2 −1
!
i,j
∗
d×d
maxAi ,Bj ,|ψ#∈C
M0.85
ω
ij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
probability
•Entangled players
i,j ≈
d (M) win with
$
=
ω(M)
maxαi ,βj ∈{±1} i,j Mij αi βj
$
ωd∗ (M)
=
maxAi ,Bj
$
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
$
Mij ai · bj
ω(G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) αi βj
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
i,j
CHSH
with
entanglement
!
ω (G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) !ψ|A ⊗ B |ψ#
∗
d
{Ai },{Bj
},|ψ#∈Cd×d
i
j
•Players can do better if they share a Bell state
i,j
#
1 "
√ |00# + |11#
2
carry
out
the
same
! protocol:
•Both
ωd∗(M) =
max
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ# ≤ max
Performi,jR(-π/16) on qubit a ,b ∈S
•QuestionA ,B0:,|ψ#∈C
•Question 1: Perform R(3π/16) on qubit
1.676 basis
≤ KG ≤ 1.782
•Measure in computational
i
j
d×d
i
j
2d2 −1
!
i,j
∗
d×d
maxAi ,Bj ,|ψ#∈C
M0.85
ω
ij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
probability
•Entangled players
i,j ≈
d (M) win with
$
=
ω(M)
(correlation
bias ≈ 0.71) maxαi ,βj ∈{±1} i,j Mij αi βj
$
ωd∗ (M)
=
maxAi ,Bj
$
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
$
Mij ai · bj
ω(G) :=
max
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
π(i, j)V (i, j) αi βj
i,j
CHSH
with
entanglement
!
ω (G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) !ψ|A ⊗ B |ψ#
∗
d
{Ai },{Bj
},|ψ#∈Cd×d
i
j
•Players can do better if they share a Bell state
i,j
#
1 "
√ |00# + |11#
2
carry
out
the
same
! protocol:
•Both
ωd∗(M) =
max
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ# ≤ max
Performi,jR(-π/16) on qubit a ,b ∈S
•QuestionA ,B0:,|ψ#∈C
•Question 1: Perform R(3π/16) on qubit
1.676 basis
≤ KG ≤ 1.782
•Measure in computational
i
j
d×d
i
j
2d2 −1
!
i,j
∗
d×d
maxAi ,Bj ,|ψ#∈C
M0.85
ω
ij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
probability
•Entangled players
i,j ≈
d (M) win with
$
=
ω(M)
(correlation
bias ≈ 0.71) maxαi ,βj ∈{±1} i,j Mij αi βj
$
•Tsirelson showed this is best possible
$
ωd∗ (M)
=
maxAi ,Bj
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
$
Mij ai · bj
Observables and vectors
(1987) discovered a correspondence between
2
= •KTsirelson
(2d
)!
G
measurements sets of observables on pure states, and inner
|ψ#products
= ai · bj of sets of unit vectors.
dxd and observables A ,B , there exist
|Ai ⊗ BFor
|ψ#
pure
state
ψ
C
a b
j
G)
G)
= KG (2d2 )!
unit vectors a,b S2d^2-1 s.t.
a · b = !ψ|Aa ⊗ Bb |ψ#
Bj |ψ# = ai ·Conversely,
bj
there exist mappings A,B from Sn-1 to
!ψ|A(a)
⊗
B(b)|ψ#
=
a
·
b
observables on maximally entangled state ψ Cdxd with
!ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
d=2n/2 s.t. for a,b Sn
!ψ|A(a) ⊗ B(b)|ψ# = a · b
ai →
$
Ai
bj →
$
Bj
ω(G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) αi βj
i,j
XOR games and Grothendieck’s
inequality
ωd∗ (G) :=
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
max
[Tsirelson87]:
!
π(i, j)V (i, j) !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
{Ai },{Bj },|ψ#∈Cd×d
•Associate a matrix M
i,j
rxr
[-1,1] with
•Tsirelson’s map lets us
game (π,V): Mij = π(i,j)V(i,j).
#
1 "
√ bound
|00# + |11#
upper
the
2
d-dim. quantum
correlation by correlations with 2d2-dim unit vectors:
ωd∗ (M) =
max
{Ai },{Bj },|ψ#∈Cd×d
!
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ# ≤
max
{ai },{bj }∈S2d2 −1
1.676 ≤ KG ≤ 1.782
$
maxAi ,Bj ,|ψ#∈Cd×d i,j Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
ωd∗ (M)
$
=
ω(M)
maxαi ,βj ∈{±1} i,j Mij αi βj
ωd∗ (M)
=
maxAi ,Bj
$
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
$
!
i,j
Mij ai · bj
ω(G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) αi βj
i,j
XOR games and Grothendieck’s
inequality
!
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
[Tsirelson87]:
!
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) αi βj
ω(G) :=
ωd∗ (G) :=
max
π(i, j)V (i, j) !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
{Ai },{Bj },|ψ#∈Cd×d
i,j
rxr with game (π,V): M = π(i,j)V(i,j).
Associate
a
matrix
M
[-1,1]
ij
•
!#
"
1
∗
√ bound
|00# + |11#
ωd (G)
:=lets us upper
max
π(i,
j)V
(i,
j)
!ψ|A
⊗
B
|ψ#
map
the
d-dim.
quantum
i
j
•Tsirelson’s
2 d×d
{Ai },{Bj },|ψ#∈C
correlation by correlations with 2d2i,j-dim unit vectors:
ωd∗ (M) =
max
!
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ# ≤
max
!
Mij ai · bj
{a #
},{b }∈S
"
1
i,j
i,j
√ |00# + |11#
2
1.676
≤the
KGquantum
≤ 1.782 correlation in terms of
This
gives
an
upper
bound
on
•
!
!
∗ the classical correlation and Grothendieck’s constant
max
M
!ψ|A
max
$i ⊗ Bj |ψ# ≤
ij
d (M) =
max∗A ,B ,|ψ#∈C
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ B{a
{Ai },{B
},|ψ#∈Cd×d
ωd∗j(M)
j |ψ#
i },{bj }∈S2d2 −1
i,j
≤ KG · $
ω(M)
i,j
i,j
= ωd (M)
{Ai },{Bj },|ψ#∈Cd×d
i
j
j
2d2 −1
d×d
maxαi ,βj ∈{±1}
ω(M)
i
i,j
Mij αi βj
2
KG (2d(Davie
)! `84, Reeds `91) 1.676$≤ KG ≤ 1.782 (Krivine `71)
∗
ωd (M)
=
maxAi ,Bj
i,j
Mij !ψ|Ai ⊗ Bj |ψ#
$
Grothendieck constant of order n
•KG(n) is the smallest constant s.t. for every real rxr matrix M
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
!
i,j∈[r] Mij ai
max{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
maxai ,bj ∈Sn−1
maxa"i ,b"j ∈Sm−1
∗
ωd (M)
max
≤
ai ,bj ∈Sn−1
"
!
!
i,j∈[r] Mij αi βj
i,j∈[r] Mij ai · bj
!
"
"
M
a
·
b
ij i
j
i,j∈[r]
max
a"i ,b"j ∈S2d2 −1
a,b∈S2n/2 −1
"
· bj
a,b∈S2n/2 −1
≤ KG (n)
≤ KG (n "→ m)
dadb(a ·
dadb(a · b)(ai · bj ) ≥
"
b)(ai
·
"
bj )
∗
ω2n/2 (M)
Grothendieck constant of order n
•KG(n) is the smallest constant s.t. for every real rxr matrix M
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
!
max{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
KG(n)
•KG = supn max
ai ,bj ∈Sn−1
!
i,j∈[r] Mij ai
!
· bj
i,j∈[r] Mij αi βj
i,j∈[r] Mij ai · bj
!
"
"
M
a
·
b
ij i
j
i,j∈[r]
≤ KG (n)
≤ KG (n "→ m)
maxa ,bof∈S
norms on tensor products of Banach spaces
•Arose in study
•Has also found applications "in:
"
"
∗ information
•Quantum
ωd (M) ≤ max
dadb(a · b)(ai · bj )
,b ∈S
•Communicationacomplexity
a,b∈S
•Approximation" algorithms
"
i
"
j
m−1
"
i
"
j
2d2 −1
2n/2 −1
∗
ω2n/2 (M)
dadb(a · b)(ai · bj ) ≥
(Krivine)
G∈S
•KG(3) <aK,bmax
a,b∈S
•KG(n) is not known to be strictly increasing with n
i
j
n−1
2n/2 −1
Our results
Dimension witnesses [Brunner et al.`08]
Alice
Bob
{A1,...,Ar}
{B1,...,Br}
Pr[αi,βj |i,j]
•Suppose we get a list of probabilities of Alice and Bob’s
measurements outcomes, conditioned on their measurements
1
χ=
k
(a · xi )
da
2
Dimension witnesses [Brunner et al.`08]
i=1
|ψ& ∈ Cd×d
Alice
|ψ& ∈ C
{A1,...,Ar}
Bob
n×n
{B1,...,Br}
∗
ω
Pr[α
i,β(G)
j |i,j]
2"n/2#
>1
∗
ωd (G)
•Suppose we get a list of probabilities of Alice and Bob’s
. measurements
measurements outcomes, conditioned. on their
a·b
π(u, v)V (αu , βv |uv) =
we
know
they
share
an
•If the data violates a Bell inequality, then
b∈R
a∈R
u
entangled state
∗
ωd (Gfinite )
=
≤
max
A,B:Sn−1 →S2d2 −1
∗
ωd (Ginfinite )
.
0
u∈E
a∈Ru
da
v
.
0
u∈E
b∈Rv
%
db(a · b) A(u) · B(v
1
χ=
k
(a · xi )
da
2
Dimension witnesses [Brunner et al.`08]
i=1
|ψ& ∈ Cd×d
Alice
|ψ& ∈ C
{A1,...,Ar}
Bob
n×n
{B1,...,Br}
∗
ω
Pr[α
i,β(G)
j |i,j]
2"n/2#
>1
∗
ωd (G)
•Suppose we get a list of probabilities of Alice and Bob’s
. measurements
measurements outcomes, conditioned. on their
a·b
π(u, v)V (αu , βv |uv) =
we
know
they
share
an
•If the data violates a Bell inequality, then
b∈R
a∈R
u
v
entangled state
.
.
the
dimension
•But can we also lower bound
0 of the state?%
0
∗
ωd (Gfinite )
=
≤
max
A,B:Sn−1 →S2d2 −1
∗
ωd (Ginfinite )
db(a · b) A(u) · B(v
da
u∈E
a∈Ru
u∈E
b∈Rv
1
χ=
k
(a · xi )
da
2
Dimension witnesses [Brunner et al.`08]
i=1
|ψ& ∈ Cd×d
Alice
{A1,...,Ar}
|ψ& ∈ C
Bob
n×n
{B1,...,Br}
∗
ω
Pr[α
i,β(G)
j |i,j]
2"n/2#
>1
∗
ωd (G)
•Suppose we get a list of probabilities of Alice and Bob’s
. measurements
measurements outcomes, conditioned. on their
a·b
π(u, v)V (αu , βv |uv) =
we
know
they
share
an
•If the data violates a Bell inequality, then
b∈R
a∈R
u
v
entangled state
.
.
the
dimension
•∗ But can we also lower bound
0 of the state?%
0
da
db(a
·
b)
A(u)
·
B(v
ωd (G
max
finite ) =
even
with
two-outcome
measurements
•Conjecture:Yes,
A,B:S
n−1 →S
2d2 −1
b∈Rv
a∈Ru
u∈E
≤
∗
ωd (Ginfinite )
u∈E
1
χ=
k
(a · xi )
da
2
Dimension witnesses [Brunner et al.`08]
i=1
|ψ& ∈ Cd×d
Alice
{A1,...,Ar}
|ψ& ∈ C
Bob
n×n
{B1,...,Br}
∗
ω
Pr[α
i,β(G)
j |i,j]
2"n/2#
>1
∗
ωd (G)
•Suppose we get a list of probabilities of Alice and Bob’s
. measurements
measurements outcomes, conditioned. on their
a·b
π(u, v)V (αu , βv |uv) =
we
know
they
share
an
•If the data violates a Bell inequality, then
b∈R
a∈R
u
v
entangled state
.
.
the
dimension
•∗ But can we also lower bound
0 of the state?%
0
da
db(a
·
b)
A(u)
·
B(v
ωd (G
max
finite ) =
even
with
two-outcome
measurements
•Conjecture:Yes,
A,B:S
n−1 →S
2d2 −1
b∈Rv
a∈Ru
u∈E
∗ for some XOR games!
This talk:
Yes,
≤ ωd (Ginfinite )
u∈E
d×d
C
. |ψ!/∈0
k
'
1/2
1
2
da
(a
· xi )XOR
χ =witnesses
Dimension
and
k
i=1n×n
|φ! ∈ C
|ψ& ∈ C
Alice
|ψ! ∈ C
i
{A1,...,Ar}
}
1
±
{
αi
games
d×d
2n/2 ×2n/2
|ψ& ∈ Cn×n
Bob
j
{B1,...,Br}
ω2∗n/2 (G)
>1
∗
∗
β
j
ω"n/2#
(G)
ω2Verifier
(G)
d
{±1}
>
1
∗ = πV
M
ω
! d (G) !
db(a
da .
M(u, v) =
. · b)
For every d, there is an a∈R
XOR
game
b∈RvM and finite n>d, s.t.
u
a·b
π(u, v)V (αu , βv |uv) =
∗
ωd (Gfinite )
ωd∗ (Gfinite )
a∈Ru
b∈Rv
!
! < ωn*(M)
ωd"
*(M)
"
da 0 .
0.
=
max
A,B:Sn−1 →S2d2 −1
=
max
u∈E
A,B:S
n−1 →S2d2 −1
∗
≤ ω (Ginfinite ) u∈E
#
db(a · b)% A(u) · B(v
b∈Rv db(a · b) A(u) · B(v)
a∈Ru da u∈E
a∈Ru
u∈E b∈Rv
d×d
C
. |ψ!/∈0
k
'
1/2
1
2
da
(a
· xi )XOR
χ =witnesses
Dimension
and
k
i=1n×n
|φ! ∈ C
|ψ& ∈ C
Alice
|ψ! ∈ C
i
{A1,...,Ar}
}
1
±
{
αi
games
d×d
2n/2 ×2n/2
|ψ& ∈ Cn×n
Bob
j
{B1,...,Br}
ω2∗n/2 (G)
>1
∗
∗
β
j
ω"n/2#
(G)
ω2Verifier
(G)
d
{±1}
>
1
∗ = πV
M
ω
! d (G) !
db(a
da .
M(u, v) =
. · b)
For every d, there is an a∈R
XOR
game
b∈RvM and finite n>d, s.t.
u
a·b
π(u, v)V (αu , βv |uv) =
∗
ωd (Gfinite )
ωd∗ (Gfinite )
a∈Ru
b∈Rv
!
! < ωn*(M)
ωd"
*(M)
"
da 0 .
0.
#
db(a · b)% A(u) · B(v
=
max
A,B:Sn−1 →S2d2 −1
v db(a
=
max independently
Obtained
by Vértesi
and
Pál · b) A(u) · B(v)
u∈E b∈R
u∈E a∈Ru da
A,B:S
n−1 →S2d2 −1
b∈R
a∈R[Wehner
∗ Other
u
u∈E
u∈E
related
work:
et
al.v`08]
≤ ω (Ginfinite )
Recall:
$
max{ai },{bj }∈S2d2 −1 i,j Mij ai · bj
ωd∗(M)
$
≤
≤ KG (2d2)
ω(M)
max{αi },{βj }∈{±1} i,j Mij αi βj
[Brunner et al. `08]
1
Since KG(3)< KG there exists an XOR game M s.t.
for some n>2, we have ω2*(M) < ωn*(M)
(there exist qubit witnesses)
If KG(n) is strictly increasing with n (not known), then there are
XOR games (M) that can be played better with more
entanglement (as conjectured)
We take a different approach:
generalize KG(n)
Generalization of !
Grothendieck’s constant
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
i,j∈[r] Mij ai
· bj
KG (n) constant
Definition:max
For m<n, let K!
smallest
G(n⟿m) be the≤
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
i,j∈[r] Mij αi βj
for, s.t. for every real rxr matrix M
KG (n "→ m) ≥
ωd∗ (M ) ≤
∗
ω2n/2 (M )
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
max{a"i },{b"j }∈Sm−1
max
"
{ai }" ,{bj }∈S2d2 −1
≥
max
i,j∈[r] Mij ai · bj
!
"
"
M
a
·
b
ij i
j
i,j∈[r]
"
dadb(a · b)(a"i · b"j )
"
dadb(a · b)(ai · bj )
a,b∈Sn−1
{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
!
#
a,b∈Sn−1
$
%
maxA,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A(a) · B(b)
ω2∗n/2 (M)
$
% >1
#
≥
∗
ωd (M )
maxA" ,B" :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A" (a) · B " (b)
Generalization of !
Grothendieck’s constant
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
i,j∈[r] Mij ai
· bj
KG (n) constant
Definition:max
For m<n, let K!
smallest
G(n⟿m) be the≤
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
i,j∈[r] Mij αi βj
for, s.t. for every real rxr matrix M
KG (n "→ m) ≥
ωd∗ (M ) ≤
∗
ω2n/2 (M )
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
max{a"i },{b"j }∈Sm−1
max
"
{ai }" ,{bj }∈S2d2 −1
≥
max
i,j∈[r] Mij ai · bj
!
"
"
M
a
·
b
ij i
j
i,j∈[r]
"
dadb(a · b)(a"i · b"j )
"
dadb(a · b)(ai · bj )
a,b∈Sn−1
{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
!
#
a,b∈Sn−1
$
%
maxA,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A(a) · B(b)
ω2∗n/2 (M)
$
% >1
#
≥
∗
ωd (M )
maxA" ,B" :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A" (a) · B " (b)
Generalization of !
Grothendieck’s constant
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
i,j∈[r] Mij ai
· bj
KG (n) constant
Definition:max
For m<n, let K!
smallest
G(n⟿m) be the≤
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
i,j∈[r] Mij αi βj
for, s.t. for every real rxr matrix M
KG (n "→ m) ≥
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
max{a"i },{b"j }∈Sm−1
!
i,j∈[r] Mij ai · bj
!
"
"
M
a
·
b
ij i
j
i,j∈[r]
KG(n)
• KG(n⟿1)ω=d∗(M
dadb(a · b)(a"i · b"j )
)≤
max
}∈S
(n⟿m)
≤ Ka,b∈S
G(n)
• Trivial upper bound:{aK}G,{b
2)
We
prove
first
lower
bound:
K
(n⟿m)
>
1+1/2m-1/2n
O(1/m
G
•
"
i
∗
ω2n/2 (M )
≥
"
"
j
"
2d2 −1
n−1
max
{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
#
a,b∈Sn−1
dadb(a · b)(ai · bj )
$
%
maxA,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A(a) · B(b)
ω2∗n/2 (M)
$
% >1
#
≥
∗
ωd (M )
maxA" ,B" :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A" (a) · B " (b)
n−1
Generalization
of
Grothendieck’s
ω2∗ (M ) ≥
max
dadb(a · b)(aconstant
i · bj )
{a },{b }∈S
!
n/2
i
j
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
n−1
"
a,b∈Sn−1
i,j∈[r] Mij ai
· bj
KG (n) constant
Definition:max
For m<n, let K!
smallest
G(n⟿m) be the≤
$
%
{αi },{βj }∈{±1}
#i,j∈[r] Mij αi βj
for, A,B:S
s.t. for
every real rxr
matrix
dadb(a
· b) M
A(a) · B(b)
max
ω ∗n/2 (M)
n−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈S
2
ωd∗ (M )
≥
n−1
$
% >1
" (a) · B " (b)
maxA" ,B" :Sn−1max
dadb(a
·
b)
A
M
a
→S2d{a
2 −1
ij i · bj
a,b∈S
n−1
i },{b
j }∈Sn−1
i,j∈[r]
KG (n "→ m) ≥
#
max{a"i },{b"j }∈Sm−1
!
"
"
M
a
·
b
ij i
j
i,j∈[r]
!
∗
ω
(G)
2
2n/2
KG (n "→ 2d") =
ωd∗ (G)
KG(n)
• KG(n⟿1)ω=d∗(M
dadb(a · b)(a"i · b"j )
)≤
max
}∈S
(n⟿m)
≤ Ka,b∈S
G(n)
• Trivial upper bound:{aK}G,{b
2) %
$
#
We
prove
first
lower
bound:
K
(n⟿m)
>
1+1/2m-1/2n
O(1/m
G
•
"
dadbM(a, b) A(a) · B(b)
maxA,B:S →S
i
KG (n "→ m)
∗ ≥
"
"
j
2d2 −1
n−1
n−1
#a,b∈Sn−1
n−1
"b(a)
" (b)
ω
≥
dadb(a
·
b)(a
·
)
n/2 (M )
" ,B "max
i
j
max
dadbM(a,
b)
A
·
B
A
:S
→S
2
m−1 by
Our lower bound is n−1
proved
choosing M: For a,b Sn-1,
a,b∈S
{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
n−1
a,b∈Sn−1
let M be a function: M(a,b) = a.b
$
%
$$
%%
dadb(a ·· b)
A(a)
· ·B(b)
maxA,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈Sn−1dadb(a
∗
b)
A(a)
B(b)
max
ω2Kn/2
(M)
A,B:S
→S
n−1
n−1
a,b∈S
#
$
%
n−1
≥
>
1
G (n "→ m)
$
%
#
"
"
>1
≥
max
·
B
(b)
∗
A" ,B " :Sn−1 →Sm−1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A (a)
"
"
ω (M )
d
##
maxA" ,B" :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1
a,b∈Sn−1
dadb(a · b) A (a) · B (b)
Relation to dimension witness game
a game (π,V)
by infinitely many questions, labelled
!
•Define
!
max
M a ·b
as
i },{b}∈S
j }∈Sn−1
i,j∈[r]Mijijai i· bjj
max{a{ai },{b
n−1
j
i,j∈[r]
! Sn-1, and≤≤
KGG(n)
(n)
unit
vectors
a,b
π(a,b)V(a,b)
!
K
max{α{α},{β
Mijijααi β
i βjj
i },{β}∈{±1}
j }∈{±1}
i,j∈[r]M
max
i
•
= M(a,b) = a.b
i,j∈[r]
j
!
!
Mijaai··bbj
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1 i,j∈[r]M
max
ij i
j
{a
},{b
}∈S
n−1 !
i
j
i,j∈[r]
K
(n
→
"
m)
≥
G
ByKTsirelson,
numerator
and
denominator
!
"
"
G (n "→ m) ≥ the
" },{b" }∈S
max
M
a
·
b
"
"
ij
{a
m−1
i
j
i,j∈[r]
" }∈S
max{a"i },{b
i
j
m−1
i,j∈[r] Mij ai · bj
j
local correlations
""
#
$
∗
#
$
max
dadb(a
·
b)
A(a)
·
B(b)
≤
ω
∗2n/2 (M)
max
dadb(a · b) A(a) · B(b) ≤ ω (M)
A,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈S
A,B:Sn−1
→Sn−1 a,b∈S n−1
n−1
2n/2
""
∗
# A" " (a) · B" " (b)$
ω
dadb(a
max
·
b)
∗ d (M ) ≤
ωd (M ) ≤ A" " ,B" " :Smax
dadb(a · b) A (a) · B (b)
n−1 →S2d2 −1
a,b∈S
n−1
A ,B :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1 a,b∈S
n−1
#
$
%
#
$
%
#
$
maxA,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A(a) · B(b)
/2 (M)
max
dadb(a · b) A(a)
· B(b) $ > 1
(M) ≥
A,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈S
#
%
n−1
∗
(M ) ≥ maxA" ,B" :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1% a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b)# A" " (a) · B"" (b)$ > 1
dM
)
maxA" ,B" :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A (a) · B (b)
∗
ω
(G)
∗
2
2n/2(G)
ω
K (n "→ 2d ) = n/2
KGG(n "→ 2d2 ) = 2ω∗d∗ (G)
ωd (G)
%
#
$
bound non-
2
i=1 ai
m  a∈Sn−1 da

KG (n !→ m) ≥
$
% &m 2 (1/2 
n
da
a
Relation
to}∈Sdimension
witness game
max{a },{b
i,j∈[r] Mij ai · bj
i
n−1
j
!
i
i=1
a∈Sn−1
-2
)
Γ( m2 )Γ( n+1
2
m+1
Γ( 2 )Γ( n2 )
G
1
1
1
≥ 1−
+
− O( 2 )
2m 2n
m
> 1
.
m
=
n
≤ K (n)
,
Mij αquestions,
{α },{β
}∈{±1}
i βj
i,j∈[r]
a gamemax
(π,V)
by
infinitely
many
labelled
!
•Define
!
max
M a ·b
i
as
j
i },{b}∈S
j }∈Sn−1
i,j∈[r]Mijijai i· bjj
max{a{ai },{b
n−1
j
i,j∈[r]
! Sn-1, and≤≤
KGG(n)
(n)
unit
vectors
a,b
π(a,b)V(a,b)
=
!
!
K
max
M
α
β
i jj
i },{β}∈{±1}
j }∈{±1}
i,j∈[r]Mijijαi β
max{α{α},{β
i
•
!
i,j∈[r]
j
KG (n "→ m) ≥
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1
M(a,b) =|ψ!a ∈bC
d×d
i,j∈[r] Mij ai · bj (a1 , . . . , ak )
!
A(a) =
"
" 1 , . . . , ak )%
%(a
M
a
·
b
ij i |φ!j∈ Cn×n
i,j∈[r]
!
!
"M
" }∈S
a
max{ai },{bj }∈Sn−1max
{a
},{b
ij
i··bbjm−1
i,j∈[r]
M
a
max
i
j
ij
i
j
{a
},{b
}∈S
n−1 !
i
j
i,j∈[r]
K
(n
→
"
m)
≥
G
.
k
ByKTsirelson,
numerator
and
denominator
bound
!
"
"
/non'1/2
0
G (n "→ m) ≥ the
"
"
max
M
a
·
b
1
"
"
ij
{a
},{b
}∈S
2
m−1
i,j∈[r]
" }∈S
max{a"i },{b
i
j
da
(a · xi )
χ=
m−1
"aii· bjj
i,j∈[r] Mij
j
k
i=1
local correlations
2n/2 ×2n/2
"
∗
"
"
|φ!
∈
C
" ωd (M ) ≤
# max
$
dadb(a
·
b)(a
·
b
)
i
j
∗
#
$
" }∈S
" ,{b
|ψ& ∈ Cd×d
max
dadb(a
·
b)
A(a)
·
B(b)
≤
ω
∗2n/2 (M)
{a
}
2
i
j · B(b)
2d −1 ≤ a,b∈S
max
dadb(a · b) A(a)
ω (M)
n−1
A,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈S
A,B:Sn−1
→Sn−1 a,b∈S n−1
n−1
2n/2
""
"
∗
# A" " (a) · B" " (b)$
∗
ω
dadb(a
max
·
b)
∗ d (M ) ≤
n/2 2
ωd (M ) ≤ A" " ,B" " :Smax
dadb(a · b) A (a) · B (b)
2→S
n−1
2d
−1
a,b∈S
n−1
A ,B :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1 a,b∈S {ai },{bj }∈Sn−1 a,b∈S
n−1
n−1
ω
(M ) ≥
max
Set n = 2d2+1 so that m>n
%
#
ω2∗n/2 (G)
>1
∗ ∈ Cn×n
|ψ&
ω
(G)
d
Alice
$
Bob
dadb(a · b)(ai Verifier
·! bj ) !
ω2∗"n/2# (G)
M(u, v) = ∗ da > 1 db(a · b)
M
=u πV b∈Rv
ωa∈R
d (G)
.
.
#
$
π(u, v)V
(αu , βv |uv)
maxA,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1% a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b)## A(a) · B(b)$
! =
! a·b
$
%
/2 (M)
"
"
max
dadb(a
·
b)
A(a)
·
B(b)
b∈R
a∈R
(M) ∗≥
A,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1 a,b∈S
#
$
%
∗
>
1
n−1
ω
(G
)
=
max
da
db(a · b)
∗
max
finitedadb(a
" (a)
" (b)$ > 1 · b) A(a) · B(b)
#
%
d
≥
ω
(M)
A,B:S
→S
(M
)
n−1
n−1
"
"
max
dadb(a
·
b)
A
·
B
n/2
a,b∈S
A,B:S
→S
,B :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1 a,b∈Sn−1
n−1
dM )
2 maxAA
a∈Ru
" ,B " :S
· B " (b)
u∈E.% b∈R
$2d2−1 u∈E
0
0.
>v 1 %
≥n−1→S2d2 −1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) #A" (a)n−1
ωd∗ (M )
•This is a
u
maxA" ,B" :Sn−1 →S2d2 −1
∗
ω
(G)
∗
2
2n/2(G)
ω
K (n that
"→ 2d2 Alice
) = n/2and
game
KGG(n "→
2d ) = 2ω∗d∗ (G)
ωd (G)
" (a) · Bda" (b)
dadb(a
·
b)
A
a,b∈Sn−1
n−1
2d2 −1
u∈E
a∈Ru
u∈E
db(a · b) A(
b∈Rv
≤ ωd∗(Ginfinite )
Bob can play better with
!
more entanglement KG (n "→ 2d2 )
%
ωd∗ (Gfinite≤
) =ωd∗ (Ginfinite
max)
A,B:S
→S
v
!
∗
"
"
.
ω2n/2
(G)
0.
db(a · b)(u · v
da 0
ω2∗n/2∗ (Gfinite ) =
ω2"n/2# (Gfinite ) =
da
db(a
· b)(u · v)
=
b∈Rv
u
∗
u∈E
u∈E a∈R
#
$
u∈E a∈Ru
u∈E b∈Rv
∗
ω
(G)
2
2n/2
KG (n "→ 2d ) =
ωd∗ (G)
$
#
%
Lower bound on K (n⟿m)
dadbM(a, b) A(a) · B(b)
#
$
%
KG (n "→ m) ≥
G
maxA" ,B" :Sn−1 →Sm−1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadbM(a,
b) A" (a) · B " (b)
maxA,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1
a,b∈Sn−1
$
#
%
dadb(a · b) A(a) · B(b)
#
$
% >1
KG (n "→ m) ≥
maxA" ,B" :Sn−1 →Sm−1 a,b∈Sn−1 dadb(a · b) A" (a) · B " (b)
maxA,B:Sn−1 →Sn−1
a,b∈Sn−1
"
Denominator
maxmaximizing
dadb(a ·maps
b) (A(a)
·and
B(b) B
We
need to =find
the
A
A,B:S
→S
n−1
$
%
m−1
$
%
% $
%
(a · b) (A(a) · B(b) = a ⊗ A(a) · b ⊗ B(b)
&"
$
$
%
' &"
$
%
'
2
axA$i ,Bj$ :Sn−1 →Sm−1
dadb(a
·
b)
A
(a)
·
B
(b)
ai ,bj ∈Sn−1
# (a) · B # (b)
$
$
a,b∈S
dadb(a
max
·
b)
A
n−1
i,j
Ai ,Bji,j
:Sn−1 →Sm−1 a,b∈Sn−1
1
How ωto choose
A and B
(G)
KG (n $→ !2d2 ) = sup
G
∗
2%n/2&
ωd∗ (G)
& $
$
%
=
max
dadb(a · b) (A(a) · B(b)
A,B:S
n−1 →Sm−1
Denominator
max
dadb(a · b) (A(a) · B(b)
# =
Dk =
#
A,B:Sn−1
$ →Sm−1
max
dadb(a · b) (A(a) · B(b)
%
$ # can be$ written
#
The integrand
as$an inner product
•
A(a) · B(b) = a ⊗ A(a) · b ⊗ B(b)
A,B:Sn−1 →Sk−1
$
$
%
$
% $
%
$ · B(b)% $= a ⊗ A(a)
%
(a · b)% (A(a)
· b ⊗ B(b)
(a · b) (A(a) · B(b) = a ⊗ A(a) · b ⊗ B(b)
max
%!
&#
Sn−1 →Sm−1
& %!
&
#
$
#
$
( '&
' &#· '& db b$⊗ B(b)
'
da
a
⊗
A(a)
%
$
%
$
%
#
$
%
#
db b ⊗ B (b)
Dk =
da =
a ⊗ A(a)max·
db b ⊗da
B(b)
Denominator
a ⊗ A (a) ·
A,B:Sn−1 →Sm−1
'!
'2
#
$
'
'
2
2
&
max
' da a ⊗ A(a) ' = )%χv% = χ
)
$
%
→S
1
k−1
)
)2
2
2
Dk =
max
) da a ⊗ A(a) ) = %χv% = χ
A:Sn−1 →Sk−1
M(a, b) := π(a, b)(αa βb |ab) = a · b
M(a, b) := π(a, b)(αa βb |ab) = a · b
m
(
1
(
2 · b) A(a) · B(b)
axA$i ,Bj$ :Sn−1
dadb(a
·
b)
A
(a)
·
B
(b)
dadb(a
max
,b
∈S
n−1
i
j
→Sm−1
Aamax
,B
:S
→S
n−1
n−1 a,b∈S
i
ja,b∈S
$ n−1
$
dadb(a · b) A# (a) · B # (b)
1
Ai ,Bji,j
:Sn−1 →Sm−1
i,j
m) ≥
"
n−1
a,b∈S
n−1
#
$ (a) · B $ (b)
maxA$i ,Bj$ :Sn−1
dadb(a
·
b)
A
→Sm−1to
∗ a,b∈S
How
choose
A and B
n−1
ω2%n/2& (G)
KG (n $→ !2d ) = sup
ω#d∗ (G)
G
2
$
& $
$
%
=
max
dadb(a · b) (A(a) · B(b)
A,B:S
n−1 →Sm−1
Denominator
dadb(a · b) (A(a) · B(b)
!max
# =
A,B:Sn−1
$ →Sm−1
%
#
Dk =
max
dadb(a · b) (A(a)
· B(b)
minator
=
max
dadb(a
· b) (A(a) · B(b)
A,B:S
→S
→S
$ #A,B:S
$ written
#
n−1
m−1
can
be
as$an inner product
•The integrand
n−1
k−1
A(a) · B(b) = a ⊗ $A(a) · b ⊗ B(b)
% $
$
% $
%
$ · B(b)% $= a ⊗ A(a)
%
(a · b)% (A(a)
· b ⊗ B(b)
(a · b) (A(a) · B(b) = a ⊗ A(a) · b ⊗ B(b)
# %!
$ &
# %!
$ #
& $
(a · b) (A(a) ·#B(b) =$ a ⊗'A(a)# · b ⊗ $B(b)
( '
max
&#
Sn−1 →Sm−1
$
' &#·
da
a
⊗
A(a)
$
%
(
& db b ⊗ B(b)
&
'
$ % # %
$
%
$
#
db b ⊗da
B(b)
a ⊗ A (a) ·
db b ⊗ B (b)
Dk =
da =
a ⊗ A(a)max·
Denominator
A,B:S%
→Sm−1
n−1
&
%
&
!
!
'!
'2 #
$
#
$
#
$
' is maximal
' davectors
2 A(a)
2 parallel.
This
if
these
are
So
set
B=A.
•
tor
=
max
a
⊗
db
b
⊗
B(b)
·
&
max
da
a
⊗
A(a)
=
%χv%
=
χ
'
'
)
)
$
%)2
1 →Sk−1 A,B:Sn−1 →Sm−1
)
2
2
Dkto
= calculate
max the) maximal
da a ⊗length
A(a) )of =
%χv% = χ
a vector
•We need
A:Sn−1 →Sk−1
'!
'2
#
$
'
M(a, b) := π(a, b)(αa'βb |ab) = a · b
2
2
Dk =
max
' da a ⊗ A(a) ' = %χv% = χ
A:Sn−1 →Sk−1
m
(
M(a, b) := π(a, b)(αa βb |ab) = a · b
1
unit vector
M(a, b) := π(a, b)(αa βb |ab) = a · b
How to choose A
•Take the Schmidt decomposition of v:
v=
m
!
λi xi ⊗ yi
i=1
({x1,...,xn} and {y1,...,ym} are bases for Rn and Rm respectively)
(
% &'
!"
m
#
$&
(
)
%
!
"
χ = (χv) · v !=
da
a
⊗
A(a)
·
λ
x
⊗
y
&
(
m
&
'
i
i
i
%
%
k
'
"
m
#
$
!
'
#y
$
# a ⊗ A(a)$
i=1x ⊗
χχ =
(χv)
·
v
=
da
·
λ
ida
i ya ⊗
i A(a)
= (χv) · v =
A(a)
·
λ
x
⊗
·
χda
max
" =a ⊗)'
i
i
i
m
*
i=1
A:Sn−1 →Sk−1
i=1
λi (a · x*i )yi · A(a)
da
i=1
m
""= ))'
m
'
* %
i=1
k
+
·
A(a)
λ
)y
=
da
!
i (a· ·xx
i
i
·
A(a)
λi (a
)y
=
da
i i
i=1
=
max
i=1
+
m →Sk−1
A:Sn−1
da(a · xi ) ·
i=1 (a · xi )yi
,
A(a)+
= , +k
+
, (a · x(a)y· xi )yi ,
mm
(a ·i=1
xi )y
i i i
i=1
i=1
,,
A(a)
A(a) =
= ,,+
+
k
k
,i ,
,
(a
·
x
)y
(a
·
x
)y
i
i
", i=1
i
m
i=1 ) '
1 2 *1/2
da
χ "=
ai
mm *m
"
)
'
)
a∈S
1/2
n−1
'
1/2
11
i=12 *
=
da
aia2i
=m
da
m a∈S
i=1
a∈Sn−1
n−1
i=1
λi A(a) ·
i=1
•Again we should set the vectors parallel. This gives an integral we
can just evaluate
χ
χ
2
! 1
1/2
da
χ=
a2i
m
a∈S
n−1
Now just evaluatei=1the integrals
*1/2 2
0
$ 1 +n 2
da
a
i
i=1
n
 a∈Sn−1

KG (n "→ m) ≥  0
$ 1 +m 2 %1/2 
da m i=1 ai
a∈Sn−1
4 " Γ( m+1 ) &2
2
√
=
m
mΓ( 2 )
1
1
1
−
− O( 2 )
≥ 1+
2m 2n
m
> 1
"
n+1 &2
Γ( 2 )
√
n
nΓ( 2 )
A(a) =
(a1 , . . . , ak )
(Gfinite ) =
"!
u∈E
a∈Ru
Making
the
da
db(a ·game
b)(u · v)finite
"!
"!
u∈E
|ψ! ∈ C
b∈Rv
"!
v E
db(a · b)(a · b) − 2ε
da
from an ε-net:
•Take≥ questions
b∈R
a∈R
E={u ,...,u } S
s.t. for every
u
u∈E
u∈E
1 ∗ t
n-1
= ω2n/2 (Ginfinite ) −
a Sn-1, there exist a
v
2ε
u E close to a:
||a - u|| ≤ ε ≤
∗
ωd (G
2 finite )
u E
∗
ωd (Ginfinite )
region Ru
|φ! ∈ C
a2
|φ! ∈ C
d×d
n×n
b
n/2 ×2n/2
Sn
-1 ∗ (G)
ω
2n/2
>1
∗
ωd (G)
region Ru is∗the set a Sn-1 to which u is the closest
•The
∗
!
ω2 (Gfinite ) ≥ ω2 (Ginfinite ) − 2ε
dadb(a · b)
•Finite game: For questions u,v E Mfinite (u, v) :=
n/2
n/2
ω2∗n/2 (Minfinite )
ω2∗n/2 (Mfinite ) + 2ε
≥
>1
∗
∗
ωd (Mfinite )
ωd (Minfinite )
∗
a∈Ru
b∈Rv
•Set n and ε appropriately
"!
"!
Summary
•Grothendieck’s inequality: non-local vs classical games
•Generalization (KG(n⟿m)): non-local vs non-local
•For every d, there is an XOR game M and finite n>d,
s.t. ωd*(M) < ωn*(M).
(Binary dimension witnesses exist.)
•We showed this by proving KG(n⟿m)>1