Arxiv:1701.00064V3 [Quant-Ph] 24 Jun 2018 Lopooe Neetn Prahbsdo H Monge the on [ Based Distance Approach Have Interesting People Proposed Distributions

Home , Wehrl entropy

arXiv:1701.00064v3 [quant-ph] 24 Jun 2018 lopooe neetn prahbsdo h Monge the on [ based distance approach have interesting People proposed distributions. also phase-space associated the Hilbert in of state classical nearest [ terms the space in from described distance light, the of of state quantum mode single of states. classical the on plied light [ theory tion optics in role [ central play characters such revealing states i s[ as sis lsia rbblt hoy[ of as- theory scope the the probability on beyond based classical distributions, is phase-space states optical sociated these of quantumness osN-nuigoeain uha htnexcitation photon as var- such [ by nonclassi- operations generated otherwise be NC-inducing could function; ious states delta nonclassical These a singu- than cal. or more prob- semi-definite no classical positive lar a i.e., like distribution, behaves ability distribution P Sudarshan uin siltr ubrdsrbto t.[ etc. distribution number oscillatory distri- sub-Poissonian bution, antibunching, photon as such tures 8 2 ,qartr qezn [ squeezing quadrature ], informa- quantum in applications various in as well as ] eea tepshv enmd oqatf h NC the quantify to made been have attempts Several h state The unu ttso ih xii eea nrgigfea- intriguing several exhibit light of states Quantum ρ a erpeetdi ignlchrn tt ba- state coherent diagonal in represented be can , 6 11 , , 7 16 ] 12 .Acmrhnierve ol efound be could review comprehensive A ]. 3 u rvoswr Py.Rv A Rev. quantum mode [Phys. single work the previous for our (NC) nonclassicality distribution. of probability classical measure genuine a not is which esrsfi oqatf h Co igemd ttsta ar that states Ivan mode Recently, single of operations. NC the quantify to fail measures ewrs ocasclt,Qatmes er nrp,Q Entropy, Wehrl Quantumness, Nonclassicality, quantificationKeywords: W our work. operations, current NC-inducing th for the multiple also under of operations, NC-inducing scope p sta single the all under mixed generated beyond particular, non-Gaussian lies the in that for states, NC computation the of of von-Ne evaluation of most ent the terms However, for Wehrl in NC maximum measured of as the classi randomness expressions entropy, same its Wehrl has betw to that its difference due state the arising from entropy as subtracting pro Wehrl light we by maximum of paper, the this states and In quantum state NC. mode mode single single of the context the in concept fnnGusa hrce fqatmotclsae nterm in states optical quantum of character non-Gaussian of swl stesglrt/eaiiy[ sigularity/negativity the as well as ] ρ ρ , ocasclsae faqatzdlgtaedsrbdi te in described are light quantized a of states Nonclassical 4 = ssi ob lsia fteGlauber- the if classical be to said is .Tento fnnlsiaiy(C or (NC) nonclassicality of notion The ]. Z .Introduction I. d er nrp ae unicto fNonclassicality of Quantification Based Entropy Wehrl π 2 α P 9 ,kr qezn [ squeezing kerr ], ( ,α α, 5 .Ayqatmsaeof state quantum Any ]. o igeMd unu pia States Optical Quantum Mode Single for ∗ ) | lc-D etrII atLk,Klaa700106 Kolkata Lake, Salt Sector-III, Block-JD, .N oeNtoa etefrBscSciences Basic for Centre National Bose N. S. α h i t al. et. α | . Qatm n.Process. Inf. [Quantum. 10 95 1 .Optical ]. t. ap- etc., ] 130(07]w aesonta h xsigwell-known existing the that shown have we (2017)] 012330 , Dtd ue2,2018) 26, June (Dated: omaat Bose Soumyakanti 13 – (1) 15 India. ] ageeta h upto ierdvc iebeam like device linear a [ of (BS) output splitter the at tanglement ia ttsare states sical h prtoa prahb Gehrke by approach hand, operational other the the On operations. NC-inducing the between entan- output BS of terms in [ NC monotones mode glement single input of h erhfra for search the operators ordered normal negativ- of the [ values of expectation terms the in of quantumness ity or NC the mode output of single quantification and suggested also NC have people principle. Recently, input superposition quantum of the quantification using entanglement unified a fined [ in ac ae [ based tance BS, [ by Sperling [ entanglement and Vogel in into states, found NC pure be of for could conversion NC of mea- mode context as single potential of entanglement sure and negativity Wigner loso httesnl oeN,dfie nterms in specific [ defined the potential entanglement NC, upon of depends mode choice monotones, single entanglement the results a of that recent at Moreover, show nonclassical also maximally strength. nonclas- state squeezing maximally squeezed moderate states a number and photon sical the all finds measures well-known existing [ The op- reasonably. quantum NC-inducing mode multiple erations, under single generated of are NC that the states capture to fail measures 12 24 norpeiu ok[ work previous our In , , atmOtc,PaeSaeDistributions Space Phase Optics, uantum 17 ept eea teps enn uniform a defining attempts, several Despite 25 13 rae ls fsae htaegenerated are that states of class broader e , m fGlauber-Sudarshan of rms ]. , ∗ nmrtsteN consistently. NC the enumerates eeae ne utpeNC-inducing multiple under generated e 11 18 fWhletoy ee eaotthis adopt we Here, entropy. Wehrl of s 15 r ttsadGusa ie states. mixed Gaussian and states ure ttso ih syta pnts.In task. open an yet is light of states .I swl nw htsnl oenonclas- mode single that known well is It ]. 5 21) aedfie measure a defined have (2012)] 853 , e ssbett xesv numerical extensive to subject is tes a o con o h eaiecompetition relative the for account not can ] a hrceitc.Ti eachieve we This characteristics. cal oeanwqatfiaino Cfor NC of quantification new a pose mn nrp.W bananalytic obtain We entropy. umann e h oa er nrp fthe of entropy Wehrl total the een hwta,aogwt h states the with along that, show e 12 oyatial yayclassical any by attainable ropy 19 swl stepaesaebsd[ based phase-space the as well as ] eesr n sufficient and necessary ossetmaueo NC of measure consistent , 20 .Ti ed otequantification 21 the to leads This ]. .Arltv oprsnbetween comparison relative A ]. 26 ,w aesonta h dis- the that shown have we ], P distribution 27 23 .Ti necessitates This ]. t al. et. aefrhrde- further have ] ognrt en- generate to o h single the for 22 [ .I the In ]. 24 13 ,also ], , 15 ] 2 mode quantum optical states. character. This we achieve by subtracting the maximum In the current paper, we propose a new quantification Wehrl entropy attainable by a classical state that cor- of the NC of a single mode quantum optical state in terms responds to ρ from the Wehrl entropy of ρ itself. The of the Wehrl entropy [28]. Recently, Ivan et. al. [29] have correspondence of the classical state with ρ is discussed proposed a quantification of non-Gaussian character of next. any state in terms of Wehrl entropy. Here, we adopt this entropic description in the context of NC. Any state of a quantized electromagnetic field contains both classical II-A. Quantification of Nonclassical Entropy and quantum features. We quantify the NC of any quantum state of light ρ by subtracting its maximal classical It is well-known that the Wherl entropy of any quan- Wherl entropy from its total Wehrl entropy. This surplus tum optical state is bounded below by unity [30], i.e., Wehrl entropy could be interpreted as the Wehrl entropy Hw(ρ) 1. The minimum of Hw(ρ) is attained for a ≥ of ρ arising solely due to its nonclassical/quantum char- coherent state z , the only pure classical state [31]. As | i acter. As the maximum classical Wehrl entropy of ρ we a consequence, while quantifying the nonclassical char- consider the supremum of the Wherl entropy of all clas- acter of a pure state (ρ = ψ ψ ) of light with we must | i h | sical states that have the purity equal to ρ itself, as mea- restrict ourselves to the set of all classical pure states. sured by von-Neumann entropy. This is achieved by considering the classical states that We obtain analytic expressions for the NC of both pure have randomness/mixedness same with that of ψ ψ . | i h | states and mixed Gaussian states. We further show that There, are plenty of characterizations of the randomness our proposed quantification of NC for Gaussian mixed of any quantum state ρ. Here,we choose von-Neumann states, is proportional to the nonclassical depth of the entropy, S(ρ)(= Tr[ρ ln ρ]), as a measure of randomness. state. However, the evaluation of NC for mixed non- In line of the analysis of the pure state, in general, for Gaussian states is subject to extensive numerical com- any nonclassical mixed state ρ, we characterize the set of putation which is not germane to the present paper. In classical reference states by considering only those states the case of quantum pure states, generated under sin- which are equientropic to ρ. This is what we mean by gle NC-inducing operation, namely photon number state the correspondence of the classical states with ρ. Asa and quadrature squeezed coherent state, we show that consequence, the surplus Wehrl entropy of any state ρ is the proposed quantification works fine. We also observe given by that the current quantification describes the NC of states s generated by quantum superposition such as Schrodinger Hw(ρ)= Hw(ρ) sup Hw(σ), (2) − σ Ωcl cat states, consistently. In the case of single mode quan- ∈ tum states, generated under multiple NC-inducing op- where, Ωcl is the set of all classical states, s.t. S(σ) = erations, we further obtain NC in line of the concerned S(ρ) σ Ωcl. The Wehrl entropy is defined as Hw(ρ)= BS generated entanglement [26], in contrast to the exist- d∀2z ∈ π Qρ(z) ln Qρ(z), where, Qρ(z) (= z ρ z ) is the ing measures. On the other hand, in the case of mixed Husimi-Kano− Q distribution of ρ. h | | i Gaussian states also, it is noteworthy that we success- R fully detect NC only if the state is quadrature squeezed, as reported earlier [21]. II-B. Understanding the Surplus Wehrl entropy s N This paper is organized as follows. In Sec. II, we (Hw): Quantification of NC ( w) introduce the mathematical description of the quantification of NC of single mode quantum optical states, Nw. Let us consider the set of all classical states, Ωcl := In Sec. III, we derive analytic expressions of Nw for σi s.t. S(σi) = S(σj ) σi, σj Ω . Let us further { } ∀ ∈ cl pure states and a generic Gaussian state. We describe consider two elements from Ωcl as σi and σmax, where certain properties of Nw in Sec. IV. In Sec. V we evaluate the NC for some examples of pure states of a sup Hw(σ)= Hw(σmax). (3) σ Ωcl quantized electromagnetic field. We discuss the NC of ∈ Sec. VI mixed Gaussian states of light in . Finally, we Now, we replace ρ by σ in Eq. (2), i.e., we check for Sec. VII i conclude our work in . the surplus Wehrl entropy of a classical state. This leads to the result

II. Quantifying the Nonclassicality: Defining Nw(ρ) s Hw(σi)= Hw(σi) sup Hw(σ) − σ Ωcl ∈ It is well-known that any quantum optical state, ρ, con- = Hw(σi) Hw(σmax) 0. (4) − ≤ tains both classical and quantum characters. We quantify the NC of ρ as the Wehrl entropy that ρ possesses in Consequently, we define the quantification of NC for addition to the Wehrl entropy arising due to its classical any quantum optical state ρ as character. This surplus Wehrl entropy could be inter- Nw(ρ) = max 0,Hw(ρ) sup Hw(σ) . (5) preted as arising solely due to its quantum/nonclassical − σ Ωcl ∈ 3

III. Nw for a Pure and Mixed States of Light where, Ω is the symplectic metric given as deﬁned as 0 1 Ω= . III-A. Nw for Pure States of Light 1 0 By using− the transformation relation between the Q It is already discussed that in the case of pure states, distribution and Wigner distribution (W ) it canbe shown by straightforward calculation that the Wehrl entropy of the set of reference classical states has to be restricted G to the pure states and the only pure classical state is a the Gaussian state ρ is given by (Appendix) coherent state [31]. Moreover, the Wehrl entropy of any 1 4δ +2ǫ +1 H (ρG)=1+ ln[ ], (10) quantum state is always greater than or atleast equal to w 2 2 unity, i.e. H (ρ) 1; equality holds only for coherent w where, δ = det V and ǫ = Tr[V]. state [30]. Thus, for≥ a pure state, ρ = ψ ψ , the mea- It is well-known that any single mode Gaussian state sure of NC, N , reduces to the analytic| formi h | w of light could be written as a displaced squeezed thermal N ( ψ )= H ( ψ ) 1. (6) state [33] w | i w | i − G On the other hand, for mixed states, in general, Eq. ρ = D(α)Ssq(z)ρth(¯n)Ssq† (z)D†(α), (11)

(5) has to be respected. However, in the case of mixed 2 2 1 (za† z∗a ) iθ Gaussian states of light one could obtain analytic expres- where, Ssq(z) = e 2 − , z = re and D(α) = αa† α∗a sion for the Nw by reducing the set of classical reference e − . In the expression of squeezing operator, Ssq(z), states further, as discussed next. r defines the degree of squeezing and θ is the angle of squeezing. The von-Neumann entropy of the Gaussian state in Eq. (11) is given as [32, 34] III-B. Nw for a Gaussian Mixed States of Light S(ρG)= S(ρ (¯n)) = (¯n + 1) ln(¯n + 1) n¯ lnn. ¯ (12) th − Any non-Gaussian mixed state of light could be well The symplectic eigenvalue of the variance matrix V constructed solely by taking convex combinations of clas- (in the Williamson’s diagonal form) for the single mode 1 sical states, for example, σ = α α + α α . G 2 | i h | |− i h− | Gaussian state ρ is related to the average thermal pho- Such non-Gaussian states could yield arbitrarily high 1 ton as λ =n ¯ + 2 . This symplectic eigenvalue could be Wehrl entropy based upon the very combination. On the obtained as the ordinary eigenvalue of the matrix iV Ω . G other hand, for a Gaussian state, ρ , its Wehrl entropy is Now the question arises is about choosing the classical| | well defined in terms of its variance matrix (Appendix). Gaussian reference, with the same von-Neumann entropy, Thus, in the context of Wehrl entropy of any Gaussian that yields maximum Wehrl entropy. Similar to the de- state arising due to its classicality, the classical character scription given above, we can choose the thermal state in G of the ρ is best represented by only a Gaussian state. As the classical reference state by equating its entropy with a consequence, in the case of nonclassical Gaussian mixed that of the Gaussian state ρG. Furthermore, any single states, we further restrict our set of classical states in Eq. mode Gaussian state of the form given in Eq. (11) is (5) to the Gaussian states. With this choice of classical 1 classical for r 2 ln (2¯n + 1). Hence, the maximum reference states, in the case of any Gaussian mixed state Wehrl entropy≤ attainable by by any classical Gaussian G N ρ , the quantity w in Eq. (5) reduces to state with entropy equal to S(ρG) is achieved for G G G Nw(ρ ) = max 0,Hw(ρ ) sup Hw(σ ) , (7) G G σ = Ssq(rmax)ρth(¯n)S† (rmax), (13) − σ Ωcl max sq ∈ G where ”G” stands for Gaussian. Next we derive an ana- where, (¯n + 1) ln(¯n + 1) n¯ lnn ¯ = S(ρ ) and rmax = N G 1 − lytic expression for w(ρ ). 2 ln(2¯n + 1). Let us consider a single mode Gaussian state of light, Using the relation between the classical and quantum ρG, described by the variance matrix V . Corresponding state parameters, as described in Eq. (13), it could be Wigner function is given by, easily shown that the quantum variance matrix for the G 1 T −1 above mentioned classical Gaussian state σmax could be G √ 1 2 (R D) V (R D) W (R)= det V − e− − − , (8) represented in terms of the variance matrix of the Gaus- G where, R (x, p)T is the column vector formed with sian state ρ as ≡ the real quadrature (x, p). The displacement (column) √4δ 0 vector is given as D ( x , p )T. T stands for transpo- V G = √δ , (14) cl 0 1/√4δ sition. The real symmetric≡ h i varianceh i matrix V is defined 1 as Vµ,ν = Tr [ Rˆ µ, Rˆ ν ρ]; µ,ν = 1, 2. The operator where, det V G = det V = δ and Tr[VG] = (4δ + 1)/2. 2 { } cl cl analogue of Rµ (R1 = x, R2 = p) is Rˆµ. The quantum The Wehrl entropy for the classical Gaussian reference G variance matrix V satisfies the canonical uncertainty re- state described by the variance matrix Vcl is given by lation [32] (Eq. 10) i 1 V + Ω 0, (9) H (σG )=1+ ln[4δ + 1]. (15) 2 ≥ w max 2 4

Consequently, Eq. (5), (10), (13) and (15) lead to the β ρ β . Under the action of a phase-space displace- h | | i analytic expression of quantumness of the Gaussian state ment, D(z): ρ ρ˜ = D(z)ρD†(z), Husimi Q distribu- ρG as tion changes as →

G 1 4δ +2ǫ +1 N (ρ ) = max 0, ln[ ] . (16) D(z): Qρ(β) Qρ˜(β)= Qρ(β z). (20) w 2 2(4δ + 1) → − The state ρG is said to nonclassical if 4δ +2ǫ +1 > This indicates that the phase-space displacement 2(4δ +1) or 2ǫ> 4δ + 1. works as the rigid translation [28, 30] that leaves Wehrl entropy unchanged, i.e. D(z): Hw(ρ) Hw(ρ). Since, the Wehrl entropy of any state is independent→ of phase- Relation with Nonclassical Depth space displacement, it is evident from the Eq. (5), that under the transformation D(z): ρ ρ˜, its NC does not → In this connection it is worth comparing the result of change, i.e., Eq. (16) with nonclassical depth [13] that serves a good D(z): N (ρ) N (ρ). (21) measure of NC for single mode Gaussian states [14]. A w → w single mode Gaussian state ρG is said to be nonclassical if it has a non-zero depth. The nonclassical depth for ρG is given by IV-B. Invariance under Passive Rotation 1 η = max 0, λ , (17) Let us now consider a passive rotation in phase space 2 min − TU : ρ ρ˜, where U is the transformation indicating → where, λmin is the minimum eigenvalue of the variance rotation in the phase-space quadrature. Under the trans- matrix V . It is given by formation TU , Husimi Q distribution changes as

ǫ √ǫ2 4δ 1 λ = − − . (18) TU : Qρ(β) Qρ˜(β)= Qρ(U − β). (22) min 2 → AS evident from Eq. (17) and (18), the condition of Since, the Jacobean of the passive rotation in phase- NC of ρG, η> 0, yields space is unity, we have TU : Hw(ρ) Hw, i.e., the Wehrl entropy does not change under passive→ rotation in phase- 1 space. This leads to the fact that under a passive phase- λmin < 2 space rotation TU : ρ ρ˜, the NC, Nw(ρ), as deﬁned in 2ǫ> 4δ + 1 (19) Eq. (5), does not change.→ ⇒ Here, it is worth mentioning that only in two- This is exactly the condition of NC for ρG that one dimension SO(2, R) Sp(2, R). That means only in derives from Eq. (16). the case of single mode,⊆ all proper rotations are canonical transformations. However, in the case of multimode,

III-B. Nw for a non-Gaussian Mixed States of Light this is not true. For a system of N (N 2) harmonic os- cillators, rotations belong to SO(2N, R≥) which is a much bigger group than the Sp(2N, R) that characterizes sym- In the case of non-Gaussian mixed states, however, one plectic or canonical transformations. As a consequence, needs to consider the set of all equientropic classical states in multimode, all phase space rotations are not canoni- as mentioned in the Eq. (5). In such cases, one has to find cal. In such cases only those rotations which belong to the supremum over all possible states which is subject to Sp(2N, R) SO(2N, R) are allowed. heavy numerical computation and lies beyond the scope ∩ N of the current work. This, we shall consider elsewhere. Next, we evaluate w for certain well-known exam- In the current work, we focus on the analytic evaluation ples of single mode nonclassical pure as well as Gaussian of the NC of single mode quantum optical states with the mixed states. proposed quantification based on Wehrl entropy. Next, we discuss some properties of the proposed quan- V. Nw for Some Pure States tification of single mode NC, Nw, that we shall be using often while evaluating it for different states. V-A. Photon Number State and Quadrature Squeezed Coherent State:

IV. Some Properties of Nw A photon number state m is obtained by applying †m | i IV-A. Invariance under Displacement photon excitation a on the vacuum. The Wehrl en- √m! tropy of a photon number state For m is given by [29] Let us consider a any quantum optical state ρ, for | i which the Husimi Q distribution is given as Qρ(β) = H ( m )=1+ m + ln m! mΨ(m + 1), (23) w | i − 5

m 1 2 where, Ψ(m+1) = k=1 k γ is the di-gamma function. where, Cm = m! Lm( α ) is the normalization con- The Euler constant γ is given− as γ =0.5722... This leads stant. For the sake of−| simplicity| we consider real dis- to the analytic expressionP for NC of m as placement, i.e., α = R. In Fig. 2(a) we plot the de- | i pendence of Nw ψpac on R for different m values. Nw( m )= m + ln m! mΨ(m + 1). (24) | i | i − With increase in m, Nw ψpac increases monotonically N | i We plot the w( m ) for different values of m in Fig. that signifies the increasing NC. On the other hand as R | i 1(a). It increases monotonically with the increase in increases Nw ψpac decreases monotonically revealing number of photon addition m. For small m( 4) we the increase in| thei classical character of the state. For N ≤ observe a rapid increase in w( m ). With further in- sufficiently high R (>> 1), Nw ψpac becomes almost N | i | i crease in m, w( m ) saturates for very high m. It is independent of m. This is quite expected, since, for suf- | i N noteworthy that the monotonic increase in w( m ) with ficiently large coherent amplitude increase in m falls in line of the increasing negativity| i in the Wigner distribution [15].

1.2 0.6 0.4 1.5 0.8 0.4 Nw 0.3 W 1 0.4 0.2 N 0.2 (a) (b) 0.5 0.1 0.8 1.6 2.4 0.8 1.6 2.4 (a) (b) R R 5 10 15 0.4 0.8 m r FIG. 2: Plot of dependence of Nw on R for (a) |ψpaci for

FIG. 1: Plot of Nw for (a) Photon number state and (b) m = 1 (solid line), 2 (dashed line), 3 (dotted line), 4 (dashed Squeezed coherent state. dotted line) and 5 (dashed double dotted line) (b) |ψ±i with |ψ+i (solid line) and |ψ−i (dashed line). A quadrature squeezed coherent state, ψ = | sci S(ζ) α , is generated under quadrature squeezing, We further study the even ( ψ+ ) an the odd ( ψ ) 2 2 | i | −i | i ζa† ζ∗a superposition of coherent states. These states are given S(ζ) = exp −2 , applied on a coherent state α , where ζ = reiθ; r and θ being the squeezing strength and| i as the squeezing angle respectively. For ψ we obtain a α α | sci ψ = | i ± |− i . (28) logarithmic NC as | ±i 2 α 2 2 1 e− | | N ± w( ψsc ) = ln µ, (25) q | i For the sake of simplicity we consider real displace- where µ = cosh r. Evidently, the N ( ψ ) is inde- N w | sci ment, i.e., α = R. We show the dependence of w on pendent of θ, since it only sets the direction of squeez- R for ψ in Fig. 2(b). It is noteworthy that for small | ±i ing rather than the degree of squeezing. Moreover, the R (. 1.0), ψ is more nonclassical than ψ+ ; however, N | −i | i w( ψsc ) is independent of the coherent displacement α, for large R (& 1.5), both ψ are equally nonclassical. |N i N | ±i e.g., w(S(ζ)α) = w(S(ζ) 0 ). This can be explained This can be explained in the following way. The Husimi- in the following way. The state| i ψ could be written as | sci Kano Q distributions for the even and odd superposition ψsc = S(ζ) α = S(ζ)D(α) 0 = D(β)S(ζ) 0 , (26) states are given as | i | i | i | i 2 2 iθ R β where, β = µα νe α∗, µ = cosh r and ν = sinh r. e− e−| | − Q ψ± (β)= 2R2 cosh[2Rβre] cos[2Rβim] , We have already discussed that the Wehrl entropy is in- | i 1+2e− ± dependent of displacement in phase space. As a conse- (29) quence, the NC of ψsc is independent of the coherent where, βre and βim are the real and complex part of the displacement α. In| Fig.i 1(b) we plot the dependence of quadrature variable β. In the expressionof Q distribution Nw( ψsc ) upon r. We observe an initial slow and then for the ψ , the second term in the bracket is a circular | ±i rapid| increasei in N ( ψ ) with increase in r. However, function that is bounded by 1 while the first term is w sc ± for very high r it saturates| i asymptotically (not shown in unbounded. As a consequence, in the large R limit only the figure). the first term predominates while the contribution from the second term becomes negligible. That is to say that in the limit R , the Q distributions for both ψ in V-B. Photon Added Coherent State and Coherent Eq. (29) reduce→ to ∞ | ±i Superposition States: R2 e− β 2 lim Q ψ± (β) 2 e−| | cosh[2Rβre]. (30) R | i 1+2e 2R An m-photon added coherent state (PAC) is given as →∞ → − 1 m As a consequence of Eq. (30), with increase in R, for ψpac = a† α , (27) | i √C | i both ψ we obtain equal NC. m | ±i 6

V-C. Photon Added Squeezed Vacuum State and VI. Nw for Some Gaussian Mixed States: Squeezed Squeezed Number State: Thermal States

Any single mode Gaussian state, as elaborated in Eq. We have also considered the single mode quantum opti- 11, could be written as displaced squeezed thermal state. cal states generated under successive application of mul- However, the NC of the state is independent of the global tiple NC-inducing operations, in particular, photon ex- displacement, since, the Wehrl entropy remains invariant citation and quadrature squeezing. The ordered appli- under any rigid translation, as discussed in Sec. 3. Thus, cation of these operations on vacuum lead to the states while discussing NC of a Gaussian mixed state, it is suf- known as photon added squeezed vacuum state (PAS) ﬁcient to deal with squeezed thermal state only. As de- and squeezed number state (SNS). These are given as scribed in Eq. (8), any Gaussian state is well represented by its variance matrix V satisfying the canonical relation (Eq. 9). A single mode squeezed thermal state is given 1 m ψpas = a† S(r) 0 by | i √Nm | i m a ρst = Ssq(r)ρth(¯n)S† (r), (32) ψ = S(r) m = S(r) † 0 , (31) sq | snsi | i √ | i m! where,n ¯ is the average number of photon in the thermal state and r is the squeezed parameter. For the sake m of simplicity we consider real squeezing. The variance where, Nm = m!µ Pm(µ), µ = cosh r and Pn(x) is the nth order Legendre Polynomial. In Fig. 3 we have plotted matrix of the squeezed thermal state is given by the dependence of Nw on the squeeze parameter r for e2r κ 2 0 PAS and SNS for diﬀerent values of m. Vst = e−2r κ , (33) 0 2 !

where, κ = 2¯n + 1. For the variance matrix Vst, its trace and determinant are given by 1.2 1.4 κ e4r +1 κ2 1.1 ǫst = 2r ; δst = . (34) Nw 0.9 2 e 4

0.8 Putting the expressions for ǫst and δst in Eq. (16), we 0.6 (a) (b) get the NC of for ρst as 0.25 0.5 0.75 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 (κ 1)2 +4κµ2 r r N (ρ ) = max 0, ln − , (35) w st 2 2(κ2 + 1) N FIG. 3: Plot of w vs r for m = 1 (solid line), 2 (dashed where, µ = cosh r. Quite evidently, the condition of NC line), 3 (dotted line), 4 (dashed dotted line) and 5 (dashed for Gaussian mixed state (Eq. 16) leads to the condition double dotted line) for (a) PAS and (b) SNS. 1 r> 2 ln(2¯n + 1). In Fig. 4, we plot the NC of squeezed thermal state. Beyond the critical value of squeezed parameter r ( In the case of PAS [Fig. 3(a)], we observe that Nw 1 N ≥ 2 ln[2¯n + 1]), w(ρst) increases monotonically with in- is non-monotonic on both r and m. For m = 1 it crease in r. On the other hand, with increase inn ¯, increases monotonically with r. However, m 2, N ∀ ≥ w(ρst) decreases. as r increases Nw ψpas first decreases and then increases. In the region| wherei the competition between photon excitation and quadrature squeezing becomes ex- plicit (0.30 r 0.60), Nw ψpas for higher m be- 0.3 comes smaller≤ than≤ the lower m| , asi expected from the 0.2 corresponding BS generated entanglement [26]. It be- Nw comes prominent with increase in m. For very high value 0.1 of r (& 0.80), Nw ψpas becomes predominantly dependent on r. On the| otheri hand, in the case of SNS 0.25 0.5 0.75 [Fig. 3(b)], we observe a monotonic dependence of Nw r on both r and m. The apparent similarity between the FIG. 4: Plot of Nw vs r for ρst. Different curves correspond curves of Nw ψpas and Nw ψsns for m = 1 is due ton ¯ = 0.2 (solid line), 0.4 (dashed line), 0.6 (dotted line), 0.8 to the fact that,| for im = 1, both| SNSi and PAS are equiv- (dashed dotted line) and 1.0 (dashed double dotted line). alent, i.e., a†S(r) 0 = S(r) 1 . Hence, these states yield | i | i similar NC. However for m 2, ψpas and ψsns are In this context, it is worth looking at the corresponding very different from each other,∀ ≥ as discussed| i in [|26]. i pure state limit, i.e. the case of squeezed vacuum state 7 that is obtained by consideringn ¯ 0 or κ 1 in Eq. acter of any quantum optical state [29, 35]. Similar (35). It is straightforward to check→ that → approach using SU(2) Q distribution on the Poincare sphere has also been proposed to quantify the quan- lim Nw(ρst) = ln µ, (36) n¯ 0 tumness of a two-mode quantized electromagnetic field → in terms of the polarization degrees [36, 37]. Here, we the NC of squeezed vacuum state as obtained in Eq. (25). present a simple quantification of the quantumness for single mode quantum optical states in terms of a positive semi-definite quadrature distribution function, namely VII. Conclusion the Husimi Q distribution, in contrast to the approaches based on phase-space singularity and/or negativity [13– To summarize, in this paper, we have proposed a new 15, 38, 39]. The efficacy of our proposal lies in the fact quantification of the quantumness of single mode quan- that in most of the cases it is could be computed ana- tum optical states in terms of Wehrl entropy. We have lytically as well as the underlying distribution could be quantified the quantumness of any state as the difference retrieved experimentally in optical heterodyne detection between its total Wehrl entropy and that arising due to [40]. its classical characteristics. We have obtained analytic Acknowledgment expressions for a broad class of states, in particular, all pure states and Gaussian mixed states. Moreover, the Author is indebted to M. Sanjay Kumar and Samyadeb proposed quantification is shown to be directly propor- Bhattacharya in S. N. Bose National Centre for Basic Sci- tional to the NC of any Gaussian state, as inferred from ences, Kolkata, India for numerous discussion and critical its depth. The evaluation of NC for the non-Gaussian remarks. mixed states is subject to an extensive numerical computation that goes beyond the scope of the current paper. This, we shall address elsewhere. Appendix: Wehrl Entropy of a Single Mode In the case of nonclassical states of light, generated Gaussian State under single NC-inducing operation, Nw quantifies the NC efficiently. It successfully distinguishes between the The Husimi-Kano Q distribution could be written as even and odd Schrodinger kittens (when coherent am- a Gaussian convolution of the Wigner distribution as plitude is small). Besides, it shows that both the states are macroscopically equally nonclassical, irrespective of 2 2 d α 2 β α Q(β,β∗)=2 W (α, α∗) e− | − | , (37) the parity, as observed in terms of the Wigner negativity π [15]. Our quantification of NC also sheds light on the rel- Z ative competition between the NC-inducing operations in where, (α, β) are the complex quadrature. Writing, α = the case of quantum optical states which are generated 1 (R + iR ) and β = 1 (R˜ + iR˜ ), where, R = (x, p)T √2 1 2 √2 1 2 under multiple NC-inducing operations, as predicted in and R˜ = (˜x, p˜)T, we can recast Eq. (37) in terms of the [26]. In the case of mixed Gaussian nonclassical state, real quadrature as for example, a squeezed thermal state, it quantifies the

T NC of the state in line of the results obtained earlier with dR (R R˜) (R R˜) Q(R˜)=2 W (R) e− − − . (38) other well-known measures. 2π In recent times, Husimi-Kano Q distribution, the clas- Z sical like distribution, has gained much interest in both Replacing W (R) in Eq. (38) by the Gaussian Wigner detection and quantiﬁcation of the non-Gaussian char- distribution W G(R) from Eq. (8), we get

dR 1 T −1 ˜ T ˜ 1 2 (R D) V (R D) (R R) (R R) Q(R˜)=2√det V e− − − e− − − − 2π Z ˜T ˜ 1 T −1 1 T dR 1 −1 T −1 1 R R+ 2 D V D 2 D MD 2 (R M D) M(R M D) =2√det V e{ − } e− − − − 2π Z 1 T T 1 T det V − R˜ R˜+ 1 D V − D 1 D MD =2 e{ 2 − 2 }, (39) r det M

1 1 where, M = V − + 2I and D = 2R˜ + V − D. Let’s matrix V of the form consider a 2 2 real symmetric matrix quantum variance × v v V = 11 12 (40) v v 12 22 8 that satisfies the condition as described in Eq. (9). A [13] C. T. Lee, Phys. Rev. A 44, R2775 (1991). straightforward calculation yields [14] N. Lutkenhaus and S. M. Barnett, Phys. Rev. A 51, 3340 (1995). T 1 (R˜ D) M (R˜ D) [15] A. Kenfack and K. Zyczkowski, J. Opt. B 6, 396 (2004). Q(R˜)= √det M e 2 − − , (41) [16] K. Zyczkowski and W. Slomczynski, J. Phys. A: Math. where, Gen. 31, 9095 (1998). [17] V. V. Dodonov, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclass. Opt. 4, 1 R1 (2002). M = 2(I 2M − ) − [18] V. Dodonov and V. Manko, Theory of Nonclassical States 2 2v22 +1 2v12 of Light, (Taylor & Francis, New York, 2003). = − (42) [19] M. S. Kim, W. Son, V. Buzek and P. L. Knight, Phys. 4δ +2ǫ +1 2v12 2v11 +1 − Rev. A 65, 032323 (2002); W. Xiang-bin, Phys. Rev. A The quantities δ and ǫ are defined to be δ = det V = 66, 024303 (2002). 2 [20] J. S. Ivan, S. Chaturvedi, E. Ercolessi, G. Marmo, G. v11v22 v12 and ǫ = Tr[V] = v11 +v22. Quite evidently, the Wehrl− entropy of the single mode Gaussian state ρG, Morandi, N. Mukunda, and R. Simon, Phys. Rev. A 83, 032118 (2011). described by the variance matrix V , is given by [21] J. K. Asboth, J. Calsamiglia and H. Ritsch, Phys. Rev. ˜ Lett. 94, 173602 (2005). G dR G G [22] J. Li, G. Li, Jun-Min Wang, Shi-Yao Zhu and Tian- Hw(ρ )= Q (R˜) ln Q (R˜) − 2π Cai Zhang, J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt. Phys. 43, 085504 Z =1 ln √det M (2010). − [23] W. Vogel and J. Sperling, Phys. Rev. A 89, 052302 1 4δ +2ǫ +1 (2014). =1+ ln . (43) 2 2 [24] C. Gehrke, J. Sperling and W. Vogel, Phys. Rev. A 86, 052118 (2012). [25] A. Miranowicz, M. Bartkowiak, X. Wang, Y. X. Liu, and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. A 82, 013824 (2010). [26] S. Bose and M. Sanjay Kumar, Phys. Rev. A 95, 012330 (2017). ∗ Electronic address: [email protected] rd [27] A. Miranowicz, K. Bartkiewicz, N. Lambert, Yueh-Nan [1] W. Vogel and D. G. Welsch, Quantum Optics, 3 Edi- Chen and F. Nori, Phys. Rev. A 92, 062314 (2015). tion, WILEY-VCH, Weinheim (2006). [28] A. Wehrl, Rep. Math. Phys. 16, 853 (1979). [2] J. Perina, Z. Hradil and B. Jurco, Quantum Optics and [29] J. S. Ivan, M. S. Kumar and R. Simon, Quantum Inf. Fundamentals of Physics, Kluwer, Dordrecht (1994). Process. 11, 853 (2012). [3] P. Kok and B. W. Lovett, Introduction to Optical [30] E. H. Lieb, Commun. Math. Phys. 62, 35 (1978). Quantum Information Processing, Cambridge University [31] M. Hillery, Phys. Lett. A 111, 409 (1985). Press, Cambridge (2010). [32] R. Simon, N. Mukunda and B. Dutta, Phys. Rev. A 49, [4] G. S. Agarwal, Quantum Optics, Cambridge University 1567 (1994). Press, Cambridge (2013). st [33] S. Chaturvedi and V. Srinivasan, Phys. Rev. A 40, 6095 [5] W. P. Schleich, Quantum Optics in Phase Space, 1 Edi- (1989). tion, Wiley-VCH, Berlin (2001). [34] A. Serafini, F. Illuminati and S. De Sienna, J. Phys. B [6] R. J. Glauber, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 84 (1963). 37, L21 (2004). [7] E. C. G. Sudarshan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 277 (1963). [35] C. Hughes, M. G. Genoni, T. Tufarelli, M. G. A. Paris [8] G. S. Agarwal and K. Tara, Phys. Rev. A 43, 492 (1991); and M. S. Kim, Phys. Rev. A 90, 013810 (2014). G. S. Agarwal and K. Tara, ibid. 46, 485 (1992). [36] A. Luis, Phys. Rev. A 66, 013806 (2002); ibid. 71, 053801 [9] H. P. Yuen, Phys. Rev. A 13, 2226 (1976); C. M. Caves (2005). Phys. Rev. D. 23, 1693 (1981). [37] A. Luis, Opt. Commun. 273, 173 (2007). [10] M. Kitagawa and Y. Yamamoto, Phys. Rev. A 34, 3974 [38] T. Kiesel, Phys. Rev. A 87, 062114 (2013). (1986); Y. Yamamoto, N. Imoto, and S. Machida, ibid. [39] E. Agudelo, J. Sperling, W. Vogel, S. Kohnke, M. Mraz 33, 3243 (1986). and B. Hage, Phys. Rev. A 92, 033837 (2015). [11] M. Hillery, Phys. Rev. A 35, 725 (1987). [40] Z. Y. Ou and H. J. Kimble, Phys. Rev. A 52, 3126 (1995). [12] V. V. Dodonov, O. V. Man’ko, V. I. Man’ko, and A. Wünsche, J. Mod. Opt. 47, 633 (2000); V. V. Dodonov and M. B. Reno, Phys. Lett. A 308, 249 (2003).