DOCSLIB.ORG

Computing the Distance Between Quantum Channels: Usefulness of the Fano Representation Giuliano Benenti, Giuliano Strini

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Computing the Distance Between Quantum Channels: Usefulness of the Fano Representation Giuliano Benenti, Giuliano Strini Computing the distance between quantum channels: usefulness of the Fano representation Giuliano Benenti, Giuliano Strini To cite this version: Giuliano Benenti, Giuliano Strini. Computing the distance between quantum channels: usefulness of the Fano representation. Journal of Physics B: Atomic, Molecular and Optical Physics, IOP Publish- ing, 2010, 43 (21), pp.215508. 10.1088/0953-4075/43/21/215508. hal-00569863 HAL Id: hal-00569863 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00569863 Submitted on 25 Feb 2011 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Confidential: not for distribution. Submitted to IOP Publishing for peer review 24 June 2010 Computing the distance between quantum channels: Usefulness of the Fano representation Giuliano Benenti1,2,∗ and Giuliano Strini3, † 1CNISM, CNR-INFM, and Center for Nonlinear and Complex Systems, Universit`adegliStudidell’Insubria,viaValleggio11,22100Como,Italy 2Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Milano, via Celoria 16, 20133 Milano, Italy 3Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit`adegliStudidiMilano,viaCeloria16,20133Milano,Italy (Dated: June 24, 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- are conveniently described in terms of quantum chan- gorithm based on the Fano representation of quantum nels,thatis,linear,tracepreserving,completelypositive 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 E1 and E2 act on quantum The paper is organized as follows. After reviewing in 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- 0 0 ρ1 = E1(ρ)andρ2 = E2(ρ)thataredistinguishable.The Carlo strategies for computing the diamond norm. The 0 0 0 0 trace norm of ρ1−ρ2 represents how well ρ1 and ρ2 can be first one is based on the Kitaev’s characterization of the 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- 0 0 then obtained after maximizing the trace norm of ρ1 −ρ2 ically significant single-qubit quantum channels. Finally, over the input state ρ.However,thetracenormisnot our conclusions are drawn in Sec. V. agoodmeasureofthedistancebetweenquantumchan- 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 E1 and E2,andasinglechanneluse,chosenuni- to be straightforward and only a limited number of al- formly at random from {E1, E2},wewishtomaximizethe 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 H such that the error prob- ∗Electronic address: [email protected] ability in the discrimination of the output states E1(ρ) † Electronic address: [email protected] and E2(ρ)isminimal.Inthiscase,theminimalerror 2 probability reads Note that the space H is traced out in the definition of ΨA,ΨB,ratherthanthespaceR.Finally,itturnsout 1 ||E −E || p0 = − 1 2 1 , that [9, 10] E 2 4 (1) ||E|| = Fmax(ΨA, ΨB), (6) ||E||1 ≡ max ||E(ρ)||1, ρ where F (Ψ , Ψ )isthemaximumoutputfidelityof √ max A B † ΨA and ΨB,definedas where ||X||1 ≡ Tr X X denotes the trace norm. The superoperator trace distance ||E1 −E2||1 is, how- Fmax(ΨA, ΨB)=maxF [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 possible to exploit quantum entanglement to increase the where ρ1,ρ2 are density matrices in H,andthefidelity distinguishability of two quantum channels. In this case, F is defined as an ancillary Hilbert space K is introduced, the input state q 1/2 1/2 ξ is a density matrix in K⊗H, and the quantum opera- F (ΨA, ΨB)=Tr ΨA ΨBΨA . (8) tions are trivially extended to K.Thatistosay,theout- put states to discriminate are (IK ⊗E1)ξ and (IK ⊗E2)ξ, Note that ΨA,ΨB are not density matrices: the condi- where IK is the identity map acting on K.Theminimal tions Tr(ΨA)=1,Tr(ΨB)=1arenotsatisfied. error probability reads 1 ||E −E || p = − 1 2 , III. COMPUTING THE DIAMOND NORM E 2 4 (2) We numerically compute the distance (induced by the ||E|| ≡ max ||(IK ⊗E)ξ||1, ξ diamond norm) between two quantum channels E1 and E2 using two Monte-Carlo algorithms. The first one is based where ||E|| denotes the diamond norm of E.Itisclear on the direct computation of ||E1 −E2||,withtheoutput from definition (2) that states (IK ⊗E1)ξ and (IK ⊗E2)ξ in Eq. (2) computed from ξ taking advantage of the Fano representation of ||E|| = ||IK ⊗E||1 ≥||E||1 (3) quantum states and quantum operations. The second Monte-Carlo algorithm uses the Kitaev’s representation 0 and therefore pE ≤ pE,sothatitcanbeconvenientto 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 E1 and E2 become perfectly distinguishable and K-algorithm, respectively. For the sake of simplicity (pE =0)whentheirdiamonddistance||E1 −E2|| =2. we will confine ourselves to one-qubit quantum channels, It turns out that the diamond norm does not depend even though the two algorithms can be easily formulated on K,provideddim(K) ≥ dim(H)[9].Duetothecon- for two- or many-qubit channels. vexity of the trace norm, it can be 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.Aconvexityargumentshows of the diamond norm, see, e.g., [9, 10]. Any superoper- that it is sufficient to optimize over pure input states ator (not necessarily completely positive) E : L(H) → ξ = |ΨihΨ| [16]. For one-qubit channels, it is enough to L(H), with L(H)spaceoflinearoperatorsmappingH to add a single ancillary qubit when computing the diamond itself, can be expressed as norm [9]. Therefore, we can write E † (X)=TrR(AXB ), (4) |Ψi = C00|00i + C01|01i + C10|10i + C11|11i, (9) where X ∈ L(H), A and B linear operators from H to with R⊗H, with R auxiliary Hilbert space and dim(R) ≤ [dim(H)]. It is then possible to define completely positive C00 =cosθ1 cos θ2, iφ1 superoperators ΨA, ΨB : L(H) → L(R): C01 =cosθ1 sin θ2e , iφ (10) C10 =sinθ1 cos θ3e 2 , † † iφ ΨA(X)=TrH(AXA ), ΨB(X)=TrH(BXB ). (5) C11 =sinθ1 sin θ3e 3 , 3 ∈ π ∈ where the angles θi 0, 2 and the phase φi [0, 2π].
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Quantum Information
    Quantum Information J. A. Jones Michaelmas Term 2010 Contents 1 Dirac Notation 3 1.1 Hilbert Space . 3 1.2 Dirac notation . 4 1.3 Operators . 5 1.4 Vectors and matrices . 6 1.5 Eigenvalues and eigenvectors . 8 1.6 Hermitian operators . 9 1.7 Commutators . 10 1.8 Unitary operators . 11 1.9 Operator exponentials . 11 1.10 Physical systems . 12 1.11 Time-dependent Hamiltonians . 13 1.12 Global phases . 13 2 Quantum bits and quantum gates 15 2.1 The Bloch sphere . 16 2.2 Density matrices . 16 2.3 Propagators and Pauli matrices . 18 2.4 Quantum logic gates . 18 2.5 Gate notation . 21 2.6 Quantum networks . 21 2.7 Initialization and measurement . 23 2.8 Experimental methods . 24 3 An atom in a laser field 25 3.1 Time-dependent systems . 25 3.2 Sudden jumps . 26 3.3 Oscillating fields . 27 3.4 Time-dependent perturbation theory . 29 3.5 Rabi flopping and Fermi's Golden Rule . 30 3.6 Raman transitions . 32 3.7 Rabi flopping as a quantum gate . 32 3.8 Ramsey fringes . 33 3.9 Measurement and initialisation . 34 1 CONTENTS 2 4 Spins in magnetic fields 35 4.1 The nuclear spin Hamiltonian . 35 4.2 The rotating frame . 36 4.3 On-resonance excitation . 38 4.4 Excitation phases . 38 4.5 Off-resonance excitation . 39 4.6 Practicalities . 40 4.7 The vector model . 40 4.8 Spin echoes . 41 4.9 Measurement and initialisation . 42 5 Photon techniques 43 5.1 Spatial encoding .
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture Notes: Qubit Representations and Rotations
    Phys 711 Topics in Particles & Fields | Spring 2013 | Lecture 1 | v0.3 Lecture notes: Qubit representations and rotations Jeffrey Yepez Department of Physics and Astronomy University of Hawai`i at Manoa Watanabe Hall, 2505 Correa Road Honolulu, Hawai`i 96822 E-mail: [email protected] www.phys.hawaii.edu/∼yepez (Dated: January 9, 2013) Contents mathematical object (an abstraction of a two-state quan- tum object) with a \one" state and a \zero" state: I. What is a qubit? 1 1 0 II. Time-dependent qubits states 2 jqi = αj0i + βj1i = α + β ; (1) 0 1 III. Qubit representations 2 A. Hilbert space representation 2 where α and β are complex numbers. These complex B. SU(2) and O(3) representations 2 numbers are called amplitudes. The basis states are or- IV. Rotation by similarity transformation 3 thonormal V. Rotation transformation in exponential form 5 h0j0i = h1j1i = 1 (2a) VI. Composition of qubit rotations 7 h0j1i = h1j0i = 0: (2b) A. Special case of equal angles 7 In general, the qubit jqi in (1) is said to be in a superpo- VII. Example composite rotation 7 sition state of the two logical basis states j0i and j1i. If References 9 α and β are complex, it would seem that a qubit should have four free real-valued parameters (two magnitudes and two phases): I. WHAT IS A QUBIT? iθ0 α φ0 e jqi = = iθ1 : (3) Let us begin by introducing some notation: β φ1 e 1 state (called \minus" on the Bloch sphere) Yet, for a qubit to contain only one classical bit of infor- 0 mation, the qubit need only be unimodular (normalized j1i = the alternate symbol is |−i 1 to unity) α∗α + β∗β = 1: (4) 0 state (called \plus" on the Bloch sphere) 1 Hence it lives on the complex unit circle, depicted on the j0i = the alternate symbol is j+i: 0 top of Figure 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Front Matter of the Book Contains a Detailed Table of Contents, Which We Encourage You to Browse
    Cambridge University Press 978-1-107-00217-3 - Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition Michael A. Nielsen & Isaac L. Chuang Frontmatter More information Quantum Computation and Quantum Information 10th Anniversary Edition One of the most cited books in physics of all time, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information remains the best textbook in this exciting field of science. This 10th Anniversary Edition includes a new Introduction and Afterword from the authors setting the work in context. This comprehensive textbook describes such remarkable effects as fast quantum algorithms, quantum teleportation, quantum cryptography, and quantum error-correction. Quantum mechanics and computer science are introduced, before moving on to describe what a quantum computer is, how it can be used to solve problems faster than “classical” computers, and its real-world implementation. It concludes with an in-depth treatment of quantum information. Containing a wealth of figures and exercises, this well-known textbook is ideal for courses on the subject, and will interest beginning graduate students and researchers in physics, computer science, mathematics, and electrical engineering. MICHAEL NIELSEN was educated at the University of Queensland, and as a Fulbright Scholar at the University of New Mexico. He worked at Los Alamos National Laboratory, as the Richard Chace Tolman Fellow at Caltech, was Foundation Professor of Quantum Information Science and a Federation Fellow at the University of Queensland, and a Senior Faculty Member at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics. He left Perimeter Institute to write a book about open science and now lives in Toronto. ISAAC CHUANG is a Professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, jointly appointed in Electrical Engineering & Computer Science, and in Physics.
    [Show full text]
  • A Representations of SU(2)
    A Representations of SU(2) In this appendix we provide details of the parameterization of the group SU(2) and differential forms on the group space. An arbitrary representation of the group SU(2) is given by the set of three generators Tk, which satisfy the Lie algebra [Ti,Tj ]=iεijkTk, with ε123 =1. The element of the group is given by the matrix U =exp{iT · ω} , (A.1) 1 where in the fundamental representation Tk = 2 σk, k =1, 2, 3, with 01 0 −i 10 σ = ,σ= ,σ= , 1 10 2 i 0 3 0 −1 standard Pauli matrices, which satisfy the relation σiσj = δij + iεijkσk . The vector ω has components ωk in a given coordinate frame. Geometrically, the matrices U are generators of spinor rotations in three- 3 dimensional space R and the parameters ωk are the corresponding angles of rotation. The Euler parameterization of an arbitrary matrix of SU(2) transformation is defined in terms of three angles θ, ϕ and ψ,as ϕ θ ψ iσ3 iσ2 iσ3 U(ϕ, θ, ψ)=Uz(ϕ)Uy(θ)Uz(ψ)=e 2 e 2 e 2 ϕ ψ ei 2 0 cos θ sin θ ei 2 0 = 2 2 −i ϕ θ θ − ψ 0 e 2 − sin cos 0 e i 2 2 2 i i θ 2 (ψ+ϕ) θ − 2 (ψ−ϕ) cos 2 e sin 2 e = i − − i . (A.2) − θ 2 (ψ ϕ) θ 2 (ψ+ϕ) sin 2 e cos 2 e Thus, the SU(2) group manifold is isomorphic to three-sphere S3.
    [Show full text]
  • Multipartite Quantum States and Their Marginals
    Diss. ETH No. 22051 Multipartite Quantum States and their Marginals A dissertation submitted to ETH ZURICH for the degree of Doctor of Sciences presented by Michael Walter Diplom-Mathematiker arXiv:1410.6820v1 [quant-ph] 24 Oct 2014 Georg-August-Universität Göttingen born May 3, 1985 citizen of Germany accepted on the recommendation of Prof. Dr. Matthias Christandl, examiner Prof. Dr. Gian Michele Graf, co-examiner Prof. Dr. Aram Harrow, co-examiner 2014 Abstract Subsystems of composite quantum systems are described by reduced density matrices, or quantum marginals. Important physical properties often do not depend on the whole wave function but rather only on the marginals. Not every collection of reduced density matrices can arise as the marginals of a quantum state. Instead, there are profound compatibility conditions – such as Pauli’s exclusion principle or the monogamy of quantum entanglement – which fundamentally influence the physics of many-body quantum systems and the structure of quantum information. The aim of this thesis is a systematic and rigorous study of the general relation between multipartite quantum states, i.e., states of quantum systems that are composed of several subsystems, and their marginals. In the first part of this thesis (Chapters 2–6) we focus on the one-body marginals of multipartite quantum states. Starting from a novel ge- ometric solution of the compatibility problem, we then turn towards the phenomenon of quantum entanglement. We find that the one-body marginals through their local eigenvalues can characterize the entan- glement of multipartite quantum states, and we propose the notion of an entanglement polytope for its systematic study.
    [Show full text]
  • Theory of Angular Momentum and Spin
    Chapter 5 Theory of Angular Momentum and Spin Rotational symmetry transformations, the group SO(3) of the associated rotation matrices and the 1 corresponding transformation matrices of spin{ 2 states forming the group SU(2) occupy a very important position in physics. The reason is that these transformations and groups are closely tied to the properties of elementary particles, the building blocks of matter, but also to the properties of composite systems. Examples of the latter with particularly simple transformation properties are closed shell atoms, e.g., helium, neon, argon, the magic number nuclei like carbon, or the proton and the neutron made up of three quarks, all composite systems which appear spherical as far as their charge distribution is concerned. In this section we want to investigate how elementary and composite systems are described. To develop a systematic description of rotational properties of composite quantum systems the consideration of rotational transformations is the best starting point. As an illustration we will consider first rotational transformations acting on vectors ~r in 3-dimensional space, i.e., ~r R3, 2 we will then consider transformations of wavefunctions (~r) of single particles in R3, and finally N transformations of products of wavefunctions like j(~rj) which represent a system of N (spin- Qj=1 zero) particles in R3. We will also review below the well-known fact that spin states under rotations behave essentially identical to angular momentum states, i.e., we will find that the algebraic properties of operators governing spatial and spin rotation are identical and that the results derived for products of angular momentum states can be applied to products of spin states or a combination of angular momentum and spin states.
    [Show full text]
  • Two-State Systems
    1 TWO-STATE SYSTEMS Introduction. Relative to some/any discretely indexed orthonormal basis |n) | ∂ | the abstract Schr¨odinger equation H ψ)=i ∂t ψ) can be represented | | | ∂ | (m H n)(n ψ)=i ∂t(m ψ) n ∂ which can be notated Hmnψn = i ∂tψm n H | ∂ | or again ψ = i ∂t ψ We found it to be the fundamental commutation relation [x, p]=i I which forced the matrices/vectors thus encountered to be ∞-dimensional. If we are willing • to live without continuous spectra (therefore without x) • to live without analogs/implications of the fundamental commutator then it becomes possible to contemplate “toy quantum theories” in which all matrices/vectors are finite-dimensional. One loses some physics, it need hardly be said, but surprisingly much of genuine physical interest does survive. And one gains the advantage of sharpened analytical power: “finite-dimensional quantum mechanics” provides a methodological laboratory in which, not infrequently, the essentials of complicated computational procedures can be exposed with closed-form transparency. Finally, the toy theory serves to identify some unanticipated formal links—permitting ideas to flow back and forth— between quantum mechanics and other branches of physics. Here we will carry the technique to the limit: we will look to “2-dimensional quantum mechanics.” The theory preserves the linearity that dominates the full-blown theory, and is of the least-possible size in which it is possible for the effects of non-commutivity to become manifest. 2 Quantum theory of 2-state systems We have seen that quantum mechanics can be portrayed as a theory in which • states are represented by self-adjoint linear operators ρ ; • motion is generated by self-adjoint linear operators H; • measurement devices are represented by self-adjoint linear operators A.
    [Show full text]
  • 10 Group Theory
    10 Group theory 10.1 What is a group? A group G is a set of elements f, g, h, ... and an operation called multipli- cation such that for all elements f,g, and h in the group G: 1. The product fg is in the group G (closure); 2. f(gh)=(fg)h (associativity); 3. there is an identity element e in the group G such that ge = eg = g; 1 1 1 4. every g in G has an inverse g− in G such that gg− = g− g = e. Physical transformations naturally form groups. The elements of a group might be all physical transformations on a given set of objects that leave invariant a chosen property of the set of objects. For instance, the objects might be the points (x, y) in a plane. The chosen property could be their distances x2 + y2 from the origin. The physical transformations that leave unchanged these distances are the rotations about the origin p x cos ✓ sin ✓ x 0 = . (10.1) y sin ✓ cos ✓ y ✓ 0◆ ✓− ◆✓ ◆ These rotations form the special orthogonal group in 2 dimensions, SO(2). More generally, suppose the transformations T,T0,T00,... change a set of objects in ways that leave invariant a chosen property property of the objects. Suppose the product T 0 T of the transformations T and T 0 represents the action of T followed by the action of T 0 on the objects. Since both T and T 0 leave the chosen property unchanged, so will their product T 0 T . Thus the closure condition is satisfied.
    [Show full text]
  • Spectral Quantum Tomography
    www.nature.com/npjqi ARTICLE OPEN Spectral quantum tomography Jonas Helsen 1, Francesco Battistel1 and Barbara M. Terhal1,2 We introduce spectral quantum tomography, a simple method to extract the eigenvalues of a noisy few-qubit gate, represented by a trace-preserving superoperator, in a SPAM-resistant fashion, using low resources in terms of gate sequence length. The eigenvalues provide detailed gate information, supplementary to known gate-quality measures such as the gate fidelity, and can be used as a gate diagnostic tool. We apply our method to one- and two-qubit gates on two different superconducting systems available in the cloud, namely the QuTech Quantum Infinity and the IBM Quantum Experience. We discuss how cross-talk, leakage and non-Markovian errors affect the eigenvalue data. npj Quantum Information (2019) 5:74 ; https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-019-0189-0 INTRODUCTION of the form λ = exp(−γ)exp(iϕ), contain information about the A central challenge on the path towards large-scale quantum quality of the implemented gate. Intuitively, the parameter γ computing is the engineering of high-quality quantum gates. To captures how much the noisy gate deviates from unitarity due to achieve this goal, many methods that accurately and reliably entanglement with an environment, while the angle ϕ can be characterize quantum gates have been developed. Some of these compared to the rotation angles of the targeted gate U. Hence ϕ methods are scalable, meaning that they require an effort which gives information about how much one over- or under-rotates. scales polynomially in the number of qubits on which the gates The spectrum of S can also be related to familiar gate-quality 1–8 act.
    [Show full text]
  • Singles out a Specific Basis
    Quantum Information and Quantum Noise Gabriel T. Landi University of Sao˜ Paulo July 3, 2018 Contents 1 Review of quantum mechanics1 1.1 Hilbert spaces and states........................2 1.2 Qubits and Bloch’s sphere.......................3 1.3 Outer product and completeness....................5 1.4 Operators................................7 1.5 Eigenvalues and eigenvectors......................8 1.6 Unitary matrices.............................9 1.7 Projective measurements and expectation values............ 10 1.8 Pauli matrices.............................. 11 1.9 General two-level systems....................... 13 1.10 Functions of operators......................... 14 1.11 The Trace................................ 17 1.12 Schrodinger’s¨ equation......................... 18 1.13 The Schrodinger¨ Lagrangian...................... 20 2 Density matrices and composite systems 24 2.1 The density matrix........................... 24 2.2 Bloch’s sphere and coherence...................... 29 2.3 Composite systems and the almighty kron............... 32 2.4 Entanglement.............................. 35 2.5 Mixed states and entanglement..................... 37 2.6 The partial trace............................. 39 2.7 Reduced density matrices........................ 42 2.8 Singular value and Schmidt decompositions.............. 44 2.9 Entropy and mutual information.................... 50 2.10 Generalized measurements and POVMs................ 62 3 Continuous variables 68 3.1 Creation and annihilation operators................... 68 3.2 Some important
    [Show full text]
  • Operators and Matrices
    Operators and Matrices Let º be an inner-product vector space with an ONB fjejig, so that 8jxi 2 º there exists a unique representation X jxi = xjjeji ; xj = hejjxi : (1) j [We remember that if the dimensionality of the vector space is ¯nite, then the sum is ¯nite. In an in¯nite-dimensional vector space, like, e.g., L2, the sum is in¯nite and is called Fourier series.] The isomorphism of the vector spaces allows one to map our space º onto the vector spaceº ~ formed by the coordinates of the vector with respect to our ¯xed ONB (see section Vector Spaces): jxi Ã! (x1; x2; x3;:::) 2 º~ : (2) In the context of this isomorphism|which is very important for practical applications, since it allows one to work with just the numbers instead of abstract vectors|the following question naturally arises. Suppose A is some linear operator that acts on some jxi 2 º producing corresponding vector jyi 2 º: jyi = Ajxi : (3) By the isomorphism, jyi Ã! (y1; y2; y3;:::) 2 º~ ; (4) and we realize that it is crucially important to understand how (y1; y2; y3;:::) is obtained from (x1; x2; x3;:::) directly in the spaceº ~. To this end, we note that X yj = hejjyi = hejjAjxi = hejjA xsjesi ; (5) s and, taking into account linearity of the operator A, ¯nd that X yj = Ajs xs ; (6) s where Ajs = hejjAjesi : (7) We see that the set of numbers fAjsg de¯ned in accordance with Eq. (7) completely de¯nes the action of the operator A on any vector jxi (in terms 1 of the coordinates with respect to a given ONB).
    [Show full text]
  • Quantifying Bell Nonlocality with the Trace Distance
    PHYSICAL REVIEW A 97, 022111 (2018) Quantifying Bell nonlocality with the trace distance S. G. A. Brito,1 B. Amaral,1,2 and R. Chaves1 1International Institute of Physics, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, 59078-970, P. O. Box 1613, Natal, Brazil 2Departamento de Física e Matemática, CAP - Universidade Federal de São João del-Rei, 36.420-000, Ouro Branco, MG, Brazil (Received 15 September 2017; published 21 February 2018) Measurements performed on distant parts of an entangled quantum state can generate correlations incompatible with classical theories respecting the assumption of local causality. This is the phenomenon known as quantum nonlocality that, apart from its fundamental role, can also be put to practical use in applications such as cryptography and distributed computing. Clearly, developing ways of quantifying nonlocality is an important primitive in this scenario. Here, we propose to quantify the nonlocality of a given probability distribution via its trace distance to the set of classical correlations. We show that this measure is a monotone under the free operations of a resource theory and, furthermore, that it can be computed efficiently with a linear program. We put our framework to use in a variety of relevant Bell scenarios also comparing the trace distance to other standard measures in the literature. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.97.022111 I. INTRODUCTION it can stand before becoming local. Interestingly, these two measures can be inversely related as demonstrated by the With the establishment of quantum information science, the fact that in the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) scenario often-called counterintuitive features of quantum mechanics [28], the resistance against detection inefficiency increases as such as entanglement [1] and nonlocality [2] have been we decrease the entanglement of the state [13] (also reducing raised to the status of a physical resource that can be used the violation the of CHSH inequality).
    [Show full text]