← Latest papers
⚛️ quantum physics

Large sets of mutually orthogonal quantum Latin squares

This paper establishes that a set of n2n-2 mutually orthogonal quantum Latin squares (MOQLS) of order nn must be classical, while simultaneously constructing large non-classical sets of MOQLS for prime power orders to improve existing bounds.

Original authors: Simeon Ball, Robin Simoens

Published 2026-07-15
📖 5 min read🧠 Deep dive

Original authors: Simeon Ball, Robin Simoens

Original paper licensed under CC BY 4.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). This is an AI-generated explanation of the paper below. It is not written or endorsed by the authors. For technical accuracy, refer to the original paper. Read full disclaimer

Imagine a giant, magical Sudoku puzzle, but instead of numbers like 1 through 9, the cells are filled with shimmering, invisible "quantum states." In the world of math, these are called Quantum Latin Squares. Just like a regular Sudoku, every row and every column must contain a unique set of these states.

Now, imagine you want to stack several of these puzzles on top of each other. If you do it right, the layers don't just sit there; they interact in a special way called "orthogonality." This means if you look at any single spot across all the stacked puzzles, the combination of states is totally unique and never repeats. Mathematicians call this stack a set of Mutually Orthogonal Quantum Latin Squares (MOQLS).

The big question this paper asks is: How tall can we stack these puzzles?

The "Classical" Ceiling

First, let's talk about the boring, predictable kind of puzzle. If every cell in your quantum puzzle just holds a standard, fixed state (like a regular number in a normal Sudoku), we call it classical. We already knew that if you try to stack n1n-1 puzzles of size nn, they must be this boring, classical type. You can't make them "quantum" if the stack is that high.

But what if you try to stack just one fewer? What if you try for a stack of size n2n-2?
For a long time, people wondered: "Could a stack of n2n-2 be the first place where we can finally build a truly non-classical, quantum stack?"

The paper's main finding is a hard "No."
The authors, Simeon Ball and Robin Simoens, proved that even if you try to build a stack of n2n-2 puzzles, you are forced to make them classical. You cannot sneak a non-classical one in there. This means the maximum number of non-classical puzzles you can stack is at most n3n-3. However, they did not prove that a stack of n3n-3 is impossible; in fact, whether a stack of n3n-3 can be non-classical is still an open question.

Building the Tallest Possible Quantum Towers

So, if we can't go higher than n3n-3 (and we know we can't reach n2n-2), how high can we go? The paper doesn't just say "no" to the big stacks; it also shows us how to build the tallest possible non-classical towers for specific sizes.

Think of the size of your puzzle, nn, as a special number. If nn is a "prime power" (a number like 4, 8, 9, 16, 25, etc., which comes from multiplying a prime number by itself a few times), the authors found a clever recipe to build these stacks.

They used a mathematical tool called a Frobenius ring (think of it as a special kind of number playground) and a "permutation" (a way of shuffling the numbers around) that isn't just a simple straight line. By picking the right shuffle, they could construct a set of d1d-1 non-classical puzzles, where dd is a specific divisor of n1n-1.

For example, if you have a puzzle of size 16 (which is 424^2), the number 15 (which is $16-1$) has a big divisor, 5. Using their recipe, they showed you can build a stack of 4 non-classical puzzles. This is a huge improvement over what we knew before, pushing the lower limit of how many we can definitely build much higher.

The "Direction" Trick

How did they do it? They used a concept called "directions." Imagine drawing lines between points on a graph. A "direction" is just the slope of the line. The authors looked for a shuffling function that avoids creating too many different slopes. If a function avoids certain slopes, it means the resulting quantum puzzles don't clash with each other.

They found that by using a specific type of shuffling function (inspired by a subgroup of numbers), they could avoid just enough directions to create a large, valid stack of non-classical puzzles.

What's Still a Mystery?

The paper is very clear about what it doesn't know.

  • The n3n-3 Question: They proved that n2n-2 is impossible for non-classical stacks. But they pose a new mystery: Is a stack of n3n-3 always classical? They don't know yet. It's an open question.
  • The Number 10: There is a famous puzzle of size 10. We know we can't build a stack of 7 classical puzzles of size 10. But can we build 7 quantum ones? The paper says we don't know. Even finding just 3 non-classical puzzles of size 10 would be a big deal, because we don't even know if 3 classical ones exist!

The Bottom Line

The authors have drawn a sharper line in the sand. They proved you can't build non-classical stacks as high as n2n-2; the ceiling is lower. But for many specific sizes (like 16, 25, 27, etc.), they showed you can build much taller towers than we thought possible before. They didn't solve the whole problem, but they gave us a much better map of where the quantum puzzles can and cannot go.

Drowning in papers in your field?

Get daily digests of the most novel papers matching your research keywords — with technical summaries, in your language.

Try Digest →