Quantum entanglement of identical particles Yu Shi∗ Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics, University of Cambridge, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge CB3 0WA, United Kingdom and Theory of Condensed Matter, Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 0HE, United Kingdom We consider entanglement in a system of fixed number of identical particles. Since any operation should be symmetrized over all the identical particles and there is the precondition that the spatial wave functions overlap, the meaning of identical-particle entanglement is fundamentally different from that of distinguishable particles. The identical-particle counterpart of the Schmidt basis is shown to be the single-particle basis in which the one-particle reduced density matrix is diagonal. But it does not play a special role in the issue of entanglement, which depends on the single-particle basis chosen. The nonfactorization due to (anti)symmetrization is naturally excluded by using the (anti)symmetrized basis or, equivalently, the particle number representation. The natural degrees of freedom in quantifying the identical-particle entanglement in a chosen single-particle basis are occupation numbers of different single particle basis states. The entanglement between effectively distinguishable spins is shown to be a special case of the occupation-number entanglement. PACS numbers: 03.67.-a, 03.65.-w, 73.21.-b How does one characterize entanglement in a fixed terminants or permanents. Another consequence is that number of identical particles? Obviously, a correct char- the two-identical-particle counterpart of the Schmidt de- acterization must exclude the nonfactorization due to composition, which we call Yang decomposition since the (anti)symmetrization. Here, we clarify that it can be corresponding transformation of an antisymmetric ma- done by using the (anti)symmetrized basis, which is trix was first obtained by Yang long ago [3], does not equivalent to the particle number representation. This play a similar role in characterizing the entanglement. naturally leads to the use of occupation numbers of dif- On the other hand, we show that like the Schmidt ba- ferent single-particle basis states as the (distinguishable) sis, the Yang basis is the single-particle basis in which degrees of freedom in quantifying identical-particle en- the one-particle reduced density matrix is diagonal. It tanglement even when the number of particles is con- is a common wisdom to treat the entanglement between served. The occupation-numbers of different modes have spins of identical particles, when they are effectively dis- already been used in quantum computing [1]. The use tinguished in terms of another degree of freedom, in the of modes was made in a previous study of identical- way of distinguishable particles. We show that it is in particle entanglement, based on formally mapping the fact a special case of the occupation-number entangle- Fock space to the state space of qubits or harmonic os- ment with a constraint on the accessible subspace of the cillators [2], but it was under the unphysical presump- Fock space. tion of full access to the Fock space. We shall elaborate In terms of the product basis k , , kN k | 1 · · · i ≡ | 1i⊗···⊗ that the concept of entanglement in a system of identical kN , the N-particle state is particles is fundamentally different from that of distin- | i guishable particles, for which entanglement is invariant ψ = X q(k1, , kN ) k1, , kN , (1) arXiv:quant-ph/0205069v5 10 Feb 2003 | i · · · | · · · i under local unitary transformations. There is no local k1, ,kN ··· operation that acts only on one of the identical parti- where the summations are made over k , , kN indepen- cles. The single-particle basis transformation is made on 1 · · · each particle and chooses a different set of particles in dently, the coefficients q(k1, , kN ) are (anti)symmetric. It is often convenient· · · to use the unnormal- representing the many-particle system. Thus, the en- ( ) tanglement property of a system of identical particles ized (anti)symmetrized basis, k1, , kN ± = N! P | · · · i ( 1) k , , kN , where P denotes permutations, depends on the single-particle basis used. The parti- PP − | 1 · · · i cle number basis state for a fixed number of particles ‘+’ is for bosons while ‘-’ is for fermions. Suppose that in k , , kN , there are nα ki’s which are α, then there is just the normalized (anti)symmetrized basis in the 1 · · · configuration space, i.e., Slater determinants or perma- are only N!/ Qα∞=0 nα! different permutations. Hence, ( ) P nents. Therefore, the occupation-number entanglement k1, , kN ± = ′ ( 1) nα k1, , kN , where | · · · i PP − Qα | · · · i in a fixed number of particles is nothing but the situation the summation is only over all different permutations. that the state is a superposition of different Slater de- The N-particle state is then ( ) ψ = X g(k1, , kN ) k1, , kN ± , (2) | i · · · | · · · i (k1, ,kN ) ··· ∗Email address:[email protected] where (k , , kN ), disregarding the order of k , , kN , 1 · · · 1 · · · 2 is a single index. Up to the sign depending on the or- tropy of any density matrix characterizes its decomposi- der of k1, , kN in q(k1, , kN ), q is equal to g, i.e., tion in its eigenbasis, which is the Yang basis in the case each set of· · · (anti)symmetrized· · · terms in Eq. (1) corre- of one-particle reduced density matrix for a system of sponds to one term in Eq. (2). Equation (2) can be two identical particles, as explicitly shown below. The n- rewritten in terms of the normalized (anti)symmetrized particle reduced density matrix for a N-particle system is (s) ( ) (n) basis k1, , kN = 1/N! nα! k1, , kN ± , as k′ , , k′ ρ k , , kn = T r(ak′ ak′ ρa† a† ), p Qα 1 n 1 1 n kn k1 | · · · i | ·( ·s ·) i h · · · (n|) | · · · i · · · · · · ψ = h(k1, , kN ) k1, , kN . with Trρ = N(N 1) (N n + 1). One can find | i P(k1, ,kN ) · · · | · · · i For a fixed··· number of particles, the normalized − · · · − (n) 1 (anti)symmetrized basis can be rewritten in terms of k1′ kn′ ρ k1 kn = (N n)! the occupation numbers of different single-particle ba- h · · · | ( )| · · · i − × ( ) ± k′ k′ kn kN ρ k knkn kN ± . Pkn+1 kN 1 n +1 1 +1 sis states. This is the particle number representation, in ··· h · · · · · · | | · · · · · · i (4) which † † k For a two-boson product state ak1 ak2 0 with 1 = k , the one-particle reduced density matrix| i is given6 ψ = X f(n1, ,n ) n1, ,n , (3) 2 | i · · · ∞ | · · · ∞i by k ρ(1) k = k ρ(1) k = 1 and k ρ(1) k = n1, ,n∞ 1 1 2 2 1 2 ··· k hρ(1)| k | =i 0, henceh | the| one-particlei partialh | entropy| i h 2| | 1i where nj is the occupation number of mode j, is log 2, contradicting the previous claim. n1 n∞ The dependence of entanglement on the single-particle n1, ,n (a1†) (a† ) 0 , the summations are | · · · ∞i≡ · · · ∞ | i basis is consistent with the point of view that individ- subject to the constraint Pα nα = N, hence in the com- plete summation, of course most of the f’s are zero. ual particles are excitation of quantum fields, and that In Refs. [4, 5, 6, 7, 8], an arbitrary N-particle state, each different single-particle basis, in fact, defines a dif- in an arbitrary single-particle basis, is inappropriately ferent set of particles representing the many-body state. In fact, in many-body physics, it is a routine to make var- written as i iN wi1 iN ai† ai†N 0 , where wi1 iN is P 1 ··· 1 · · · | i ··· (anti)symmetric,··· and each subscript of the creation op- ious transformations, which usually changes the nature erators runs over all the modes. One should note that of entanglement [11]. the creation or annihilation operators are associated With (anti)symmetrization already made on the ba- sis, the correlation embedded in the coefficients natu- with (anti)symmetrized basis. For example, ai†aj† 0 = 1 | i rally gives the information on entanglement. A Slater a†a† 0 = 1i 1j = ( i j i j ), where i = j. ± j i | i | i| i √2 | i| i ± | i| i 6 determinant or permanent is just a (anti)symmetrized Therefore a† a† 0 in these papers may be corrected basis state, hence is nonentangled with respect to the i1 · · · iN | i to i1 iN . On the other hand, if one uses the particle given single-particle basis. One can regard a superpo- number| · · · basisi states, no (anti)symmetrization needs to sition of Slater determinant or permanent as entangled made [9]. in the given single-particle basis. Any operation, even a Single-particle basis transformation for identical parti- one-body one, of which the single-particle basis transfor- cles is not the counterpart of the local unitary transfor- mation is an example, acts on all the particles. A trans- mation in a system of distinguishable particles. It acts formation from a superposition of Slater determinant or on each identical particle in the same way. For distin- permanent to a single Slater determinant or permanent, guishable particles, local unitary transformations do not in another single-particle basis, must involve operations change the entanglement. In contrast, for identical par- on all particles and actually chooses a different set of ticles, the entanglement depends on which single-particle particles in representing the state. In a sense, there is a basis is chosen. Consequently, unlike the Schmidt decom- builtin nonseparability, based on both the symmetriza- position of distinguishable particles, the Yang decompo- tion of any operation and the spatial wave function over- sition does not play a special role in identical-particle lap.