Arxiv:1004.4110V1 [Quant-Ph]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Computing the distance between quantum channels: Usefulness of the Fano representation 1,2, 3, Giuliano Benenti ∗ and Giuliano Strini † 1CNISM, CNR-INFM, and Center for Nonlinear and Complex Systems, Universit`adegli Studi dell’Insubria, via Valleggio 11, 22100 Como, Italy 2Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Milano, via Celoria 16, 20133 Milano, Italy 3Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit`adegli Studi di Milano, via Celoria 16, 20133 Milano, Italy (Dated: April 26, 2010) The diamond norm measures the distance between two quantum channels. From an operational vewpoint, this norm measures how well we can distinguish between two channels by applying them to input states of arbitrarily large dimensions. In this paper, we show that the diamond norm can be conveniently and in a physically transparent way computed by means of a Monte-Carlo algorithm based on the Fano representation of quantum states and quantum operations. The effectiveness of this algorithm is illustrated for several single-qubit quantum channels. PACS numbers: 03.65.Yz, 03.67.-a I. INTRODUCTION cated semidefinite programming or convex optimization. On the other hand, analytical solutions are limited to special classes of channels [7, 8]. In this paper, we pro- Quantum information processes in a noisy environment pose a simple and easily parallelizable Monte-Carlo al- quantum chan- are conveniently described in terms of gorithm based on the Fano representation of quantum nels , that is, linear, trace preserving, completely positive states and quantum operations. We show that our al- maps on the set of quantum states [1, 2]. The problem gorithm provides reliable results for the case, most sig- of discriminating quantum channels is of great interest. nificant for present-day implementations of quantum in- For instance, knowing the correct noise model might pro- formation processing, of single-qubit quantum channels. vide useful information to devise efficient error-correcting Furthermore, in the Fano representation quantum opera- strategies, both in the fields of quantum communication tions are described by affine maps whose matrix elements and quantum computation. have precise physical meaning: They are directly related It is therefore natural to consider distances between to the evolution of the expectation values of the system’s quantum channels, that is to say, we would like to quan- polarization measurements [1, 14, 15]. tify how similarly two channels 1 and 2 act on quantum The paper is organized as follows. After reviewing in E E states, or in other words to determine if there are input Sec. II basic definitions of the distance between quantum states ρ on which the two channels produce output states channels, we discuss in Sec. III two numerical Monte- ρ′ = 1(ρ) and ρ′ = 2(ρ) that are distinguishable. The Carlo strategies for computing the diamond norm. The 1 E 2 E trace norm of ρ′ ρ′ represents how well ρ′ and ρ′ can be first one is based on the Kitaev’s characterization of the 1− 2 1 2 distinguished by a measurement [3]: the more orthogonal diamond norm. The second one is based on the Fano rep- two quantum states are, the easier it is to discriminate resentation of quantum states and quantum operations. them. The trace distance of two quantum channels is The two methods are compared in Sec. IV for a few phys- arXiv:1004.4110v1 [quant-ph] 23 Apr 2010 then obtained after maximizing the trace norm of ρ′ ρ′ ically significant single-qubit quantum channels. Finally, 1 − 2 over the input state ρ. However, the trace norm is not our conclusions are drawn in Sec. V. a good measure of the distance between quantum chan- nels. Indeed, in general the presence in the input state of entanglement with an ancillary system can help discrim- II. THE DIAMOND NORM inating quantum channels [4–8]. This fact is captured by the diamond norm [9, 10]: the trace distance between the overall output states (including the ancillary system) is A. Basic definitions optimized over all possible input states, including those entangled. We consider the following problem: given two quantum The computation of the diamond norm is not known channels 1 and 2, and a single channel use, chosen uni- formly atE randomE from , , we wish to maximize the to be straightforward and only a limited number of al- {E1 E2} gorithms have been proposed [11–13], based on compli- probability of correctly identifying the quantum channel. It seems natural to reformulate the optimization problem into the problem of finding an input state (density ma- trix) ρ in the Hilbert space such that the error prob- H ∗Electronic address: [email protected] ability in the discrimination of the output states 1(ρ) E †Electronic address: [email protected] and (ρ) is minimal. In this case, the minimal error E2 2 probability reads Note that the space is traced out in the definition of Ψ , Ψ , rather thanH the space . Finally, it turns out A B R 1 1 2 1 that [9, 10] p′ = ||E −E || , E 2 − 4 (1) = Fmax(ΨA, ΨB), (6) ⋄ 1 max (ρ) 1, ||E|| ||E|| ≡ ρ ||E || where Fmax(ΨA, ΨB) is the maximum output fidelity of Ψ and Ψ , defined as where X Tr√X X denotes the trace norm. A B || ||1 ≡ † The superoperator trace distance 1 2 1 is, how- ||E −E || Fmax(ΨA, ΨB) = max F [ΨA(ρ1), ΨB(ρ2)], (7) ever, not a good definition of the distance between two ρ1,ρ2 quantum operations. The point is that in general it is where ρ ,ρ are density matrices in , and the fidelity possible to exploit quantum entanglement to increase the 1 2 H distinguishability of two quantum channels. In this case, F is defined as an ancillary Hilbert space is introduced, the input state K 1/2 1/2 ξ is a density matrix in , and the quantum opera- F (ΨA, ΨB) = Tr ΨA ΨBΨA . (8) tions are trivially extendedK ⊗ to H . That is to say, the out- K put states to discriminate are (I 1)ξ and (I 2)ξ, Note that ΨA, ΨB are not density matrices: the condi- K ⊗E K ⊗E where is the identity map acting on . The minimal tions Tr(ΨA) = 1, Tr(ΨB) = 1 are not satisfied. error probabilityIK reads K 1 1 2 III. COMPUTING THE DIAMOND NORM p = ||E −E ||⋄ , E 2 − 4 (2) We numerically compute the distance (induced by the max ( )ξ 1, ||E||⋄ ≡ ξ || IK ⊗E || diamond norm) between two quantum channels 1 and 2 using two Monte-Carlo algorithms. The first oneE is basedE where denotes the diamond norm of . It is clear on the direct computation of 1 2 , with the output ||E||⋄ E ||E −E ||⋄ from definition (2) that states ( 1)ξ and ( 2)ξ in Eq. (2) computed from ξ ItakingK ⊗E advantageIK of⊗E the Fano representation of = 1 1 (3) quantum states and quantum operations. The second ||E||⋄ ||IK ⊗ E|| ≥ ||E|| Monte-Carlo algorithm uses the Kitaev’s representation and therefore p p′ , so that it can be convenient to E ≤ E of the diamond norm to compute the maximum output use an ancillary system to better discriminate two quan- fidelity Fmax of Eq. (7). In the following, we will refer tum operations after a single channel use. The two quan- to the two above Monte-Carlo algorithms as F-algorithm tum channels and become perfectly distinguishable E1 E2 and K-algorithm, respectively. For the sake of simplicity (pE = 0) when their diamond distance 1 2 = 2. we will confine ourselves to one-qubit quantum channels, ||E −E ||⋄ It turns out that the diamond norm does not depend even though the two algorithms can be easily formulated on , provided dim( ) dim( ) [9]. Due to the con- for two- or many-qubit channels. vexityK of the trace norm,K ≥ it can beH shown that the maxi- mum in both Eqs. (1) and (2) is achieved for pure input states [16]. A. The F-algorithm In this section we describe the F-algorithm, which we B. Kitaev’s characterization of the diamond norm will use to directly compute the diamond norm (2), with the maximum taken over a large number of randomly Kitaev provided a different equivalent characterization chosen input states ξ. A convexity argument shows of the diamond norm, see, e.g., [9, 10]. Any superoperator that it is sufficient to optimize over pure input states (not necessarily completely positive) : L( ) L( ), ξ = Ψ Ψ [16]. For one-qubit channels, it is enough to E H → H with L( ) space of linear operators mapping to itself, add a| single | ancillary qubit when computing the diamond H H can be expressed as norm [9]. Therefore, we can write (X) = Tr (AXB†), (4) Ψ = C 00 + C 01 + C 10 + C 11 , (9) E R | 00| 01| 10| 11| where X L( ), A and B linear operators from to with , with∈ H auxiliary Hilbert space and dim( H) R ⊗ H R R ≤ [dim( )]. It is then possible to define completely positive C00 = cos θ1 cos θ2, H iφ1 superoperators ΨA, ΨB : L( ) L( ): C01 = cos θ1 sin θ2e , H → R iφ2 (10) C10 = sin θ1 cos θ3e , iφ3 ΨA(X) = Tr (AXA†), ΨB(X) = Tr (BXB†). (5) C11 = sin θ1 sin θ3e , H H 3 π where the angles θi 0, 2 and the phase φi [0, 2π]. B. The K-algorithm Hence, the maximization∈ in the diamond norm is∈ over the 6 real parameters θ1,θ2,θ3, and φ1, φ2, φ3. Of course, We consider a special and unnormalized state in the the number of parameters can be reduced for specific extended Hilbert space : channels when there are symmetries.