arXiv:1505.00123v1 [quant-ph] 1 May 2015 aiodsnete r eurdt ennngtv;how- non-negative; be to non-linear required a are is they POVMs since and manifold matrices density of space The ooti n hsclyraiePVsfrtepermu- the 2 for POVMs symmetric realize tationally physically and construction obtain the use to secondly, matrices; complex of space based POVMs of construction on for recipe simple a present symmetric useful. to particularly lead be always can action states construc- post-measurement whose tasks, POVMs such of in utility tion their Given entangle- [22–24]. multipartite ment char- and in [21] crucial nonlocality are of class acterization this on POVMs and states, Dicke on–elne GZ tts tts and states, W Greenberger– states, states, Bell (GHZ) includes Horne–Zeilinger information class quantum in the 20] experimentally processing; [19, class an rich to and corresponds developed states symmetric ally the space, eea osrcinmcaimfrPVsi therefore importance. is considerable POVMs A of for mechanism 18]. construction be [17, general POVMs cannot using tasks be states unambiguously can certain non-orthogonal but discriminated measurements, of achieve projective using set to the distinguished measurements; a projective in used example, of scope lies be for the importance can outside are Their they which that and fact [16]. 15] [14, measures with POVMs ﬁdelity Symmetric (SIC) theory[11–13] through Informationally-Complete measurements information optimal particular Their on quantum of emphasis are 10]. in realization [9, interest physical teleportation and conclusive construction and 2], [8] Preparation [1, State (RSP) [3–6], Remote protocols [7], ﬁltering veriﬁcation communication entanglement quantum quantum of information including realization quantum tasks in frequently processing used are (POVMs) N h ups hno hsLte stofl:t ﬁrst to two-fold: is Letter this of then purpose The Introduction For dmninlHletsaei which in space Hilbert -dimensional any N OMcntuto:asml eiewt plctost sym to applications with recipe simple a construction: POVM rhnra e fbssmtie ntevector the on matrices basis of set orthonormal uisrsdn nte2 the in residing qubits N ASnmes 36.a 36.a 36.a 03.67.Bg 03.67.-a, 03.65.Ta, 03.65.Aa, numbers: PACS s spin-1 ones. a separable on from construction states proposed entangled generate the illustrate We group. rsn ehdt hsclyraietecntutdPOVM irre constructed of the POV product tensor a realize the of physically of realization to decomposition on Clebsch–Gordan method result Neumark’s a to present spirit in Similar fte2 the of peia esr,w xmn h rpriso h constru the of properties Consid the examine matrices. we complex of tensors, space spherical the for basis orthonormal -iesoa usaeo permutation- of subspace 1-dimensional + —oiieOeao-audMeasures Operator-Valued .—Positive epooeasml ehdfrcntutn OM sn n s any using POVMs constructing for method simple a propose We N dmninlHletsaeof space Hilbert -dimensional N -iesoa usaeo the of subspace 1-dimensional + wraaaSirsi Swarnamala 3 .S colo niern n aaeet aglr,Indi Bangalore, Management, and Engineering of School S. K. 2 N 1 uaaasClee nvriyo yoe Mysore Mysore, of University College, Yuvaraja’s dmninlHilbert -dimensional nvriyo otnhm otnhm ..and U.K. Nottingham, Nottingham, of University N uisreside. qubits 1 ati Bharath Karthik , N Dtd a ,2015) 4, May (Dated: N -qubit uiscmrsn h emttoal ymti states. symmetric permutationally the comprising qubits h rhnra basis orthonormal the nlpoeto prtronto orthog- operator an and projection onal idempotent, non-negative, Hermitian, is matrix ie ya rhnra ai.I re oetn hsto this extend to order In basis. coordina- orthonormal matrices an density by of tized space the projection of subspaces for onto mechanism construction POVM potential N ehns ognrt nage ttsfo nta sep- initial a states. from states arable demonstrate entangled 4-dimensional additionally, generate a to and mechanism in space, POVMs Hilbert the 2-qubit of phys- the implementation demonstrate We ical states. symmetric of subspace et h rjcinof projection the sents bevto oiaigtecntuto.Let construction. the motivating observation be eetees eetblt a evee nthe in POVM viewed dilated be the can that repeatability sense repeat- Nevertheless, not generally able. and measurements, projective not favco space vector a of OM iae ote2 the to the dilated However, measurements POVMs theorem. projective Neumark’s of through construction POVMs similar from the is to procedure a spirit such in context, current the In states. ino esrpout noirdcberpeettosof representations irreducible SU into products real- tensor decomposi- of physically Clebsch–Gordan tion the to on by method based POVMs novel tensors the a ize spherical present irreducible we [25], of with Fano matrix set density orthonormal the of ma- the representation density the the Using of representations trix. linear in assumed ally ea rhnra ai fa of basis orthonormal an be arcsne o egnrtr of generators be basis the not used; need matrices bases matrices a orthonormal by the spanned of subspaces subset speciﬁc the of to that constructing states ensures structure for construction project POVMs the space suﬃces of vector nature matrices The the complex POVMs. that of seen space be the will it ever, eea OMconstruction POVM General 2 × (2) , ∗ k to nthe on ction ⊗ n .P Shilpashree P. S. and arxwoeclmsare columns whose matrix A rn h rhnra e firreducible of set orthonormal the ering N uil ersnain fterotation the of representations ducible se,adso hti spsil to possible is it that show and ystem, hc nld ymti n anti-symmetric and symmetric include which , xrse ntebasis the in expressed sapoetv esrmn,we measurement, projective a as M o ymti ttsuigthe using states symmetric for s to arcswihfr an form which matrices of et V N fdimension of -iesoa subspace 1-dimensional + x A 1 N x , . . . , onto dmninlHletsaeare space Hilbert -dimensional a 1 , 3 S S k —ebgnwt simple a with begin .—We N always x ercstates metric dmninlsubspace -dimensional hspeet swt a with us presents This . pne yasbe of subset a by spanned , N 1 of x , . . . , x n let and , 1 V x , . . . , SU ie any Given . rjcsot the onto projects N ( N , k XX X Then . ,a susu- is as ), eoethe denote x † 1 A x , . . . , N repre- XX × N S k † 2 matrix spaces, we equip the manifold of density matri- We have thus shown how any orthonormal basis matri- ces with basis matrices for the space of N N complex ces for N can be constructed from the elementary basis × M matrices; while this ignores the manifold structure of the Eij . Note that for any complex matrix A, not necessarily density matrix space, it provides us with a convenient square, AA† is always non-negative and Hermitian. From mechanism for constructing POVMs. Potential matrix (1) and the fact that UU † = IN 2 , it is now straightfor- bases include, the generalised Gell-Mann basis, Weyl op- ward to verify that erator basis, spherical tensor basis etc. Such an approach T T † = αI , for the Bloch vector characterization of the density ma- X ij ij N trix was adopted in [29], wherein realization of an entan- i,j glement witness was considered. where α is a constant not depending on i and j. We Let denote the vector space of N N matrices N can formalize the preceding discussion with the following of dimensionM N 2 over the ﬁeld of complex× numbers C. Theorem. Deﬁne a linear map : N N , V M →M 2 T T T T Theorem 1 Let Tj : j =1,...,N be an orthonormal (X)= x1 , x2 , , xN , { } V ··· set of basis matrices for N . Then the set αTjTj† where xi is the ith row of X containing N elements, satisﬁes the conditions of aM POVM, where α is a{ constant} T and v denotes the transpose of a vector v; the map not depending on j. transforms an N N matrix into a column vector of N 2 elements by stacking× rows into a column, providing an It is important to recognize that the subspace onto which equivalent representation of elements of N . The in- the POVMs project a state is a vector space and is the 1 M verse map − : N N is then the map which ambient space in which the submanifold of density ma- uniquely constructsV M an →N MN complex matrix by tak- trices reside. ing the ﬁrst N elements of× (X) and setting that as Spherical tensor representation of density matrix.—A V the ﬁrst row of X, and so on. Since N is a vector density matrix for an N-qubit system can be represented space over C, we can choose the elementaryM matrix set as Ei, : i, j = 1,...,N of N N matrices with 1 in the { } × 2j k (i, j)th position and 0 everywhere else as an orthonormal 1 k k† ρ = tq τq , (2) ′ ′ ′ ′ (2j + 1) X X basis; indeed, TrEij Ei j = δii δjj and Eij forms an k=0 q= k { } − orthonormal set of basis matrices for N . Any element M of N can be expressed as a linear combination, with where j = N/2 and τ k are irreducible tensor operators of M q complex coeﬃcients, of the Eij s. It is easy to verify that rank k in the N+1 dimensional spin space with projection Eij Eij† is Hermitian, non-negative, and satisﬁes q along the axis of quantization in the real 3-dimensional 0 I space; here τ0 = N , the N N identity operator. Here E E† = NI . (1) × X ij ij N and elsewhere, orthogonality in the matrix space is al- i,j ways deﬁned with respect to Trace norm or the square of k Let us denote by Tij : i, j = 1,...,N another set of the Hilbert–Schmidt norm. The τq satisfy orthogonality { } orthonormal basis matrices for N . Now, using the and symmetry relations, M map we can express the orthonormal basis Eij as ′ V { } k† k k† q k 2 2 ′ ′ (Eij ): i, j = 1,...,N . If U is an N N unitary Tr(τq τq′ )=(2j + 1) δkk δqq , τq = ( 1) τ q, {V } × − − matrix with UU † = IN 2 , then it is possible to obtain a new orthonormal basis Tij , where Tij = U (Eij ): where the normalization has been chosen so as to be in i, j =1,...,N . Explicitly,{V } {V V agreement with Madison convention [27]. The Fano sta- } k T tistical tensors [25] or the spherical tensor parameters tq (1) (2) (N) Tij = U (Eij )= uij ,uij , ,uij , parametrise the density matrix ρ as expectation values V V ··· k k k 2 of τq : Tr(ρτq ) = tq . In other words, the N 1 spher- (k) k − where the N-dimensional uij is the kth sub-column vec- ical tensor operators τq , in conjunction with the iden- 2 tor of the N -dimensional complex vector Tij. The in- tity operator, form an orthonormal basis for the vector 1 V verse mapping − , along with unitary matrix U, pro- space of N N complex matrices over C that acts on the V vides us with way to obtain the N N orthonormal basis N + 1 dimensional× spin space. In contrast to some or- × matrices Tij from Eij as thonormal basis matrices, like Gell–Mann matrices, their { } { } T (1) importance lies in the fact they can be constructed as uij T symmetrized products of the angular momentum oper- u(2) ators J~ = (J , J , J ) following the well-known Weyl 1 ij x y z Tij = − (U (Eij )) = . . construction [26] as, V V . T (N) k ~ ~ ~ k k k uij τq (J)= kj (J ) r Yq (ˆr) , N · ∇ 3

k where kj are the normalization factors and Yq (ˆr) are into invariant subspaces including symmetric and anti- the sphericalN harmonics. They possess simple transfor- symmetric states, wherein the latter does not transform N mation properties under coordinate rotations of the 3- under the action of SU(2)⊗ . In essence, the decompo- dimensional space: for a rotation R(α,β,γ), where α, β sition is achieved through the action of a unitary matrix and γ are Euler angles, the parameters in the rotated with Clebsch–Gordan coeﬃcients as elements. What is k R coordinates, (tq ) , are related to the ones in the initial of interest in this context is that the unitary matrix de- coordinates as composes the computational basis in the 2N -dimensional

k R k k Hilbert space to a set of bases, one amongst which is the (t ) = D ′ (α,β,γ)t , q X q q q basis for the N + 1-dimensional symmetric subspace. As ′ q an indirect consequence, we are provided with a mech- k anism to dilate a POVM constructed on the symmet- where D ′ (α,β,γ) are the Wigner rotation matrices; q q ric subspace to the 2N -dimensional Hilbert space. The thus the rank of the tensor is preserved under rotations. key diﬀerence with Neumark’s theorem is that the di- The matrix elements of the tensor operators, in the an- lated POVM is not a projective measurement ensuring gular momentum basis, are given by repeatability of measurements; instead, repeatability is k ~ jm′ τq (J) jm = [k] C(jkj; mqm′), to be viewed in the sense that measurements based on the h | | i dilated POVM will always result in a symmetric state. where C(jkj; mqm′) are the Clebsch–Gordan coeﬃcients Using the constructed POVM, a measurement on an ini- and [k] = √2k +1. The tensor operators are traceless tial state ρi results in a ﬁnal state ρf described by the but not Hermitian, and cannot in general be identiﬁed density operator, with generators of SU(N). POVMs for permutation- ally symmetric states.—The subspace of permutationally k i k f Eq ρ Eq symmetric states is spanned by the eigen states jm of ρk,q = k i k . (4) 2 | i T r(Eq ρ Eq ) angular momentum operators J and Jz, where j = N/2 and m = j, . . . , +j. Employing Theorem 1 in conjunc- The Spin-1 case.—As an illustration, we now explic- tion with− the orthonormal set of spherical tensors from itly construct the following POVMs for a spin-1 system, (2) which form a basis for the space of N N complex where the Eks are expressed in the basis 11 , 10 and × q | i | i matrices, we can construct POVMs for a symmetric sub- 1 1 : space of dimension (2j + 1) where j = N/2, as | − i 1 1 † k k 9 0 0 6 0 0 1 0 0 τq τq 0 1 1 2 4 k E0 = 0 0 ,E0 = 0 0 0 ,E0 = 0 0 , Eq = , k =0,..., 2j; q = k, , k, (3) 9 18 − ··· 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 N 9 6 1 where is a constant not depending on k and q. Inter- 3 0 0 0 0 0 N 1 2 1 1 2 1 estingly, using symmetry properties of Clebsch–Gordan E1 =E1 = 0 3 0 ,E 1 = E 1 = 0 3 0 , k − − 1 coeﬃcients, it can be veriﬁed that the set E con- 0 0 0 0 0 3 q { } 1 tains only diagonal matrices. The symmetry relations 3 0 0 0 0 0 k† q k 2 2 τ = ( 1) τ ensure that it is not possible to have E2 = 0 0 0 ,E 2 = 0 0 0 . q q 1 2 − − 0 0 0 − 0 0 N 1 distinct POVM elements; the POVMs constructed 3 are− hence neither informationally complete nor symmet- ric. We can observe the degeneracy regarding the num- k We now present a method which aids the physical real- ber of distinct POVM elements; we also note that Eq s k do not transform like spherical tensor operators. We ization of the POVM Eq in the laboratory. Recall that N qubits reside in a 2N -dimensional Hilbert space of which now demonstrate how starting with a POVM in a 3- the symmetric space of dimension N +1 is a subspace. In dimensional symmetric subspace we can obtain its dila- this setting, Neumark’s theorem states that any POVM tion to the 4-dimensional 2-qubit Hilbert space. Con- sider E1, in the symmetric 1m basis, m = 1, 0, 1. on the N + 1-dimensional symmetric subspace can be 1 | i − realized as a a projective measurement in the 2N dimen- The relationship between 1m basis and the computa- | i + sional Hilbert space. We adopt an alternative route by tional basis is such that 11 = , 10 = |↑↓i |↓↑i and | i | ↑↑i | i √2 seeking recourse to Clebsch–Gordan decomposition of ir- 1 1 = . Here the spinor in the ﬁrst and second po- N | − i | ↓↓i reducible representations of SU(2)⊗ . From the ten- sitions correspond to the ﬁrst and second qubits respec- sor product representation of N qubit state the Clebsch– tively. Let U be the unitary matrix (orthogonal matrix, Gordan decomposition leads to a direct sum of irreducible to be accurate, since Clebsch–Gordan coeﬃcients are all representations of which, the one with the largest dimen- real-valued) which transforms the computational basis sion corresponds to the invariant subspace of symmetric to the angular momentum basis 11 , 10 , 1 1 , 00 . 1 | i | i | − i | i states. In other words, we are able to obtain an orthog- Then, the representation of E1 in the 2-qubit state space onal decomposition of the 2N -dimensional Hilbert space of dimension 4 in the computational basis , , | ↑↑i | ↑↓i | ↓↑ 4

, , is given by i | ↓↓i 1 1 1 1 10 0 0 ǫ 1 = (I1 I2) (σz(1) I2) (I1 σz(2)) − 6h ⊗ − 12 ⊗ 12 ⊗ 0 1 1 0 1 1 √2 √2 1 1 ǫ = U(E 0)U †, with U = , 1 1 ⊕ 00 0 1 + (σx(1) σx(2)) + (σy(1) σy(2))i; 6 ⊗ 12 ⊗ 0 1 1 0 √2 √2 2 1 1 1 − ǫ = (I I )+ (σz(1) σz(2)) 0 6h2 1 ⊗ 2 6 ⊗ where denotes the direct sum. Thus, 5 1 ⊕ + (σx(1) σx(2)) + (σy(1) σy(2)) ; 12 ⊗ 3 ⊗ i 10 00 10 00 a 2 1 1 1 1 1 ǫ2 = (I1 I2) + (σz(1) I2) 1 0 6 6 0 1 0 6 6 0 b 24h ǫ1 = 1 1 , ǫ1 ψ = 1 1 , ⊗ ⊗ 0 6 6 0 | i 0 6 6 0 c 00 00 00 00 d + (I1 σz(2)) + (σz(1) σz(2))i; ⊗ ⊗ 2 1 ǫ 2 = (I1 I2) (σz(1) I2) (I1 σz(2)) and − 24h ⊗ − ⊗ − ⊗

+ (σz(1) σz(2)) + (σx(1) σx(2)) . a ⊗ ⊗ i ǫ1 ψ √2 b+c 1| i = 2 , We turn our attention to the resulting state following a 1 2 2 2 b+c ψ ǫ ψ (2a + b + c +2bc) 2 POVM measurement of a spin-1 density matrix . For a ph | 1| i p 0 spin-1 system, the initial density matrix, in the represen- tation given in (2), is given by 2 where ψ = a + b + c + d , with a + 3 1 1 2 3 1 2 2 2 | 2i |2 ↑↑i | ↑↓i | ↓↑i | ↓↓i | | 1+ 2 t0 + 2 t0 2 (t 1 + t 1) √3t 2 b + c + d = 1, is the most general pure state in √ − − − i 1 3 1 2 2 3 1 2 |the| 2-qubit| | state| | space. Observe that the normalized ρ = 2 (t1 + t1) 1 √2t0 2 (t 1 + t 1) 3 − √ 2 3− 1 2 3− 1 −1 2 resultant state is a symmetric state given by 3t2 2 (t1 + t1) 1 2 t0 + 2 t0 − − √ ρ11 ρ12 ρ13 2a 11 (b + c) 10 ψ . := ρ21 ρ22 ρ23 ; sym = 2 2| i 2 + 2 2 | 2i | i (2a + b + c + 2bc) (2a + b + c + 2bc) ρ31 ρ32 ρ33 p p here k = 1 refers to its vector polarization while k = 2 Therefore, ǫ1 projects a vector in the 4-dimensional 1 refers to its tensor polarization. From (4) we obtain, Hilbert space onto the 3-dimensional symmetric space. Moreover, in this example, we show that the POVMs can ρ11 0 ρ13 be expressed in terms of Pauli spin matrices which are f 1 ρ10 = 0 0 0 . identiﬁed as Hamiltonians easily implemented in NMR (ρ11 + ρ33) ρ31 0 ρ33 quantum computing. If I1 and I2 represent the identity 1 2 matrices for the qubits 1 and 2 respectively, and σi(1) The only non-zero spherical tensor parameters are t0,t0 2 and σi(2), with i = x,y,z, the corresponding Pauli spin and t 2. Such a system can be produced in the labora- 1 ± matrices, then ǫ1’s can be expressed in terms of Pauli tory by the combined electric quadrupole and magnetic spin matrices as dipole ﬁeld, where the direction of the magnetic ﬁeld is along the Z axis of the Principal Axis frame of the elec- − 1 1 1 1 tric quadrupole ﬁeld. In similar fashion, ǫ = (I I )+ (σz(1) I )+ (I σz(2)) 1 6h 1 ⊗ 2 2 ⊗ 2 2 1 ⊗ ρ ρ 0 1 1 1 11 12 + (σx(1) σx(2)) + (σy(1) σy(2))i, ρf = ρ ρ 0 , 2 ⊗ 2 ⊗ 11 (ρ + ρ ) 21 22 11 22 0 00 where the symbol denotes the direct product. Similar calculations yield: ⊗ 00 0 f 1 ρ = 0 ρ22 ρ23 ; 0 1 1 1 1 1 ǫ = (I I )+ (σz(1) I ) − (ρ22 + ρ33) 0 6h 2 1 ⊗ 2 6 ⊗ 2 0 ρ32 ρ33 1 1 1 2 1 2 + (I σz(2)) (σx(1) σx(2)) ; the non-zero spherical parameters are t ,t ,t and t . 6 1 ⊗ − 6 ⊗ i 0 0 1 1 In ± ± 1 1 ǫ0 = h(I1 I2) + (σz(1) σz(2)) 12 ⊗ ⊗ ρ11 4ρ12 ρ13 1 1 f 1 + (σ (1) σ (2)) + (σ (1) σ (2)) ; ρ20 = 4ρ21 16ρ22 4ρ23 , y y x x i (ρ11 + 16ρ22 + ρ33) 3 ⊗ 2 ⊗ ρ31 4ρ32 ρ33 5 we can see that all the spherical tensor parameters are K.B. acknowledges discussions with Huiling Le about non-zero. Next, we note that in the case of Theorem 1.

1 0 0 0 0 0 f f ρ22 = 0 0 0 , ρ2 2 = 0 0 0 , (5) 0 0 0 − 0 0 1 ∗ Electronic address: [email protected] an arbitrary initial state collapses to a separable state [1] F. Hirsch, M. T. Quintino, J. Bowles, and N. Brunner, 2 2 Phys. Rev. Lett 111, 160402 (2013). after performing a measurement with E2 and E 2. Entangled states from separable states.— Considering− [2] Ram A. Somaraju, Alain Sarlette and Hugo Thienpont, a spin-1 example, again, we demonstrate how some of the Proceeedings of 52nd IEEE Conference on Decision and constructed POVM measurements can be used to gener- Control, Florence, Italy (2013). 1 [3] J. Wu, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 49, 324 (2010). ate entangled states from separable states. Consider ǫ1 acting on a separable state, [4] Z.Y. Wang, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 49, 1357 (2010). [5] J.F. Song and Z.Y. Wang, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 50, 2410 1 (2011). 1 1 (1) + (1) (2) + (2) [6] P. Zhou, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 45, 215305 (2012). ψ = = | ↑ i | ↓ i | ↑ i | ↓ i . | i 2 1 √ ⊗ √ [7] R. Blume-Kohout, J. O. S. Yin, and S. J. van Enk, Phys. 2 2 1 Rev. Lett 105, 170501 (2010). [8] Siendong Huang, Phys. Lett. A 377, 448 (2013) and the Then, references therein. 1 10 00 2 [9] T. Mor, arXiv:quant-th/9608005v1,1996. 1 1 1 1 1 0 2 2 0 2 [10] T. Mor, P. Horodecki, arXiv:quant-ph/9906039 (1999). ǫ1 ψ = 1 1 1 , 71 | i 3 0 2 2 0 2 [11] S. E. Ahnert and M. C. Payne, Phys. Rev. A , 012330 1 00 00 2 (2005). [12] M. Ziman and V. Buzek, Phys. Rev. A 72, 022343 (2005). leading to [13] S. E. Ahnert and M. C. Payne, Phys. Rev. A 73, 022333 1 (2006) . 1 [14] J. M. Rennes, R. Blume-Kohout, A. J. Scott, and C.M. f ǫ1 ψ 1 1 ψ = | i = , 45 | i 1 √ 1 Caves, J. Math. Phys. , 2171 (2004). ψ ǫ1 ψ 3 4 h | | i 0 [15] A. Kalev, and G. Gour, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. , p 335302 (2014). where ψf represents the normalized state. In the com- [16] R. Derka, V. Buzek, and A. K. Ekert, Phys. Rev. Lett 80, 1571 (1998). putational| i basis, ψf can be represented as | i [17] I.D. Ivanovic, Phys. Lett. A 123, 257 (1987). 126 1 [18] D. Dieks, Phys. Lett. A , 303 (1988). ψf = [ + + ], [19] Hlaﬀner, H. et al., Nature 438, 643 (2005). | i √3 | ↑↑i | ↑↓i | ↓↑i [20] A. R. Usha Devi, Prabhu, and R. Rajagopal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 060501 (2007). with corresponding density matrix [21] Z. Wang, and D. Markham, Phys. Rev. Lett 108, 210407 (2012). 1110 [22] C. Eltschka, and J. Siewert, Phys. Rev. Lett 108, 230502 1 1110 ρf = ψf ψf = . (6) (2012). | ih | 3 1110 [23] C. Eltschka, and J. Siewert, Phys. Rev. Lett 108, 020502 0000 (2012). [24] P. Ribeiro and, R. Mosseri , Phys. Rev. Lett 106, 180502 In order to check if ψf is entangled, we use the PPT (2011). 29 criterion [30], which oﬀers| i a necessary and suﬃcient con- [25] U. Fano , Rev. Mod. Phys. , 74 (1957). [26] G. Racah, Group theory and spectroscopy. CERN, report dition for entanglement veriﬁcation in 2 2 and 2 3 × f × 61-8 (1961). systems. The partially transposed matrix of ρ in (6), [27] Satchler et al. Proceedings of the International Confer- f ρP P T , can be calculated as, ence on Polarization Phenomena in Nuclear Reactions. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison (1971). 1111 [28] S. Sirsi, V. Adiga and S. Hegde, Pramana–J. Phys. 83, 1 1100 279 (2014). ρf = , P P T 3 1010 [29] R. A. Bertlmann, and P. Krammer, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 41 235303 (2008). 1000 [30] A. Peres, Phys. Rev. Lett., 77, 1413 (1996). [31] M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki and R. Horodecki, Phys. with eigenvalues λ = 0.872678, λ = 0.333333, λ = 1 2 − 3 Lett. A 223, 1 (1996). 0.333333, and λ4 = 0.127322. Since λ2 is negative we conclude that a separable state collapses in to an entan- 1 gled state after a measurement is performed with ǫ1.