Arxiv:2104.06938V2 [Quant-Ph] 20 Apr 2021 to Characterize Their Several Important Features [9]
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
On the state space structure of tripartite quantum systems Hari krishnan S V,∗ Ashish Ranjan,∗ and Manik Banik School of Physics, IISER Thiruvanathapuram, Vithura, Kerala 695551, India. State space structure of tripartite quantum systems is analyzed. In particular, it has been shown that the set of states separable across all the three bipartitions [say Bint(ABC)] is a strict subset of the set of states having positive partial transposition (PPT) across the three bipartite cuts [say Pint(ABC)] d1 d2 d3 for all the tripartite Hilbert spaces CA ⊗ CB ⊗ CC with minfd1, d2, d3g ≥ 2. The claim is proved by constructing state belonging to the set Pint(ABC) but not belonging to Bint(ABC). For (Cd)⊗3 with d ≥ 3, the construction follows from specific type of multipartite unextendible product bases. However, such a construction is not possible for (C2)⊗3 since for any n the bipartite system C2 ⊗ Cn cannot have any unextendible product bases [Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 5385 (1999)]. For the 3-qubit system we, therefore, come up with a different construction. I. INTRODUCTION arable across every possible bipartite cut and hence con- tains multipartite entanglement [11]. On the other hand, Hilbert space quantum mechanics provides an ex- for such a system the set of biseparable states is strictly tremely precise mathematical description for micro- contained within the PPT mixture set [12]. In this work, scopic phenomena. It associates tensor product Hilbert we show that the set of states that are separable across spaces with composite quantum systems and results in all possible bipartitions are strictly contained within the entangled quantum states which have no analog in clas- set of states that are PPT across all possible bipartite cuts. sical physics [1–3]. The advent of quantum information We prove this claim for an arbitrary tripartite Hilbert d d d theory [4] identifies several important applications of en- space C 1 ⊗ C 2 ⊗ C 3 with minfd1, d2, d3g ≥ 2. The tanglement (see [5, 6] and references therein). Character- proof is constructive. We construct states that are PPT ization, identification, and quantification of quantum en- across all three bipartitions but inseparable across some d ⊗3 tanglement are thus questions of great practical interest. bipartite cuts. Construction for (C ) with d ≥ 3 fol- One of the most widely used tests for bipartite states’ lows from a specific kind of unextendible product bases. entanglement verification is the positive partial trans- However, such a construction is not possible for 3-qubit position (PPT) criterion. States having negative partial Hilbert space as there cannot be any set of mutually 2 n transposition (NPT) are always entangled [7], whereas orthogonal product states in C ⊗ C that are not com- PPT implies separability only for the systems with com- pletable [13, 14]. To prove the claim for 3-qubit system posite dimensions no more than six [8]. In other words, we, therefore, come up with a different construction. being PPT is a necessary and sufficient condition for The manuscript is organized as follows: in sectionII, separability for the composite systems with dimensions we note down the notations and recall some preliminary ≤ 6. Consequently, for higher dimensional systems one results; all our findings are listed in section III; finally has several hierarchical convex-compact subsets of states in sectionIV we put our conclusions along with some within the set of allowed quantum states. Identifying open questions for further research. these subsets as well as their boundaries is essential to understand the intricacy of quantum state space struc- ture and entanglement properties of the quantum states. II. NOTATIONS AND PRELIMINARIES Having the convex-compact structures, these sets allow the classic Minkowski-Hahn–Banach separation theorem arXiv:2104.06938v2 [quant-ph] 20 Apr 2021 to characterize their several important features [9]. A quantum system S is associated with a complex The complexity of the situation increases rapidly with separable Hilbert space. HS over complex field [4, 15]. an increase in the number of component subsystems Throughout this work, we will consider only finite di- comprising the composite system [10]. For instance, mensional systems and hence HS will be isomorphic Cd separability/ PPT-ness can be considered across differ- to some complex space S, with d being the dimen- ent bipartite cuts and accordingly one ends up with sion of the complex vector space. The system’s state is different convex-compact subsets of states. Several in- described by a density operator rS (positive operator Cd triguing structures consequently emerge. For instance, a with unit trace) acting on S. Collection of density operators form a convex compact set D(S) embedded 3-qubit state may not be fully separable even if it is sep- 2 in Rd −1. We will also sometimes specify this set as D(d) to distinguish between systems with different di- mensions. The extreme points of D(S) are called pure ∗ These authors have contributed equally. 2 states, and they satisfy rS = rS. Let ED(S) denotes the 2 set of all extremal points of D(S). Such an extremal also immediately follows that, state can also be considered as a rank−1 projector, i.e. d E (AB) ⊆ E (AB) E (AB).(2) rS = jyiS hyj for some jyiS 2 CS whenever rS 2 ED(S). S P ( D States that are not pure are called mixed states and they allow convex decomposition in terms of pure states, i.e. It is important to note that a state belonging either in i i ES (AB) or in ED(AB) must be a pure state. However, 8 rS 62 ED(S), 9 sS 2 ED(S) s.t rS = ∑ pisS, where for systems with composite dimension more than 6 the pi > 0 & ∑ pi = 1. set E (AB) is strictly contained within E (AB) and con- Hilbert space CAB··· of a composite system consist- S P ing of component subsystems A, B, ··· is given by the tains ES (AB) as a proper subset. Therefore, for such tensor product of the Hilbert spaces associated with the higher dimensional systems EP (AB) must contain some d d nontrivial mixed states along with the pure product states component subsystems, i.e. Cd = C A ⊗ C B ⊗ · · · . AB··· A B belonging in E (AB). For instance, the PPT entangled Here d , d , ··· denotes the dimension of the compon- S A B state of C3 ⊗ C3 as constructed in [11] lies in E (3 ⊗ 3) ent subsystems while the dimension of the composite P [33]. Examples of such extremal states for E (n ⊗ n) system is d = d × d × · · · . While the axiomatic for- P A B with odd n & n ≥ 3 can be found in [34]. There are mulations of quantum mechanics contain this tensor in-fact some efficient methods in literature to check ex- product postulate [16–18], recent developments indicate tremality of P(AB) [35–38]. that this assumption can be logically derived from the Moving to the tripartite system, a pure state jci is state postulate and the measurement postulate [19]. ABC called fully product if it is of the form jciABC = jyiA ⊗ A bipartite state rAB 2 D(AB) is called a pure jfi ⊗ jhi for some jyi 2 CdA , jfi 2 CdB & jhi 2 product state if and only if rAB = jciAB hcj, where B C A A B B C C C dC jciAB = jyiA ⊗ jfiB for some jyiA 2 A & jfiB 2 B. CC . The convex hull of pure product states will be The convex hull of these product states will be denoted denoted as F(ABC), and a state belonging to this set is as S(AB), and the states in S(AB) are generally called generally called fully separable state. A tripartite state separable states. States that are not separable are called is called biseparable across A|BC cut if it of the form ent entangled, i.e. an entangled state rAB 2 D(AB) but jciABC = jyiA ⊗ jfiBC, where the state jfiBC is allowed ent rAB 62 S(AB). While ED(AB) consists of pure product to be entangled across B|C cut. Convex hull of the states and pure entangled states, ES (AB) consists of states biseparable across A|BC cut will be denoted as only pure product states. For a bipartite system one can B(AjBC). Similarly, one can define the sets B(BjCA) define another convex compact set, namely the Peres set and B(CjAB) that are biseparable across B|CA cut and P(AB): the set of states with positive-partial-transpose C|AB cut, respectively. A state belonging in the con- (PPT) [7]. A bipartite state rAB belongs to the set P(AB) vex hull of the sets B(AjBC), B(BjCA) & B(CjAB) is Tk whenever r ≥ 0, where Tk denotes (partial) transposi- generally called biseparable, and we denote this set as AB ch tion with respect to the kth subsystem with k 2 fA, Bg. B (ABC), i.e. The following set inclusion relations are immediate: Bch(ABC) := Convex Hull fB(AjBC), B(BjCA), S(AB) ⊆ P(AB) ( D(AB).(1) B(CjAB)g .(3) Equality between the first two sets holds only for the We can also consider the intersection of these three sets, composite system of dimension no more than 6 [8]. which we will denote as Bint(ABC), i.e. For the higher dimensions S(AB) is known to be a proper subset of P(AB) [11, 14, 20, 21]. A bipartite Bint(ABC) := B(AjBC) \B(BjCA) \B(CjAB).(4) ppt ppt state rAB is PPT-entangled whenever rAB 2 P(AB) ppt Analogously, one can define the convex sets of PPT but r 62 S(AB).