Electrical Engineering in Japan, Vol. 163, No.
4, 2008
Translated from Denki Gakkai Ronbunshi, Vol. 126-C, No. 12, December 2006, pp. 1474–1482
Properties of Quantum Gain of Coding with Information Criterion by Binary
Linear Codes
YUKI ISHIDA,1 SHOGO USAMI,2 TSUYOSHI SASAKI USUDA,1 and ICHI TAKUMI3
1
Aichi Prefectural University, Japan
2
Meijo University, Japan
3
Nagoya Institute of Technology, Japan
SUMMARY
In quantum information theory, superadditivity in the
capacity of a quantum channel occurs as a special property.
We present a method of calculating the mutual information
analytically for binary linear codes by using square-root
measurement as the decoding process. Many examples of
codes showing the existence of superadditivity in capacity
have been given in the past, but the scope of the method was
not clarified. In the present paper, we show that the method
can be applied to any binary linear codes. We also show that
the quantum channel capacity is almost fully attained in a
finite codeword length by using approximation to simplex
code. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Electr Eng Jpn,
163(4): 48–57, 2008; Published online in Wiley Inter-
Science (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI 10.1002/
eej.20646
Key words: quantum information theory; quantum
channel capacity; superadditivity; square-root measure-
ment; quantum gain by coding.
1. Introduction
In contrast to conventional information theory, quan-
tum information theory includes superadditivity of the
channel capacity [1, 2]. Usually, when a channel is used
twice, the amount of transmittable information increases by
no more than twice; with superadditivity, however, more
than twice as much information may be transmitted. That
is, the superadditivity of a communication channel capacity
Contract grant sponsor: Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science
and Technology, as a part of the SCOPE project of the Ministry of Internal
Affairs and Communications.
48
may be attributed to an essential increase of the amount of
transmittable information due to information source exten-
sion.
Recently, superadditivity was demonstrated clearly
by the existence of codes exhibiting superadditivity at finite
codeword length in the case of binary pure-state signals [3,
4]. On the other hand, no matter how ingenious the coding
scheme, superadditivity cannot be realized in the case of
individual decoding. Entanglement must be involved in the
decoding process in order to obtain superadditivity; that is,
quantum combined measurement (entanglement measure-
ment) is required. In addition, as shown in Ref. 3, even if
entanglement is involved in the decoding process, an in-
crease in the amount of transmittable information cannot be
implemented so long as all signal sequences derived by n-th
order extension of the information source are used with
equal probability. This means that the signal sequences
must be selected from the n-th order extension of the
information source in order to increase the information
content. Since selection of the signal sequences is equiva-
lent to coding, the increase of information content due to
superadditivity of the communication channel capacity is
called the quantum gain of coding.
Usually, an effort is made to reduce the decoding
error rate in coding. However, the information content is
estimated when the discussion is conducted in terms of
superadditivity of the quantum channel capacity. The infor-
mation content does not increase unless entanglement, a
specific quantum effect, is employed in the decoding
scheme, and therefore, such an information increase is
called a quantum gain rather than merely a coding gain.
In addition, the world’s first proof-of-principle ex-
periments on superadditive quantum gain were carried out
at the National Institute on Information and Communica-
tion Technology (NICT, formerly the Communications Re-
search Laboratory) [5]. Linearly dependent signals of a
single-photon system were used in the experiments. In the
© 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

future, the experiments must be extended to linearly inde-
pendent signals (coherent-state system) in order to imple-
ment ultrafast, ultrareliable quantum communication.
However, even in the case of binary signals (the simplest
linearly independent system), such basic properties as the
relationship between the quantum gain and the code struc-
ture have not yet been made clear. In addition, the quantum
gain implemented so far has been very small, only about
1.1 (versus uncoded transmission) in most cases. The prob-
able reason is that matrix eigenvalues and eigenvectors
must be calculated when finding the mutual information for
a specific code by quantum combined measurement.
By using the group covariance of signals [6], the
authors have proposed a method [7] of finding the mutual
information analytically for the case that the decoding
process is square-root measurement (SRM). Although we
expected this method to be applicable to arbitrary binary
linear codes, in Ref. 7 we could demonstrate its applicabil-
ity to only single parity check codes, and its range of
application remained unclear.
In this paper, we prove that the method of Ref. 7
allows the analytic solution of the mutual information for
arbitrary binary linear codes. In addition, we consider a
further simplification of analytic solution for BCH codes
and their extensions, and the achievement factor of the
quantum gain for codewords as long as about 1010. In
addition, we use approximation to find the mutual informa-
tion of simplex codes, and examine the quantum gain
properties for extremely long codes with lengths of about
10300 to show that the quantum channel capacity is almost
fully attained.
Below, base-2 logarithms are assumed unless other-
wise specified.
2. Superadditivity of Quantum Channel Capacity
and Mutual Information
2.1 Superadditivity of quantum channel
capacity
Here we deal with a transmission model of classical
information via a quantum channel. Let {i|i = 0, 1, . . . , M
– 1} denote the alphabet of a classical information source,
and {ξi} denote its a priori probability. The classical output
information j for classical input information i is obtained
by quantum measurement of one-to-one quantum states
^ . Generally, the quantum measurement process
(signals) ρi
can be considered as a noisy channel without one-to-one
correspondence of the classical input–output information.
The communication channel is characterized by the condi-
tional probability P(j|i) as follows:
(1)
49
^
Here {Πj} denotes the quantum measurement process, and
is called the decision operator. P(j|i) is the probability that
j is obtained when i is sent. Thus, the mutual information is
defined just as in conventional information theory:
(2)
The maximum of Eq. (2) with respect to the quantum
measurement process and the a priori probability is the
channel capacity at a codeword length of 1 (or the maxi-
mum mutual information without coding) C1 [8, 9]:
(3)
The channel capacity at a codeword length of n for n-th
order extension of the information source (or the maximum
mutual information without coding) is defined similarly.
The superadditivity of channel capacity is expressed
as follows, with Cn denoting the capacity of the quantum
channel at a codeword length of n:
(4)
Strictly speaking, superadditivity is recognized if the in-
equality sign applies in the above expression. Now, accord-
ing to the quantum channel coding theorem, the maximum
rate C of errorless transmission is determined as the follow-
ing limit value:
(5)
This is called the quantum channel capacity [2].
Thus, the simplest condition of quantum superaddi-
tivity is nC1 < Cn. In all examples of superadditivity re-
ported so far [3, 4, 10], the left inequality sign in the
following expression applies:
(6)
Here In(X ; Y) / n − C1 is the lower bound of Cn / n − C1.
Therefore, In / n − C1 > 0 means that Cn / n − C1 > 0, which
is indicative of strict superadditivity. In this study, we refer
to In(X ; Y) / n − C1 as the quantum gain. Since the highest
quantum gain is C − C1, it is meaningful to compare the
actual quantum gain In(X ; Y) / n − C1 of specific codes with
the highest possible value.
2.2 Estimation of mutual information by
square-root measurement
Appropriate coding and decoding must be performed
to show the superadditivity of the quantum channel capac-
ity. Here we follow the previous papers on superadditivity
[3, 4]. In particular, we perform coding by appropriate
selection of codewords (the a priori probabilities of the
selected codewords are assumed equal), while using
square-root measurement (SRM) for decoding. SRM is a
decoding process intended to minimize the error rate for
arbitrary binary linear codes [3, 11]. Thus, the SRM for an
M-ary pure-state signal system {|ψi〉 |i = 0, 1, . . . , M – 1}
^ (srm) = |µ 〉 〈µ ||j = 0, 1,
with equal a priori probabilities is {Π
j j j
. . . , M – 1}. Here the measured quantum state {|µj〉} is
defined as follows:
(7)
According to Ref. 12, the inner product of the signal |ψi〉
and the measurement quantum state |µj〉 is equal to the
i-th-row j-th-column element of the square root of the Gram
matrix of the signal system:
(8)
Therefore, when SRM is applied, the channel matrix is
(9)
Now suppose that codeword states of length n are
composed of binary letter states {|0〉, |1〉}, and the code is
produced by selecting 2k codewords. The elements of the
Gram matrix can be expressed as follows, using the inner
product of the letter states κ = 〈0|1〉 and the Hamming
distance dH (ψi, ψj) between corresponding classical code-
words:
(10)
The mutual information in the case of SRM can be
found from the channel matrix as follows:
(11)
However, finding the eigenvalues and eigenvectors remains
a difficult task, and square root calculation of a high-degree
Gram matrix is difficult.
3. Analytic Solution for Mutual Information of
Binary Linear Codes
3.1 Derivation of analytic solution for mutual
information
Here we show that the SRM formula for the mutual
information proposed in Ref. 7 holds true for arbitrary
50
binary linear codes. In the previous paper, the formula was
applied to single parity check codes as an example of code
meeting condition (29) in Ref. 7. Here we examine the
range of application of the formula in another way.
Consider linear codes composed of the correspond-
ing classical code when codeword states of length n are
composed of binary letter states {|0〉, |1〉}, and M = 2k
codewords are selected. From the group covariance of
linear codes, mutual information In (X ; Y) is found as fol-
lows [7]:
(12)
Thus, the mutual information can be found by calculating
the 0-th row P(j|0) of the channel matrix, that is, the 0-th
row (Γ2k)10,j/ 2 of the square root of the Gram matrix. In
addition, the following is true for the 0-th row (Γ2k)10,j/ 2 of
the square root of the Gram matrix:
(13)
Here ωH(i) denotes the Hamming weight when i is ex-
pressed as a binary number. Therefore, the first and second
terms represent the bit counts of the binary logical products
of j and k′, and k′ and l, respectively.
Proposition 1
Equation (13) gives an analytic solution of the square
root of the Gram matrix for arbitrary binary linear codes.
Lemma 1 The eigenvalues λj and eigenvectors lj of
the Gram matrix (Γ2k) of the covariant signals for a group
with exclusive ORing ⊕ are expressed as follows:
(14)
(15)
Here j = 0, 1, . . . , 2k − 1.
Proof To prove the lemma, it will suffice to show
that
(16)
First, the i-th-row element of column vector Γ2 lj of the
k
Gram matrix of the covariant signals for a group with
exclusive ORing ⊕ is
 (17)
The i-th-row element of the column vector λjlj is
(18)
Thus, Eq. (16) is true, as is evident from Eqs. (17) and (18).
All eigenvectors must be orthonormalized in order to
calculate the square root of the Gram matrix using eigen-
values and eigenvectors. In general, eigenvalues (14) may
be degenerate. However, eigenvectors (15) are mutually
orthogonal and normalized.
Lemma 2 Eigenvectors (15) are orthonormalized.
Proof
(19)
If j = j′, then j ⊕ j′ = 0; therefore,
(20)
Thus, the eigenvectors are normalized.
On the other hand, if j ≠ j′, then j″ = j ⊕ j′ ≠ 0. In this
case, at least one nonzero bit exists in the binary notation
of j″. Now suppose that the u-th bit is nonzero (i.e., is 1). If
the u-th bit is zero when a nonnegative integer v smaller
than 2k − 1 is represented by k bits, then the u-th bit of
v + 2u is 1. Then,
(21)
In addition, when arbitrary nonnegative integers smaller
than 2k − 1 are represented by k bits, there are always pairs
that differ only in the u-th bit. Therefore,
51
(22)
Thus, different eigenvectors are mutually orthogonal.
Therefore, Eqs. (12) and (13) give an analytic solu-
tion of the mutual information of covariant signals for a
group with exclusive ORing ⊕. Since covariant signals for
a group with exclusive ORing ⊕ form binary linear codes,
Proposition 1 is true.
It should be noted that the expression under the
radical on the right-hand side of Eq. (13) is an eigenvalue
of the Gram matrix, and therefore, the expression under the
radical is nonnegative because the Gram matrix is positive
definite.
3.2 Quantum pseudo-cyclic code
3.2.1 Derivation
Analytic solution (12), (13) for the mutual informa-
tion can be applied so long as the corresponding classical
code is a binary linear code. Now consider a binary pseudo-
cyclic code. Let G(x) denote the generator polynomial, and
Ai (x) denote a polynomial with weights corresponding to
the binary notation of i. Consider the following i-th code-
word polynomial with codeword length n:
(23)
Here wi,k ∈ {0, 1}; therefore, assuming |wi,k〉 ∈ {|0〉, |1〉},
the corresponding quantum codeword is
(24)
Thus, a quantum pseudo-cyclic code can be obtained. Since
a pseudo-cyclic code is a linear code, the mutual informa-
tion can be found analytically as explained above. When
the generator polynomial G(x) is of degree m, the number
of codewords is 2n−m and (n, n − m) codes can be generated.
When G(x) = 1, selection of codewords is not performed.
In this case, the mutual information per symbol is equal to
the maximum mutual information without coding C1, re-
gardless of the codeword length. When G(x) = x + 1, the
quantum code corresponds to an (n, n − 1) single parity
code for a codeword length of n; in this case, simplified
analysis and characteristics have already been obtained [7].
 (25)

(26)

(27)

Fig. 1. Ratios of mutual information per symbol of Writing x n = X for every D(j)
i (x) / x , we have
j

codes generated by G(x) = x2 + 1 to uncoded channel

capacity C1 as function of κ.

When applying the analytic solution of the mutual informa-

tion to generator polynomials of second and higher orders,
we found that many pseudo-cyclic codes have quantum
(28)
gain (except for some cases with low coding efficiency),
which offers the potential of superadditivity (see Fig. 1).
which is a (k + 2, k + 1) single parity code. Thus, the
3.2.2 Pseudo-cyclic code splitting and mutual pseudo-cyclic code generated by G(x) = x n + 1 can be split
into n single parity codes. In addition, the form of
information
D(j)
i (x) / x denotes the extraction of the (ln + j)-th bit
j

In a classical pseudo-cyclic code, splitting into mul- (l = 0, 1, . . . , k + 1) from the LSD (least significant digit)
tiple codes with generator polynomials of lower order may of the original code.
prove possible. In such cases, the mutual information of the
corresponding quantum pseudo-cyclic code found by SRM (2) For G(x) = x 2n + x n + 1
is the sum of the mutual information values of the quantum Similarly, consider the case of G(x) = x2n + xn + 1.
codes corresponding to the split codes. Therefore, there is Suppose that the i-th codeword of the generator polynomial
no need for data about codes obtained by synthesis. In G(x) = x2n + xn + 1(n ≤ m) of an (m + 2n + 1, m + 1)
addition, a synthesized code has the same degree of quan- pseudo-cyclic code is represented as Wi(x) = Ai(x)G(x),
tum gain as the component codes, which imposes a lower Ai(x) = ai,mxm + . . . + ai,1x + ai,0. Then,
limit on the maximum mutual information for long codes.
But the characteristics of the mutual information for short
codes are included in those for long codes, and the degree
of achievement of high quantum gain increases with the
codeword length.
Below we give examples of splittable classical codes.

(1) For G(x) = xn + 1

Suppose that the i-th codeword of the generator poly- (29)
nomial G(x) = xn + 1(n ≤ m) of (m + n + 1, m + 1) pseudo- (30)
cyclic code is represented as Wi(x) = Ai(x)G(x), Ai(x) =
ai,mxm + . . . + ai,1x + ai,0. Then,
Writing x n = X for every D(j)
i (x) / x , we have
j

52
 2m−1 [(2m − 1) times each], 0, and 2m − 1. The mutual infor-
mation can be expressed as follows:

(31)
(33)
which is a (k + 3, k + 1) single parity code generated by
G(x) = x2 + x + 1. Thus, the pseudo-cyclic code generated
by G(x) = x 2n + x n + 1 can be split into n codes
(k + 3, k + 1).

(3) For G(x) = Gr(x)2

Generally, the following holds true for polynomials
in a binary field:

(32)

Using this relationship when G(x) = [Gr(x)]2, the pseudo-

cyclic code generated from G(x) can be split into two
pseudo-cyclic codes generated from Gr(x). By repeated
application of this procedure, splitting into 2n pseudo-cyclic
n
codes can be implemented for G(x) = [Gr(x)]2 .

3.3 Simplified analytic solutions of mutual

information for specific codes

3.3.1 Single parity code and simplex code

For single parity codes, a simplified form of analytic
solution (13) has already been proposed in Ref. 7. Such
simplified solutions can be obtained only if the Hamming
weights are small in number and their distribution is known.
From Eq. (10), the Gram matrix can be found using the
Hamming distances between codewords; however, the 0-th-
row elements of the matrix can be found only from the
Hamming distance between every codeword and the zero
codeword 00 . . . 0, that is, the Hamming weight of every
codeword. Therefore, a small number of Hamming weights
is equivalent to a small number of different elements in the
0-th row of the Gram matrix. An analytic solution for
simplex codes is proposed in Ref. 3. Specific code features
are utilized, such as the uniform distribution of the Ham-
ming weights (there are only two Hamming weights, 0 and
M/2, and hence there are only two different elements in the
0-th row of the Gram matrix: 1 and κM / 2).
3.3.3 Extended BCH code
For binary linear codes whose minimum Hamming
distance is an odd number, the minimum Hamming distance
can be augmented by 1 by adding a parity bit to every
codeword. The (2m − 1, m + 1) code considered above is a
primitive BCH code with an odd minimum Hamming dis-
tance 2m−1 − 1, thus meeting the above condition. We also
obtained a simplified analytic solution for a (2m, m + 1)
code derived by adding a parity check bit to
(2m − 1, m + 1) code. This is an extension of the primitive
BCH code that exists for arbitrary m ≥ 2 [m = 2 gives just
a (4,3) parity code]. As regards the Hamming weight distri-
bution, there are three values: 2m−1 [(2m+1 − 2) times], 0, and
2m; that is, the minimum Hamming weight is 2m−1. The
mutual information for this code can be expressed as fol-
lows:

3.3.2 BCH code

We attempted to simplify the analytic solution for
(2m − 1, m + 1) code. This code is a primitive BCH code (34)
that exists for arbitrary m ≥ 2. It offers high error correction
capability but the coding efficiency decreases drastically
with the codeword length. As regards the Hamming weight
distribution, generally there are four values: 2m−1 − 1 and

53

4. Properties of Quantum Gain
4.1 On the existence of quantum gain
In quantum state coding with n-th order extension,
the mutual information does not exceed nC1 if all 2n code-
words are used as quantum codewords, without selection.
This is because the results of minimization of the decision
operator are equivalent to those of individual measurement
[3]. Therefore, for codes using the entire codeword space,
that is, codes of the largest scale (or with the greatest
number of codewords), the mutual information in the whole
range 0 ≤ κ ≤ 1 after optimum decoding is equal to C1. The
measurement process to provide such optimum decoding is
individual measurement when SRM is applied to every
letter.
Now consider n-th order extension of binary quantum
signals {|0〉, |1〉} with equal a priori probabilities. Consider
in particular a code that selects only two quantum code-
words |ψ0〉 = |0〉|0〉 . . . |0〉 and |ψ1〉 = |1〉|1〉 . . . |1〉, that is,
the code of smallest scale (or the smallest number of code-
words). In this case, the Gram matrix Γ2, its square root
(Γ2)1 / 2, and the channel matrix are as follows:
(35)
In the communication matrix, all diagonal elements are the
same, as are the off-diagonal elements. That is,
(36)
(37)
From Eq. (12), the mutual information per symbol
(1/n)In(X; Y) is
54
(38)
Figure 2 shows a comparison between the mutual
information per symbol of a two-word quantum code with
codeword length (extension order) n = 2, 3, 4 and the
channel capacity C1 for a unit codeword length. As is
evident from the diagram, the mutual information per sym-
bol decreases with higher extension order (greater Ham-
ming distance between codewords). In addition, Eq. (38)
indicates that without redundant bits (n = 1), the mutual
information per symbol is equal to C1. Therefore, the quan-
tum gain cannot be achieved in a binary code with two
codewords of length n. Thus, the following is true (equality
occurs at n = 1):
(39)
A combination of such codes would also not provide quan-
tum gain. Thus, although the (minimum) Hamming dis-
tance between codewords has a strong effect on the
quantum gain, one cannot simply say that the greater the
minimum Hamming distance, the higher the quantum gain
that is achieved. Since two-word quantum codes cannot
offer quantum gain, the simplest linear code that demon-
strates superadditivity is a single parity code with 4 code-
words of length 3.
On the other hand, binary linear codes, except for the
two cases mentioned above, offer quantum gain in many
Fig. 2. Mutual information per symbol of quantum
code with two codewords and C1 as function of κ.
cases, although the gain properties vary with the generator Table 1. Achievement factor of quantum gain for
polynomial and the coding efficiency. primitive BCH codes with codeword length of 15 and 31
as function of κ
4.2 Achievement of quantum gain

Quantum gain occurs when the mutual information

of code of length n satisfies the following condition:

(40)

The objective of our research is the achievement of a

quantum channel capacity C. The achievement factor AF of
the quantum gain is defined as follows:

(41)
AF = 1 means that the highest quantum gain is achieved. In
addition, let us denote the maximum achievement factor
with respect to codeword length as
(42)
For BCH and other codes with lengths up to 127, the
maximum achievement factor shows nearly the same value
for a given codeword length (see Fig. 3). If this tendency
holds true for longer codes, finding the maximum achieve-
ment factor for a certain class of codes is very significant.
At least, the lower limit of the achievement factor with
respect to the codeword length can be obtained.
We found the maximum value of the achievement
factor for (2m − 1, m) simplex codes, (2m − 1, m + 1) BCH
codes, and (2m, m + 1) extended BCH codes up to a certain
codeword length (see Table 1). Thus, an achievement factor
of about 2/3 is obtained for any of the three codes at a
codeword length of 230.
4.3 Limiting characteristic of quantum gain
achievement
One of our objectives is to investigate how the mutual
information approaches the quantum channel capacity. This
issue is considered in reliability function theory [16, 17]. In
the preceding section, we considered AFmax for codes of a
given length. However, dealing with longer codes is diffi-
cult because the κ giving the maximum achievement factor
becomes very close to 1, and the mutual information be-
comes extremely small. Thus, we applied Maclaurin series
approximation to simplex codes (similar to BCH codes in
their characteristics) in order to calculate AFmax. Specifi-
cally, the following approximation formula was used for
analytic solution of the mutual information of a simplex
code [3]:
(43)

Here

(44)
(45)
Fig. 3. Achievement factor of quantum gain for
primitive BCH codes with codeword length Figure 4 presents the exact and approximate AFmax for
of 15 and 31 as function of κ. simplex codes as functions of the code scale parameter m

55
 under energy constraints is achieved via coherent states
[18], thus reconfirming the importance of coherent states.
Since coherent-state properties are maintained even in case
of attenuation, an attenuated channel outputs pure states.
Thus, a study limited to pure states has some significance.
In this study, we have investigated the quantum gain
of coding from the viewpoint of information criterion.
However, coding is used primarily to minimize the error
probability, and hence, in the future, the quantum gain
properties must be explored in terms of the error probability
criterion.

Fig. 4. Maximum achievement factor of quantum gain
for simplex codes as a function of code scale m.
from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science
and Technology, as a part of the SCOPE project of the
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications.
(which corresponds to the number of information symbols).
In a simplex code, x decreases as m increases, which corre-
sponds to the approximation conditions. The approxima-
tion agrees closely with the strict solution at m > 10. AFmax
increases with the code length, without saturation, and the
full quantum channel capacity can be almost reached when
κ is very close to 1. In simplex codes, κ resulting in AFmax
approaches 1 as m increases. This is because the parameter
m in a simplex code governs not only the codeword length
but also the coding efficiency. On the other hand, the
codeword length and coding efficiency can be designed
independently for BCH codes. Thus, one can assume that
in a BCH code, the quantum channel capacity can be
achieved over nearly the entire range of κ.
5. Conclusions
We have shown in this paper that the previously
proposed analytic solution for mutual information applies
to arbitrary binary linear codes. We applied this analytic
solution to various quantum pseudo-cyclic codes, and veri-
fied its effectiveness. In addition, we proposed simplified
analytic solutions for certain code classes and examined the
achievement factor of the quantum gain for long codes.
Specifically, we introduced the Maclaurin series approxi-
mation for the mutual information of simplex codes, and
examined the maximum achievement factor of the quantum
gain for very long codes. We found that the achievement
factor does not become saturated, and that the full quantum
channel capacity can be nearly reached.
Considering more realistic situations, mixed quan-
tum states with classical noise must be considered rather
than pure states. However, in an attenuated channel, the
most important quantum channel model for representing
optical fiber channels and space communication channels,
it was shown in 2004 that the quantum channel capacity
Acknowledgment
The present study was supported by financial aid
REFERENCES
1. Kholevo AS. Information-theoretical aspects of
quantum measurement. Problemy Peredachi Infor-
matsii 1973;9:31–42.
2. Kholevo AS. Capacity of a quantum communication
channel. Problemy Peredachi Informatsii 1979;15:3–
11.
3. Sasaki M, Kato K, Izutsu M, Hirota O. Quantum
channels showing superadditivity in classical capac-
ity. Phys Rev 1998;A58:146–158.
4. Kato K, Osaki M, Hirota O. Calculation of mutual
information for quantum code words with very tong
length. Abstracts of 4th International Conference on
Quantum Communication, Measurement, and Com-
puting (QCM 98), p 30.
5. Takeoka M, Fujiwara M, Mizuno J, Sasaki M. Imple-
mentation of generalized quantum measurements:
Superadditive quantum coding, accessible informa-
tion extraction, and classical capacity limit. Phys Rev
2004;A69:052329.
6. Usuda TS, Takumi I. Group covariant signals in quan-
tum information theory. Quantum communication,
computing, and measurement 2. In: Kumar P, D’Ari-
ano GM, Hirota O (editors). Plenum Press; 2000. p
37–42.
7. Usami S, Usuda TS, Takumi I, Hata M. Trans IEICE
1999;E82-A:2185–2190.
8. Ban M, Kurokawa K, Hirota O. Cut-off rate perfor-
mance of quantum communication channels with
symmetric states. Quantum Semiclass Opt
1999;1:206–218.
9. Osaki M, Ban M, Hirota O. On maximum mutual
information without coding. Quantum communica-
tion, computing, and measurement 2. In: Kumar P,

56
 D’Ariano GM, Hirota O (editors). Plenum Press;
2000. p 17–26.
10. Hirota O. A foundation of quantum channels with
super additiveness for Shannon information. Appl
Algebra Eng Commun Comput 2000;10:401–423.
11. Usuda TS, Takumi I, Hata M, Hirota O. Minimum
error detection of classical linear code sending
through a quantum channel. Phys Lett
1999;A256:104–108.
12. Hausladen P, Jozsa R, Schumacher B, Westmoreland
M, Wootters WK. Classical information capacity of
a quantum channel. Phys Rev 1996;A54:1869–1876.
13. Usami S, Usuda TS, Takumi I, Nakano R, Hata M.
Superadditivity in capacity of quantum channel by
classical pseudo-cyclic codes. Quantum communica-
tion, computing, and measurement 3. In: Tombesi P,
Hirota O (editors). Plenum Press; 2001. p 35–38.
14. Peres A, Wootters WK. Optimal detection of quan-
tum information. Phys Rev Lett 1991;66:1119–1122.
15. Ban M, Yamazaki K, Hirota O. Accessible informa-
tion in combined and sequential quantum measure-
ment on a binary-state signal. Phys Rev
1997;A55:22–26.
16. Burnashev MV, Holevo AS. On reliability function of
quantum communication channel. quant-
ph/9703013, 1997.
17. Kurokawa K, Hirota O. Properties of quantum reli-
ability function and its applications to several quan-
tum signals. Trans IEICE 2000;J83-A:57–66.
18. Giovannetti V, Guha S, Lloyd S, Maccone L, Shapiro
JH, Yuen HP. Classical capacity of the lossy bosonic
channel: The exact solution. Phys Rev Lett
2004;92:027902.
19. Hirota O. Foundation of quantum information sci-
ence. Morikita; 2002.

AUTHORS (from left to right)

Yuki Ishida (nonmember) graduated in 2005 from the Faculty of Information Science and Technology, Aichi Prefectural
University, and completed the master’s program in 2007. While in the master’s program, he pursued research on quantum
information theory. He is a member of IEICE.

Shogo Usami (nonmember) graduated in 1997 from the Faculty of Engineering, Nagoya Institute of Technology, majoring
in AI and computer science, completed the doctoral program in 2002, and was appointed a postdoctoral researcher in 2002.
Since 2004 he has been an assistant professor in the Department of Information Engineering at Meijo University. His current
research interests are coding theory and quantum information theory. He holds a D.Eng. degree, and is a member of IEICE,
IPSJ, and SITA.

Tsuyoshi Sasaki Usuda (member) graduated in 1990 from the Faculty of Engineering, Tamagawa University, majoring
in information and communications, completed the doctoral program in 1995, and was appointed a research associate at Nagoya
Institute of Technology. Since 2002 he has been an associate professor in the Department of Applied Information Technology
at Aichi Prefectural University. His current research interests are quantum information theory and its applications. He holds a
D.Eng. degree, and is a member of IEICE and SITA.

Ichi Takumi (member) graduated in 1982 from the Faculty of Engineering, Nagoya Institute of Technology, majoring in
electronic engineering, completed the master’s program in 1984, and was appointed a research associate in 1985. He is currently
a professor in the Department of Computer Science. His research interests include digital communications and adaptive system
processing. He holds a D.Eng. degree, and is a member of IEICE and SICE.

57