Arxiv:2102.02709V2 [Quant-Ph] 22 Mar 2021 Established [15]

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Arxiv:2102.02709V2 [Quant-Ph] 22 Mar 2021 Established [15] Semi-device-independent certification of entanglement in superdense coding George Moreno,1 Ranieri Nery,1 Carlos de Gois,2 Rafael Rabelo,2 and Rafael Chaves1, 3 1International Institute of Physics, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, 59070-405 Natal, Brazil 2Instituto de Física “Gleb Wataghin”, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, CEP 13083-859, Campinas, Brazil 3School of Science and Technology, Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte, 59078-970 Natal, Brazil (Dated: March 24, 2021) Superdense coding is a paradigmatic protocol in quantum information science, employing a quan- tum communication channel to send classical information more efficiently. As we show here, it can be understood as a particular case of a prepare and measure experiment, a scenario that has attracted growing attention for its fundamental and practical applications. Formulating superdense coding as a prepare and measure scenario allows us to provide a semi-device-independent witness of entan- glement that significantly improves over previous tests. Furthermore, we also show how to adapt our results into self-testing of maximally entangled states and also provide a semidefinite program formulation allowing one to efficiently optimize, for any shared quantum state, the probability of success in the superdense coding protocol. I. INTRODUCTION turns out to be rather restrictive in the context of quan- tum communication, since only pre-established correla- Quantum communication [1] is arguably among the tions but no communication are allowed. More recently, first offsprings of quantum technologies to break out device-independent scenarios allowing for communica- of the laboratory. Recent milestones, such as quan- tion have started to attract growing attention. Of par- tum teleportation using metropolitan networks [2] and ticular relevance is the so-called prepare and measure satellites sharing entanglement across continental and (PAM) scenario, a fairly general structure that, apart intercontinental distances [3, 4], are paving the way from its foundational relevance [23–25], has found ap- for the realistic implementation of many of the quan- plications in quantum networks [26, 27], self-testing tum communication protocols discovered over the last [28, 29], quantum key distribution [30], randomness cer- years. Of particular relevance is the possibility of large tification [31], random access codes [32] and as non- scale quantum networks, the so-called quantum inter- classicality witnesses [33–38]. Apart from exploratory net [5, 6], not only allowing for more efficient commu- attempts in [39], in all these works the communicat- nication [7, 8] but also for fundamental information se- ing parties share classical correlations; the nonclassical- curity [9]. ity can only arise due to the communicating (nonen- tangled) quantum states. As a consequence, the PAM In such applications it is of utmost importance to be scenario and the kind of device-independence it en- able to certify the nonclassicality of the quantum re- tails have not yet found any use in the most relevant sources, typically the presence of quantum entangle- entanglement-enhanced quantum communication pro- ment [10] between the communicating parties. For tocols. That is precisely the problem we solve here. instance, entangled states allow for better teleported states [11], improved communication efficiency in the As we show, the paradigmatic superdense coding [7] superdense coding protocol [7] and quantum cryptog- can be cast as a particular instance of the prepare and raphy [12]. However, in order to detect any quantum measure scenario. As a consequence, a dimension wit- enhancement in these examples, one needs to have full ness quantifying the probability of success of the su- control over the preparation as well as of the measure- perdense coding [40] can also be used to certify, in a ment apparatuses. In practice, noise is unavoidable, semi-DI manner, the nonclassicality of the shared cor- potentially leading to erroneous conclusions [13] and relations between the communicating parties. As op- opening the way to hacker attacks [14]. To cope with posed to the typical Bell scenario that is fully DI, quan- that, the device-independent (DI) framework has been tum communication scenarios have to impose a limit arXiv:2102.02709v2 [quant-ph] 22 Mar 2021 established [15]. Based on mild general assumptions, it on the amount of communication exchanged, otherwise allows one to certify quantumness simply from the ob- the communication problem becomes trivial. In line servational data, not requiring any detailed knowledge with the superdense coding protocol, we achieve that of the underlying physical mechanisms at play. by imposing a limit on the Hilbert-space dimension of The DI framework emerged in the context of Bell’s the quantum system being communicated. Strikingly, theorem [16], finding use in practical applications rang- no other information about the preparation and mea- ing from quantum key distribution [17–19] to commu- surement devices is required. Nicely, any pure bipartite nication complexity [20] and self-testing [21, 22]. In entangled state as well as a large family of entangled spite of its clear importance, however, the Bell scenario mixed states violate our witness. Our results largely 2 x y Alice |i⟩ ρx | j⟩ b Z X Λ/ρ FIG. 1. Directed acyclic graph (black box representation) of |0⟩ H H the prepare and measure scenario where two parties share some correlation, which in principle could be either classical, | represented above by the set of variables L, or quantum, rep- 0⟩ resented by a shared state r. According to some input x Alice prepares a state rx and sends it to Bob, this being the only Bob communication between them, who performs a measurement labeled by some input y obtaining an output b. FIG. 2. Quantum circuit (device-dependent) representation of the superdense coding. Alice wants to send a two bit mes- sage to Bob, represented here by the states jii, jji 2 fj0i, j1ig improve over other semi-DI witnesses of entanglement: by sharing an entangled state with Bob (the two bottom qubits not only do they reduce the experimental requirements in the circuit, the first of which is held by Alice). The goal is and increase the tolerance to noise, but they also do achieved by applying sz conditioned to jii and sx conditioned j i not require partial state tomography to work, such as to j on the qubit in possession of Alice, which is, then, sent to Bob, who, in turn, retrieves the values of i and j by per- in quantum steering [41]. We also provide a semidefi- forming a Bell-state measurement on both qubits. nite program (SDP) formulation allowing one to obtain lower bounds for the optimal probability of superdense coding success for arbitrary shared states. Following has a classical explanation, it can be written as that we show how the nonclassicality in the superdense coding naturally leads to a self-testing protocol, also p(bjx, y) = ∑ ∑ p(l)p(ajx, l)p(bja, y, l).( 1) discussing its limitations in cryptographic scenarios. Fi- a2A l2L nally, we also go beyond the superdense coding, an- In turn, a quantum description will explicitly de- alyzing a more general prepare and measure scenario pend on which resources are made nonclassical. For allowing for quantum correlations and a measurement instance, Alice might be allowed to prepare and send device with several inputs. quantum states to Bob, but only share classical correla- tions with him. In this case, the prepared states are de- scribed by the set fr g ⊂ D(H), where D(H) II. SUPERDENSE CODING AS A PREPARE AND x x=0,...,N−1 MEASURE SCENARIO represents the set of density operators acting on some Hilbert space H. A set of positive semidefinite oper- f (y)g ⊂ (H) = − The prepare and measure scenario consists of an ex- ators Mb b=0,...,k−1 Pos for y 0, . , m 1, k−1 (y) = 1 8 periment performed between two parties, which we for which ∑b=0 Mb y, describes the possible will label Alice and Bob. Alice prepares a system in measurements performed by Bob. By Born’s rule, the a state represented by x 2 f0, . , N − 1g and sends observed distribution is then given by 2 it to Bob, who chooses a measurement setting y f − g 2 f − g (y) 0, . , m 1 and obtains an output b 0, . , k 1 p(bjx, y) = tr rx Mb .( 2) (see Fig. 1). The whole experiment is described by the conditional probability distribution p(bjx, y). In particular, notice that the quantum and classical de- In a classical description, depending on her input x, scriptions become equivalent if the prepared states rx Alice prepares a message a 2 f0, . , l − 1g, where l form a mutually commuting set. is the size of the alphabet of the message a, or the In the most general case, Alice not only prepares dimension of the system, that is a probabilistic func- and sends quantum states to Bob but might also share tion not only of x but also of l, the source of possible entangled states with him. That is precisely the case preshared correlations between Alice’s preparation and of the paradigmatic superdense coding protocol [7], Bob’s measurement apparatus. Similarly, Bob’s mea- where, by sharing entanglement with Bob, Alice can surement outcome will depend on the message a be- send him 2 dits of information by actually transmit- ing received, the choice of measurement y and the pre- ting only one qudit. To illustrate this, suppose Al- shared correlations. Thus, if the observed distribution ice wants to send two bits of information to Bob, 3 (x0, x1) 2 f00, 01, 10, 11g. If they sharep a maximally We highlight that this is a device-independent measure entangled state jF+i = (j00i + j11i) / 2, Alice can en- of success, since it only depends on observational data code the information to be sent in different local uni- and does not assume anything about Alice’s prepara- taries applied to the qubit in her possession, for in- tions or Bob’s measurements.
Recommended publications
  • Superdense Teleportation and Quantum Key Distribution for Space Applications
    2015 IEEE International Conference on Space Optical Systems and Applications (ICSOS) Superdense Teleportation and Quantum Key Distribution for Space Applications Trent Graham, Christopher Zeitler, Joseph Chapman, Hamid Javadi Paul Kwiat Submillimeter Wave Advanced Technology Group Department of Physics Jet Propulsion Laboratory, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign California Institute of Technology Urbana, USA Pasadena, USA tgraham2@illinois. edu Herbert Bernstein Institute for Science & Interdisciplinary Studies & School of Natural Sciences Hampshire College Amherst, USA Abstract—The transfer of quantum information over long for long periods of time (as would be needed for large scale distances has long been a goal of quantum information science quantum repeaters) and cannot be amplified without and is required for many important quantum communication introducing error [ 6 ] and thus can be very difficult to and computing protocols. When these channels are lossy and distribute over large distances using conventional noisy, it is often impossible to directly transmit quantum states communication techniques. Despite current limitations, some between two distant parties. We use a new technique called quantum communication protocols have already been superdense teleportation to communicate quantum demonstrated over long-distances in terrestrial experiments. information deterministically with greatly reduced resources, Notably, quantum teleportation (a remote quantum state simplified measurements, and decreased classical transfer protocol),
    [Show full text]
  • Superdense Coding Ch.4.4 No Cloning Ch.4.2
    C/CS/PhysC191 SuperdenseCoding,NoCloning 9/15/07 Fall 2009 Lecture 6 1 Readings Benenti, Casati, and Strini: Superdense Coding Ch.4.4 No Cloning Ch.4.2 2 Superdense Coding Super dense coding is the less popular sibling of teleportation. It can actually be viewed as the process in reverse. The idea is to transmit two classical bits of information by only sending one quantum bit. The process starts out with an EPR pair that is shared between the sender (Alice) and receiver (Bob). ψ = 1 00 + 11 √2 The first qubit is Alice’s, the second is Bob’s. Alice wants to send a two bit message to Bob, e.g., 00, 01, 10, or 11. She first performs a single qubit operation on her qubit which transforms the EPR pair according to which message she wants to send: • for a message 00: Alice applies I (i.e., does nothing) • for a message 01: Alice applies X • for a message 10: Alice applies Z • for a message 11: Alice applies iY (i.e. both X and Z) + + + This transforms the EPR pair φ into the four Bell (EPR) states φ , φ − , ψ , and ψ− , respec- tively: 1 1 0 0 • 00: 1 00 + 11 1 00 + 11 = 1 0 1 √2 −→ √2 √2 0 1 0 0 1 1 • 01: 1 00 + 11 1 10 + 01 = 1 1 0 √2 −→ √2 √2 1 0 1 1 0 0 • 10: 1 00 + 11 1 00 11 = 1 0 1 √2 −→ √2 − √2 0 − 1 − C/CS/Phys C191, Fall 2009, Lecture 6 1 0 0 i 1 • 11: i − 1 00 + 11 1 01 10 = 1 i 0 √2 −→ √2 − √2 1 − 0 The key to super-dense coding is that these four Bell states are orthonormal and are hence distinguishable by a quantum measurement, in this case a two-qubit measurement made by Bob.
    [Show full text]
  • Classical Information Capacity of Superdense Coding
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by CERN Document Server Classical information capacity of superdense coding Garry Bowen∗ Department of Physics, Australian National University, Canberra, A.C.T. 0200, Australia. (February 1, 2001) Classical communication through quantum channels may be enhanced by sharing entanglement. Superdense coding allows the encoding, and transmission, of up to two classical bits of information in a single qubit. In this paper, the maximum classical channel capacity for states that are not maximally entangled is derived. Particular schemes are then shown to attain this capacity, firstly for pairs of qubits, and secondly for pairs of qutrits. 03.67.Hk Quantum information exhibits many features which do ters, then the maximal amount of classical information not have analogues in classical information theory [1]. that may be transferred is given by the Kholevo bound For this reason, when a quantum channel is used for com- [10], munication, there exist a number of different capacities for the different types of information transmitted through C = max S p (U k I )ρ (U k I )y k k A B AB A B the channel [2{5]. fU ;pkg ⊗ ⊗ A " k ! Superdense coding (referred to in this paper simply as X dense coding), first proposed by Bennett and Wiesner [6], k k y pkS (U IB )ρAB(U IB ) : (1) is where the transmission of classical information through − A ⊗ A ⊗ k # a quantum channel is enhanced by shared entanglement X between sender and receiver. The classical information This bound has been shown to be asymptotically attain- capacity for a channel where sender and receiver share able by using product state block coding [8,11].
    [Show full text]
  • General Overview of the Field
    Introduction to quantum computing and simulability General overview of the field Daniel J. Brod Leandro Aolita Ernesto Galvão Outline: General overview of the field • What is quantum computing? • A bit of history; • The rules: the postulates of quantum mechanics; • Information-theoretic-flavoured consequences; • Entanglement; • No-cloning; • Teleportation; • Superdense coding; What is quantum computing? • Computing paradigm where information is processed with the rules of quantum mechanics. • Extremely interdisciplinary research area! • Physics, Computer science, Mathematics; • Engineering (the thing looks nice on paper, but building it is hard!); • Chemistry, biology and others (applications); • Promised speedup on certain computational problems; • New insights into foundations of quantum mechanics and computer science. Let’s begin with some history! Timeline of (classical) computing Charles Babbage Ada Lovelace (1791-1871) (1815-1852) Analytical Engine (1837) First computer program (1843) First proposed general purpose Written by Ada Lovelace for the mechanical computer. Not Analytical engine. Computes completed by lack of money ☹️ Bernoulli numbers. Timeline of (classical) computing Alonzo Church Alan Turing (1903-1995) (1912-1954) 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 Turing Machine (1936) World War II Abstract model for a universal Colossus, Bombe, Z3/Z4 and others; computing device. - Decryption of secret messages; - Ballistics; Timeline of (classical) computing Intel® 4004 (1971) 2.300 transistors. Intel® Core™ (2010) 560.000.000 transistors. Transistor
    [Show full text]
  • The IBM Quantum Computing Platform
    The IBM Quantum Computing Platform Martin Koppenh¨ofer https://www.quantumtheory-bruder.physik.unibas.ch/ Online resources https://www.quantumtheory-bruder.physik.unibas.ch/ people/martin-koppenhoefer/ quantum-computing-and-robotic-science-workshop.html installation guide material for this session slides 2 Outline 1 Recap Overview of quantum-computing platforms Bell states 2 Programming the quantum computer with python The qiskit framework Programming session 1 3 Superdense coding Programming session 2 4 Quantum algorithms Deutsch algorithm Programming session 3 3 Recap spins in large molecules + NMR ions in electromagnetic traps neutral atoms in optical lattices optical quantum computing 31P donor atoms in silicon electron spins in semiconductor quantum dots superconducting electrical circuits flux qubit * charge qubit phase qubit * transmon qubit topological qubits * online access 4 Recap Bell states 1 2 3 x H 1 jβ00i = p (j00i + j11i) |βxy > 2 CNOT 1 y jβ01i = p (j01i + j10i) 2 1 jβ10i = p (j00i − j11i) 1 input state: jxyi = j00i 2 2 apply Hadamard gate 1 jβ i = p (j01i − j10i) 1 1 11 H^ = p1 : 2 2 1 −1 p1 (j00i + j10i) General expression: 2 jβ i = p1 (j0yi + (−1)x j1¯yi) 3 apply CNOT gate: xy 2 p1 (j00i + j11i) = jβ i 2 00 5 Recap Bell states 6 Recap Bell states on a real quantum processor 7 Programming the quantum computer with python The qiskit framework 8 Programming the quantum computer with python The qiskit framework Terra Ignis define quantum algorithms characterize quantum by quantum circuits / pulses hardware adapt quantum
    [Show full text]
  • Entanglement and Superdense Coding with Linear Optics
    International Journal of Quantum Information Vol. 9, Nos. 7 & 8 (2011) 1737À1744 #.c World Scientific Publishing Company DOI: 10.1142/S0219749911008222 ENTANGLEMENT AND SUPERDENSE CODING WITH LINEAR OPTICS MLADEN PAVIČIĆ Chair of Physics, Faculty of Civil Engineering, University of Zagreb, Croatia [email protected] Received 16 May 2011 We discuss a scheme for a full superdense coding of entangled photon states employing only linear optics elements. By using the mixed basis consisting of four states that are unambigu- ously distinguishable by a standard and polarizing beam splitters we can deterministically transfer four messages by manipulating just one of the two entangled photons. The sender achieves the determinism of the transfer either by giving up the control over 50% of sent messages (although known to her) or by discarding 33% of incoming photons. Keywords: Superdense coding; quantum communication; Bell states; mixed basis. 1. Introduction Superdense coding (SC)1 — sending up to two bits of information, i.e. four messages, by manipulating just one of two entangled qubits (two-state quantum systems) — is considered to be a protocol that launched the field of quantum communication.2 Apart from showing how different quantum coding of information is from the classical one — which can encode only two messages in a two-state system — the protocol has also shown how important entanglement of qubits is for their manipulation. Such an entanglement has proven to be a genuine quantum effect that cannot be achieved with the help of two classical bit carriers because we cannot entangle classical systems. To use this advantage of quantum information transfer, it is very important to keep the trade-off of the increased transfer capacity balanced with the technology of implementing the protocol.
    [Show full text]
  • I I Mladen Paviˇci´C: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — Page 331 — Le-Tex I I
    i i Mladen Paviˇci´c: Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication — 2013/3/5 — page 331 — le-tex i i 331 Index a – nuclear 258 A-gate 218 – quantum number 258 abacus 10 – total 258 adiabatic passage 255 annihilation Adleman, Leonard 22 – operator 195 AlGaAs 223 anti-diagonally polarized photon 53 algorithm anti-Hermitian – Bernstein–Vazirani 286 –operator 43 – Deutsch–Jozsa 284 anti-Stokes – exponential speedup 286 – photon 265 – Deutsch’s 282 Antikythera mechanism 10 –eigenvalue argument – exponential speedup 293 –bit 27 – exponential time 293 astrolabe 10 – Euclid’s 288 atom –feasible 20 – interference 269 – field sieve 22, 287 atom–cavity – general number field sieve 155 – coupling 252, 256, 273 – GNFS 155, 287 – constant 256 – Grover’s 19, 293 atomic –intractable 20 – dipole matrix element 198 – Shor’s 19, 157, 214, 287, 288 – ensemble 262 – all optical 192 auxiliary qubit 181 – exponential speedup 288 axis – exponential time 288 –fast 53 – NMR 214, 287, 290 –slow 53 – Simon’s 287 – exponential speedup 287 b – subexponential 22 B92 165 Alice 81 B92 protocol 170, 171 – classical 141, 152 balanced function 282 – quantum 160 bandwidth 16 alkali-metal atoms 257 Bardeen all-optical 176 – John 236 analog computer 12 basis ancilla 103, 138, 146, 181 – computational 34 angular BB84 protocol 167, 170 – momentum BBN Technologies 157 – electron 215 BBO crystal 55 Companion to Quantum Computation and Communication, First Edition. M. Paviˇci´c. © 2013 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. Published 2013 by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA. i
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Protocols Involving Multiparticle Entanglement and Their Representations in the Zx-Calculus
    Quantum Protocols involving Multiparticle Entanglement and their Representations in the zx-calculus. Anne Hillebrand University College University of Oxford A thesis submitted for the degree of MSc Mathematics and the Foundations of Computer Science 1 September 2011 Acknowledgements First I want to express my gratitude to my parents for making it possible for me to study at Oxford and for always supporting me and believing in me. Furthermore, I would like to thank Alex Merry for helping me out whenever I had trouble with quantomatic. Moreover, I want to say thank you to my friends, who picked me up whenever I was down and took my mind off things when I needed it. Lastly I want to thank my supervisor Bob Coecke for introducing me to the subject of quantum picturalism and for always making time for me when I asked for it. Abstract Quantum entanglement, described by Einstein as \spooky action at a distance", is a key resource in many quantum protocols, like quantum teleportation and quantum cryptography. Yet entanglement makes protocols presented in Dirac notation difficult to follow and check. This is why Coecke nad Duncan have in- troduced a diagrammatic language for multi-qubit systems, called the red/green calculus or the zx-calculus [23]. This diagrammatic notation is both intuitive and formally rigorous. It is a simple, graphical, high level language that empha- sises the composition of systems and naturally captures the essentials of quantum mechanics. One crucial feature that will be exploited here is the encoding of complementary observables and corresponding phase shifts. Reasoning is done by rewriting diagrams, i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • Deterministic Entanglement Distillation for Secure Double-Server Blind Quantum Computation
    OPEN Deterministic entanglement distillation for SUBJECT AREAS: secure double-server blind quantum QUANTUM INFORMATION computation QUANTUM OPTICS Yu-Bo Sheng1,2 & Lan Zhou2,3 Received 1Institute of Signal Processing Transmission, Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Nanjing 210003, China, 2Key 2 May 2014 Lab of Broadband Wireless Communication and Sensor Network Technology, Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, 3 Accepted Ministry of Education, Nanjing 210003, China, College of Mathematics & Physics, Nanjing University of Posts and 2 December 2014 Telecommunications, Nanjing 210003, China. Published 15 January 2015 Blind quantum computation (BQC) provides an efficient method for the client who does not have enough sophisticated technology and knowledge to perform universal quantum computation. The single-server BQC protocol requires the client to have some minimum quantum ability, while the double-server BQC protocol makes the client’s device completely classical, resorting to the pure and clean Bell state shared by Correspondence and two servers. Here, we provide a deterministic entanglement distillation protocol in a practical noisy requests for materials environment for the double-server BQC protocol. This protocol can get the pure maximally entangled Bell should be addressed to state. The success probability can reach 100% in principle. The distilled maximally entangled states can be remaind to perform the BQC protocol subsequently. The parties who perform the distillation protocol do Y.-B.S. (shengyb@ not need to exchange the classical information and they learn nothing from the client. It makes this protocol njupt.edu.cn) unconditionally secure and suitable for the future BQC protocol. lind quantum computation (BQC) is a new type of quantum computation model which can release the client who does not have enough knowledge and sophisticated technology to perform the universal B quantum computation1–15.
    [Show full text]
  • Deterministic Secure Quantum Communication on the BB84 System
    entropy Article Deterministic Secure Quantum Communication on the BB84 System Youn-Chang Jeong 1, Se-Wan Ji 1, Changho Hong 1, Hee Su Park 2 and Jingak Jang 1,* 1 The Affiliated Institute of Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute, P.O.Box 1, Yuseong Daejeon 34188, Korea; [email protected] (Y.-C.J.); [email protected] (S.-W.J.); [email protected] (C.H.) 2 Korea Research Institute of Standards and Science, Daejeon 43113, Korea; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +82-42-870-2134 Received: 23 September 2020; Accepted: 6 November 2020; Published: 7 November 2020 Abstract: In this paper, we propose a deterministic secure quantum communication (DSQC) protocol based on the BB84 system. We developed this protocol to include quantum entity authentication in the DSQC procedure. By first performing quantum entity authentication, it was possible to prevent third-party intervention. We demonstrate the security of the proposed protocol against the intercept-and-re-send attack and the entanglement-and-measure attack. Implementation of this protocol was demonstrated for quantum channels of various lengths. Especially, we propose the use of the multiple generation and shuffling method to prevent a loss of message in the experiment. Keywords: optical communication; quantum cryptography; quantum mechanics 1. Introduction By using the fundamental postulates of quantum mechanics, quantum cryptography ensures secure communication among legitimate users. Many quantum cryptography schemes have been developed since the introduction of the BB84 protocol in 1984 [1] by C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard. In the BB84 protocol, the sender uses a rectilinear or diagonal basis to encode information in single photons.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 7 1 Readings 2 Superdense Coding
    C/CS/Phys C191 Superdense Coding, Quantum Cryptography 9/20/05 Fall 2005 Lecture 7 1 Readings Benenti, Casati, and Strini: Superdense Coding Ch.4.4 Quantum Cryptography Ch. 4.1, 4.3 2 Superdense Coding Super dense coding is the less popular sibling of teleportation. It can actually be viewed as the process in reverse. The idea is to transmit two classical bits of information by only sending one quantum bit. The process starts out with an EPR pair that is shared between the sender (Alice) and receiver (Bob). ψ = 1 00 + 11 √2 The first qubit is Alice’s, the second is Bob’s. Alice wants to send a two bit message to Bob, e.g., 00, 01, 10, or 11. She first performs a single qubit operation on her qubit which transforms the EPR pair according to which message she wants to send: • for a message 00: Alice applies I (i.e., does nothing) • for a message 01: Alice applies X • for a message 10: Alice applies Z • for a message 11: Alice applies iY (i.e. both X and Z) + + + This transforms the EPR pair φ into the four Bell (EPR) states φ , φ − , ψ , and ψ− , respec- tively: 1 1 0 0 • 00: 1 00 + 11 1 00 + 11 = 1 0 1 √2 −→ √2 √2 0 1 0 0 1 1 • 01: 1 00 + 11 1 10 + 01 = 1 1 0 √2 −→ √2 √2 1 0 1 1 0 0 • 10: 1 00 + 11 1 00 11 = 1 0 1 √2 −→ √2 − √2 0 − 1 − C/CS/Phys C191, Fall 2005, Lecture 7 1 0 0 i 1 • 11: i − 1 00 + 11 1 01 10 = 1 i 0 √2 −→ √2 − √2 1 − 0 The key to super-dense coding is that these four Bell states are orthonormal and are hence distinguishable by a quantum measurement, in this case a two-qubit measurement made by Bob.
    [Show full text]
  • Entanglement Manipulation
    Entanglement Manipulation Steven T. Flammia1 1Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 2Y5 Canada (Dated: 22 March 2010) These are notes for my RIT tutorial lecture at the University of Maryland math department. I. INTRODUCTION Entanglement serves as a resource which we can use to perform novel information processing tasks, in particular communication tasks. For example, superdense coding and teleportation are two such tasks which are impossible classically; they make essential use of entanglement. In this lecture I’m going to cover dense coding and teleportation and then show how we can manipulate entanglement into a standard “currency” which will allow us to quantify how useful different states are for these tasks. Based on an operational definition, we will define a way to measure the amount of entanglement in a quantum state. We will consider the following scenario. We have two parties, Alice and Bob (labeled A and B), and they wish to communicate through a quantum or classical channel. In the literature, channel does have a technical meaning: it is a completely positive linear map, i.e. a linear map that takes density operators to density operators (and it is not necessarily surjective). We call these CP maps for short. We can consider that the channel is noisy, or we can consider a perfect channel (the identity map), but we have noisy quantum states. We will always assume that any classical channel is perfect. A and B would like to communicate classical and quantum information in the most efficient way possible using the classical and quantum channels (respectively) that they share.
    [Show full text]