Monads are commonplace in computer science, and can be composed using Beck's distributive laws. Unfortunately, finding distributive laws can be extremely difficult and error-prone. The literature contains some general principles for constructing distributive laws. However, until now there have been no such techniques for establishing when no distributive law exists.We present three families of theorems for showing when there can be no distributive law between two monads. The first widely generalizes a counterexample attributed to Plotkin. It covers all the previous known no-go results for specific pairs of monads, and includes many new results. The second and third families are entirely novel, encompassing various new practical situations. For example, they negatively resolve the open question of whether the list monad distributes over itself, reveal a previously unobserved error in the literature, and confirm a conjecture made by Beck himself in his first paper on distributive laws. S • T ⇒ T • S

Density operators are one of the key ingredients of quantum theory. They can be constructed in two ways: via a convex sum of 'doubled kets' (i.e. mixing), and by tracing out part of a 'doubled' two-system ket (i.e. dilation). Both constructions can be iterated, yielding new mathematical species that have already found applications outside physics. However, as we show in this paper, the iterated constructions no longer yield the same mathematical species. Hence, the constructions 'mixing' and 'dilation' themselves are by no means equivalent. Concretely, when applying the Choi-Jamiolkowski isomorphism to the second iteration, dilation produces arbitrary symmetric bipartite states, while mixing only yields the disentangled ones. All results are proven using diagrams, and hence they hold not only for quantum theory, but also for a much more general class of process theories. This paper is the shorter version of the ArXiv paper [25], all missing proofs can be found in the full version.

Monads are commonplace in computer science, and can be composed using Beck's distributive laws. Unfortunately, finding distributive laws can be extremely difficult and error-prone. The literature contains some general principles for constructing distributive laws. However, until now there have been no such techniques for establishing when no distributive law exists. We present three families of theorems for showing when there can be no distributive law between two monads. The first widely generalizes a counterexample attributed to Plotkin. It covers all the previous known no-go results for specific pairs of monads, and includes many new results. The second and third families are entirely novel, encompassing various new practical situations. For example, they negatively resolve the open question of whether the list monad distributes over itself, reveal a previously unobserved error in the literature, and confirm a conjecture made by Beck himself in his first paper on distributive laws. In addition, we establish conditions under which there can be at most one possible distributive law between two monads, proving various known distributive laws to be unique.

No abstract