arXiv:1204.6042v2 [quant-ph] 16 Oct 2012 u ehnc.A mhszdb Landauer[ by quan emphasized on As based mechanics. devices i tum of superior capabilities the to processing clues formation vital entanglemen provides as such sub-systems, correlations between of measures informati of via role quantified The tech applications. future engineering building and for propertie nology harnessed what be on could light systems shed quantum has mechanics t It to quantum counterparts. superior of classical capabilities processing laws information the have can by governed protocols and h htntks eseitreec rne ntescreen. the on slit fringes which interference to as see available we information takes, experimen no photon two-slit is the there the as is long instance As in canonical causing A up the them, add terference. distinguish amplitudes us probability help corresponding can in the that are universe information the paths no in these is soever there If i.e. indistinguishable, general. principle re in both components has imaginary that amplitude, and probability char complex is a which by of terized each paths, or alternatives various through a hnmn r ecie by described phy are approach, phenomena this cal o In formulation mechanics. path-integral quantum non-relativistic Feynman’s is exam- mechanics. example For ther statistical relevant of and cornerstone information universe. the entropy, form our modynamics between of connections workings the the ple, gain to into crucial insights is ing information exchange and process systems t physics the operation. of its independent process governs not information are device the a that of capabilities indicates and physical is tion ∗ † [email protected] [email protected] unu nomto cec a hw httedevices the that shown has science information Quantum tamr udmna ee,udrtnighwphysical how understanding level, fundamental more a At eateto hsc n optrSine ifi Laurie Wilfrid Science, Computer and Physics of Department etrfrQatmIfrainadCnrl nvriyo N of University Control, and Information Quantum for Center ewrs unu icr,flyqatmSeinWl pro Slepian-Wolf quantum fully discord, Quantum Keywords: pro quantum noisy in di advantages and quantum palpable entanglement attaining quantum between tradeoff the mergi regarding state quantum and di quantum distillation of entanglement significance coding, The involved. Slepian-Wol state discu quantum the We fully of the discord of processes. yield communication the between quantum relation for resource c quantum a in as coherence envir quantum decoherent of advantage a the of quantifying effects damaging advantages. the quantum captures tangible discord attaining on limitations the sqatmtcnlge oefo h suso rnil to principle of issues the from move technologies quantum As lrno aoaoy eateto hsc,Uiest o University Physics, of Department Laboratory, Clarendon .INTRODUCTION I. unu icr sarsuc nqatmcommunication quantum in resource a as discord Quantum events neetcnoccur can event An . 1 , 2 ,informa- ], Dtd a 2 2018) 22, May (Dated: aba Madhok Vaibhav nms Datta Animesh what- heir of s ing hat on, ac- si- n- A al t. n - - f - - - t oo,qatmentanglement quantum tocol, gaedsusd hs eut edt pnquestions open to lead results These discussed. are ng a erae.Isacsicueqatmagrtm o int for benefits algorithms factorization[ quantum such ger include where Instances reaped. scenarios be are can methods be classical the than known efficiently quantum more on tasks accomplish based that Computational mechanics protocols communication provide. and might algorithms processing information tum unu nomto hoyi unu eeotto,or teleportation, quantum is teleportation[ entanglement-assisted theory information quantum hog h nevnn pc.Epesn eeotto a transmitte teleportation being Expressing inequality state resource from space. the transmitted intervening without the be another, through can to state location quantum one unknown an which days the since mechanics the quantum at Einstein[ of of be weirdness to quantum the believed of of are nat heart light the correlations the of Quantum study in the information. themselves to correlations devoted quantum is article of resourc this view a spirit, as to this systems tools In physical the of properties us quantum given en- certain the and like decoherence, phenomena and quantum tanglement of resulte understanding has better This a mechanics. in quantum of study the to o spective laws. kinds its certain formulating in about it cares of lack universe ce the the It or information that intriguing. us and tells philosophical “path” both tainly slit which is about each takes cares of photon universe the the out why path to as classical question wave two the The of around superposition a centered in be packets, to considered is photon The inwt urnedscrt gis eavesdropping[ against security guaranteed with communica- enable tion cryptography quantum in advantages The hw htasae btad2bt fcasclcommunicatio single classical of a bits communicate 2 to and ebit shared a that shows rdc h oainue ntersuc hoyo quantum of theory resource the in used notation the troduce nvriy aelo nai 2 C,Cnd and Canada 3C5, N2L Ontario Waterloo, University, r nteramo unu omncto,quantum communication, quantum of realm the In cr nniyvrin ftlprain super-dense teleportation, of versions noisy in scord net hsi osqec fqatmdiscord quantum of consequence a is This onment. rtcli h rsneo os n h quantum the and noise of presence the in protocol f tocols. n ftesmls e otitiun rmtvsin primitives intriguing most yet simplest the of One unu nomto cec a de hl e per- new whole a added has science information Quantum cr ncosn h pia unu ttsfor states quantum optimal the choosing in scord muiain hsetbihsqatmdiscord quantum establishes This ommunication. wMxc,Abqeqe M81100,USA 87131-0001, NM Albuquerque, Mexico, ew † ∗ sti rges hc eie quantitative a derives which progress, this ss understand to important is it practice, of those xod X P,Uie Kingdom United 3PU, OX1 Oxford, f 3 ,adtersuc o h oeta eet quan- benefits potential the for resource the and ], [ 4 qq , 5 2[ + ] n erhn nusre database[ unsorted an searching and ] unknown c → c ]  unu i.Hr,w in- we Here, bit. quantum [ 8 q .I stepoesby process the is It ]. → q ] , 7 ]. ure (1) a s 6 e- e. st r- ]. d d n f . 2 communication protocols[9]. [q q] represents one qubit of There is a considerable interest in the research community communication between two parties→ and [qq] represents one about quantum discord, following evidence that it is responsi- shared ebit between two parties. Similarly, [c c] repre- ble for the exponential speed up of a certain class of quantum sents one classical bit of communication between→ the parties. algorithms over classical ones[11, 12]. To communicate an unknown quantum bit by a classical pro- An important question is whether quantum discord is cedure will take exponentially large amount of resources as merely a mathematical construct or does it have a definable compared to teleportation. physical role in information processing. It is known that there Another simple protocol which shows the advantage of is a link between quantum discord and an actual physical task quantum communications is the super-dense coding[8]. Ex- involving quantum communication between two parties – an pressing it as a resource inequality[9], operational interpretation of quantum discord based on the quantum state merging protocol[13, 14]. Quantum discord is [qq] + [q q] 2[c c], (2) →  → the markup in the cost of quantum communication in the pro- showing that one can employ a shared ebit and a single bit of cess of quantum state merging, if one discards relevant prior information. A subsequent question regards the role of quan- quantum communication to communicate 2 bits of classical information. Thus, complete classical information about two tum discord in quantum information theory as a whole be- yond the state merging protocol. We provide the answer to particles can be sent by direct manipulation of just one par- ticle by the sender. The success of both these protocols rely this question within the domain of quantum communication. For details on the properties of quantum discord, and its role on pre-existing shared entanglement. Without entanglement, it is impossible to execute either teleportation and the super- in quantum computation, the reader is invited to several recent dense coding. However, quantum entanglement does not fully review articles[15–17]. capture the quantum character of a system. There are several The key insight to the findings discussed here is that quan- other possible resources to which quantum advantages are of- tum measurements and environmental decoherence disturb a ten ascribed. These include quantum system in a way that is unique to quantum theory. Quantum correlations in a bipartite system are precisely the 1. size of Hilbert Space: The dimension of a quantum sys- ones that are destroyed by such disturbances, and therefore tem of n d-dimensional particles scales as nd. This is a quantum communication protocols become overloaded by an consequence of the tensor product structure of quantum amount exactly equal to quantum discord. More specifically, mechanics. discord is the markup in the cost of quantum communication in the process of quantum state merging[18, 19], if the system 2. superpositions: A quantum state can exist in an ar- undergoes measurement and/or decoherence. We observe that bitrary complex linear combination of classical logic quantum state merging protocol is a derivative of the more states. A classic example is the “cat state”, named after general fully quantum Slepian-Wolf (FQSW) protocol[20] Schr¨odinger. and the closely related “mother” protocol. A link between Alive + Dead quantum discord and state merging can be generalised to a ψcat = | i | i . (3) connection between quantum discord and the mother protocol | i √ 2 and role of discord in essentially all bipartite, unidirectional In a quantum process, both the ‘basis’ states evolve in and memoryless quantum communication protocols. parallel according to a given unitary evolution. This is made possible by comparing the performance of the fully quantum Slepian-Wolf protocol in the presence and 3. interference: The quantum wave functions undergo in- absence of decoherence and linking it to the discord of the terference, and different paths are explored in parallel state involved. While decoherence is expected to diminish the in search of the solution and the probability amplitude gain provided by a quantum protocol, we provide, for the first of the path leading to the right solution gradually builds time, a general lower bound on the amount of this deterio- up. ration. Our bound is only dependent on the state involved, 4. indistinguishability of quantum states: Non-orthogonal independent of the details of the protocol as well as the na- quantum states cannot be unambiguously distinguished. ture of the decoherence. Within the resource framework of Moreover, obtaining information about an unknown quantum Shannon theory[9, 21], we couple the performance quantum state can cause disturbance and actually of the FQSW protocol to the most general environmental de- change it. This feature is exploited in designing crypto- coherence to show that quantum discord of the state partici- graphic protocols. pating in the protocol is the lower bound to the depreciation of the protocol’s performance. The FQSW protocol - a quan- Yet, these do not comprise the whole story. Although en- tum communication-assisted entanglement distillation proto- tanglement is still generally believed to the resource of choice, col - is the parent protocol from which all information pro- in recent years there has been some progress in quantifying cessing protocols emanate[20]. This protocol is the most gen- the quantum character of composite quantum systems using eral known in the family of protocols in quantum information measures that go beyond entanglement. Quantum discord theory. The significance of quantum discord in noisy versions has been suggested as a prospective candidate and aims to of teleportation, super-dense coding, entanglement distillation captures all the quantum correlations in a quantum state[10]. and quantum state merging are discussed. We also demon- 3 strate similar roles for quantum discord in quantum compu- If Bob wishes to learn X fully, how much information must tation and correlation erasure. Our work shows that quantum Alice send to him ? Evidently, she can send H(X) bits to sat- discord captures and quantifies the advantage of quantum co- isfy Bob. However, Slepian and Wolf showed that she can do herence in quantum communication. The generality of the better, by merely sending H(X Y )= H(X, Y ) H(Y ) bits, FQSW protocol allows us to establish the role of quantum the conditional information[26].| Since H(X Y−) H(X), discord in the performance of noisy versions of quantum tele- Alice can take advantage of correlations between| ≤X and Y portation, super-dense coding, and distillation[22]. to reduce the communication cost needed to accomplish the Although it is known that entanglement is often necessary given task. for the success of quantum protocols, and that the presence of Quantum states can also be used for information processing decoherence affects its performance, we have now provided a and communication. In such cases, questions related to chan- quantitative result of the amount of such a depreciation. We nel capacities, existence of a reliable compression scheme etc. show that the amount by which a protocol suffers in the pres- about those quantum states become relevant. For example, ence of decoherence is an inherent property of the quantum Schumacher’s quantum source coding theorem[8] says that if states involved. It suggests that the choice of the best state R S(ρ), then there exists a reliable compression scheme of for any noisy quantum protocol must be a tradeoff between rate≥R for an independent and identically distributed source of the entanglement and discord of the state involved. Given the ρ. If R S(ρ) then no compression scheme of rate R is reli- non-monotonic relation between quantum discord and entan- able. Here≤ S(ρ) is the von Neumann entropy of the quantum glement in quantum states[23–25], choosing the optimal state state ρ. Another example which is useful to us is the quantum for a quantum task is a non-trivial one, though for which we state merging protocol which is the extension of the classical now have the proper certificate. Slepian-Wolf protocol into the quantum domain where Alice ⊗n and Bob share the quantum state ρAB, with each party having ⊗n ⊗n the marginal density operators ρA and ρB respectively. Let II. CLASSICAL AND QUANTUM COMMUNICATION ΨABC be a purification of ρAB. Assume, without loss of |generality,i that Bob holds C. The quantum state merging pro- Shannon provided the mathematical theory of commu- tocol quantifies the minimum amount of quantum information nication, laying the foundation of classical information which Alice must send to Bob so that he ends up with a state ⊗n ′ theory[26]. During the latter half of the previous century, this arbitrarily close to Ψ B′BC ,B being a register at Bob’s end led to enormous progress in understanding the key resources to store the qubits received| i from Alice. It was shown that in and issues surrounding communication and information tech- the limit of n , and asymptotically vanishing errors, the nology. The central concept in classical information theory answer is given→ by ∞ the quantum conditional entropy[18, 19] is the Shannon entropy, a measure of the uncertainty associ- S(A B)= S(A, B) S(B). When S(A B) is negative, Bob ated with a random variable. It quantifies the expected value obtains| the full state− with just local operations| and classical of the information contained in a message, usually in the unit communication, and distill S(A B) ebits with Alice, which of bits. A ‘message’ is a specific realization of the random can be used to transfer additional− | quantum information in the variable, whose symbols or alphabets appear with probabili- future. ties p(1),p(2), ..., p(i)... . The Shannon entropy H associ- After realizing that quantum states can be used for infor- ated{ with such a probability} distribution is mation theoretic tasks, the next question is whether the con- ceptual breakthroughs promised by quantum communication H = p(i) log p(i). (4) can be palpably harnessed. In other words, what features of − i X quantum mechanics can be used to give us information pro- This entropy is related to the physical resources required cessing capabilities and communication protocols that are far to solve certain information processing tasks. For example, superior to their classical counterparts. We discuss both these Shannon’s source coding theorem says the entropy represents questions in the next section in terms of quantum discord. an absolute limit on the best possible lossless compression of any source of information. This operational interpretation of Shannon entropy in terms of lossless data compression is the III. QUANTUM DISCORD cornerstone of classical information theory. Classical infor- mation theory also sheds light on the nature of correlations be- Characterizing the resources behind the enhancements and tween two information sources, or, the input and the output of speedups provided by quantum mechanics over best known a channel and how they determine the rate at which messages classical procedures is one of the most fundamental questions can be exchanged securely. Shannon’s noisy channel coding in quantum information science. Quantum entanglement[28] theorem states that the capacity of a channel is given by the is generally seen to be the key resource that gives quan- maximum of the mutual information between the input and tum information processors their power. There are, how- output of the channel, where the maximization is with respect ever, quantum processes which provide an exponential advan- to the input distribution. Another example pertinent to us is tage in the presence of little or no entanglement[29, 30]. In the Slepian-Wolf theorem[27]. For that, consider a party Bob the realm of mixed-state quantum computation, for example, having access to some incomplete informationabout a random quantum discord[10, 31] has been proposed as a resource[12] variable Y, and another party Alice having the missing part X. and there has been progress in this direction since[16, 32– 4

34]. It has also been shown to be a resource in quantum state Also, discrimination[35, 36] and quantum locking[37, 38]. pik Quantum discord aims at generalizing the notion of quan- ρA|i = Tr B(ρABΠi)/pi = Tr B(ρAB Πik)/pik pi k tum correlations in a quantum state, beyond entanglement[10, X 31]. It aims to capture all the nonclassical correlations in a = pk|iρA|ik, (7) quantum system. Quantum measurements disturb a quantum k system in a way that is unique to quantum theory. Quantum X correlationsin a bipartite system are precisely the ones that are and, destroyed by such disturbances. As we discuss below, this fea- ture of quantum systems can be used to quantify the amount pj S(ρA|j)= piS pk|iρA|ik of purely quantum correlations present in a bipartite quantum j i k ! X X X system. pip S(ρ ) Quantum mutual information is generally taken to be the ≥ k|i A|ik i,k measure of total correlations, classical and quantum, in a X quantum state. For two systems, A and B, it is defined = pikS(ρA|ik). (8) as I(A : B) = S(A) + S(B) S(A, B). Here S( ) de- i,k X notes the von Neumann entropy− of the appropriate distri-· Since any POVM element can be written in terms of its eigen- bution. For a classical probability distribution, Bayes’ rule decomposition, the minimum conditional entropy, and there- leads to an equivalent definition of the mutual information as fore the discord is always attained on a rank-1 POVM. I(A : B) = S(A) S(A B). This motivates a definition of For information theoretic considerations, the asymptotic classical correlation− in a quantum| state. limit needs to be studied. When Alice and Bob share n copies Suppose Alice and Bob share a quantum state ρAB A ∈ H ⊗ of the state ρAB, we can define a regularized version of quan- B. If Bob performs a measurement specified by the POVM H tum discord as set Πi , the resulting state is given by the shared ensemble { } ⊗n pi,ρA|i , where (ρAB) { } (ρAB ) = lim D (9) D n→∞ n ρA i = TrB(ΠiρAB)/pi, pi = TrA,B(ΠiρAB). | I(ρAB) (ρAB ), ≡ − J A quantum analogue of the conditional entropy can then be where ˜ Π defined as S{ i}(A B) i piS(ρA|i), and an alternative ⊗n version of the quantum| ≡ mutual information can now be de- (ρAB) (ρAB) = lim J . (10) P ˜ n→∞ fined as {Πi}(ρAB ) = S(ρA) S{Πi}(A B), where S( ) J n denotes theJ von Neumann entropy− of the relevant| state. The· The quantity has an operational interpretation above quantity depends on the chosen set of measurements (ρAB) as a measureJ of classical correlations, as the distill- Πi . To capture all the classical correlations present in ρAB, { } able common randomness (DCR) with one-way classical we maximize {Πi}(ρAB) over all Πi , arriving at a mea- surement independentJ quantity { } communication[39], which is identical to the regularized ver- sion of the measure of classical correlations as defined by ˜ Henderson and Vedral[31]. Using the monogamy between (ρAB) = max(S(ρA) S{Πi}(A B)). (5) J {Πi} − | DCR and the entanglementcost EC , the regularized version of the entanglement of formation [28, 40], it has been shown that Then, quantum discord is defined as[10] quantum discord is subadditive[13]. Thus, the operational and other interpretations of quantum discord based on multicopy (ρAB )= I(ρAB) (ρAB) D − J quantum protocols only provide a lower bound. Interestingly, ˜ = S(ρB) S(ρAB) + min S{Πi}(A B) for separable states, quantum discord is additive. This follows − {Πi} | from the trivial additivity of EC for separable states. ˜ = min S{Πi}(A B) S(A B). (6) {Πi} | − | The minimization can be restricted to rank-1 operators by sup- IV. THE MOTHER PROTOCOL AND THE QUANTUM INFORMATION FAMILY TREE posing a POVM on B can be fine-grained into

Π = Π . Abeyesinghe et al. showed that essentially all unidirec- i ik tional, bipartite and memoryless quantum communication k X protocols are actually siblings originating from one “mother”. Then The mother protocol can be seen to provide a hierarchical structure to the family of quantum protocols[20]. pikρA|ik = Tr B(ρAB Πik), pik = Tr (ρABΠik). The mother protocol starts with n copies of a quantum state ψABR . Alice holds the A shares and Bob the B shares. The | i Evidently, k pik = pi whereby we can define pk|i = pik/pi. reference system R is “purification” of the AB system (which P 5 might be describedby a mixed state) anddoes not activelypar- V. QUANTUM DISCORD AS A MEASURE OF ticipate in the protocol. The mother protocol can be viewed as COHERENCE IN THE FQSW PROTOCOL an entanglement distillation between A and B when the only type of communication permitted is the ability to send qubits The FQSW is essentially a non-dissipative protocol in that from Alice to Bob. The transformation can be expressed in no information is leaked to the environment in each step of the resource inequality as the protocol, but any practical implementation of a quantum information protocol will be affected by loss and noise. In 1 1 particular, we will consider loss of information and coherence ψAB + I(A : R)[q q] I(A : B)[qq]. (11) h i 2 → ≥ 2 at Bob’s end. This can be studied by considering a unitary coupling between Bob’s system B and an ancillary environ- Here, ψAB refers to the state shared between Alice and Bob ment system, say C, and then tracing C out. Physically, such whose| purificationi is the state ψABR . The above inequality a quantum operation will emulate environmentaldecoherence. states that n copies of the state| ψABi can be converted to We begin by expanding the size of the Hilbert space so that 1 | i an arbitrary measurement (or any other quantum operation) 2 I(A : B) EPR pairs per copy, provided Alice is allowed to communicate with Bob by sending him qubits at the rate can be modeled by coupling to the auxiliary subsystem and 1 then discarding it. We assume the ancilla C to initially be in a 2 I(A : R) per copy. pure state 0 , and a unitary interaction U between B and C. A stronger version of the mother protocol, the FQSW pro- Letting primes| i denote the state of the system after U has acted tocol not only enables the two parties, Alice (A)andBob(B), ′ ′ ′ 1 we have S(A, B)= S(A ,B C ) as C starts out in a product to distill I(A : B) EPR pairs per copy, in addition Alice can 2 state with AB. We also have I(A : BC) = I(A′ : B′C′). “merge” her state with Bob. This implies that Alice is able As discarding quantum systems cannot increase the mutual to successfully transfer her entanglement with the reference information, we get I(A′ : B′) I(A′ : B′C′). system R to Bob. Writing the FQSW in terms of a resource Now consider the FQSW protocol≤ between A and B in the inequality presence of C. We can always view the yield of the FQSW protocol on the system AB to be the same as that of perform- 1 1 ψAB + I(A : R)[q q] I(A : B)[qq] ing the protocol between systems A and BC, where C is some h i 2 → ≥ 2 ancilla (initially in a pure state) with which B interacts coher- +State Merging between A and B (12) ently through a unitary U. Such an operation does not change the cost or yield of the FQSW protocol, as shown, but helps In a more rigorous mathematical notation, we write the above us in counting resources. Discarding system C yields as I(A′ : B′) I(A′ : B′C′)= I(A : BC)= I(A : B), ≤ 1 1 (14) S→AB : ψS + I(A : R)[q q] I(A : B)[qq] or alternatively, hU i 2 → ≥ 2 ˆ + IS→B : ψS ,(13) S(A′ B′) S(A′ B′C′)= S(A B). (15) h i | ≥ | | Now consider a protocol which we call as FQSWD where we have a noisy resource mixed state, ψS inserted be- B (FQSW after decoherence), where the subscript refers to the tween a “ ”. Thus a mixed state is represented by ψS , decoherence at B. The resource inequality for FQSWD is and a noisyh·i channel by . A channel is a relative resourceh i B S→AB S hN i ′ ′ ′ ′ : ψ meaning that the protocol only works pro- S →A B S 1 ′ ′ 1 ′ ′ hU i S : ψ + I(A : R )[q q] I(A : B )[qq] vided the input to the channel is the state ψ . On the LHS, hU i 2 → ≥ 2 takes the state ψS and distributes it to Alice and Bob. On theU ′ ˆ ′ + IS →B : ψS . RHS, the symbol I is an identity channel taking the state ψS to h i Bob alone. The state ψS on the left-hand side of the inequality The primed letters, A′, B′ etc., indicate that the protocol is is distributed to Alice and Bob, while on the right-hand side, taking place in the presence of decoherence at Bob’s end. that same state is given to Bob alone. This inequality states As in the fully coherent version, Alice is able to transfer ABR ⊗n 1 ′ that starting from the state (ψ ) , and using 2 I(A : R) her entanglement with the reference system R , and is able | i 1 ′ ′ bits of quantum communication from Alice to Bob, they can to distill 2 I(A : B ) EPR pairs ([qq]) with Bob. The net distill 1 I(A : B) EPR pairs per copy, and in addition Alice 1 2 quantum gain for the fully coherent protocol is G = 2 I(A : can accomplish merging her state with Bob, in which she is 1 B) 2 I(A : R)= S(A B) ebits. This is the difference be- able to successfully transfer her entanglement with the refer- tween− the yield obtained− and| the cost of quantum communica- ence system R to Bob. This means that Alice transfers her tion incurred. Likewise, the net gain for the protocol suffering portion of the state to Bob. In other words, they manage to 1 ′ ′ 1 ′ ′ ˆ decoherence at B is GD = 2 I(A : B ) 2 I(A : R ) = RB ⊗n create the state (ψ ) , where Bˆ is a register held with B S(A′ B′). Therefore, the net advantage of− the coherent pro- RBˆ | ABR i − | and (ψ ) = (ψ ) in the limit n . Finally, the tocol over the decohered one is given by D = G GD = asymptotic| naturei | of the equivalencei is denoted→ ∞ by the symbol S(A′ B′) S(A B) ebits. Evidently, this quantum− advan- . tage depends| − on the| exact nature of the environment and the ≥ 6 system’s interaction with it via U. Employing the original def- in accomplishing any of the so called “children protocols” that inition of quantum discord due to Zurek[41] (Zurek’s origi- can be derived from the FQSW protocol. In this section, we nal definition of discord did not consider optimizing over all show that by connectingquantum discord with the FQSW pro- measurements), D quantifies the loss in the yield of a quan- tocol, we can interpret discord as the advantage of quantum tum protocol due to environmental decoherence. Our results coherence in noisy versions of teleportation, super-dense cod- therefore provide a standard way of quantifying, in entropy ing, and entanglement distillation. Finally, we reproduce an units, the damage to the performance of quantum process and earlier result on the connection of quantum discord and quan- protocols in the presence of any decoherence process in any tum state merging. experimental scenario. The strength of our result, however, comes from the next step of minimizing D over all environmental operations per- A. Noisy teleportation forming measurements. Using the measurement model of quantum operations[8], the state ρAB under measurement of The noisy teleportation resource inequality can be ex- ′ subsystem B, changes to ρ = pj ρA j πj , where pressed as AB j | ⊗ πj are orthogonal projectors resulting from a Neumark ex- { } P ΨAB + I(A : B)[c c] I(A B)[q q], (18) tension of the POVM elements[42]. The unconditioned post- h i → ≥ i → measurement states of A and B are obtained by combining the mother protocol with ′ ′ teleportation[9]. Here, I(A B) = S(A B) is also ρA = pj ρA|j = ρA, ρB = pjπj . (16) i − | j j known as the coherent information[43]. When Bob undergoes X X decoherence, we get,

Invoking these relations, we get ′ ′ ΨA B + I(A′ : B′)[c c] I(A′ B′)[q q]. (19) ′ ′ h i → ≥ i → S(A B )= pj S(ρ ). (17) | A|j The above can be interpreted as following: The net loss in j X the number of qubits that can be teleported when comparing After minimization over all POVMs, D reduces to (A : B) the coherent teleportation (the one without any decoherence), as defined in Eq. (6). Quantum discord thus quantifiesD the Eq. (18), and the one which suffers decoherence, Eq. (19), is minimum loss in yield of the FQSW protocol due to decoher- given by I(A B) I(A′ B′) = S(A′ B′) S(A B). We i − i | − | ence. This is our main result, and shows that the performance assume the classical communication to be free in this case, of all the protocols in the quantum information family tree as long as we are teleporting unknown quantum states. We must be judged by the quantum discord. The connection be- have S(A B) = S(A) I(A : B) = S(A) I(A : BC) = | − − tween quantum discord and the FQSW protocol provides a S(A BC). AsinSec.(V), the application of the unitary U, but | metric for studying the advantage of coherence in accomplish- before discarding the subsystem C, the cost of teleportation is ing any of the children protocols that can be derived from the still given by S(A′ B′C′)= S(A B). FromEq. (14), | | FQSW protocol. For example, we look at the noisy versions S(A′ B′) S(A′ B′C′)= S(A B). (20) of quantum teleportation, super-dense coding, and entangle- | ≥ | | ment distillation. Therefore, we see that the advantage of the coherent protocol The connection we have made here is crucial. While it over the noisy version in teleporting unknown quantum states is known that entanglement is necessary for the success of is equal to the quantum discord of the original state. the protocol, and that the presence of decoherence affects its For a particular class of two-qubit quantum states, it was performance, we have now provided a quantitative result of recently shown that the fidelity of remote state preparation is the amount of such a depreciation. We have shown that the equal to the geometric quantum discord[33]. This was also amount by which a protocol suffers in the presence of de- demonstrated experimentally using photonic qubits[44]. Re- coherence is an inherent property of the quantum states in- mote state preparation is a special case of quantum telepor- volved. It suggests that thebest state to beemployedin a noisy tation, and the relation between discord and the fidelity has quantum communication protocol should be the outcome of been suggested as an operational interpretation for quantum a tradeoff between the entanglement and discord of the state discord. involved, since the variation of discord and entanglement in quantum states in not monotonic[23–25]. In the next section, we demonstrate the versatility of this result by applying it to B. Noisy super-dense coding some well-known quantum protocols. Noisy super-dense coding can be derived by combining the VI. QUANTUM DISCORD IN THE CHILDREN mother protocol with super dense coding[9] PROTOCOLS [qq] + [q q] 2[c c], (21) →  → The connection between quantum discord and the FQSW showing that one can employ a shared ebit and a single bit of protocol provides a metric for studying the effect of coherence quantum communication to communicate 2 bits of classical 7

⊗n ′ information. Here, [q q] represents one qubit of communi- with a state arbitrarily close to Ψ B′BC , B being a regis- cation between two parties→ and [qq] represents one shared ebit ter at Bob’s end to store the qubits| i received from Alice. It between two parties. Similarly, [c c] represents one classi- was shown that in the limit of n , and asymptotically cal bit of communication between→ the parties. The symbol vanishing errors, the answer is given→ ∞by the quantum condi- is used to denote exact attainability as compared to which is tional entropy: S(A B) = S(A, B) S(B). When S(A B) to denote asymptotic attainability. Combining these,≥ the noisy is negative, Bob obtains| the full state− with just local opera| - super-dense coding protocol can be expressed as, tions and classical communication, and distill S(A B) ebits with Alice, which can be used to transfer additional− | quantum AB Ψ + S(A)[q q] I(A : B)[c c]. (22) information in the future. Quantum state merging provides h i → ≥ → an operational interpretation for quantum discord[13, 14]. It When the party B is undergoingdecoherence, the noisy super- is the markup in the cost of quantum communication in the dense coding can be expressed as, process of quantum state merging, if one discards relevant ′ ′ prior information. An intuitive argument for the above in- ΨA B + S(A′)[q q] I(A′ : B′)[c c]. (23) h i → ≥ → terpretation of quantum discord can be made through strong subadditivity[19] We note that S(A) = S(A′). Thus, due to decoherence, the number of classical bits communicated through this protocol S(A B, C) S(A B). (26) gets reduced by the amount I(A : B) I(A′ : B′), which is | ≤ | equal to the discord of the original state.− From the point of view of the state merging protocol, this has While all our results are derived for finite-dimensional a very clear interpretation. Having more prior information cases, gaussian quantum discord[45] hasbeenrelatedto a gen- makes state merging cheaper. In other words, throwing away eralisation of quantum dense coding for continuous-variable information will make state merging more expensive. Thus, states, when all the states and operations involved are gaus- if Bob discards system C, it will increase the cost of quantum sian. The problem was cast as the advantage that can be har- communication needed by Alice in order to merge her state nessed by using nonlocal quantum interactions. This connec- with Bob. tion was also explored experimentally in the same work[46]. Quantum state merging can be derived from the FQSW if the entanglement produced at the end of the FQSW protocol can be used to perform teleportation. As a resource inequality C. Entanglement distillation ˆ AB S→B S Ψ +S(A B)[q q]+I(A : B)Ψ[c c] I :Ψ , h i | → → ≥ h i The one-way entanglement distillation can be expressed as (27) it accomplishes state merging from Alice to Bob at the cost ΨAB + I(A : R)[c c] I(A B)[qq]. (24) of S(A B) bits of quantum communication. When S(A B) h i → ≥ i is negative,| Alice and Bob can distill this amount of entan-| This inequality can be derived by combining the FQSW pro- glement in the form of Bell pairs. Thus, quantum state merg- 1 tocol Eq. (13) and recycling the 2 I(A : R) ebits out of the ing provides an operational interpretation of S(A B). As in 1 | total 2 I(A : B) produced for teleportation, as shown in[9]. Sec. (V), the resource inequality for the noisy version of the Decoherence at Bob’s end B provides quantum state merging protocol

′ ′ ′ ′ ˆ A B A B ′ ′ ′ ′ S→B S Ψ + I(A′ : R′)[c c] I(A′ B′)[qq]. (25) Ψ +S(A B )[q q]+I(A : B )Ψ[c c] I :Ψ . h i → ≥ i h i | → → ≥ h (28) i The net change in entanglement distillation is I(A′ B′) The cost of quantum communication in this case is S(A′ B′), i − I(A B) = S(A B) S(A′ B′), which is the negative of the and the mark up in this cost is S(A′ B′) S(A B), which| is i | − | quantum discord of the original state. As is well known, clas- equal to the quantum discord of the original| − state.| sical communication between parties cannot enhance entan- glement, and we can neglect the overheadof I(A : R) I(A′ : R′) classical bits. − VII. SUMMARY AND OUTLOOK

The role of quantumentanglementas a resource in quantum D. Quantum state merging information science is well established and acknowledged. It is also well known that maximizing the amount of entangle- Quantum state merging protocolis the extension of the clas- ment in a system does not monotonically enhance the quan- sical Slepian-Wolf protocol into the quantum domain where tum advantages it may provide. This is true at a conceptual ⊗n Alice and Bob share the quantum state ρAB, with each party level due to results such as the Gottesman-Knill theorem[8], ⊗n ⊗n having the marginal density operators ρA and ρB respec- as well as at a practical level, where the more entangled the tively. Let ΨABC be a purification of ρAB. Assume, with- state, the more it is susceptible to decoherence. Our work out loss of| generality,i that Bob holds C. The quantum state clarifies and establishes the central role played by quantum merging protocol quantifies the minimum amount of quantum discord in the latter scenario. We have shown that quantum information which Alice must send to Bob so that he ends up discord is a quantity of fundamental significance in quantum 8 information theory, by virtue of its role in the performance of tainable in such scenarios. Broader applicability would also a large class of quantum communication protocols. result from the incorporation of non-markovian environments To harness the enhancements promised by quantum tech- into the framework. Activities in this direction are already be- nologies in the real world, it is essential that we go beyond ing undertaken[47, 48], and unified framework will put such the idealized scenarios in which most of the now-famous pro- results in context. It will also allow for the theoretical and tocols such as teleportation, and dense-coding were designed. experimental exploration of quantum advantages provided by This article summarizes the recent advances made in that di- discord in atomic, molecular and condensed systems. rection. The outcome is that quantum discord quantifies, in a very direct manner, the damage that a decohering environment inflicts on the advantages promised by a quantum protocol. If ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS our goal is to maximize the extraction of such quantum advan- tages, we must design quantum states that minimize the dele- It is a pleasure to that several discussions with G. Adesso, terious effects of the environment. This inexorably leads us C. Brukner, B. Dakic, M. Gu, K. Modi, M. Piani, and A. to identifying quantum states that provide a balance between Shaji. VM was supported by the Center for Quantum Infor- its entanglement and discord content. Given the nontrivial in- mation and Control (CQuIC), Ontario Ministry of Economic terrelation between the two quantities, and the geometry of Development and Innovation, NSERC, and the Laurier Re- entangled and discordant states, this provides a promising and search Office. AD was supported in part by the EPSRC (Grant engaging avenue for future research. Nos. EP/H03031X/1 and RDF/BtG/0612b/31) and the EU In- The generality of the framework – that of the FQSW pro- tegrated Project QESSENCE. tocol – employed by us also allows for additional scopes of progress. It would be fruitful to extend the protocol to include multiple parties and multiple rounds of communications, and REFERENCES then explore the role of quantum discord in the advantages at-

[1] R. Landauer, IBM Journal of Research and Develpment, 5, 183 [19] M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, and A. Winter, Communications (1961). in Mathematical Physics, 269, 107 (2007). [2] A. Berut, A. Arakelyan, A. Petrosyan, S. Ciliberto, R. Dillen- [20] A. Abeyesinghe, I. Devetak, P. Hayden, and A. Winter, Proc. schneider, and E. Lutz, Nature, 483, 187 (2012). R. Soc. A, 465, 2537 (2009). [3] A. Einstein, B. Podolsky, and N. Rosen, Phys. Rev., 47, 777 [21] I. Devetak, A. W. Harrow, and A. Winter, Phys. Rev. Lett., 93, (1935). 230504 (2004). [4] A. Ekert and R. Jozsa, Rev. Mod. Phys., 68, 733 (1996). [22] V. Madhok and A. Datta, , arxiv:1107.0994 (2011). [5] P. Shor, SIAM Review, 41, 303 (1999). [23] K. Modi, T. Paterek, W. Son, V. Vedral, and M. Williamson, [6] L. Grover, in Proceedings of the Twenty-Eighth Annual ACM Phys. Rev. Lett., 104, 080501 (2010). Symposium on the Theory of Computing (1996) p. 212, ISBN 0 [24] A. Al-Qasimi and D. F. V. James, Phys. Rev. A, 83, 032101 89791 785 5. (2011). [7] N. Gisin, G. Ribordy, W. Tittel, and H. Zbinden, Rev. Mod. [25] D. Girolami and G. Adesso, Phys. Rev. A, 84, 052110 (2011). Phys., 74, 145 (2002). [26] T. M. Cover and J. A. Thomas, Elements of Information Theory [8] M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and (Wiley, 1991). Quantum Information (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2000). [27] D. Slepian and J. Wolf, Information Theory, IEEE Transactions [9] I. Devetak, A. Harrow, and A. Winter, Information Theory, on, 19, 471 (1973). IEEE Transactions on, 54, 4587 (2008). [28] R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, [10] H. Ollivier and W. H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. Lett., 88, 017901 Rev. Mod. Phys., 81, 865 (2009). (2002). [29] A. Datta, S. T. Flammia, and C. M. Caves, Phys. Rev. A, 72, [11] E. Knill and R. Laflamme, Phys. Rev. Lett., 81, 5672 (1998). 042316 (2005). [12] A. Datta, A. Shaji, and C. M. Caves, Phys. Rev. Lett, 100, [30] A. Datta and G. Vidal, Phys. Rev. A, 75, 042310 (2007). 050502 (2008). [31] L. Henderson and V. Vedral, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen., 34, 6899 [13] V. Madhok and A. Datta, Phys. Rev. A, 83, 032323 (2011). (2001). [14] D. Cavalcanti, L. Aolita, S. Boixo, K. Modi, M. Piani, and [32] B. Eastin, , arxiv:1006.4402 (2010). A. Winter, Phys. Rev. A, 83, 032324 (2011). [33] B. Daki´c, V. Vedral, and C. Brukner, Phys. Rev. Lett., 105, [15] L. C. Celeri, J. Maziero, and R. M. Serra, International Journal 190502 (2010). of Quantum Information, 9, 1837 (2011). [34] F. F. Fanchini, L. K. Castelano, M. F. Cornelio, and M. C. [16] A. Datta and A. Shaji, International Journal of Quantum Infor- de Oliveira, New Journal of Physics, 14, 013027 (2012). mation, 9, 1787 (2011). [35] L. Roa, J. C. Retamal, and M. Alid-Vaccarezza, Phys. Rev. [17] K. Modi, A. Brodutch, H. Cable, T. Paterek, and V. Vedral, , Lett., 107, 080401 (2011). arxiv:1112.6238 (2012). [36] B. Li, S.-M. Fei, Z.-X. Wang, and H. Fan, Phys. Rev. A, 85, [18] M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, and A. Winter, Nature, 436, 673 022328 (2012). (2005). [37] A. Datta and S. Gharibian, Phys. Rev. A, 79, 042325 (2009). 9

[38] S. Boixo, L. Aolita, D. Cavalcanti, K. Modi, and A. Winter, P. Walther, , arxiv:1203.1629 (2012). International Journal of Quantum Information, 9, 1643 (2011). [45] G. Adesso and A. Datta, Phys. Rev. Lett., 105, 030501 (2010). [39] I. Devetak and A. Winter, IEEE Transactions on Information [46] M. Gu, H. M. Chrzanowski, S. M. Assad, T. Symul, K. Modi, Theory, 50, 3183 (2004). T. C. Ralph, V. Vedral, and P. K. Lam, , arxiv:1203.0011 [40] M. Koashi and A. Winter, Phys. Rev. A, 69, 022309 (2004). (2012). [41] W. Zurek, Ann. der Physik, 9, 855 (2000). [47] R. Vasile, P. Giorda, S. Olivares, M. G. A. Paris, and S. Manis- [42] A. Peres, Quantum Theory: Concepts and Methods (Kluwer calco, Phys. Rev. A, 82, 012313 (2010). Academic Publishers, 1995). [48] P. Haikka and S. Maniscalco, , arxiv:1203.6469 (2012). [43] B. Schumacher and M. A. Nielsen, Phys. Rev. A, 54, 2629 (1996). [44] B. Dakic, Y. O. Lipp, X. Ma, M. Ringbauer, S. Kropatschek, S. Barz, T. Paterek, V. Vedral, A. Zeilinger, C. Brukner, and