1: \documentclass[twocolumn]{IEEEtran}

2: %\documentclass[onecolumn,draft,journal,twoside,12pt]{IEEEtran}

3: \usepackage{amsmath}

4: \usepackage{latexsym}

5: \usepackage{amssymb}

6: \usepackage{bm}

7: %This version was revised based on Han's comment.

8: \newtheorem{thm}    {Theorem}%[section]

9: \newtheorem{lem}     {Lemma}%[section]

10: \newtheorem{corollary}  {Corollary}%[section]

11: \newtheorem{proposition}        {Proposition}%[section]

12: \newtheorem{rem}     {Remark}%[section]

13: \newtheorem{define}     {Definition}%[section]

14: \newtheorem{example}  {Example}%[section]

15: \def\argmax{\mathop{\rm argmax}}

16: \def\complex{\mathbb{C}}

17: \newcommand{\defeq}{\stackrel{\rm def}{=}}

18: \newcommand{\bR}{\mathbb{R}}

19: \newcommand{\bC}{\mathbb{C}}

20: \newcommand{\bN}{\mathbb{N}}

21: \newcommand{\cH}{{\cal H}}

22: \newcommand{\cS}{{\cal S}}

23: \def\cY{{\cal Y}}

24: \def\cZ{{\cal Z}}

25: \def\cN{{\cal N}}

26: \def\cM{{\cal M}}

27: \def\cD{{\cal D}}

28: \def\cU{{\cal U}}

29: \def\rE{{\rm E}}

30: \def\rP{{\rm P}}

31: \newcommand{\cC}{\mathfrak{C}}

32: %\newcommand{\cC}{{\cal C}}

33: \newcommand{\cP}{{\cal P}}

34: \newcommand{\cPn}{{\cal P}^{(n)}}

35: \newcommand{\cX}{{\cal X}}

36: \newcommand{\cXn}{{\cal X}^{(n)}}

37: \newcommand{\cXvec}{\vec{\cX}}

38: \newcommand{\cXnhat}{\hat{\cX}^{(n)}}

39: \newcommand{\cXvechat}{\vec{\hat{\cX}}}

40: \newcommand{\Tr}{{\rm Tr}\,}

41: \newcommand{\cHn}{{\cal H}^{(n)}}

42: \newcommand{\cHvec}{\vec{\cH}}

43: \newcommand{\rhon}{\rho^{(n)}}

44: \newcommand{\sigman}{\sigma^{(n)}}

45: \newcommand{\rhovec}{\vec{\bm{\rho}}}

46: \newcommand{\sigmavec}{\vec{\bm{\sigma}}}

47: \newcommand{\Phin}{\Phi^{(n)}}

48: \newcommand{\Phivec}{\vec{\bm{\Phi}}}

49: \newcommand{\cCvec}{\vec{\cC}}

50: \newcommand{\cPvec}{\vec{\cP}}

51: \newcommand{\cSvec}{\vec{\cS}}

52: \newcommand{\Pn}{P^{(n)}}

53: \newcommand{\Pnhat}{\hat{P}^{(n)}}

54: \newcommand{\Pvec}{\vec{\bm{P}}}

55: \newcommand{\bW}{{\bf W}}

56: \newcommand{\bQ}{{\bf Q}}

57: \newcommand{\bX}{{\bf X}}

58: \newcommand{\bY}{{\bf Y}}

59: \newcommand{\by}{{\bf y}}

60: \newcommand{\bp}{{\bf p}}

61: \newcommand{\Wn}{W^{(n)}}

62: \newcommand{\Xn}{X^{(n)}}

63: \newcommand{\Yn}{Y^{(n)}}

64: \newcommand{\cn}{c^{(n)}}

65: \newcommand{\cvec}{\vec{\bm{c}}}

66: \newcommand{\Kn}{K_n}

67: \newcommand{\cQ}{{\cal Q}}

68: \newcommand{\cR}{{\cal R}}

69: \newcommand{\cF}{{\cal F}}

70: \newcommand{\cFn}{{\cal F}_n}

71: \newcommand{\cFvec}{\vec{\cal F}}

72: \newcommand{\fn}{f_n}

73: \newcommand{\fvec}{\vec{\bm{f}}}

74: 

75: \newcommand{\rhonarg}[1]{\rho^{(n)}_{#1}}

76: \newcommand{\Xnarg}[1]{X^{(n)}_{#1}}

77: 

78: 

79: \newcommand{\Pe}{{\rm P_e}}

80: 

81: \makeatletter

82: \newcommand{\lleq}{\mathrel{\mathpalette\gl@align<}}

83: \newcommand{\ggeq}{\mathrel{\mathpalette\gl@align>}}

84: \newcommand{\gl@align}[2]{%\lower.1ex

85: \vbox{\baselineskip\z@skip\lineskip\z@

86: \ialign{$\m@th#1\hfil##\hfil$\crcr#2\crcr{}_{{}_{(=)}}\crcr}}}

87: \makeatother

88: 

89: \newcommand{\supD}{\overline{D}}

90: \newcommand{\infD}{\underline{D}}

91: \newcommand{\supJ}{\overline{J}}

92: \newcommand{\infJ}{\underline{J}}

93: \newcommand{\supI}{\overline{I}}

94: \newcommand{\infI}{\underline{I}}

95: \newcommand{\infH}{\underline{H}}

96: \newcommand{\supH}{\overline{H}}

97: 

98: \newcommand{\cHtensor}{{\cal H}^{\otimes n}}

99: \newcommand{\rhotensor}{\rho^{\otimes n}}

100: \newcommand{\sigmatensor}{\sigma^{\otimes n}}

101: 

102: \newcommand{\rhotvec}{\rhovec}

103: \newcommand{\sigmatvec}{\sigmavec}

104: 

105: %\newcommand{\Ptn}{P^{\times n}}

106: \newcommand{\Ptn}{\Pn}

107: \newcommand{\cXtn}{{\cX}^n}

108: %\newcommand{\Ptvec}{\overrightarrow{P^{\times}}}

109: \newcommand{\Ptvec}{\Pvec}

110: \newcommand{\Ptnhat}{\hat{P}^{\times n}}

111: 

112: %double space

113: %\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.66}

114: \def\Label#1{\label{#1}\ [\ #1\ ]\ }

115: \def\Label{\label}

116: 

117: \newcommand{\spec}[1]{\left\{#1\right\}}

118: 

119: \newcommand{\ch}{W}

120: \newcommand{\chn}{W^{(n)}}

121: \newcommand{\chnhat}{\hat{W}^{(n)}}

122: \newcommand{\chvec}{\vec{\bm{W}}}

123: \newcommand{\charg}[1]{W_{#1}}

124: \newcommand{\chnarg}[1]{W^{(n)}_{#1}}

125: \newcommand{\chvecarg}[1]{\vec{\bm{W}}_{#1}}

126: \newcommand{\code}{\Phi}

127: \newcommand{\coden}{\Phi^{(n)}}

128: \newcommand{\codevarn}{\widetilde{\Phi}^{(n)}}

129: \newcommand{\codevec}{\vec{\bm{\Phi}}}

130: \newcommand{\dec}{Y}

131: \newcommand{\decn}{Y^{(n)}}

132: \newcommand{\decarg}[1]{Y_{#1}}

133: \newcommand{\decnarg}[1]{Y^{(n)}_{#1}}

134: \newcommand{\decvar}{\widetilde{Y}}

135: \newcommand{\decvarn}{\widetilde{Y}^{(n)}}

136: \newcommand{\decvararg}[1]{\widetilde{Y}_{#1}}

137: \newcommand{\decvarnarg}[1]{\widetilde{Y}^{(n)}_{#1}}

138: \newcommand{\enc}{\varphi}

139: \newcommand{\encn}{\varphi^{(n)}}

140: \newcommand{\encarg}[1]{\varphi(#1)}

141: \newcommand{\encnarg}[1]{\varphi^{(n)}(#1)}

142: \newcommand{\encvec}{\vec{\bm{\varphi}}}

143: \newcommand{\xn}{x^n}

144: \newcommand{\xvec}{\vec{\bm{x}}}

145: \newcommand{\cost}{c}

146: \newcommand{\costn}{c^{(n)}}

147: \newcommand{\costvec}{\vec{\bm{c}}}

148: 

149: \newcommand{\Pnrc}{P^{(n)}_{\rm rc}}

150: \newcommand{\Enrc}{E^{(n)}_{\rm rc}}

151: \newcommand{\En}{E^{(n)}}

152: 

153: \newcommand{\restrict}[1]{\!\!\restriction_{#1}}

154: 

155: %\date{\today}

156: \begin{document}

157: \title{General non-asymptotic and asymptotic 

158: formulas \\in channel resolvability and identification capacity\\

159: and their application to wire-tap channel}

160: 

161: \author{

162: Masahito Hayashi

163: \thanks{

164: M. Hayashi is with Quantum Computation and Information Project, ERATO, JST,

165: 5-28-3, Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, 113-0033, Japan.

166: (e-mail: masahito@qci.jst.go.jp)

167: The material in this paper was presented in part

168: at 2004 International Symposium on Information Theory and 

169: its Applications, Parma, Italy, October 2004.}}

170: \date{}

171: \maketitle

172: \begin{abstract}

173: Several non-asymptotic formulas 

174: are established in channel resolvability and 

175: identification capacity,

176: and they are applied to wire-tap channel.

177: By using these formulas, 

178: the $\epsilon$ capacities of

179: the above three problems are

180: considered in the 

181: most general setting, where 

182: no structural assumptions 

183: such as the stationary memoryless property are made on 

184: a channel.  

185: As a result, we solve

186: an open problem proposed in Han \& Verd\'{u}\cite{Han-V} and

187: Han \cite{Han-book}. 

188: Moreover, 

189: we obtain lower bounds of the exponents of 

190: error probability and the wire-tapper's information in wire-tap channel.

191: \end{abstract}

192: \begin{keywords}

193: identification code,

194: channel resolvability,

195: information spectrum,

196: wire-tap channel,

197: non-asymptotic setting

198: \end{keywords}

199: \section{Introduction}

200: \PARstart{I}{n} 1989,

201: Ahlswede \& Dueck \cite{Ah-D} proposed the identification 

202: code as a new framework for communication system using noisy channels.

203: However, 

204: the upper bound of the rate of the reliable identification 

205: codes was not solved in their paper.

206: In 1993, for analysis of the converse part of this problem,

207: Han \& Verd\'{u}\cite{Han-V} proposed the channel resolvability problem, 

208: in which 

209: we approximate the output distribution to a desired output distribution

210: by using a uniform input distribution with smaller support.

211: In particular, 

212: the capacity of this problem is defined as the rate of 

213: the maximal number of the size of support for 

214: every desired output distribution.

215: In order to discuss the channel resolvability problem,

216: they introduced the concepts of `general sequence of channels' and 

217: the `information spectrum method'.

218: They gave the relation between 

219: identification code and channel resolvability,

220: and succeeded in proving the converse part of

221: the capacity of identification code for the discrete memoryless channel.

222: In this method it is essential that the performances of 

223: several problems be characterized by using 

224: the probability distribution of 

225: the random variable with a form of `likelihood' function in this method. 

226: This insight is very useful for obtaining the overview of 

227: information theory\cite{Han-book}.

228: In particular, it gives a useful insight into quantum information theory

229: \cite{ON1,Nag-Hay,Hay-Nag}.

230: Therefore, Han \& Verd\'{u}'s paper\cite{Han-V} is undoubtably the landmark of 

231: information spectrum.

232: 

233: However, while Han \& Verd\'{u}'s paper gives the capacity of 

234: channel resolvability for general sequence of channels\cite{Han-V},

235: their proof of the converse part contains mistakes as is

236: recognized in section 6.3. of Han\cite{Han-book}.

237: They proved the achievability of

238: channel resolvability with the asymptotic zero error setting

239: for a general sequence of channels.

240: Concerning the converse part,

241: their proof is valid for the asymptotic $\epsilon$ error setting

242: when the general sequence of channels

243: has a strong converse property.

244: However, their proof is not valid in the general channel even in

245: the asymptotic zero error setting.

246: 

247: In this paper, we give several useful non-asymptotic formulas 

248: for identification code and channel resolvability,

249: which are divided into two parts.

250: One is the direct part of the identification code.

251: The existence of a good identification code is proved in Theorem \ref{t-1}.

252: This construction is much improved from Ahlswede \& Dueck's construction.

253: The other is the direct part of channel resolvability.

254: The existence of a good approximation regarding the output statistics

255: is proved in the two criteria, variational distance and

256: K-L divergence as in Theorem \ref{t-2}.

257: In this discussion, we derived upper bounds of 

258: the average of the variational distance and K-L divergence

259: between the output distribution of a given distribution $p$ 

260: and the output distribution of 

261: the input uniform distribution on $M$ elements of the input signal space,

262: when the $M$ elements

263: are randomly chosen with the distribution $p$ (Lemma \ref{lem-1-11}).

264: Combining Han \& Verd\'{u}'s relation between identification code and 

265: channel resolvability,

266: we derived 

267: the capacity of the channel resolvability for general sequence of channels

268: with the asymptotic zero error setting, 

269: which was conjectured by Han \& Verd\'{u}\cite{Han-V} 

270: ((\ref{1-13-1}) and (\ref{1-13-2}) of Theorem \ref{t-3}).

271: This discussion is valid even though 

272: the strong converse property does not hold.

273: 

274: As another application, we give an upper bound of the capacity of the 

275: channel resolvability for a general sequence of channels

276: with the asymptotic $\epsilon$ error.

277: As a byproduct, we show that

278: there exists a sequence of codes whose second error probability goes to $0$

279: in any general sequence of channels,

280: and only the first error probability is asymptotically related to 

281: the probability distribution of 

282: the random variable with the form of `likelihood' 

283: ((\ref{3-3-1}) and (\ref{3-3-2}) of Theorem \ref{t-3}).

284: We also derived

285: several lower bounds of exponent of channel resolvability in 

286: the stationary memoryless setting

287: with respective error criteria (Theorem \ref{t-5}).

288: 

289: Moreover, we apply our non-asymptotic formulas for channel resolvability to 

290: wire-tap channel,

291: in which there are two receivers {\it i.e.},

292: the eavesdropper and the normal receiver.

293: Wyner\cite{Wyner} introduced this wire-tap channel,

294: and proved that its capacity is greater then 

295: the difference between 

296: the normal receiver's information 

297: and the eavesdropper's information.

298: Csisz\'{a}r \& Narayan \cite{CN}

299: showed that

300: the capacity does not depend on the following two conditions 

301: for eavesdropper's information:

302: i) The eavesdropper's information must be less than $n \epsilon$ 

303: for given $ \epsilon \,> 0$, where $n$ is the number of

304: transmissions.

305: ii) The eavesdropper's information must go to $0$ exponentially.

306: However, 

307: there are no results giving an explicit lower 

308: bound of the optimal exponents of wire-tapper's information.

309: 

310: Indeed, this problem is closely related to the channel resolvability 

311: as follows.

312: In Wyner's proof \cite{Wyner}, 

313: in the asymptotic i.i.d. setting with a large enough number $M$,

314: he essentially showed that

315: when $M$ elements of the input signal space

316: are randomly chosen with a given distribution $p$,

317: the output distribution of the distribution $p$ 

318: can be approximated with a high probability by the output distribution of 

319: the input uniform distribution on the above 

320: $M$ elements of the input signal space.

321: This idea is also applied in 

322: Devetak\cite{Deve} and Winter, Nascimento \& Imai \cite{WNI}.

323: Using the same idea in the non-asymptotic setting, 

324: we can apply our formulas of channel resolvability 

325: to wire-tap channel, and

326: derive a good non-asymptotic formula for 

327: wire-tap channel (Theorem \ref{3-6}).

328: As consequences we obtain 

329: the capacity of general sequence of wire-tap channel (Theorem \ref{t-1-17}),

330: and lower bounds of the exponents 

331: of error probability and the wire-tapper's information in 

332: the stationary memoryless setting (Theorem \ref{t-7}).

333: We can expect that these results will be applied to evaluations of 

334: the security of channels.

335: 

336: Finally, we should remark that our non-asymptotic resolvability formula 

337: regarding 

338: variational distance can be regarded as 

339: essentially the same results as 

340: Oohama\cite{Oohama2}'s formula, where

341: he treated the partial resolvability.

342: Furthermore, he also derived a lower bound of exponent of 

343: channel resolvability by type method\cite{Oohama}.

344: %We compare compare our exponents with his exponents.

345: \section{Identification code in non-asymptotic setting}

346: Let $W: x \mapsto W_x$ be an arbitrary channel with the input alphabet

347: $\cX$ and the output alphabet $\cY$.

348: The identification channel code for the channel $W$

349: is defined in the following way.

350: First, let $\cN =\{ 1, \ldots, N\}$ be a set of

351: messages to be transmitted, and

352: denote by $\cP(\cX)$ the set of all probability distribution

353: over $\cX$. A transmitter prepares $N$ probability

354: distributions $Q_1, \ldots, Q_N \in \cP(\cX)$.

355: If the transmitter wants to send a message $i \in \cN$,

356: an encoder generates an input sequence $x_i \in \cX$

357: randomly subject to the probability 

358: distribution $Q_i$.

359: In this case, the output signal $y$ obeys the distribution

360: $W_{Q_i}$, where

361: the output distribution $W_p$ of a given input distribution

362: $p$ is defined as

363: \begin{align*}

364: W_p(y)\defeq \sum_{x} p(x) W_x(y).

365: \end{align*}

366: On the other hand, at the decoder side an $N$-tuple of decoders

367: is prepared.

368: For every $i=1, \ldots, N$, the $i$-th decoder judges that

369: $i \in \cN$ is transmitted if a channel output $y$ belongs to 

370: $\cD_i$, where

371: $\{ \cD_1, \ldots, \cD_N\}$ are $N$ subsets of $\cY$ in advance.

372: The $i$-th decoder judges that a message different from $i \in \cN$

373: if $y \notin \cD_i$.

374: Here, $\cD_i$ is called the {\it decoding region},

375: of the message $i$.

376: It is not required that $\cD_1, \ldots, \cD_N$ be disjoint.

377: In the identification coding problem, the $i$-th decoder 

378: is only interested in transmission of the corresponding 

379: message $i$.

380: Thus, we call the tuple of 

381: $\Phi \defeq (N,\{ Q_1, \ldots Q_N \},\{ \cD_1, \ldots, \cD_N\})$

382: an identification code of channel $W$.

383: The performance of this code can be characterized by the following three 

384: quantities.

385: One is the size $N$ of the message sent and is denoted by $|\Phi|$, and 

386: the others are the maximum values of the two-type error probabilities

387: given as:

388: \begin{align*}

389: \mu (\Phi) \defeq \max_i  W_{Q_i} (\cD_i^c) , \quad

390: \lambda (\Phi) \defeq \max_{i\neq j} W_{Q_j} (\cD_i) ,

391: \end{align*}

392: where $\cD_i^c$ is the complement set of $\cD_i$.

393: Concerning this problem, as discussed in the following theorem,

394: the `likelihood' function $\frac{W_x}{W_p}(y)

395: \defeq \frac{W_x(y)}{W_p(y)}$ suitablely characterizes

396: the performance of good identification codes.

397: \begin{thm}\Label{t-1}

398: Assume that real numbers

399: $\alpha, \alpha',\beta,\beta',\tau, \kappa \,> 0$ 

400: satisfy 

401: \begin{align}

402: &\kappa \log (\frac{1}{\tau}- 1)  \,> \log 2 +1, ~

403: 1/3 \,> \tau\,> 0,~1 \,> \kappa \,> 0,

404: \Label{3-3-5}\\

405: &1  \,> \frac{1}{\alpha} + \frac{1}{\alpha'} ,~

406: \gamma  \defeq 1 - \frac{1}{\beta}- \frac{1}{\beta'}\,> 0.

407: \Label{3-3-4}

408: \end{align}

409: Then, 

410: for any integer $M \,> 0$, any real number $C \,>0$,

411: any channel $W$,

412: and any probability distribution

413: $p \in \cP(\cX)$, 

414: there exists an identification code $\Phi$ such that

415: \begin{align*}

416: \mu(\Phi) &\le \alpha \beta \rE_{p,x}

417: W_x \left\{ y \left| \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \le C\right.\right\} \\

418: \lambda(\Phi) & \le \kappa + \alpha'\beta'\frac{1}{C}

419: \left\lceil \frac{M}{\gamma}\right\rceil,\quad

420: |\Phi| = 

421: \left\lfloor\frac{e^{\tau M}}{Me}\right\rfloor

422: \end{align*}

423: if

424: \begin{align}

425: \beta \rE_{p,x}

426: W_x \left\{ y \left| \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \le C\right.\right\}

427: +

428: \alpha'\beta'\frac{1}{C}

429: \left\lceil \frac{M}{\gamma}\right\rceil

430: < 1,\label{11-23-7-q}

431: \end{align}

432: where $\rE_{p,x}$ denotes the expectation

433: concerning random variable $x$ obeying the probability distribution $p$.

434: \end{thm}

435: In the following, we omit $x$ or $p$ in the notation $\rE_{p,x}$,

436: and abbreviate the set $\left\{ y \left| \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \le C\right.

437: \right\}$

438: as $\left\{ \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \le C\right\}$.

439: we also denote the probability

440: that the random variable $X$ belongs to

441: the set $\cD$, by $\rP_X (\cD)$ or $\rP_X \cD$.

442: If we do not need to take note of the random variable $X$,

443: we simplify it to $\rP (\cD)$ or $\rP \cD$.

444: This theorem is proven by using the following lemma.

445: 

446: \begin{lem}\Label{A-D}

447: (Ahlswede and Dueck\cite{Ah-D})

448: Let $\cM$ be an arbitrary finite set of the size $M=|\cM|$.

449: Choose constants $\tau$ and $\kappa$ satisfying the condition (\ref{3-3-5}).

450: Then there exist $N (\defeq 

451: \lfloor\frac{e^{\tau M}}{Me}\rfloor)$ subsets 

452: $A_1 , \ldots , A_N \subset \cM$

453: satisfying 

454: \begin{align}

455: |A_i|= \lfloor \tau M \rfloor ,\quad

456: |A_i \cap A_j| \,< \kappa \lfloor \tau M \rfloor (i \neq j).

457: \Label{3-3-7}

458: \end{align}

459: \end{lem}

460: 

461: \noindent

462: \quad{\it Proof of Theorem \ref{t-1}:}

463: In this proof, the subset 

464: $\cU_x \defeq \left\{  \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) > C 

465: \right\}$ plays an important role.

466: First, we assume the existence of 

467: $M$ distinct elements $x_1, \ldots, x_M$ of $\cX$ satisfying

468: \begin{align}

469: W_{x_i} (\cU_{x_i}^c) &\le \alpha \beta \rE_p

470: W_x \left\{  \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \le C \right\} ,\Label{3-3-8}\\

471: W_{x_i} \left(\bigcup_{j\neq i} \cU_{x_j}\right) &\le 

472: \alpha'\beta'\frac{1}{C}

473: \left\lceil \frac{M}{\gamma}\right\rceil .\Label{3-3-9}

474: \end{align}

475: From Lemma \ref{A-D},

476: we can choose 

477: $N \defeq 

478: \lfloor\frac{e^{\tau M}}{Me}\rfloor$ subsets 

479: $A_i , \ldots, A_N$ of the set

480: $\{x_1, \ldots, x_M\}$ satisfying 

481: (\ref{3-3-7}).

482: Let $Q_i$ be 

483: the uniform distribution on the subset $A_i$ whose cardinality is

484: $\lfloor \tau M \rfloor $, that is,

485: $Q_i$ is defined as

486: \begin{align}

487: Q_i(x)\defeq \frac{1}{|A_i|} \sum_{x' \in A_i}

488: 1_{x'}(x),

489: \end{align}

490: where $1_{x'}=1_{x'}(x)$ is an indicator function

491: taking value 1 if $x=x'$ and $0$ otherwise.

492: Defining the subset $\cD_i$ as $\cD_i\defeq \cup_{x \in A_i} \cU_{x}$,

493: we evaluate

494: \begin{align*}

495: & W_{Q_i}(\cD_i) =

496: \sum_{x \in A_i}\frac{1}{|A_i|}

497: W_{x} (\cD_i)

498: \ge

499: \sum_{x \in A_i}\frac{1}{|A_i|}

500: W_{x} (\cU_x) \\

501: \ge & 1- \alpha \beta \rE_p

502: W_x \left\{  \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \le C\right\},\\

503: & W_{Q_i}(\cD_j)

504: = \sum_{x \in A_i}\frac{1}{|A_i|}

505: W_{x} (\cD_j) \\

506: = &

507: \sum_{x \in A_i \cap A_j }\frac{1}{|A_i|}

508: W_{x} (\cD_j)

509: +

510: \sum_{x \in A_i \cap A_j ^c }\frac{1}{|A_i|}

511: W_{x} (\cD_j)\\

512: \le &

513: \frac{|A_i \cap A_j |}{|A_i|}

514: +

515: \sum_{x \in A_i \cap A_j ^c }\frac{1}{|A_i|}

516: W_{x} \left(\bigcup_{x'\neq x} \cU_{x'}\right)\\

517: \le &

518: \kappa

519: +

520: \alpha'\beta'\frac{1}{C}

521: \lceil \frac{M}{\gamma}\rceil.

522: \end{align*}

523: Therefore, we obtain the desired argument.

524: 

525: Next, we prove the existence of $M$ elements and 

526: $M$ subsets satisfying (\ref{3-3-8}) and (\ref{3-3-9})

527: by a random coding method.

528: Let $M'$ be $\lceil \frac{M}{\gamma}\rceil$,

529: and $X=(X_1, \ldots, X_{M'})$ be $M$ independent and 

530: identical random variables 

531: subject to the probability distribution

532: $p \in\cP(\cX)$,

533: %The expectations about this probability can be calculated by using 

534: %$\cU_x \defeq \left\{  \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \le C \right\}$ as follows.

535: then we have

536: \begin{align*}

537: W_p(\cU_x) \le \frac{1}{C} W_x(\cU_x) \le \frac{1}{C}.

538: \end{align*}

539: Using this inequality, we obtain

540: \begin{align*}

541: & \rE_{X}

542: \frac{1}{M'}

543: \sum_{i=1}^{M'}

544: W_{X_i}

545: \left(\bigcup_{j \neq i} \cU_{X_j}\right)

546: \le 

547: \rE_{X}

548: \sum_{j=1}^{M'}

549: \frac{1}{M'}

550: \sum_{i\neq j}

551: W_{X_i}(\cU_{X_j}) \\

552: &=

553: \sum_{j=1}^{M'}

554: \rE_{X_j}

555: \frac{M'-1}{M'}

556: W_p(\cU_{X_j})

557: \le

558: \sum_{j=1}^{M'}

559: \rE_{X_j}

560: \frac{M'-1}{M'C}

561: \le \frac{M'-1}{C}.

562: \end{align*}

563: Further,

564: \begin{align*}

565: &\rE_{X}\frac{1}{M'}\sum_{i=1}^{M'}

566: W_{X_i}(\cU_{X_i}^c)

567: =

568: \sum_{i=1}^{M'}

569: \rE_{X_i}W_{X_i}\frac{(\cU_{X_i}^c)}{M'}

570: = \rE_p W_x(\cU_x^c) .

571: \end{align*}

572: Using the Markov inequality

573: $\rP_X \{ X  \,> \alpha \rE X\}\,< \frac{1}{\alpha}$,

574: {\em i.e.}, 

575: $\rP_X \{ X  \le \alpha \rE X\}\,> 1-  \frac{1}{\alpha}$,

576: we can show that

577: \begin{align*}

578: \rP_X

579: \left\{

580: \frac{1}{M'}

581: \sum_{i=1}^{M'}

582: W_{X_i}

583: \left(\bigcup_{j \neq i} \cU_{X_j}\right)

584: \le

585: \alpha' \frac{M'-1}{C}

586: \right\}

587: & \,>

588: 1- \frac{1}{\alpha'} \\

589: \rP_X

590: \left\{

591: \frac{1}{M'}\sum_{i=1}^{M'}

592: W_{X_i}(\cU_{X_i}^c)

593: \le

594: \alpha \rE_p W_x(\cU_x^c) 

595: \right\}

596: & \,>

597: 1- \frac{1}{\alpha}.

598: \end{align*}

599: Since

600: $(1- \frac{1}{\alpha'})+(1- \frac{1}{\alpha})\,>1$,

601: there exist $M$ elements

602: $x_1, \ldots, x_{M'}$ such that

603: \begin{align*}

604: \frac{1}{M'}

605: \sum_{i=1}^{M'}

606: W_{x_i}

607: \left(\bigcup_{j \neq i} \cU_{x_j}\right)

608: & \le

609: \alpha' \frac{M'-1}{C} \\

610: \frac{1}{M'}\sum_{i=1}^{M'}

611: W_{x_i}(\cU_{x_i}^c)

612: & \le

613: \alpha \rE_p W_c(\cU_x^c) .

614: \end{align*}

615: In the following, 

616: the above $M$ elements $x_1, \ldots, x_{M'}$ are fixed,

617: and we only focus on 

618: the random variable $i$ subject

619: to the uniform distribution on the set $\{1, \ldots, M' \}$.

620: Combining Markov inequality and the preceding inequalities,

621: we have

622: \begin{align*}

623: \rP_i \left\{

624: W_{x_i}

625: \left(\bigcup_{j \neq i} \cU_{x_j}\right)

626: \le \beta' \alpha' \frac{M'-1}{C} 

627: \right\}

628: & \,> 1- \frac{1}{\beta'} \\

629: \rP_i \left\{

630: W_{x_i}(\cU_{x_i}^c)

631: \le

632: \beta \alpha \rE_p W_x(\cU_x^c)\right\}

633: & \,> 1- \frac{1}{\beta} .

634: \end{align*}

635: Hence, we obtain

636: \begin{align*}

637: & \rP_i \left\{

638: \begin{array}{c}

639: W_{x_i}

640: \left(\bigcup_{j \neq i} \cU_{x_j}\right)

641: \le \beta' \alpha' \frac{M'-1}{C} ,\\

642: W_{x_i}(\cU_{x_i}^c)

643: \le

644: \beta \alpha \rE_p W_x(\cU_x^c)

645: \end{array}

646: \right\} \\

647: \,> &(1- \frac{1}{\beta} )+

648: (1- \frac{1}{\beta'})-1= \gamma,

649: \end{align*}

650: which yields

651: \begin{align*}

652: \left| \left\{

653: i\left|

654: \begin{array}{c}

655: W_{x_i}

656: \left(\bigcup_{j \neq i} \cU_{x_j}\right)

657: \le \beta' \alpha' \frac{M'-1}{C} ,\\

658: W_{x_i}(\cU_{x_i}^c)

659: \le

660: \beta \alpha \rE_p W_x(\cU_x^c)

661: \end{array}

662: \right.\right\} \right|

663: \,>  \lfloor \gamma M'\rfloor.

664: \end{align*}

665: Since

666: $\lfloor \gamma M'\rfloor

667: = \lfloor\gamma 

668: \lceil \frac{M}{\gamma} \rceil \rfloor\ge M$,

669: there exist $M$

670: elements of $\cX$ satisfying (\ref{3-3-8}) and (\ref{3-3-9}).

671: Here, one may think that these $M$ elements 

672: may not be distinct.

673: However, if $x_i= x_{i'} (i \neq i')$,

674: the relation $W_{x_i}(\cU_{x_i}^c)

675: + 

676: W_{x_i} \left(\bigcup_{j\neq i} \cU_{x_j}\right) \ge 1$

677: holds.

678: From condition (\ref{11-23-7-q}),

679: this contradicts 

680: (\ref{3-3-8}) and (\ref{3-3-9}).

681: Hence, we obtain the desired bound.

682: \endproof

683: 

684: \section{Channel resolvability in non-asymptotic setting}

685: In the channel resolvability, 

686: we choose 

687: $M$ elements $x_1, \ldots, x_M$ in the input set $\cX$ 

688: for every probability distribution $p \in \cP(\cX)$,

689: such that 

690: the output distribution of 

691: the input distribution 

692: \begin{align*}

693: \sum_{i=1}^M \frac{1}{M} 1_{x_i}

694: \end{align*}

695: close enough to 

696: the output distribution of 

697: $p$ through the channel $W$.

698: In particular, 

699: we call the distribution 

700: with the preceding form

701: an $M$-type.

702: In this setting, 

703: our purpose is to disenable

704: the receiver of the given channel $W$

705: to distinguish whether

706: the sender generates the input signal based on 

707: `the given distribution $p$'

708: or `the $M$-type $\sum_{i=1}^M \frac{1}{M} 1_{x_i}$ 

709: with a smaller number $M$'.

710: This kind of indistinguishability  

711: can not be applied to any realistic model, directly,

712: but it can be technically related to wire-tap channel.

713: In particular, 

714: we prove Lemma \ref{lem-1-11} in this section as

715: the technically essential part, but

716: this lemma is also the technically essential part

717: for the direct part of wire-tap channel.

718: %This problem does not seem to be useful,

719: %but it can be applied to the treatment of 

720: %the impossibility of the identification code as

721: %was pointed by Han-Verd\'u \cite{}.

722: %Moreover, this 

723: 

724: In the following, we call

725: the pair of the integer $M$ and

726: the $M$ elements $x_1, \ldots, x_M$ of $\cX$,

727: a resolvability code $\Psi$ with the size $|\Psi|\defeq M$.

728: The performance of a resolvability code $\Psi$

729: is characterized by its size $|\Psi|$ and

730: the variational distance

731: \begin{align*}

732: \epsilon (\Psi,W_p)

733: \defeq d\left( 

734: \sum_{i=1}^M \frac{1}{M} W_{x_i}, W_p\right),

735: \end{align*}

736: where

737: the variational distance $d(p,q)$

738: defined by

739: \begin{align*}

740: d(p,q)= \sum_y |p(y)-q(y)|,

741: \end{align*}

742: which equals the $l_1$ norm $\|p-q\|_1$.

743: Another characterization of its performance is given by 

744: K-L divergence

745: \begin{align}

746: D(\Psi,W_p )\defeq D(\sum_{i=1}^M \frac{1}{M} W_{x_i}\| W_p),

747: \Label{3-5-1}

748: \end{align}

749: where

750: $D(p\|q)\defeq \sum_y p(y)\log \frac{p(y)}{q(y)}$.

751: \begin{thm}\Label{t-2}

752: For any integer $M \,> 0$, any real number $C \,> 0$ and

753: any probability distribution $p \in \cP(\cX)$,

754: there exists a resolvability code $\Psi$ such that

755: $|\Psi|= M$ and 

756: \begin{align}

757: \epsilon (\Psi, W_p) &\le 2 \delta_{p,W,C}

758: + \sqrt{\frac{\delta_{p,W,C}'}{M}} ,

759: \Label{3-3-10}\\

760: \delta_{p,W,C}' &\le C , \nonumber

761: \end{align}

762: where $\delta_{p,W,C}

763: \defeq \rE_p W_x \left\{ \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \,> C\right\}$,

764: and $\delta_{p,W,C}'\defeq 

765: \rE_p \frac{W_x^2}{W_p} 

766: \left\{ \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \le C\right\}$.

767: If the cardinality $|\cY|$ is finite,

768: for any $0\,> t \ge -1/2$, 

769: there exists a resolvability code $\Psi'$ such that

770: $|\Psi'|=M$ and either of 

771: \begin{align}

772: D(\Psi',W_p) \le &

773: \frac{\log (1+M^t e^{\phi(t|W,p)})}{-t},\Label{6-26-1}\\

774: D(\Psi',W_p) \le & \eta(\delta_{p,W,C})+  \delta_{p,W,C}\log |\cY| + 

775: \frac{\delta_{p,W,C}'}{M}\Label{7-1-3}

776: \end{align}

777: holds, where 

778: $\eta(x)\defeq -x\log x$

779: and $\phi(t|W,p)\defeq \log \sum_y 

780: (\rE_p W_x^{1/(1+t)}(y))^{1+t}$.

781: \end{thm}

782: \begin{rem}

783: The partial resolvability version of inequality (\ref{3-3-10})

784: has been obtained by Oohama\cite{Oohama2}.

785: Inequality (\ref{3-3-10}) can be regarded as 

786: the essentially same result as Oohama's inequality.

787: \end{rem}

788: \begin{proof}

789: In the following,

790: the indicator functions 

791: $I_x$ and $I_x^c$ 

792: on the sets $\cU_x

793: =\left\{  \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) > C \right\}$

794: and their compliment sets $\cU_x^c$

795: play important roles.

796: In our proof of Theorem \ref{t-2}, 

797: we use the random coding method, {\it i.e.},

798: we consider the $M$ independent and identical random variables 

799: $X=(X_1, \ldots, X_M)$

800: subject to $p$. 

801: Using the notations:

802: \begin{align*}

803: W_x^{\alpha}(y)&\defeq W_x(y)I_x^c(y) ,\quad

804: W_x^{\beta}(y)\defeq W_x(y)I_x(y) ,\\

805: W_p^{\alpha}(y)&\defeq \rE_p W_x^{\alpha}(y) ,\quad

806: W_p^{\beta}(y)\defeq \rE_p W_x^{\beta}(y) ,\\

807: W_X^{\alpha}(y)&\defeq \frac{1}{M} \sum_{i=1}^M W_{X_i}^{\alpha}(y), \quad

808: W_X^{\beta}(y)\defeq \frac{1}{M} \sum_{i=1}^M  W_{X_i}^{\beta}(y), \\

809: W_X^{M}(y)&\defeq W_X^{\alpha}(y)+ W_X^{\beta}(y)

810: = \frac{1}{M} \sum_{i=1}^M W_{X_i}(y),

811: \end{align*}

812: we have the following lemma.

813: \begin{lem}\Label{lem-1-11}

814: The $M$ random variables 

815: $X=(X_1, \ldots, X_M)$ satisfy the following inequality

816: \begin{align}

817: \rE_X

818: \left\| W_X^{M} - W_p \right\|_1 

819: \le & 2 \delta_{p,W,C}

820: + \sqrt{\frac{\delta_{p,W,C}'}{M}} \Label{1-11-1}\\

821: \rE_X D(W_X^{M}\|W_p) 

822: \le &

823: \frac{\log (1+ M^t e^{\phi(t|W,p)})}{-t}\Label{1-11-3}

824: \end{align}

825: for $0 \,> t \ge - \frac{1}{2}$.

826: If the cardinality $\cY$ is finite,

827: the inequality 

828: \begin{align}

829: \rE_X D(W_X^{M}\|W_p) 

830: \le & \eta(\delta_{p,W,C})+  \delta_{p,W,C}\log |\cY| + 

831: \frac{\delta_{p,W,C}'}{M} \Label{1-11-2}

832: \end{align}

833: holds.

834: \end{lem}

835: 

836: Since there exists a resolvability code $\Psi$ 

837: with the size $M$ such that 

838: \begin{align*}

839: \epsilon (\Psi,W_p)\le \rE_X

840: \left\| W_X^{M} - W_p \right\|_1 ,

841: \end{align*}

842: the inequality (\ref{1-11-1}) guarantees the existence 

843: of a resolvability code $\Psi$ satisfying (\ref{3-3-10}).

844: On the other hand, 

845: the relation $\frac{W_{x}^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)}= 

846: \frac{W_{x}(y)}{W_p(y)}I_{x}^c(y)\le C$ holds.

847: Thus,

848: \begin{align*}

849: \delta_{p,W,C}'=

850: \sum_y W_x(y) \frac{W_{x}^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)} \le C.

851: \end{align*}

852: Similarly, 

853: since there exists a resolvability code $\Psi$ 

854: with the size $M$ such that 

855: \begin{align*}

856: D(\Psi',W_p) \le 

857: \rE_X D(W_X^{M}\|W_p) ,

858: \end{align*}

859: the inequalities (\ref{1-11-3}) and (\ref{1-11-2}) guarantees the existence 

860: of a resolvability code $\Psi$ satisfying (\ref{6-26-1}) and (\ref{7-1-3}).

861: \end{proof}

862: \quad{\it Proof of Lemma \ref{lem-1-11}}:

863: 

864: First, we show (\ref{1-11-1}). 

865: Since 

866: \begin{align*}

867:  \delta_{p,W,C}

868: =\rE_{p,x} W_{x} (\cU_x)

869: = \rE_p \| W_x^{\beta}\|

870: = \| W_p^{\beta} \|,

871: \end{align*}

872: we can evaluate

873: \begin{align*}

874: & \rE_X

875: \left\| W_X^{M} - W_p \right\|_1 \\

876: = &

877: \rE_X

878: \left\| W_X^{\alpha} - W_p^{\alpha}

879: +W_X^{\beta} - W_p^{\beta} \right\|_1 \\

880: \le &

881: \rE_X

882: \left\| W_X^{\alpha}- W_p^{\alpha} \right\|_1 

883:  + \sum_{i=1}^M \frac{1}{M}\rE_X \left\|W_{X_i}^{\beta}\right\|_1

884: +\left\|W_p^{\beta}\right\|_1 \\

885: = &

886: \rE_X

887: \left\| W_X^{\alpha}- W_p^{\alpha} \right\|_1 

888: + 2\rE_{p,x} W_{x} (\cU_x).

889: \end{align*}

890: Next, we focus on 

891: the Schwarz inequality regarding 

892: the random variable

893: $l_X(y) \defeq \frac{W_X^{\alpha}}{W_p}(y)$

894: and the sign function $\tilde{l}_X(y)\defeq

895: \frac{l_X(y)}{|l_X(y)|}$ 

896: (we can check that $\tilde{l}_X^2=1$.),

897: then we obtain

898: \begin{align*}

899: &(\|W_p l_X\|_1 )^2= 

900: (\rE_{W_p} |l_X(y)|)^2= (\rE_{W_p} l_X (y)\tilde{l}_X(y))^2 \\

901: \le &\rE_{W_p} l_X^2(y) \rE_{W_p} \tilde{l}_X^2(y)

902: = \rE_{W_p} l_X^2(y) .

903: \end{align*}

904: Thus, the Jensen inequality yields that

905: \begin{align*}

906: \left( 

907: \rE_X

908: \left\| W_{X}^{\alpha} - W_p^{\alpha} \right\|_1

909: \right)^2

910: \le \rE_X

911: \left\| W_{X}^{\alpha} - W_p^{\alpha} \right\|_1^2

912: \le \rE_X \rE_{W_p} l_X^2 (y).

913: \end{align*}

914: Since $\rE_x \frac{W_x^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)} = 

915: \frac{W_p^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)}$, we have

916: \begin{align*}

917: & \rE_X \rE_{W_p} l_X^2 

918: =\rE_{W_p} \rE_X l_X^2(y) \\

919: = &

920: \rE_{W_p} \rE_X

921: \frac{1}{M^2} \sum_{i=1}^M 

922: \left(\frac{W_{X_i}^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)}

923: -\frac{W_p^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)}\right)^2 \\

924: = &

925: \rE_{W_p} 

926: \frac{1}{M} \rE_x

927: \left (\left(\frac{W_{x}^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)}\right)^2 

928: -\left(\frac{W_p^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)}\right)^2 \right)\\

929: \le &

930: \rE_x

931: \frac{1}{M} \rE_{W_p} 

932: \left(\frac{W_{x}^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)}\right)^2 

933: = \frac{\delta_{p,W,C}'}{M}.

934: \end{align*}

935: Therefore, we obtain

936: \begin{align*}

937: \rE_X\left\| \sum_{i=1}^M \frac{1}{M} W_{X_i} 

938: - W_p \right\|_1 

939: \le 2 \delta_{p,W,C}

940: + \sqrt{\frac{\delta_{p,W,C}'}{M}} .

941: \end{align*}

942: Hence, we obtain (\ref{1-11-1}).

943: 

944: Next, we show (\ref{1-11-2}).

945: Since $\frac{W_X^{M}(y)}{W_p(y)} 

946: \le \frac{1}{W_p^{\beta}(y)}$,

947: by using the inequality $\log x \le x-1$,

948: we can evaluate

949: \begin{align*}

950: &\rE_X D(W_X^{M}\|W_p) \\

951: =& \rE_X \sum_y \left( W_X^{\alpha}(y)\log 

952: \frac{W_X^{M}(y)}{W_p(y)}

953: + \sum_y W_X^{\beta}(y)\log 

954: \frac{W_X^{M}(y)}{W_p(y)}\right) \\

955: \le& \rE_X \sum_y \left( W_X^{\alpha}(y)\left( 

956: \frac{W_X^{M}(y)}{W_p(y)}-1 \right)

957: + W_X^{\beta}(y)\log 

958:  \frac{1}{W_p^{\beta}(y)} \right)\\

959: =&\sum_y 

960: \rE_X W_X^{\alpha}(y)

961: \left( \frac{W_X^{M}(y)}{W_p(y)}-1 \right)

962: + \sum_y W_p^{\beta}(y)\log 

963: \frac{1}{W_p^{\beta}(y)} .

964: \end{align*}

965: Regarding the first term,

966: we can calculate

967: \begin{align*}

968: & \sum_y \rE_X W_X^{\alpha}(y)

969: \left( \frac{W_X^{M}(y)}{W_p(y)}-1 \right)\\

970: =&

971: \sum_y \rE_X \frac{1}{M^2}\sum_{i,j}

972: W_{X_i}^{\alpha}(y)

973: \left( \frac{W_{X_j}(y)}{W_p(y)}-1 \right)\\

974: = & \sum_y \frac{1}{M}\rE_{p,x}

975: W_{x}^{\alpha}(y)

976: \left( \frac{W_{x}(y)}{W_p(y)}-1 \right) \\

977: \le &\sum_y \frac{1}{M}\rE_{p,x}

978: \frac{W_{x}^{\alpha}(y)}{W_p(y)}

979: W_{x}(y) 

980: = \frac{\delta_{p,W,C}'}{M},

981: \end{align*}

982: where we use the relation $\rE_X

983: W_{X_i}^{\alpha}(y)

984: \left( \frac{W_{X_j}(y)}{W_p(y)}-1 \right)

985: =0$ for $i \neq j$.

986: Concerning the second term, 

987: letting $K\defeq \sum_y W_p^{\beta}(y)$,

988: we have 

989: \begin{align*}

990: &\sum_y W_p^{\beta}(y)\log 

991: \frac{1}{W_p^{\beta}(y)} \\

992: =&

993: - K \log K - K \sum_y \frac{W_p^{\beta}(y)}{K}

994: \log \frac{W_p^{\beta}(y)}{K}\\

995: \le &\eta( \sum_y W_p^{\beta}(y))

996: +  \sum_y W_p^{\beta}(y) \log |\cY|,

997: \end{align*}

998: because $\log |\cY|$ is the maximal entropy 

999: of the distribution on the probability space $\cY$.

1000: Since

1001: $\sum_y W_p^{\beta}(y)=

1002: \delta_{p,W,C}$, 

1003: we obtain 

1004: (\ref{1-11-2}).

1005: 

1006: Finally, we prove (\ref{1-11-3})

1007: by a different method.

1008: The quantity $\rE_X D(W_X^{M}\|W_p)$ can be regarded as

1009: the mutual information of channel

1010: $X\mapsto W_X^{M}$ with the input probability

1011: $p^M(X)$ which equals the $M$-fold i.i.d. of $p$.

1012: We can check that 

1013: the function $t \mapsto \phi(t|W^{M},p^M)$

1014: satisfies the following property:

1015: \begin{align*}

1016: \phi(0|W^{M},p^M)&= 0 \\

1017: \left.\frac{\,d \phi(t|W^{M},p^M)}{\,d t}

1018: \right|_{t=0}& = -\rE_X D(W_X^{M}\|W_p), \\

1019: \frac{\,d^2 \phi(t|W^{M},p^M)}{\,d t^2}

1020: & \ge 0 .

1021: \end{align*}

1022: Hence, its convexity guarantees

1023: the inequality

1024: $-t\, \rE_X D(W_X^{M}\|W_p) \le\phi(t|W^{M},p^M)$,

1025: which implies the inequality

1026: \begin{align}

1027: \rE_X D(W_X^{M}\|W_p)

1028: \le \frac{\phi(t|W^{M},p^M)}{-t}\Label{1-12-1}

1029: \end{align}

1030: for $0 \,> t \ge -\frac{1}{2}$.

1031: 

1032: Let $1+s= \frac{1}{1+t}$, then 

1033: $1\ge s \,> 0$ and $t= \frac{-s}{1+s}$.

1034: Since $x \mapsto x^s$ is concave,

1035: \begin{align}

1036: \rE_X (\sum_{j\neq i} W_{X_j}(y))^s 

1037: \le \bigl[\rE_X \sum_{j\neq i} W_{X_j}(y)\bigl]^s 

1038: = (M-1)^s W_p^s(y). \Label{7-4-1}

1039: \end{align}

1040: Using (\ref{7-4-1}) and the relation $(x+y)^s \le x^s + y^s$ for 

1041: two positive real numbers $x,y$, 

1042: we obtain

1043: \begin{align*}

1044: &e^{\phi(t|W^{M},p^M)}

1045: = \sum_y \left(\rE_X (W_X^{M})^{1+s}(y)\right)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}\\

1046: =& \frac{1}{M}\sum_y \Biggl(\rE_X 

1047: \sum_{i=1}^M W_{X_i}(y)

1048: \Bigl(W_{X_i}(y)+ \sum_{j\neq i} W_{X_j}(y)\Bigr)^s

1049: \Biggr)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}\\

1050: \le &\frac{1}{M}\sum_y \Biggl(\rE_X 

1051: \sum_{i=1}^M W_{X_i}(y)

1052: \Bigl(W_{X_i}^s(y)+ \Bigl(\sum_{j\neq i} W_{X_j}(y)\Bigr)^s\Bigr)

1053: \Biggr)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}\\

1054: = &\frac{1}{M}\sum_y 

1055: \Biggl(

1056: \sum_{i=1}^M \rE_X W_{X_i}^{1+s}(y)\\

1057: & \quad 

1058: +\sum_{i=1}^M \rE_X W_{X_i}(y) 

1059: \Bigl(\sum_{j\neq i} W_{X_j}(y)\Bigr)^s

1060: \Biggr)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}\\

1061: \le& \sum_y 

1062: \frac{1}{M}\left(

1063: \sum_{i=1}^M \rE_X W_{X_i}^{1+s}(y)

1064: +\sum_{i=1}^M (M-1)^s W_p^{1+s}(y)

1065: \right)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}\\

1066: =  &\frac{1}{M}\sum_y

1067: \left(M \rE_x W_{x}^{1+s}(y)

1068: +M (M-1)^s W_p^{1+s}(y)

1069: \right)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}\\

1070: \le &

1071: \frac{1}{M}\sum_y 

1072: \left(M \rE_x W_{x}^{1+s}(y)\right)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}

1073: +\left(M (M-1)^s W_p^{1+s}(y)\right)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}\\

1074: =&

1075: \sum_y 

1076: \frac{\left(\rE_x W_{x}^{1+s}(y)\right)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}}{M^{\frac{s}{1+s}}}

1077: +\Bigl(\frac{M-1}{M}\Bigr)^{\frac{s}{1+s}} W_p(y)\\

1078: \le & 1+

1079: \frac{1}{M^{\frac{s}{1+s}}} 

1080: \sum_y \left(\rE_x W_{x}^{1+s}(y)\right)^{\frac{1}{1+s}}

1081: = 1+ M^t e^{\phi(t|W,p)}.

1082: \end{align*}

1083: Since $-t$ is positive, 

1084: the desired inequality (\ref{1-11-3})

1085: follows from (\ref{1-12-1}) and the above inequality.

1086: \endproof

1087: 

1088: Next, we proceed to the relation with identification codes.

1089: In order to discuss this relation, 

1090: we focus on channel resolvability of the worst input case,

1091: and define the following values:

1092: \begin{align*}

1093: \epsilon(M,W)\defeq&

1094: \max_{p\in \cP(\cX)}

1095: \min_{\Psi:|\Psi|\le M}\epsilon(\Psi,W_p),\\

1096: D(M,W)\defeq&

1097: \max_{p\in \cP(\cX)}

1098: \min_{\Psi:|\Psi|\le M}D(\Psi,W_p),

1099: \end{align*}

1100: which satisfies 

1101: \begin{align}

1102: \epsilon(M,W)\le

1103: 2 \max_p \rE_p 

1104: W_x \left\{ \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \,> C\right\} + 

1105: \sqrt{\frac{C}{M}} ,

1106: \Label{3-3-3}

1107: \end{align}

1108: for any real number $C\,>0$.

1109: \begin{lem}\Label{H-V}

1110: (Han \& Verd\'{u}\cite{Han-V})

1111: If 

1112: the cardinality $|\cX|$ is finite, and if

1113: an identification code $\Phi$ and 

1114: an integer $M$

1115: satisfy 

1116: \begin{align*}

1117: 1- \mu (\Phi)-\lambda(\Phi)

1118: \,> \epsilon (M,W),

1119: \end{align*}

1120: then

1121: \begin{align}

1122: |\cX|^{M} \ge |\Phi|.\Label{3-1}

1123: \end{align}

1124: \end{lem}

1125: \begin{proof}

1126: Let the identification code $\Phi$ be a triplet

1127: $(N, \{Q_1 ,\ldots, Q_N\}, \{\cD_1,\ldots,\cD_N\})$,

1128: then 

1129: there exist $N$ $M$-types $Q_1', \ldots Q_N'$ such that

1130: \begin{align*} 

1131: d(W_{Q_i}, W_{Q_i'}) \le \epsilon (M,W).

1132: \end{align*}

1133: Since 

1134: the inequalities

1135: \begin{align*}

1136: & 2 \epsilon (M,W) + d( W_{Q_i'},  W_{Q_j'} )\\

1137: \ge & d( W_{Q_i},  W_{Q_i'} )+ d(W_{Q_j}, W_{Q_j'} )+ d(W_{Q_i'}, 

1138: W_{Q_j'} ) \\

1139: \ge &

1140: d( W_{Q_i}, W_{Q_j} ) \ge 

1141: 2(W_{Q_i}(\cD_i)-  W_{Q_j}(\cD_i)) \\

1142: \ge & 2 (1- \mu (\Phi)-\lambda(\Phi))

1143: \end{align*}

1144: hold for any $i\neq j$,

1145: we can show

1146: \begin{align*}

1147: d(W_{Q_i'}, W_{Q_j'} )\,> 0,

1148: \end{align*}

1149: which implies that $Q_i' $ is different from $Q_j'$.

1150: However, the total number of 

1151: $M$-types

1152: %input distributions with the form $\frac{1}{M}\sum_{i=1}^M 1_{x_i}$

1153: is less than $|\cX|^M$.

1154: Therefore, we obtain (\ref{3-1}).

1155: \end{proof}

1156: 

1157: 

1158: \section{Wire-tap channel in non-asymptotic setting}

1159: Next, we discuss the message transmission with the 

1160: wire-tapper who has less information than

1161: the main receiver.

1162: This problem is formulated as follows.

1163: Let $\cY$ be the probability space of the main receiver,

1164: and $\cZ$ be the space of the wire-tapper,

1165: then the main channel from the transmitter to the main receiver

1166: is described by $W^B:x \mapsto W^B_x$,

1167: and the wire-tapper channel from the transmitter to the 

1168: the wire-tapper is described by $W^E:x \mapsto W^E_x$.

1169: In this setting,

1170: the transmitter choose $M$ 

1171: distributions $Q_1, \ldots, Q_M$ on $\cX$,

1172: and he generates $x\in \cX$ subject to $Q_i$

1173: when he wants to send the message $i \in \{1, \ldots, M\}$.

1174: The normal receiver prepares $M$ disjoint subsets

1175: $\cD_1,\ldots, \cD_M$ of $\cY$ and 

1176: judges that a message is $i$ if $y$ belongs to $\cD_i$.

1177: Therefore, the triplet $(M,\{Q_1, \ldots, Q_M\},

1178: \{\cD_1,\ldots, \cD_M\})$ is called a

1179: code, and is described by $\Phi$.

1180: Its performance is given by the following quantities.

1181: One is the size $M$, which is denoted by $|\Phi|$.

1182: The second one is the average 

1183: error probability $\epsilon_B(\Phi)$:

1184: \begin{align*}

1185: \epsilon_B(\Phi)\defeq

1186: \frac{1}{M} \sum_{i=1}^M  W_{Q_i}^B (\cD_i^c),

1187: \end{align*}

1188: and the third one is the wire-tapper's information

1189: regarding the transmitted message $I_E(\Phi)$:

1190: \begin{align*} 

1191: I_E(\Phi) \defeq \sum_i \frac{1}{M} D(  W_{Q_i}^E\| W^E_{\Phi}),\quad

1192: W^E_{\Phi}  \defeq \sum_i \frac{1}{M} W_{Q_i}^E.

1193: \end{align*}

1194: A different measure of the wire-tapper's information is given 

1195: by the average variational 

1196: distance $d_E(\Phi)$:

1197: \begin{align*}

1198: d_E(\Phi)\defeq \frac{1}{M(M-1)} \sum_{i\neq j} d( W_{Q_i}^E,W_{Q_j}^E).

1199: \end{align*}

1200: \begin{thm}\Label{3-6}

1201: There exists a code $\Phi$ for any

1202: integers $L,M$,

1203: any real numbers $C, C' \,> 0$,

1204: and any probability distribution $p$ on $\cX$

1205: such that

1206: \begin{align}

1207: |\Phi| &=M \nonumber \\

1208: \epsilon_B(\Phi) & \le 3

1209: \min_{0\le s\le 1}

1210: (ML)^{s}\sum_y \left( \rE_p (W_x^B(y))^{1/(1+s)}\right)^{1+s} 

1211: \Label{3-8-1}\\

1212: \epsilon_B(\Phi) & \le 3

1213: \left(\rE_p W_x  \left\{ \frac{W_x^B}{W_p^B}(y) \le C'\right\}+

1214: \frac{ML}{C'}\right)\Label{3-8-2}\\

1215: I_E(\Phi) & \le  3

1216: \left(\eta(\delta_{p,W^E,C})+ \delta_{p,W^E,C} \log |\cZ| + 

1217: \frac{\delta_{p,W^E,C}'}{L}

1218: \right)\Label{3-6-2} \\

1219: I_E(\Phi) & \le  3

1220: \min_{0 > t \ge -1/2}

1221: \frac{\log (1+ L^t e^{\phi(t|W^E,p)})}{-t}

1222: \Label{7-1-2} \\

1223: d_E(\Phi) & \le  6

1224: \left(2 \delta_{p,W^E,C} + 

1225: \sqrt{\frac{\delta_{p,W^E,C}'}{L}}\right).\Label{3-8-12} 

1226: \end{align}

1227: \end{thm}

1228: 

1229: \begin{proof}

1230: We prove Theorem \ref{3-6}

1231: by a random coding method.

1232: Let $X=(X_{l,m})$ be $LM$ independent and identical random

1233: variables subject to the distribution $p$ on $\cX$

1234: for integers $l=1, \ldots, L$ and $m=1,\ldots,M$, and

1235: $\cD_{l,m}'(X)$ be the maximum likelihood decoder

1236: of the code $X_{l,m}$,

1237: then we can evaluate as follows by Gallager upper bound\cite{Gal}.

1238: \begin{align*}

1239: &\rE_X \frac{1}{ML}\sum_{l,m} W^B_{X_{m,l}}(\cD_{l,m}'(X)^c)\\

1240: \le & \min_{0\le s\le 1}

1241: (ML)^{s}\sum_y \left(

1242: \rE_p (W_x^B(y))^{1/(1+s)}\right)^{1+s}.

1243: \end{align*}

1244: Since the maximum likelihood decoder is better than 

1245: the code $\cD_{l,m}''(X)= 

1246: \left\{ \frac{W_x^B}{W_p^B}(y) \,> C'\right\}

1247: \setminus \cup_{(l',m')\neq (l,m)}

1248: \left\{ \frac{W_x^B}{W_p^B}(y) \,> C'\right\}$,

1249: we have another evaluation as

1250: \begin{align*}

1251: &\rE_X \frac{1}{ML}\sum_{l,m} W^B_{X_{m,l}}(\cD_{l,m}'(X)^c)\\

1252: \le 

1253: &\rE_X \frac{1}{ML}\sum_{l,m} W^B_{X_{m,l}}(\cD_{l,m}''(X)^c)\\

1254: \le &

1255: \rE_X 

1256: \frac{1}{ML}\sum_{l,m} W^B_{X_{m,l}}

1257: \left\{ \frac{W_{X_{m,l}}^B}{W_p^B}(y) \le C'\right\} \\

1258: &\quad +

1259: \rE_X 

1260: \frac{1}{ML}\sum_{l,m} W^B_{X_{m,l}}

1261: \sum_{(l',m')\neq (l,m)} 

1262: \left\{ \frac{W_{X_{m',l'}}^B}{W_p^B}(y) \le C'\right\} \\

1263: \le &

1264: \rE_{p,x} 

1265: W^B_{x}

1266: \left\{ \frac{W_x^B}{W_p^B}(y) \le C'\right\} \\

1267: & \quad +

1268: W^B_p

1269: (ML-1) \rE_{p,x} 

1270: \left\{ \frac{W_x^B}{W_p^B}(y) \le C'\right\} \\

1271: \le &

1272: \rE_{p,x} 

1273: W^B_{x}

1274: \left\{ \frac{W_x^B}{W_p^B}(y) \le C'\right\}

1275: +

1276: \frac{ML}{C'}.

1277: \end{align*}

1278: Let $Q_m(X)$ be the uniform distribution on 

1279: $\{X_{1,m},\ldots, X_{L,m}\}$,

1280: $\cD_m(X)$ be $\cup_l \cD_{l,m}'(X)$,

1281: and $\Phi(X)$ be the code

1282: $(M,\{Q_m(X)\},\{\cD_m(X)\})$,

1283: then $\rE_X \epsilon_B(\Phi(X))$ is less than 

1284: the right hand sides of (\ref{3-8-1}) and (\ref{3-8-2})

1285: because the average error probability of $\Phi(X)$

1286: is less than the one of the code 

1287: $(ML,\{X_{m,l}\},\{\cD_{l,m}'(X)\})$.

1288: 

1289: Since

1290: \begin{align*}

1291: & \sum_{m=1}^M  

1292: \frac{1}{M} D( W_{Q_m(X)}^E\|W^E_{\Phi(X)})

1293: + D(W^E_{\Phi(X)}\| W^E_p) \\

1294: = & \sum_{m=1}^M  

1295: \frac{1}{M} D( W_{Q_m(X)}^E\|W^E_p),

1296: \end{align*}

1297: we obtain

1298: \begin{align*}

1299: & \rE_X I_E(\Phi(X))

1300: = \rE_X \sum_{m=1}^M  

1301: \frac{1}{M} D( W_{Q_m(X)}^E\|W^E_{\Phi(X)}) \\

1302: \le &

1303: \rE_X \sum_{m=1}^M  

1304: \frac{1}{M} D( W_{Q_m(X)}^E\|W^E_p) \\

1305: \le &

1306: \eta(\delta_{p,W^E,C})+ \delta_{p,W^E,C} \log |\cZ| + 

1307: \frac{\delta_{p,W,C}'}{L},

1308: \end{align*}

1309: where the last inequality follows from

1310: Lemma \ref{lem-1-11}. Similarly,

1311: we can show

1312: \begin{align*}

1313: \rE_X I_E(\Phi(X)) \le\frac{\log (1+ L^t e^{\phi(t|W^E,p)})}{-t}.

1314: \end{align*}

1315: Regarding $d_E(\Phi(X))$,

1316: we can calculate 

1317: \begin{align*}

1318: &\rE_X \frac{1}{M(M-1)} \sum_{i\neq j} d( W^E_{Q_i(X)},W^E_{Q_j (X)}) \\

1319: \le &

1320: \rE_X \frac{1}{M(M-1)} \sum_{i\neq j} d( W^E_{Q_i(X)},W^E_p)

1321: + d( W^E_{Q_j(X)},W^E_p) \\

1322: =& 2

1323: \rE_X d( W^E_{Q_1(X)},W^E_p) \\

1324: \le & 2 \left(2 \delta_{p,W,C} + \sqrt{\frac{\delta_{p,W,C}'}{L}}\right).

1325: \end{align*}

1326: Using Markov inequality, we obtain

1327: \begin{align*}

1328: \rP_X \{ \epsilon_B(\Phi(X)) \le 3 \rE \epsilon_B(\Phi(X)) \}^c

1329: &\,< \frac{1}{3} \\

1330: \rP_X \{ I_E(\Phi(X)) \le 3 \rE I_E(\Phi(X))\}^c

1331: &\,< \frac{1}{3} \\

1332: \rP_X \{ d_E(\Phi(X)) \le 3 \rE d_E(\Phi(X))\}^c

1333: &\,< \frac{1}{3}.

1334: \end{align*}

1335: Therefore, there exists a code $\Phi$ satisfying desired conditions.

1336: \end{proof} 

1337: %\epsilon_B(\Phi)\le 2 \rE_p

1338: %W_x^B \left\{  \frac{W_x^B}{W_p}(y) \le C_1 \right\} 

1339: %+ (ML) W_p \left\{  \frac{W_x^B}{W_p}(y) \,> C_1 \right\},\\

1340: 

1341: \section{General asymptotic setting}

1342: \subsection{Identification code and channel resolvability}

1343: Next, we focus on an arbitrary sequence of channels

1344: $\bW=\{W^n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$, in which $W^n$ is an arbitrary channel from 

1345: $\cX^n$ to $\cY^n$.

1346: In this setting,

1347: two-types of $(\mu,\lambda)$-identification capacities are defined by

1348: \begin{align}

1349: &D(\mu,\lambda|\bW) \nonumber \\

1350: \defeq &

1351: \sup_{\{\Phi_n\}}

1352: \left\{\left.

1353: \varliminf \frac{1}{n}\log\log |\Phi_n|

1354: \right|

1355: \varlimsup \mu (\Phi_n)\,< \mu,

1356: \varlimsup \lambda(\Phi_n)\le \lambda

1357: \right\}\nonumber\\

1358: & D^{\dagger}(\mu,\lambda|\bW) \nonumber\\

1359: \defeq & 

1360: \sup_{\{\Phi_n\}}

1361: \left\{\left.

1362: \varliminf \frac{1}{n}\log\log |\Phi_n|

1363: \right|

1364: \varliminf \mu (\Phi_n)\,< \mu,

1365: \varlimsup \lambda(\Phi_n)\le \lambda

1366: \right\}.\nonumber

1367: \end{align}

1368: However, in the case of $\mu =0$,

1369: we replace $\varlimsup \mu (\Phi_n)\,< \mu,

1370: (\varliminf \mu (\Phi_n)\,< \mu)$ by $

1371: \varlimsup \mu (\Phi_n)=0,

1372: (\varliminf \mu (\Phi_n)=0)$ at the above two definitions.

1373: On the other hand,

1374: two-types $\epsilon$-resolvability capacities are defined by

1375: \begin{align*}

1376: S(\epsilon|\bW) & \defeq

1377: \sup

1378: \left\{\left.R

1379: \right|

1380: \varlimsup \epsilon(e^{nR},W^n) \le \epsilon

1381: \right\} \\

1382: S^{\dagger}(\epsilon|\bW) & \defeq

1383: \sup

1384: \left\{\left.R

1385: \right|

1386: \varliminf \epsilon(e^{nR},W^n) \le \epsilon

1387: \right\},

1388: \end{align*}

1389: where the case of $\epsilon=2$,

1390: we replace $\le \epsilon $ by $\,< 2$ 

1391: at the above two definitions.

1392: 

1393: In the information spectrum method,

1394: the following quantities 

1395: are defined for arbitrary sequence $\bp = \{p^n\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$

1396: of input probability distributions:

1397: \begin{align*}

1398: &\overline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW) \\

1399: \defeq &

1400: \inf\left\{

1401: a \left|

1402: \varlimsup \rE_{p^n}

1403: W_x^n\left\{ 

1404: \frac{1}{n}\log \frac{W_x^n}{W_{p^n}^n}(y)\,> a

1405: \right\}

1406: \le \epsilon

1407: \right.

1408: \right\}\\

1409: & \underline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW)\\

1410: \defeq &

1411: \inf\left\{

1412: a \left|

1413: \varliminf \rE_{p^n}

1414: W_x^n\left\{ 

1415: \frac{1}{n}\log \frac{W_x^n}{W_{p^n}^n}(y)\,> a

1416: \right\}

1417: \le \epsilon

1418: \right.

1419: \right\},

1420: \end{align*}

1421: where the case of $\epsilon =1$,

1422: we replace $\le $ by $\,<$ at the above definitions.

1423: These quantities have another expression as

1424: \begin{align*}

1425: &\overline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW) \\

1426: =& \sup \left\{

1427: a \left|

1428: \varliminf 

1429: \rE_{p^n}

1430: W_x^n\left\{ 

1431: \frac{1}{n}\log \frac{W_x^n}{W_{p^n}^n}(y)\le a

1432: \right\}

1433: \,<1- \epsilon

1434: \right.

1435: \right\}, \\

1436: &\underline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW)\\

1437: =& \sup \left\{

1438: a \left|

1439: \varlimsup 

1440: \rE_{p^n}

1441: W_x^n\left\{ 

1442: \frac{1}{n}\log \frac{W_x^n}{W_{p^n}^n}(y)\le a

1443: \right\}

1444: \,<1- \epsilon

1445: \right.

1446: \right\}.

1447: \end{align*}

1448: %of $S(\epsilon|\bW) ,S^{\dagger}(\epsilon|\bW),

1449: %\underline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW),$ and 

1450: %$\overline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW)$.

1451: \begin{thm}\Label{t-3}

1452: Assume that $|\cX^n|= d^n$, then

1453: the above quantities satisfy the following relations.

1454: \begin{align}

1455: & \sup_{\bp} \underline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW) 

1456: \le D (1-\epsilon,0|\bW)

1457: \le S^{\dagger}(\epsilon|\bW) \nonumber \\

1458: \le &\sup_{\bp} \underline{I}(\frac{\epsilon}{2}| \bp, \bW) 

1459: \Label{3-3-1}\\

1460: & \sup_{\bp} \overline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW) 

1461: \le D^{\dagger} (1-\epsilon,0|\bW)

1462: \le S(\epsilon|\bW)\nonumber \\

1463: \le & \sup_{\bp} \overline{I}(\frac{\epsilon}{2}| \bp, \bW) ,

1464: \Label{3-3-2}

1465: \end{align}

1466: for any real number $0 \le \epsilon \,<1$.

1467: However, the first inequalities in (\ref{3-3-1}) and (\ref{3-3-2})

1468: hold for $0 \le \epsilon \le 1$, and 

1469: the third ones hold for $0\le \epsilon \le 2$.

1470: In particular,

1471: we obtain

1472: \begin{align}

1473: \sup_{\bp} \underline{I}(0| \bp, \bW) 

1474: &= D (1,0|\bW)

1475: = S^{\dagger}(0|\bW) \Label{1-13-1}\\

1476: \sup_{\bp} \overline{I}(0| \bp, \bW) 

1477: &= D^{\dagger} (1,0|\bW)

1478: = S(0|\bW),\Label{1-13-2}

1479: \end{align}

1480: which is desired in Han \& Verd\'{u}\cite{Han-V} and 

1481: Han\cite{Han-book}\footnote{Theorem 6 in Han and Verd\'{u}\cite{Han-V}

1482: claims that $S(0|\bW)=\sup_{\bp} \overline{I}(0| \bp, \bW) $

1483: always holds for any channel $\bW$ if the input alphabet is finite.

1484: However, the proof in \cite{Han-V} contains mistake in part, as

1485: is mentioned in section 6.3 in Han\cite{Han-book}.

1486: Therefore, it has been an open problem

1487: as to whether this inequality holds or not.}.

1488: \end{thm}

1489: This theorem indicates the existence of a code satisfying the following:

1490: The second error probability $\lambda$ is asymptotically independent for the 

1491: behavior of the distribution of the random variable of 

1492: likelihood and always goes to $0$, and only the second error 

1493: probability $\mu$ asymptotically depends on it.

1494: \begin{rem}

1495: Steinberg\cite{Steinberg} claims the inequalities 

1496: \begin{align*}

1497: \sup_{\bp} \underline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW) 

1498: &\ge D (\lambda_1,\lambda_2|\bW),\\

1499: \sup_{\bp} \overline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW) 

1500: &\ge D^\dagger (\lambda_1,\lambda_2|\bW)

1501: \end{align*}

1502: for $\lambda_1+\lambda_2 \,< 1- \epsilon$.

1503: If they are proved, 

1504: by combining the above inequalities and Theorem \ref{t-3},

1505: we can prove the equalities of the above inequalities

1506: in the continuous case.

1507: However, it seems that 

1508: his paper has a gap in counting the maximum number of

1509: different pairs of 

1510: a partial response and an $M'$-type measure 

1511: at the proof of Lemma 2,

1512: which is essential for these inequalities.

1513: That is,

1514: he estimated the total number of 

1515: positive functions on $\cX \times \cY$ with the form

1516: \begin{align*}

1517: f(x,y) =\frac{1}{M'}

1518: \sum_{i=1}^{M'}1_{x_i}(x) \sum_{(x',y')\in F}1_{(x',y')} (x,y),

1519: \end{align*}

1520: where $F$ is an arbitrary subset of $\cX \times \cY$.

1521: The total measure of $f$, {\it i.e.},

1522: $\sum_{(x,y)\in \cX \times \cY}f(x,y)$

1523: is not necessarily less than $1$,

1524: while he indicated that it is less than $1$.

1525: Hence, this total number cannot be bounded by 

1526: $|\cX|^{M'}$.

1527: \end{rem}

1528: \begin{proof}

1529: In order to prove the first inequalities,

1530: we choose an arbitrary real number $R \,< \sup_{\bp} 

1531: \underline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW)$ and a sequence of 

1532: input probability distributions $\bp$ such that

1533: $R \,< R'\defeq \underline{I}(1- \mu | \bp, \bW)$.

1534: Substitute $M=e^{nR},C=e^{nR'},\alpha=\beta=1+\frac{2}{n},

1535: \alpha'=\beta'=\frac{1}{n+2},

1536: \tau= \frac{1}{n+2},

1537: \kappa= \frac{\log 2 +1}{\log n}$ in Theorem \ref{t-1},

1538: then the conditions (\ref{3-3-5}) and (\ref{3-3-4}) are satisfied and

1539: $\gamma= \frac{1}{n+2}$.

1540: Thus, there exists an identification code $\Phi_n$ such that

1541: \begin{align*}

1542: |\Phi_n|& = \left\lfloor \frac{e^{\frac{e^{nR}}{n+2}}}{e^{1+nR} }\right\rfloor \\

1543: \mu(\Phi_n)

1544: & \le (1+\frac{2}{n})^2 \rE_{p^n} 

1545: W_x^n\left\{ 

1546: \frac{1}{n}\log \frac{W_x^n}{W_{p^n}^n}(y)\le R'

1547: \right\} \\

1548: \lambda(\Phi_n) 

1549: & \le \frac{\log 2 +1}{\log n}+(n+2)^2 \frac{1}{e^{nR'}} 

1550: \lceil (n+2)e^{nR} \rceil \\

1551: & \cong \frac{\log 2 +1}{\log n}+(n+2)^3 e^{-n(R'-R)} .

1552: \end{align*}

1553: Therefore,

1554: we obtain 

1555: \begin{align}

1556: &\lim \frac{1}{n}\log \log |\Phi_n| = R, \nonumber \\

1557: &\varlimsup \mu(\Phi_n) \le

1558: \varlimsup \rE_{p^n} 

1559: W_x^n\left\{ 

1560: \frac{1}{n}\log \frac{W_x^n}{W_{p^n}^n}(y)\le R'

1561: \right\}\,< \mu \Label{3-2-1}\\

1562: & \lim \lambda(\Phi_n) =0, \nonumber 

1563: \end{align}

1564: which implies that

1565: $D (\mu,0|\bW) \ge R'$.

1566: Thus, we obtain the first inequality in (\ref{3-3-1})

1567: for $0 \le \epsilon \,< 1$.

1568: In the case of $\epsilon = 1$,

1569: we need to replace $\,< \mu$ by $=0$ at (\ref{3-2-1}).

1570: By replacing $\varlimsup$ by $\varliminf$ at (\ref{3-2-1}),

1571: we can similarly prove $D^{\dagger} (\mu,0|\bW) \ge 

1572: \sup_{\bp} \overline{I}(1-\mu| \bp, \bW) $.

1573: 

1574: Next,

1575: we proceed to the second inequalities.

1576: Let $R$ be an arbitrary real number such that

1577: $R\,> D(1-\epsilon,0|\bW)$.

1578: Then, there exists a sequence $\{\Phi_n\}$

1579: of identification codes

1580: such that

1581: \begin{align*}

1582: R= \varlimsup \frac{1}{n} \log \log |\Phi_n|,

1583: \varlimsup \mu (\Phi_n) < 1-\epsilon,

1584: \lim \lambda (\Phi_n)=0.

1585: \end{align*}

1586: Therefore, we can choose an integer $N$ large enough, 

1587: such that

1588: $1 - \mu(\Phi_n) -\lambda (\Phi_n) \ge

1589: 1- \varlimsup \mu (\Phi_n)\,> \epsilon$.

1590: Moreover, we choose a strictly increasing sequence $\{a_n\}$

1591: of integers such that

1592: $a_1\ge N$ and

1593: $1- \varlimsup \mu (\Phi_{a_n})\,> 

1594: \epsilon (e^{a_n R'},W^n)$,

1595: where $R'= S^{\dagger}(\epsilon, \bW)$.

1596: 

1597: Thus, Lemma \ref{H-V} yields that

1598: $(d^{a_n})^{e^{a_n R'}} \ge |\Phi_{a_n}|$,

1599: which implies that

1600: $R'\ge R$.

1601: We obtain the second inequalities in (\ref{3-3-1}).

1602: We can prove the second inequalities in (\ref{3-3-2})

1603: by choosing a strictly increasing sequence $\{a_n\}$

1604: of integers such that

1605: $1 - \mu(\Phi_{a_n}) -\lambda (\Phi_{a_n}) \ge

1606: 1- \varliminf \mu (\Phi_n)\,> \epsilon$.

1607: 

1608: Finally, we prove the third inequalities

1609: by using another expression of

1610: $\sup_{\bp}\underline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW)

1611: $:

1612: \begin{align*}

1613: & \sup_{\bp}\underline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW) \\

1614: = &\inf \left\{

1615: a \left|

1616: \varlimsup 

1617: \max_{p^n} \rE_{p^n}

1618: W_x^n\left\{ 

1619: \frac{1}{n}\log \frac{W_x^n}{W_{p^n}^n}(y)\,> a

1620: \right\}

1621: \le\epsilon

1622: \right.

1623: \right\}.

1624: \end{align*}

1625: Let $R$ and $R'$ be arbitrary real numbers such that

1626: $R \,>\sup_{\bp}\underline{I}(\epsilon/2| \bp, \bW)$

1627: and 

1628: $R \,>R'\,> \sup_{\bp}\underline{I}(\epsilon| \bp, \bW)$,

1629: then the inequality (\ref{3-3-3}) yields that

1630: \begin{align*}

1631: &\epsilon(e^{n R} ,W^n)\\

1632: \le &

1633: 2 \min_{p^n} \rE_{p ^n}

1634: W_x^n \left\{ \frac{1}{n} \log \frac{W_x^n}{W_{p^n}^n}(y) \,>

1635: R'\right\} + e^{-n (R-R')/2}.

1636: \end{align*}

1637: Taking the limit $\varliminf$,

1638: we obtain

1639: \begin{align}

1640: \varliminf \epsilon(e^{n R} ,W^n)

1641: \le \epsilon, \Label{3-3-6}

1642: \end{align}

1643: which implies 

1644: $S^{\dagger}(2 \epsilon, \bW) \le R$.

1645: Thus, we obtain the third inequality in (\ref{3-3-1})

1646: for $0 \le \epsilon \,< 1$.

1647: In the case of $\epsilon =2$,

1648: we need to replace $\le \epsilon$ by $\,< 1$

1649: at (\ref{3-3-6}).

1650: By replacing $\varliminf$ by $\varlimsup$ in the above,

1651: we can prove the third one in (\ref{3-3-2}).

1652: \end{proof}

1653: 

1654: \subsection{Wire-tap channel}

1655: Next, we focus on a general sequence 

1656: $(\bW^B=\{W^{B,n}\}, \bW^E=\{W^{E,n}\})$  

1657: of 

1658: wire-tap channels, and define the 

1659: following two kinds of capacities

1660: by

1661: \begin{align*}

1662: &C_d(\bW^B,\bW^E ) \\

1663: \defeq &

1664: \sup_{\{\Phi_n\}}

1665: \left\{\left.

1666: \varliminf \frac{1}{n}\log |\Phi_n|

1667: \right|

1668: \lim \epsilon_B (\Phi_n)=

1669: \lim d_E(\Phi_n)= 0

1670: \right\} \\

1671: &C_I (\bW^B,\bW^E ) \\

1672: \defeq &

1673: \sup_{\{\Phi_n\}}

1674: \left\{\left.

1675: \varliminf \frac{1}{n}\log |\Phi_n|

1676: \right|

1677: \lim \epsilon_B (\Phi_n)=

1678: \lim \frac{I_E(\Phi_n)}{n}= 0

1679: \right\} .

1680: \end{align*}

1681: %In this setting, 

1682: %the following information spectrum quantity

1683: %plays a key role.

1684: %\begin{align*}

1685: %&\underline{I}(\bp,\bW^B,\bW^E)\defeq \\

1686: %&\inf\left\{ a \left|\varliminf \rE_{p^n}

1687: %W_x^n\left\{ \frac{1}{n}

1688: %\log \frac{W_x^{B,n}(y)}{W_{p^n}^{B,n}(y)}\cdot

1689: %\frac{W_{p^n}^{E,n}(y)}{W_x^{E,n}(y)}

1690: %\,> a\right\}=0\right.\right\}.

1691: %\end{align*}

1692: 

1693: \begin{lem}\Label{t-1-11}

1694: The inequality

1695: \begin{align}

1696: C_d(\bW^B,\bW^E) 

1697: \ge \underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B)

1698: - \overline{I}(0|\bp,\bW^E)

1699: \Label{3-8-13}

1700: \end{align}

1701: holds for any sequence of input distributions $\bp=\{p^n\}$.

1702: Furthermore, if $|\cZ^n|= d^n$,

1703: \begin{align}

1704: C_I(\bW^B,\bW^E) 

1705: \ge \underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B)

1706: - \overline{I}(0|\bp,\bW^E) \Label{3-8-13-1}.

1707: \end{align}

1708: \end{lem}

1709: This theorem is an information spectrum version of Wyner's result

1710: \cite{Wyner},

1711: that will be mentioned in the next section.

1712: 

1713: \begin{proof}

1714: Let $R' \,> \overline{I}(0|\bp,\bW^E)$,

1715: $R\,< \underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B)- R'$ and 

1716: choose a real number $a$ such that $0\,< a \,< 

1717: \min \{\underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B) -(R+R'), 

1718: R'- \overline{I}(0|\bp,\bW^E)\}$.

1719: Substituting $M= e^{n R}, L=e^{n R'},

1720: C= e^{n(R'-a)}, C'=e^{n(R+R'+a)}$,

1721: we can show that the right hand side of (\ref{3-8-2}) goes to $0$,

1722: and that 

1723: \begin{align*}

1724: \delta_{p^n,W^{E,n},e^{n(R'-a)}}  \to 0 , \quad

1725: \frac{\delta_{p^n,W^{E,n},e^{n(R'-a)}}'}{e^{n R'}}  \to 0.

1726: \end{align*}

1727: Hence, 

1728: the right hand side of (\ref{3-8-12}) go to $0$.

1729: Concerning (\ref{3-6-2}),

1730: the relations

1731: \begin{align*}

1732: & \frac{1}{n}

1733: \Bigl( 

1734: \eta(\delta_{p^n,W^{E,n},e^{n(R'-a)}})+ \delta_{p,W^{E,n},e^{n(R'-a)}} 

1735: \log |\cZ^n| \\

1736: & \quad + \frac{\delta_{p^n,W^{E,n},e^{n(R'-a)}}'}{e^{n R'}}

1737: \Bigr)\\

1738: = &

1739: \frac{1}{n}

1740: \eta(\delta_{p^n,W^{E,n},e^{n(R'-a)}})+ \delta_{p,W^E,e^{n(R'-a)}}

1741: \log d \\

1742: & \quad + 

1743: \frac{1}{n}

1744: \frac{\delta_{p^n,W^{E,n},e^{n(R'-a)}}'}{e^{n R'}}\\

1745: \to & 0

1746: \end{align*}

1747: hold. Therefore, we obtain (\ref{3-8-13}) and (\ref{3-8-13-1}).

1748: \end{proof}

1749: 

1750: Conversely, we obtain the following lemma.

1751: \begin{lem}\Label{l-1-14}

1752: Let $\bQ= \{Q^n\}$ be a sequence of channels from 

1753: arbitrary set $\tilde{\cX}^n$ to the set

1754: $\cX^n$ and $\bp=\{p^n\}$ be a sequence of

1755: distributions on $\tilde{\cX}^n$.

1756: Then, the inequalities

1757: \begin{align}

1758: C_d(\bW^B,\bW^E) 

1759: \le &

1760: \sup_{\bp, \bQ}

1761: \left\{

1762: \underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B \bQ)- \overline{I}(0|\bp,\bW^E\bQ)

1763: \right\}\Label{1-14-4}\\

1764: C_I(\bW^B,\bW^E)

1765: \le &

1766: \sup_{\bp, \bQ}

1767: \left\{

1768: \underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B \bQ)- \overline{I}(0|\bp,\bW^E\bQ)

1769: \right\}\Label{1-14-5}

1770: \end{align}

1771: hold, where

1772: $\bW \bQ =\{W^{n} Q^n \}$ denotes the sequence of channels 

1773: from $\tilde{\cX}^n$ to $\cY^n$:

1774: \begin{align*}

1775: (W^n Q^n)_{\tilde{x}}(y)\defeq \sum_{x \in \cX^n} W^n_{x}(y) 

1776: Q^n_{\tilde{x}}(x)

1777: \end{align*}

1778: for a sequence of channels $\bW=\{W^n\}$ 

1779: from $\cX^n$ to $\cY^n$.

1780: \end{lem}

1781: 

1782: Hence, applying Lemma \ref{t-1-11} to the sequence of the channels 

1783: $\bW^B \bQ, \bW^E\bQ$,

1784: we obtain the following theorem.

1785: \begin{thm}\Label{t-1-17}

1786: \begin{align*}

1787: &C_d(\bW^B,\bW^E) 

1788: =C_I(\bW^B,\bW^E)  \\

1789: =& \sup_{\bp, \bQ}

1790: \left\{

1791: \underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B \bQ)- \overline{I}(0|\bp,\bW^E\bQ)\right\}.

1792: \end{align*}

1793: \end{thm}

1794: 

1795: \quad

1796: {\it Proof of Lemma \ref{l-1-14}:}

1797: Let $\{\Phi_n =(M_n,\{Q_1^n, \ldots, Q_{M_n}^n\},

1798: \{\cD_1^n, \ldots, \cD_{M_n}^n\})\}$ 

1799: be a sequence of codes of wire-tap channel such that

1800: \begin{align*}

1801: R= \varliminf \frac{1}{n}\log |\Phi_n|,

1802: \quad

1803: \lim \epsilon_B (\Phi_n) =0, \quad

1804: \lim d_E (\Phi_n) =0.

1805: \end{align*}

1806: Hence, Verd\'{u}-Han's result \cite{V-H} yields that

1807: the transmission capacity of the sequence of channel 

1808: $\bW^B \bQ$ is less than $\underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B \bQ)$,

1809: which implies 

1810: \begin{align*}

1811: R \le \underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B \bQ) .

1812: \end{align*}

1813: Furthermore,

1814: the property $\lim d_E (\Phi_n) =0$ implies that

1815: $S(0|\bW^E\bQ)= 0$.

1816: Hence, we have

1817: \begin{align}

1818: \overline{I}(0|\bp,\bW^E\bQ)= 0. \Label{1-17-4}

1819: \end{align}

1820: Thus, we obtain

1821: \begin{align*}

1822: R = \underline{I}(1|\bp,\bW^B \bQ)- \overline{I}(0|\bp,\bW^E\bQ),

1823: \end{align*}

1824: which implies (\ref{1-14-4}).

1825: 

1826: Next, we assume that

1827: a sequence of codes of wire-tap channel 

1828: $\{\Phi_n =(M_n,\{Q_1^n, \ldots, Q_{M_n}^n\},

1829: \{\cD_1^n, \ldots, \cD_{M_n}^n\})\}$ 

1830: satisfies that

1831: \begin{align*}

1832: R= \varliminf \frac{1}{n}\log |\Phi_n|,

1833: \quad

1834: \lim \epsilon_B (\Phi_n) =0, \quad

1835: \lim \frac{I_E (\Phi_n)}{n} =0.

1836: \end{align*}

1837: Since the mutual information 

1838: \begin{align*}

1839: I_E (\Phi_n)= \sum_{i=1}^{M_n} 

1840: \frac{1}{M_n} \rE_{(W^{E,n}Q^n)_{i},y}

1841: \log \frac{(W^{E,n}Q^n)_{i}}{

1842: \sum_{i=1}^{M_n} \frac{1}{M_n}(W^{E,n}Q^n)_{i}}(y)

1843: \end{align*}

1844: can be regarded as KL-divergence,

1845: Lemma \ref{l-1-17} yields that

1846: \begin{align*}

1847: & \sum_{i=1}^{M_n} 

1848: \frac{1}{M_n}

1849: (W^{E,n}Q^n)_{i}

1850: \left\{

1851: \frac{1}{n}\log \frac{(W^{E,n}Q^n)_{i}}{

1852: \sum_{i=1}^{M_n} \frac{1}{M_n}(W^{E,n}Q^n)_{i}}(y)

1853: \ge a \right\} \\

1854: & \le 

1855: \frac{I_E (\Phi_n) + \frac{1}{e}}{n a} \to 0

1856: \end{align*}

1857: for any $a\,> 0$.

1858: Thus, we obtain (\ref{1-17-4}).

1859: Therefore, similarly to (\ref{1-14-4}), we obtain (\ref{1-14-5}).

1860: \endproof

1861: 

1862: \begin{lem}\Label{l-1-17}

1863: Assume that $p$ and $q$ are two probability distributions

1864: on $\Omega$.

1865: Then, we have

1866: \begin{align}

1867: D(p\|q)+ \frac{1}{e}

1868: \ge \alpha 

1869: \cdot p \left\{ \log \frac{p(\omega)}{q(\omega)} \ge \alpha \right\}

1870: .\Label{1-17-1}

1871: \end{align}

1872: \end{lem}

1873: \begin{proof}

1874: We focus on the two probability distributions on 

1875: $\Omega_0 \defeq\left\{ \log \frac{p}{q}(\omega) \,< \alpha \right\}$:

1876: \begin{align*}

1877: p_0(\omega) \defeq \frac{p(\omega)}{p\{\Omega_0\}} , \quad

1878: q_0(\omega) \defeq \frac{q(\omega)}{q\{\Omega_0\}}.

1879: \end{align*}

1880: Hence,

1881: \begin{align*}

1882: &D(p\|q) = 

1883: \sum_{\omega \in \Omega_0^c} p(\omega) \log \frac{p(\omega)}{q(\omega)}

1884: + \sum_{\omega \in \Omega} p(\omega) \log \frac{p(\omega)}{q(\omega)} \\

1885: \ge & \alpha p\{\Omega_0^c\}

1886: + \sum_{\omega \in \Omega} p_0(\omega) 

1887: \left(\log \frac{p\{\Omega_0\}}{q\{\Omega_0\}}

1888: + \log \frac{p_0(\omega)}{q_0(\omega)}\right) \\

1889: = & \alpha p\{\Omega_0^c\}

1890: + p\{\Omega_0\}\log \frac{p\{\Omega_0\}}{q\{\Omega_0\}}

1891: + D(p_0\|q_0) \\

1892: \ge & \alpha p\{\Omega_0^c\}

1893: + p\{\Omega_0\}\log \frac{p\{\Omega_0\}}{q\{\Omega_0\}}

1894: \ge \alpha p\{\Omega_0^c\}

1895: + p\{\Omega_0\}\log p\{\Omega_0\}.

1896: \end{align*}

1897: Finally, the convexity of the map $x \mapsto x \log x $ guarantees that

1898: $p\{\Omega_0\}\log p\{\Omega_0\}\ge -\frac{1}{e}$.

1899: We obtain (\ref{1-17-1}).

1900: \end{proof}

1901: 

1902: \section{Exponents in stationary memoryless channel}

1903: \subsection{Channel resolvability}

1904: Next, we proceed to 

1905: the stationary memoryless 

1906: channel of a given channel $W$ as a special case.

1907: 

1908: First, we treat channel resolvability.

1909: As was shown by 

1910: Han \& Verd\'{u}\cite{Han-V} and Han \cite{Han-book},

1911: the information spectrum quantities of discrete memoryless channel of $W$

1912: is calculated as

1913: \begin{align*}

1914: \sup_{\bp}\overline{I}(\epsilon|\bp,\bW)

1915: =\sup_{\bp}\underline{I}(\epsilon|\bp,\bW)

1916: = \max_p I(p;W)

1917: \end{align*}

1918: for $1\ge \epsilon \ge 0$,

1919: where

1920: \begin{align*}

1921: I(p;W) & \defeq \rE_p D(W_x\|W_p).

1922: \end{align*}

1923: Hence, Theorem \ref{t-3} yields 

1924: \begin{align*}

1925: S(\epsilon|\bW)

1926: =S^{\dagger}(\epsilon|\bW)

1927: = \max_p I(p;W),

1928: \end{align*}

1929: which has been obtained by Han \& Verd\'{u}\cite{Han-V}.

1930: Furthermore, using Theorem \ref{t-2},

1931: we can discuss these problems 

1932: in more details by treating the following 

1933: optimal exponents:

1934: \begin{align*}

1935: & e_\epsilon (R|W,p) \\

1936: \defeq &

1937: \sup_{\{\Psi_n\}} \left\{\left. 

1938: \varliminf \frac{-1}{n}\log \epsilon (\Psi_n,W^n_{p^n}) 

1939: \right|

1940: \varlimsup \frac{1}{n}\log |\Psi_n|\le R

1941: \right\} \\

1942: & e_D (R|W,p) \\

1943: \defeq &

1944: \sup_{\{\Psi_n\}} \left\{\left. 

1945: \varliminf \frac{-1}{n}\log D (\Psi_n, W^n_{p^n}) 

1946: \right|

1947: \varlimsup \frac{1}{n}\log |\Psi_n|\le R

1948: \right\} ,\\

1949: \end{align*}

1950: and 

1951: \begin{align*}

1952: e_\epsilon (R|W) &\defeq \varliminf \frac{-1}{n}\log \epsilon (e^{nR},W^n) ,\\

1953: e_D (R|W) &\defeq \varliminf \frac{-1}{n}\log D (e^{nR},W^n) ,

1954: \end{align*}

1955: where $p^n$ is the $n$-fold identical independent distribution of

1956: $p$.

1957: As is discussed by Oohama \cite{Oohama},

1958: by using Lemma \ref{H-V}, the exponent $e_{\epsilon}(R,W)$

1959: gives a lower bound of strong converse exponent of 

1960: identification code.

1961: \begin{thm}\Label{t-5}

1962: Assume that the cardinality $|\cY|$ is finite, then

1963: \begin{align}

1964: e_\epsilon (R|W,p) & \ge

1965: \max_{1\ge s \ge 0} \left\{\frac{-\psi(s|W,p)+ sR}{1+s} \right\}

1966: \Label{3-8-7}\\

1967: e_D (R|W,p) & \ge

1968: \max_{0 \ge t \ge -1/2}\left\{ - \phi(t|W,p) - tR\right\}

1969: %\max_{1\ge s \ge 0} -\psi(s|W,p)+ sR,

1970: \Label{3-8-8} \\

1971: e_\epsilon (R|W) & \ge

1972: \max_{1\ge s \ge 0} \left\{ \frac{-\psi(s|W)+ sR}{1+s} \right\}\Label{3-9-2}\\

1973: e_D(R|W) & \ge

1974: \max_{0 \ge t \ge -1/2} \left\{ - \max_p \phi(t|W,p) - tR \right\},

1975: \Label{7-1-1}

1976: \end{align}

1977: where $\psi(s|W,p)\defeq \log \rE_p \sum_y W_x^{1+s}(y)W_p^{-s}(y)$

1978: and $\psi(s|W)\defeq \log \max_p \sum_y 

1979: \left(\rE_p W_x^{1+s}(y)\right)^{1-s}$.

1980: \end{thm}

1981: Using Pinsker's inequality

1982: $D(p\|q)\ge \|p-q\|^2$,

1983: we obtain two inequalities

1984: $\frac{1}{2}e_D (R|W,p) \le e_\epsilon (R|W,p)$ and 

1985: $\frac{1}{2}e_D(R|W) \le e_\epsilon (R|W)$,

1986: which implies different lower bounds of exponents:

1987: \begin{align}

1988: e_\epsilon (R|W,p) & \ge

1989: \frac{1}{2} \max_{0 \ge t \ge -1/2}  \left\{- \phi(t|W,p) - tR\right\}

1990: \Label{7-1-5}\\

1991: e_\epsilon (R|W) & \ge

1992: \frac{1}{2}

1993: \max_{0 \ge t \ge -1/2}  \left\{- \max_p \phi(t|W,p) - tR \right\}

1994: .\Label{7-1-6}

1995: \end{align}

1996: We can derive different lower bounds of $e_D (R|W,p)$ and $e_D (R|W)$

1997: from the inequality (\ref{7-1-3}).

1998: However, these bounds are smaller than the bound presented here.

1999: 

2000: \begin{rem}

2001: Arimoto's strong converse exponent \cite{Arimoto} of 

2002: channel coding of transmission code equals

2003: \begin{align*}

2004: \max_{0 \ge t \ge -1}  \left\{- \max_p \phi(t|W,p) - tR\right\},

2005: \end{align*}

2006: which is a bit greater than the RHS of (\ref{3-8-8})

2007: when $R$ is sufficiently large.

2008: 

2009: \end{rem}

2010: \begin{rem}

2011: By using inequality (\ref{3-3-10}) and type method,

2012: Oohama \cite{Oohama} has obtained a lower bound of $e_\epsilon (R|W)$:

2013: \begin{align*}

2014: \frac{1}{2}

2015: \max_{0 \ge t \ge -1}  \left\{- \max_p \phi(t|W,p) - tR\right\},

2016: \end{align*}

2017: which is a bit better than (\ref{7-1-6})

2018: when $R$ is sufficiently large.

2019: It is interesting that his approach

2020: is in contrast to our approach to (\ref{7-1-6}),

2021: which is based on (\ref{6-26-1}) not on (\ref{3-3-10}).

2022: \end{rem}

2023: \begin{rem}

2024: It is difficult to treat the exponent of 

2025: the sum of two error probabilities in identification code

2026: based on Theorem \ref{t-1}.

2027: For this purpose, we need a modified version of Theorem \ref{t-1}.

2028: \end{rem}

2029: 

2030: %Since $\left.\frac{\,d -\psi(s|W,p) }{\,d s}\right|_{s=0}

2031: %= \rE_p D(W_x\|W_p)$,

2032: %we can show $ \max_{s \ge 0} \frac{-\psi(s|W,p)+ sR}{1+2s} \,> 0$

2033: %and $\max_{s \ge 0} \frac{-\psi(s|W,p)+ sR}{1+s}\,> 0$

2034: %for any real number $R \,< \rE_p D(W_x\|W_p)$.

2035: The following lemma is a preparation of our proof of Theorem \ref{t-5}.

2036: 

2037: \begin{lem}\Label{3-9-1}

2038: For any $s \ge 0$ and $0 \ge t \,> -1$,

2039: the equalities

2040: \begin{align}

2041: & \max_{p \in \cP(\cX^n)} 

2042: \sum_{y^n \in \cY^n} \left (\rE_{p} (W_x^n(y^n))^{1+s} \right)^{1-s}

2043: \nonumber\\

2044: = &

2045: \left(\max_{p\in \cP(\cX)} 

2046: \sum_y \left( \rE_p W_x^{1+s}(y) \right)^{1-s}

2047: \right)^n \label{6-27-1}\\

2048: & \max_{p \in \cP(\cX^n)} 

2049: \sum_{y^n \in \cY^n} \left (\rE_{p} (W_x^n(y^n))^{\frac{1}{1+t}} \right)^{1+t}

2050: \nonumber\\

2051: = &

2052: \left(\max_{p\in \cP(\cX)} 

2053: \sum_y \left( \rE_p W_x^{\frac{1}{1+t}}(y) \right)^{1+t}

2054: \right)^n \label{7-1-4}

2055: \end{align}

2056: hold.

2057: \end{lem}

2058: \begin{proof}

2059: Since (\ref{7-1-4}) has been shown by Arimoto \cite{Arimoto}, 

2060: we prove only (\ref{6-27-1})

2061: by the same method.

2062: Since the function $f: p \mapsto 

2063: \max_{p\in \cP(\cX)} 

2064: \sum_y \left( \rE_p W_x^{1+s}(y) \right)^{1-s}$ is continuous and

2065: convex function,

2066: if and only if

2067: $f(p^*)= \max_p f(p)$,

2068: there exists a constant $\lambda$ such that

2069: \begin{align*}

2070: &\sum_y W_x^{1+s}(y) \left(

2071: \sum_x p^*(x) W_x^{1+s}(y)\right)^{-s}\\

2072: =& \frac{\partial f}{\partial p(x)}

2073: \left\{

2074: \begin{array}{cc}

2075: = \lambda & \hbox{if } p^*(x)\,> 0 \\

2076: \le \lambda & \hbox{if } p^*(x)= 0 

2077: \end{array}

2078: \right.

2079: \end{align*}

2080: Indeed, $\lambda$ is calculated as

2081: \begin{align*}

2082: \sum_x p(x) \lambda 

2083: &=

2084: \sum_x p(x) 

2085: \sum_y W_x^{1+s}(y) \left(

2086: \sum_x p^*(x) W_x^{1+s}(y)\right)^{-s}\\

2087: &=

2088: \left(

2089: \sum_x p^*(x) W_x^{1+s}(y)\right)^{1-s}.

2090: \end{align*}

2091: Thus,

2092: if and only if

2093: $f(p^*)= \max_p f(p)$,

2094: \begin{align}

2095: &\sum_y W_x^{1+s}(y) \left(

2096: \sum_x p^*(x) W_x^{1+s}(y)\right)^{-s}\nonumber \\

2097: &\left\{

2098: \begin{array}{cc}

2099: = \left(

2100: \sum_x p^*(x) W_x^{1+s}(y)\right)^{1-s} & \hbox{if } p^*(x)\,> 0 \\

2101: \le \left(

2102: \sum_x p^*(x) W_x^{1+s}(y)\right)^{1-s}& \hbox{if } p^*(x)= 0 

2103: \end{array}

2104: \right.\nonumber,

2105: \end{align}

2106: $p^*$ gives the maximum.

2107: Hence, if $p^*$ satisfies the above condition,

2108: $(p^*)^n$ also satisfies the following condition:

2109: \begin{align*}

2110: &\sum_{y^n} (W_{x^n}^n)^{1+s}(y^n) \left(

2111: \sum_{x^n} (p^*)^n(x^n) (W_{x^n}^n)^{1+s}(y^n)\right)^{-s}\nonumber \\

2112: &\left\{

2113: \begin{array}{cc}

2114: = \left(

2115: \sum_{x^n} (p^*)^n(x^n) (W_{x^n}^n)^{1+s}(y^n)\right)^{1-s}

2116: & \hbox{if } (p^*)^n(x^n)\,> 0 \\

2117: \le \left(

2118: \sum_{x^n} (p^*)^n(x^n) (W_{x^n}^n)^{1+s}(y^n)\right)^{1-s}

2119: & \hbox{if } (p^*)^n(x^n)= 0 ,

2120: \end{array}

2121: \right. 

2122: \end{align*}

2123: which is a necessary and sufficient condition for 

2124: \begin{align*}

2125: & \sum_{y^n \in \cY^n} 

2126: \left(\rE_{(p^*)^n} (W_x^n(y^n))^{1+s} \right)^{1-s}\\

2127: = &

2128: \max_{p \in \cP(\cX^n)} 

2129: \sum_{y^n \in \cY^n} 

2130: \left(\rE_{p} (W_x^n(y^n))^{1+s} \right)^{1-s}.

2131: \end{align*}

2132: It implies the equation (\ref{6-27-1}).

2133: \end{proof}

2134: 

2135: \quad{\it Proof of Theorem \ref{t-5}:}

2136: By inequality (\ref{6-26-1}) of Theorem \ref{t-2},

2137: we have

2138: \begin{align}

2139: D(e^{nR},W^^n_{p^n})

2140: &\le

2141: \frac{\log (1+ (e^{nR})^t e^{ \phi(t|W^n,p^n)})}{-t}\nonumber \\

2142: & \le

2143: \frac{(e^{nR})^t e^{ \phi(t|W^n,p^n)}}{-t}\nonumber \\

2144: & =

2145: \frac{e^{n( \phi(t|W,p)+t R)}}{-t},\label{A1}

2146: \end{align}

2147: for $0 > t \ge -1/2$, where 

2148: the second inequality follows from $\log (1+x) \le x$.

2149: From (\ref{A1}), we obtain 

2150: \begin{align}

2151: e_D(R|W,p)\ge -\phi(t|W,p)-t R

2152: \end{align}

2153: for $0 > t \ge -1/2$.

2154: Since $\phi(t|W,p)+ tR$ is 

2155: continuous for $t$,

2156: the inequality (\ref{3-8-8}) holds.

2157: By inequality (\ref{6-26-1}) and Lemma \ref{3-9-1},

2158: we have

2159: \begin{align}

2160: D(e^{nR},W^n)

2161: & \le

2162: \max_{p \in \cP(\cX^n)}

2163: \frac{\log (1+ (e^{nR})^t e^{ \phi(t|W^n,p)})}{-t}\nonumber \\

2164: & \le

2165: \frac{

2166: (e^{nR})^t \cdot

2167: \max_{p \in \cP(\cX^n)}

2168: e^{ \phi(t|W^n,p)}

2169: }{-t} \nonumber \\

2170: = &

2171: \frac{

2172: (e^{nR})^t \cdot

2173: \max_{p \in \cP(\cX)}

2174: e^{n \phi(t|W,p)}

2175: }{-t} \label{A2}

2176: \end{align}

2177: for $0 > t \ge - 1/2$.

2178: Hence, in a manner similar to the derivation of 

2179: (\ref{3-8-8}) from (\ref{A1}), we obtain (\ref{7-1-1}) from (\ref{A2}).

2180: 

2181: Next, we derive (\ref{3-8-7}) and (\ref{3-9-2}).

2182: To this end, we first derive an upper bound of 

2183: \begin{align*}

2184: 2\delta_{p,W,e^{R'}}+

2185: \sqrt{

2186: \frac{\delta'_{p,W,e^{R'}}}

2187: {e^R}}.

2188: \end{align*}

2189: For any $1\ge s \ge 0$,

2190: we choose $R'\defeq \frac{\psi(s|W,p)+R}{1+s}$.

2191: By using Markov inequality, we can evaluate 

2192: $\delta_{p,W,e^{R'}}$ and $\delta_{p,W,e^{R'}}'$ as

2193: \begin{align}

2194: & \delta_{p,W,e^{R'}}

2195: \le \rE_p \sum_{y \in 

2196: \left\{ \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \,> e^{R'} \right\}}

2197: W_x (y) \left(\frac{e^{- R'} W_x(y)}{W_p(y)}\right)^s

2198: \nonumber\\

2199: \le &

2200: \rE_p \sum_{y} 

2201: W_x (y) \left(\frac{ W_x(y)}{W_p(y)}\right)^s e^{- s R'} 

2202: =e^{ \psi(s|W,p)-s R'}\nonumber\\

2203: =& e^{\frac{ \psi(s|W,p)-sR}{1+s}}\label{A3}

2204: \end{align}

2205: and

2206: \begin{align}

2207: & \delta_{p,W,e^{R'}}'

2208: \le \rE_p \sum_{y \in 

2209: \left\{ \frac{W_x}{W_p}(y) \le e^{R'} \right\}}

2210: \frac{W_x (y)^2}{W_p (y)} 

2211: \left(\frac{W_p(y)}{e^{- R'} W_x(y)}\right)^{1-s}\nonumber\\

2212: \le &

2213: \rE_p \sum_{y} 

2214: W_x (y) \left(\frac{ W_x(y)}{W_p(y)}\right)^s e^{(1- s) R'} 

2215: =e^{ \psi(s|W,p)+(1- s) R'},\label{A4}

2216: \end{align}

2217: respectively.

2218: Inequality (\ref{A4}) yields

2219: \begin{align}

2220: \sqrt{\frac{\delta_{p,W,e^{R'}}'}{e^{R}}}

2221: \le e^{ \frac{\psi(s|W,p)+(1- s) R'-R }{2}}= 

2222: e^{\frac{ \psi(s|W,p)-sR}{1+s}}.\label{A5}

2223: \end{align}

2224: Combining (\ref{A3}) and (\ref{A5}), 

2225: we have

2226: \begin{align}

2227: 2\delta_{p,W,e^{R'}}+

2228: \sqrt{

2229: \frac{\delta'_{p,W,e^{R'}}}

2230: {e^R}}

2231: \le 3 e^{\frac{ \psi(s|W,p)-sR}{1+s}}.\label{A6}

2232: \end{align}

2233: Hence, (\ref{A6}) and (\ref{3-3-10}) in Theorem \ref{t-2}

2234: guarantee that

2235: \begin{align}

2236: \epsilon(e^{nR},W^n_{p^n})

2237: \le 3 e^{\frac{ \psi(s|W^n,p^n)-snR}{1+s}}

2238: = 3 e^{n\frac{ \psi(s|W,p)-sR}{1+s}}\label{A7}

2239: \end{align}

2240: for $1 \ge s \ge 0$

2241: because $\psi(s|W^n,p^n)= n \psi(s|W,p)$.

2242: Thus, (\ref{A7}) implies that

2243: \begin{align}

2244: e_\epsilon(R|W,p)

2245: \ge 

2246: \frac{-\psi(s|W,p)+sR}{1+s}\label{A8}

2247: \end{align}

2248: for $1 \ge s \ge 0$.

2249: Taking the maximum for $1 \ge s \ge 0$, 

2250: we obtain (\ref{3-8-7}).

2251: 

2252: %Similarly, by using Markov inequality, we can evaluate

2253: %\begin{align*}

2254: %\delta_{p^n,W^n,e^{nR}}

2255: %&\le e^{ n(\psi(s|W,p)-s R)}\\

2256: %\frac{\delta_{p,W,e^{nR}}}{e^{nR}}

2257: %& \le e^{ n(\psi(s|W,p)-s R)}\quad\hbox{for}\quad 1 \ge \forall s \ge 0.

2258: %\end{align*}

2259: %Thus, we obtain (\ref{3-8-8}) from (\ref{6-26-1}).

2260: 

2261: 

2262: We proceed to the proof of (\ref{3-9-2}).

2263: By inequalities (\ref{3-3-10}) and (\ref{A6}), we obtain 

2264: \begin{align}

2265: \epsilon(e^{nR},W^n)\le

2266: \max_{p \in \cP(\cX^n)}

2267: 3 e^{\frac{\psi(s|W^n,p)-snR}{1+s}}\nonumber \\

2268: =

2269: 3 e^{\frac{-snR}{1+s}}

2270: \left[

2271: \max_{p \in \cP(\cX^n)}

2272: e^{\frac{\psi(s|W^n,p)}{1+s}}

2273: \right]^{\frac{1}{1+s}}\label{A9}.

2274: \end{align}

2275: Now, we estimate an upper bound of 

2276: \begin{align}

2277: e^{\psi(s|W^n,p)}

2278: = \rE_p\sum_y W_x^{1+s}(y)W_p^{-s}(y).

2279: \end{align}

2280: Since the map $x \mapsto x^{1+s}$ is convex,

2281: we have

2282: \begin{align*}

2283: W_p(y) = \rE_p W_x(y) \ge

2284: \rE_p W_x^{1+s}(y),

2285: \end{align*}

2286: which imply that

2287: \begin{align*}

2288: W_p^{-s} (y) \le \left(\rE_p (W_x(y))^{1+s}\right)^{-s}.

2289: \end{align*}

2290: Hence, the relations

2291: \begin{align}

2292: & \rE_p \sum_y W_x^{1+s}(y)W_p^{-s} (y)

2293: = \sum_y \rE_p W_x^{1+s}(y)W_p^{-s} (y)\nonumber \\

2294: \le & \sum_y \left (\rE_p W_x^{1+s}(y) \right)^{1-s}\Label{3-12-1}

2295: \end{align}

2296: hold. Using (\ref{3-12-1}) and Lemma \ref{3-9-1}, 

2297: we can evaluate

2298: \begin{align}

2299: &\max_{p \in \cP(\cX^n)} 

2300: \rE_{p} \sum_{y\in \cY^n} W_x^n(y)^{1+s}

2301: W_{p}^n (y)^{-s} \nonumber \\

2302: \le &

2303: \max_{p \in \cP(\cX^n)} 

2304: \sum_{y \in \cY^n} \left (\rE_{p} (W_x^n(y))^{1+s} \right)^{1-s}

2305: \nonumber \\

2306: = &

2307: \left(\max_{p\in \cP(\cX)} 

2308: \sum_y \left( \rE_p W_x^{1+s}(y) \right)^{1-s}

2309: \right)^n = e^{n (\psi(s|W))}.

2310: \label{A10}

2311: \end{align}

2312: Combining (\ref{A9}) and (\ref{A10}), 

2313: we have

2314: \begin{align}

2315: \epsilon(e^{nR}, W^n)

2316: \le e^{n \frac{\psi(s|W)-sR}{1+s}},

2317: \label{A11}

2318: \end{align}

2319: for any $1 \ge s \ge 0$.

2320: In a manner similar to the derivation of (\ref{3-8-7})

2321: from (\ref{A7}), we can derive (\ref{3-9-2}) from (\ref{A11}).

2322: \endproof

2323: 

2324: 

2325: \subsection{Wire-tap channel}

2326: Next, we proceed to discrete memoryless wire-tap channel.

2327: Applying Theorem \ref{t-1-11} 

2328: to this case with the input identical and independent distribution,

2329: we obtain 

2330: \begin{align*}

2331: & C(\bW^B,\bW^E) \\

2332: \defeq &

2333: \sup_{\{\Phi_n\}}

2334: \left\{\left.

2335: \varliminf \frac{1}{n}\log\log |\Phi_n|

2336: \right|

2337: \lim \epsilon_B (\Phi_n)=

2338: \lim d_E(\Phi_n)= 0

2339: \right\} \\

2340: \ge &\sup_p \left\{I(p;W^B)- I(p;W^E)\right\},

2341: %\rE_p D(W_x^B\|W_p^B)- \rE_p D(W_x^E\|W_p^E),

2342: \end{align*}

2343: which has been obtained by Wyner \cite{Wyner}.

2344: Hence, Theorem \ref{t-1-11} can be 

2345: regarded as a general extension of Wyner's result.

2346: Moreover, using Lemma \ref{3-6},

2347: we derived several explicit lower bounds of exponents.

2348: \begin{thm}\Label{t-7}

2349: Assume that the cardinality $|\cZ|$ is finite,

2350: then there exists a sequence $\{\Phi_n\}$ of codes

2351: for any real numbers $R, R'$ and any probability distribution $p$

2352: such that

2353: \begin{align}

2354: \lim \frac{1}{n}\log |\Phi_n|& = R \nonumber \\

2355: \varliminf \frac{-1}{n}\log \epsilon_B(\Phi_n) & \ge

2356: \max_{1 \ge s \ge 0}  \left\{-\phi(s|W^B,p) - s(R+R')\right\}\Label{3-8-10} \\

2357: \varliminf \frac{-1}{n}\log I_E(\Phi_n) & \ge

2358: \max_{0\ge t \ge -1/2} \left\{ -\phi(t|W^E,p)- tR'\right\} \Label{6-8-10} \\

2359: \varliminf \frac{-1}{n}\log d_E(\Phi_n) & \ge

2360: \max_{1\ge s \ge 0} \left\{\frac{-\psi(s|W^E,p)+ sR'}{1+s}\right\}

2361: \Label{7-8-10}\\

2362: \varliminf \frac{-1}{n}\log d_E(\Phi_n) &\ge

2363: \frac{1}{2} \max_{0\ge t \ge -1/2}  \left\{-\phi(t|W^E,p)- tR'\right\}.

2364: \Label{1-12-3}

2365: \end{align}

2366: %where

2367: %$\phi(s|W,p)\defeq \log 

2368: %\sum_y \left( \rE_p (W_x(y))^{1/(1+s)}\right)^{1+s} $.

2369: Indeed, these exponents are very useful for evaluating

2370: error and wire-tapper's information

2371: for a finite $n$.

2372: \end{thm}

2373: \begin{proof}

2374: The inequality (\ref{3-8-10}) immediately follows from

2375: (\ref{3-8-1}).

2376: By using an evaluation similar to (\ref{3-8-8}),

2377: we can show (\ref{6-8-10}) from (\ref{3-6-2}).

2378: Furthermore, by using an evaluation similar to (\ref{3-8-7}),

2379: we can show (\ref{7-8-10}) from (\ref{3-8-12}).

2380: \end{proof}

2381: \section{Comparison of lower bounds of exponents}

2382: Finally, we compare the lower bounds

2383: (\ref{3-8-7}), (\ref{3-9-2}), (\ref{7-1-5}), and (\ref{7-1-6})

2384: of error exponents of channel resolvability.

2385: 

2386: \begin{thm}

2387: Assume that $\Delta \defeq R- I(p;W)$ is sufficiently small.

2388: Then, 

2389: RHSs of (\ref{3-8-7}) and (\ref{7-1-5}) 

2390: (which are lower bounds of exponent of the variational distance)

2391: are approximately

2392: calculated as

2393: \begin{align*}

2394: \hbox{RHS of } (\ref{3-8-7})~&

2395: \max_{1\ge s \ge 0} \left\{ \frac{-\psi(s|W,p)+ sR}{1+s} \right\}

2396:  \cong \frac{\Delta^2}{4 J(p;W)}\\

2397: \hbox{RHS of } (\ref{7-1-5})~&

2398: \frac{1}{2}\max_{0 \ge t \ge -1/2} \left\{ - \phi(t|W,p) - tR\right\} 

2399:  \cong \frac{\Delta^2}{8 J(p;W)}, 

2400: \end{align*}

2401: where 

2402: \begin{align*}

2403: &J(p;W) \\

2404: \defeq 

2405: &\frac{1}{2} 

2406: \left( 

2407: \rE_{p,x} \rE_{W_x,y}

2408: (\log W_x(y) - \log W_p(y))^2- I^2(p;W) \right) .

2409: \end{align*}

2410: Moreover, 

2411: RHSs of (\ref{3-9-2}) and (\ref{7-1-6}) 

2412: (which are lower bounds of exponent of the worst variational distance)

2413: are approximately

2414: calculated as

2415: \begin{align*}

2416: \hbox{RHS of } (\ref{3-9-2})~

2417: &\max_{s \ge 0}\left\{

2418: \frac{-\psi(s|W)+sR}{1+s}\right\}\\

2419: & \cong \frac{\Delta^2}{4 (J(p_0;W)+\rE_{p_0} H(W_x))}, \\

2420: \hbox{RHS of } (\ref{7-1-6})~

2421: &\frac{1}{2}\max_{0 \ge t \ge -1/2} \left\{- \max_p\phi(t|W,p) - tR\right\}\\

2422: & \cong \frac{\Delta^2}{8 J(p_0;W) },

2423: \end{align*}

2424: where $p_0 \defeq \argmax_p I(p;W)$.

2425: \end{thm}

2426: Thus, when $R$ is sufficiently close to

2427: $\max_p I(p;W)$,

2428: (\ref{3-8-7}) gives a better lower bound than

2429: (\ref{7-1-5}).

2430: Of course, this comparison can be applied to 

2431: exponents of eavesdropper's information in wire-tap channel,

2432: {\it i.e.},

2433: the comparison of RHSs of (\ref{7-8-10}) and (\ref{1-12-3}).

2434: On the other hand, 

2435: (\ref{3-9-2}) gives a better lower bound than

2436: (\ref{7-1-6}),

2437: if and only if

2438: \begin{align*}

2439: &\rE_{p_0} H(W_x)\\

2440: &\le \frac{1}{2} 

2441: \left( 

2442: \rE_{p,x} \rE_{W_x,y}

2443: (\log W_x(y) - \log W_p(y))^2

2444: - I^2(p;W) \right).

2445: \end{align*}

2446: Therefore, although $R- \max_p I(p;W)$ is small enough,

2447: the relation between 

2448: bounds (\ref{3-9-2}) and (\ref{7-1-6}) is not clear.

2449: 

2450: \begin{proof}

2451: By using a Taylor expansion, we obtain the approximations:

2452: \begin{align*}

2453: \psi(s|W,p)&\cong  I(p;W)s + J(p;W)s^2\\

2454: \phi(t|W,p)&\cong - I(p;W)t + J(p;W)t^2\\

2455: \psi(s|W) &\cong I(p_0;W) s + (J(p_0;W)+\rE_{p_0} H(W_x)) s^2,

2456: %

2457: %&\max_p \log \sum_y (\rE_p W_x(y)^{1+s})^{1/(1+s)}\\

2458: %&\cong I(p_0;W) s + J(p_0;W) s^2.

2459: \end{align*}

2460: Thus,

2461: \begin{align*}

2462: &\max_{1\ge s \ge 0} \left\{ \frac{-\psi(s|W,p)+ sR}{1+s} \right\}\\

2463: \cong &\max_{1\ge s \ge 0} \left\{ 

2464: \frac{-I(p;W)s - J(p;W)s^2+(I(p;W)+\Delta)s }{1+s}\right\} \\

2465: \cong &\max_{1\ge s \ge 0}\left\{

2466: - J(p;W)s^2 + \Delta s \right\}\cong 

2467: \frac{\Delta^2}{4 J(p;W)} \\

2468: & \max_{0 \ge t \ge -1/2} \left\{- \phi(t|W,p) - tR \right\}\\

2469: \cong & \max_{0 \ge t \ge -1/2} \left\{

2470: I(p;W)t - J(p;W)t^2 - (I(p;W)+\Delta)t \right\}\\

2471: = & \max_{0 \ge t \ge -1/2}\left\{- J(p;W)t^2 - \Delta t \right\}

2472: = \frac{\Delta^2}{4 J(p;W)}\\

2473: & \max_{s \ge 0}\left\{

2474: \frac{-\psi(s|W)+sR}{1+s}\right\} \\

2475: \cong &

2476: \max_{s \ge 0}\Biggl\{

2477:  \frac{-I(p_0;W) s - (J(p_0;W)+\rE_{p_0} H(W_x)) s^2}{1+s}\\

2478: &\qquad +\frac{s(I(p_0;W)+\Delta)}{1+s} \Biggr\}\\

2479: \cong &

2480: \max_{s \ge 0}\left\{

2481: - (J(p_0;W)+\rE_{p_0} H(W_x)) s^2 + \Delta s \right\}\\

2482: = &\frac{\Delta^2}{4 (J(p_0;W)+\rE_{p_0} H(W_x))}.

2483: %&\max_{s \ge 0} -\log \sum_y (\rE_p W_x(y)^{1+s})^{1/(1+s)}

2484: %+\frac{s}{1+s}R \\

2485: %\cong &

2486: %\max_{s \ge 0} 

2487: %-I(p_0;W) s - (J(p_0;W)+I(p;W) s^2 \\

2488: %&\qquad+(s-s^2)I(p_0;W)+s \Delta\\

2489: %= &

2490: %\max_{s \ge 0} 

2491: %- J(p_0;W) s^2 + \Delta s\\

2492: %=& \frac{\Delta^2}{4 J(p_0;W) }.

2493: \end{align*}

2494: \end{proof}

2495: 

2496: \section{Conclusion}

2497: We give several non-asymptotic formulas

2498: in identification code, channel resolvability, and

2499: wire-tap channel.

2500: Using these formulas,

2501: we give the achievable rate channel resolvability

2502: for the general channel, which had been an open problem.

2503: Also, we derived several asymptotic relations among

2504: divergence rates, capacities of identification code,

2505: and $\epsilon$ capacities of channel resolvability.

2506: 

2507: From these non-asymptotic formulas,

2508: we obtained lower bounds of error exponents of 

2509: channel resolvability in the stationary memoryless setting.

2510: Moreover, we derived lower bounds of 

2511: error probability and wire-tapper's information

2512: in the stationary memoryless setting in

2513: wire-tap channel.

2514: 

2515: Concerning the quantum setting,

2516: wire-tap channel has been discussed in the discrete memoryless channel case

2517: by Devetak \cite{Deve}, Winter {\it et. al.}\cite{WNI}

2518: and Cai \& Yeung\cite{CY},

2519: and identification codes has been discussed by Ahlswede \& Winter\cite{AW}.

2520: Hence, several quantum extensions of the results presented here

2521: can be expected.

2522: Some has been obtained by the author.

2523: And some of them have appeared in the author's textbook\cite{H-text}.

2524: Those not already presented 

2525: will appear in a forthcoming paper.

2526: 

2527: 

2528: \section*{Acknowledgments}

2529: The author would like to thank Professor Hiroshi Imai of the

2530: QCI project for support.

2531: He is grateful to Professor Yasutada Oohama for 

2532: useful discussions.

2533: He is also grateful to reviewers

2534: for their kind and useful comments.

2535: 

2536: 

2537: \bibliographystyle{IEEE}

2538: \begin{thebibliography}{1}

2539: %%%%%%%%%

2540: \bibitem{Ah-D}

2541: R. Ahlswede and G. Dueck,

2542: ``Identification via Channels,''

2543: {\em IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory}, vol.35, 15-29, 1989.

2544: %%%%%%%

2545: \bibitem{Han-V}

2546: T.S.\ Han and S.\ Verd\'{u},

2547: ``Approximation Theory of Output Statistics,''

2548: {\em IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory}, vol.39, 

2549: 752--772, 1993.

2550: %%%%%%%%%

2551: \bibitem{Han-book}

2552: T.S.\ Han, 

2553: {\em Information-Spectrum Methods in 

2554: Information Theory}, Springer-Verlag, 2003.

2555: (The original Japanese edition was published 

2556: from Baifukan-Press, Tokyo, in 1998.)  

2557: %%%%%%%%%

2558: \bibitem{Wyner}

2559: A. D. Wyner, 

2560: ``The wire-tap channel,'' 

2561: Bell. Sys. Tech. Jour., vol. 54, pp. 1355-1387, 1975.

2562: %%%%%%%%%

2563: \bibitem{Deve}

2564: I. Devetak,

2565: ``The private classical information capacity and quantum information 

2566: capacity of a quantum channel,''

2567: quant-ph/0304127 (2003).

2568: %%%%%%%%%

2569: \bibitem{WNI}

2570: A. Winter, A. C. A. Nascimento, and

2571: H. Imai,

2572: ``Commitment Capacity of Discrete Memoryless Channels,''

2573: cs.CR/0304014 (2003)

2574: %%%%%%%%%

2575: \bibitem{Gal}

2576: R.\ G.\ Gallager, 

2577: {\em Information Theory and Reliable Communication}, 

2578: John Wiley \& Sons, 1968.

2579: %%%%%%%%%

2580: %\bibitem{Maurer}

2581: %U. M. Maurer, 

2582: %``The Strong Secret Key Rate of Discrete Random Triples,'' 

2583: %Communication and Cryptography-Two Sides of One Tapestry, 

2584: %R. Blahut et al. eds.), Kluwler Academic Publishers, pp. 271-285, 1994. 

2585: %U. M. Maurer and S. Wolf, 

2586: %``Information-Theoretic Key Agreement:From Weak to Strong Secrecy for Free,'' 

2587: %Advances in Cryptology-EUROCRYPT'00, 

2588: %Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, 

2589: %vol. 1807, pp. 351-368, 2000.

2590: \bibitem{Oohama}

2591: Y. Oohama,

2592: ``Error Probability of Identification via Channels

2593: at Rates above Capacity,''

2594: In {\em Proc. of International Symposium of Information Theory},

2595: Lausanne, p. 26, 2002.

2596: \bibitem{Oohama2}

2597: Y. Oohama,

2598: ``Average Error Probability of Identification via Channels at Rates above

2599: Identification Capacity,''

2600: In {\em Proc. of International Symposium of Information Theory

2601: and Its Applications}, p. 859--862, 2002.

2602: 

2603: %\bibitem{Oohama3}

2604: %Y. Oohama,

2605: %private communication, 2004.

2606: 

2607: %%%%%%%%%

2608: \bibitem{Hay-Nag}

2609: M. Hayashi and H. Nagaoka,

2610: ``General formulas for capacity of classical-quantum channels,''

2611: {\it IEEE Trans. Inform. Theor.}, {\bf 49}, 1753-1768, 2003;

2612: quant-ph/0206186 (2002).

2613: %%%%%%%%%

2614: \bibitem{Nag-Hay}

2615: H.\ Nagaoka and M.\ Hayashi,

2616: ``An information-spectrum approach to

2617: classical and quantum hypothesis testing,''

2618: quant-ph/0206185 (2002).

2619: %%%%%%%%%

2620: \bibitem{ON1}

2621: T.\ Ogawa and H.\ Nagaoka,

2622: ``A New Proof of the Channel Coding Theorem via

2623: Hypothesis Testing in Quantum Information Theory,''

2624: {\em Proc.\ 2002 IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory},

2625: p.73. (2002);

2626: quant-ph/0208139 (2002).

2627: %%%%%%%%%

2628: \bibitem{H-text}

2629: M. Hayashi,

2630: {\em Introduction to Quantum Information Theory},

2631: (Saiensu-sha, 2004) (In Japanese);

2632: Its English version will be published from Springer in March 2006.

2633: 

2634: \bibitem{Steinberg}

2635: Y. Steinberg,

2636: ``New Converses in the Theory of Identification via Chanels,''

2637: {\it IEEE Trans. Inform. Theor.}, {\bf 44}, 984--998, 1998.

2638: 

2639: \bibitem{Arimoto}

2640: S. Arimoto,

2641: ``On the Converse to the 

2642: coding theorem for discrete memoryless channels,''

2643: {\it IEEE Trans. Inform. Theor.}, {\bf 19}, 357--359, 1973.

2644: 

2645: \bibitem{CN}

2646: I. Csisz\'{a}r, and P. Narayan, 

2647: ``Common Randomness and Secret Key Generation with a Helper,''

2648: {\it IEEE Trans. Inform. Theor.}, {\bf 46}, 344--366, 2000.

2649: \bibitem{CY}

2650: N. Cai and R. Yeung,

2651: ``Quantum Privacy and Quantum Wiretap Channels,''

2652: manuscript, 2003.

2653: \bibitem{AW}

2654: R. Ahlswede and A. Winter,

2655: ``Strong converse for identification via quantum channels,''

2656: {\it IEEE Trans. Inform. Theor.}, {\bf 48}, 569--579, 2002.

2657: 

2658: \bibitem{V-H}

2659: S.\ Verd\'{u} and T.S.\ Han, 

2660: ``A general formula for channel capacity,"

2661: {\em IEEE Trans.\ Inform.\ Theory}, 

2662: vol.40, no.4, 1147--1157, 1994.

2663: \end{thebibliography}

2664: 

2665: \begin{biography}{Masahito Hayashi} was born in Japan in 1971.

2666: He received the B. S. degree from Faculty of Sciences in Kyoto 

2667: University, Japan, in 1994

2668: and the M. S. and Ph. D. degrees in Mathematics from 

2669: Kyoto University, Japan, in 1996 and 1999, respectively.

2670: 

2671: He worked in Kyoto University as a Research Fellow of the Japan Society of the 

2672: Promotion of Science from 1998 to 2000,

2673: and worked in the 

2674: Laboratory for Mathematical Neuroscience, 

2675: Brain Science Institute, RIKEN from 2000 to 2003.

2676: In 2003, he joined 

2677: Quantum Computation and Information Project, ERATO, JST

2678: as the Research Head.

2679: He also works in 

2680: Superrobust Computation Project

2681: Information Science and Technology Strategic Core (21st Century COE by MEXT)

2682: Graduate School of Information Science and Technology

2683: The University of Tokyo

2684: as Adjunct Associate Professor from 2004.

2685: He is an Editorial Board of International Journal of Quantum Information.

2686: His research interests include quantum information theory and

2687: quantum statistical inference.

2688: \end{biography}

2689: \end{document}