{
  "annotation_id": "2dfa6825-9716-4f6e-9850-5d3f6a2d8b98",
  "date_created": "2026-03-02T18:02:31.142000Z",
  "date_modified": "2026-03-02T18:02:31.142000Z",
  "file_hash": "af60d95009dbb839295279ec97bed4621f3503b72b616da5203c386757439e82",
  "private": false,
  "record": {
    "abstract": "As it is well known, quantum entanglement is one of the most important\nfeatures of quantum computing, as it leads to massive quantum parallelism,\nhence to exponential computational speed-up. In a sense, quantum entanglement\nis considered as an implicit property of quantum computation itself. But...can\nit be made explicit? In other words, is it possible to find the connective\n\"entanglement\" in a logical sequent calculus for the machine language? And\nalso, is it possible to \"teach\" the quantum computer to \"mimic\" the EPR\n\"paradox\"? The answer is in the affirmative, if the logical sequent calculus is\nthat of the weakest possible logic, namely Basic logic. A weak logic has few\nstructural rules. But in logic, a weak structure leaves more room for\nconnectives (for example the connective \"entanglement\"). Furthermore, the\nabsence in Basic logic of the two structural rules of contraction and weakening\ncorresponds to the validity of the no-cloning and no-erase theorems,\nrespectively, in quantum computing.",
    "arxiv_id": "quant-ph/0611119",
    "authors": [
      "Paola Zizzi"
    ],
    "categories": [
      "quant-ph",
      "hep-th",
      "math.LO"
    ],
    "doi": "10.1088/1742-6596/67/1/012045",
    "journal_ref": "J.Phys.Conf.Ser.67:012045,2007",
    "title": "Basic Logic and Quantum Entanglement",
    "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0611119"
  },
  "schema_id": "dorsal/arxiv",
  "source": {
    "execution_id": "aba3b717-8b94-4a0b-9f24-2ee08186cdb8",
    "id": "arXiv Dataset IDs",
    "type": "Model",
    "variant": "snapshot-2026-03-01",
    "version": "0.1.0"
  },
  "user_id": 1000002
}