Geometry on the set of quantum states and quantum correlations

Publication GSI2015
DOI : You do not have permission to access embedded form.


Geometry on the set of quantum states and quantum correlations


Voir la vidéo


2.92 Mo


Creative Commons Aucune (Tous droits réservés)





Séminaire Léon Brillouin Logo
<resource  xmlns:xsi=""
        <identifier identifierType="DOI">10.23723/11784/14277</identifier><creators><creator><creatorName>Dominique Spehner</creatorName></creator></creators><titles>
            <title>Geometry on the set of quantum states and quantum correlations</title></titles>
        <resourceType resourceTypeGeneral="Text">Text</resourceType><dates>
	    <date dateType="Created">Sat 7 Nov 2015</date>
	    <date dateType="Updated">Wed 31 Aug 2016</date>
            <date dateType="Submitted">Sat 17 Feb 2018</date>
	    <alternateIdentifier alternateIdentifierType="bitstream">4faf553d62d9be2522d504cba2df3eb9c2ebd078</alternateIdentifier>
            <description descriptionType="Abstract"></description>

FOURIER INSTITUT i f Geometry on the set of quantum states and quantum correlations Dominique Spehner Institut Fourier et Laboratoire de Physique et Mod´elisation des Milieux Condens´es, Grenoble Short course, GSI’2015, ´Ecole Polytechnique, Paris, 28/10/2015     Quantum Correlations & Quantum Information ™ Quantum Information Theory (QIT) studies quantum systems that can perform information-processing tasks more efficiently than one can do with classical systems: - computational tasks (e.g. factorizing into prime numbers) - quantum communication (e.g. quantum cryptography, ...)  A quantum computer works with qubits, i.e. two-level quantum systems in linear combinations of |0y and |1y.  Entanglement is a resource for quan- tum computation and communication [Bennett et al. ’96, Josza & Linden ’03] However, other kinds of “quantum correlations” differing from entanglement could also explain the quantum efficiencies.  
Outlines  Entangled and non-classical states  Contractive distances on the set of quantum states  Geometrical measures of quantum correlations     Basic mathematical objects in quantum mechanics (1) A Hilbert space H (in this talk: n  dim H   V). (2) States ρ are non-negative operators on H with trace one. (3) Observables A are self-adjoint operators on H (in this talk: A € MatpC, nq finite Hermitian matrices) (4) An evolution is given by a linear map Φ : MatpC, nq Ñ MatpC, nq which is (TP) trace preserving (so that trpΦpρqq  trpρq  1) (CP) Completely Positive, i.e. for any integer d ¥ 1 and any d ¢d matrix pAijqd i,j1 ¥ 0 with elements Aij € MatpC, nq, one has pΦpAijqqd i,j1 ¥ 0. Special case: unitary evolution Φpρq  U ρ U¦ with U unitary.     Pure and mixed quantum states  A pure state is a rank-one projector ρψ  |ψyxψ| with |ψy € H, }ψ}  1 (actually, |ψy belongs to the projective space PH). The set EpHq of all quantum states is a convex cone. Its extremal elements are the pure states.  A mixed state is a non-pure state. It has infinitely many pure state decompositions ρ  ¸ i pi|ψiyxψi|, with pi ¥ 0, ° i pi  1 and |ψiy € PH. Statistical interpretation: the pure states |ψiy have been prepared with probability pi.     Quantum-classical analogy Hilbert space H Ø finite sample space Ω state ρ Ø probability p on pΩ, PpΩqq observable Ø random variable on pΩ, PpΩqq set of quantum states Ø probability simplex EpHq Eclass  2 p € Rn  ; ° k pk  1 @ CPTP map Φ Ø stochastic matrices pΦklqk,l1,...,n (Φkl ¥ 0, ° k Φkl  1 d l)     Separable states A bipartite system AB is composed of two subsystems A and B with Hilbert spaces HA and HB. It has Hilbert space HAB  HA ˜HB. For instance, A and B can be the polarizations of two photons localized far from each other ñ HAB C2 ˜C2 (2 qubits):  A pure state |Ψy of AB is separable if it is a product state |Ψy  |ψy˜|φy with |ψy € PHA and |φy € PHB.  A mixed state ρ is separable if it admits a pure state decomposition ρ  ° i pi|ΨiyxΨi| with |Ψiy  |ψiy ˜ |φiy separable for all i.     Entangled states  Nonseparable states are called entangled. Entanglement is ãÑ the most specific feature of Quantum Mechanics. ãÑ used as a resource in Quantum Information (e.g. quantum cryptography, teleportation, high precision interferometry...).  Examples of entangled & separable states: let HA HB C2 (qubits) with canonical basis t|0y, |1yu. The pure states |Ψ¨ Belly  1c 2 ¡ |0 ˜0y¨|1 ˜1y © are maximally entangled. ãÑ lead to the maximal violation of the Bell inequalities observed experimentally [Aspect et al ’82] ñnonlocality of QM In contrast, the mixed state ρ  1 2 |Ψ  BellyxΨ  Bell| 1 2 |Ψ¡ BellyxΨ¡ Bell| is separable ! (indeed, ρ  1 2 |0 ˜0yx0 ˜0|  1 2 |1 ˜1yx1 ˜1|).  
Classical states  A state ρ of AB is classical if it has a spectral decomposition ρ  ° k pk|ΨkyxΨk| with product u states |Ψky  |αky˜|βky. Classicality is equivalent to separability for pure states only.  A state ρ is A-classical if ρ  ° i qi|αiyxαi|˜ρB|i with t|αiyu orthonormal basis of HA and ρB|i arbitrary states of B.  The set CAB (resp. CA) of all (A-)classical states is not convex. Its convex hull is the set of separable states SAB. ρ CA C ABS CAB B  Some tasks impossible to do clas- sically can be realized using sepa- rable non-classical mixed states.  Such states are easier to produce and presumably more robust to a coupling with an environment.     Quantum vs classical correlations  Central question in Quantum Information theory: identify (and try to protect) the Quantum Correlations responsible for the exponential speedup of quantum algorithms. classical correlations quantum correlations  For mixed states, two (at least) kinds of QCs Õ entanglement [Schr¨odinger ’36] × nonclassicality (quantum discord) [Ollivier, Zurek ’01, Henderson, Vedral ’01]  
Outlines Entangled and non-classical states  Contractive distances on the set of quantum states  
Contractive distances ρ φ(ρ) φ(σ) σ CONTRACTIVE DISTANCE  The set EAB of all quantum states of a bipartite system AB (i.e. , operators ρ ¥ 0 on HAB with tr ρ  1) can be equipped with many distances d.  From a QI point of view, interesting distances must be contractive under CPTP maps, i.e. for any such map Φ on EAB, d ρ, σ € EAB, dpΦpρq, Φpσqq ¤ dpρ, σq Physically: irreversible evolutions can only decrease the distance between two states.  A contractive distance is in particular unitarily invariant, i.e. dpUρU¦, UσU¦q  dpρ, σq for any unitary U on HAB  The Lp -distances dppρ, σq  }ρ ¡σ}p  ptr |ρ ¡σ|p q1{p are not contractive excepted for p  1 (trace distance) [Ruskai ’94].  
Petz’s characterization of contractive distances  Classical setting: there exists a unique (up to a multiplicative factor) contractive Riemannian distance dclas on the probability simplex Eclas, with Fisher metric ds2  ° k dp2 k{pk [Cencov ’82]  Quantum generalization: any Riemannian contractive distance on the set of states EpHq with n  dim H   V has metric ds2  gρpdρ, dρq  n¸ k,l1 cppk, plq|xk|dρ|ly|2 where pk and |ky are the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of ρ, cpp, qq  pfpq{pq qfpp{qq 2pqfpp{qqfpq{pq and f : R  Ñ R  is an arbitary operator-monotone function such that fpxq  xfp1{xq [Morozova & Chentsov ’90, Petz ’96]     Distance associated to the von Neumann entropy ™ Quantum analog of the Shannon entropy: von Neumann entropy Spρq  ¡trpρ ln ρq ™ Since S is concave, the physically most natural metric is ds2  gSpdρ, dρq  ¡d2 Spρ tdρq dt2 § § § t0  d2 F pX sdXq ds2 § § § s0 [Bogoliubov; Kubo & Mori; Balian, Alhassid & Reinhardt, ’86, Balian ’14]. with FpXq  ln trpeX q and ρ  eX¡F pXq  eX {trpeX q. ™ ds2 has the Petz form with fpxq  x¡1 ln x ãÑ the corresponding distance is contractive. ™ Loss of information when mixing the neighboring equiprobable states ρ¨  ρ ¨ 1 2dρ: ds2 {8  Spρq¡ 1 2Spρ q¡ 1 2Spρ¡q     Bures distance and Uhlmann fidelity ™ Fidelity (generalizes F|xψ|φy|2 for mixed states) [Uhlmann ’76] Fpρ, σq  2 trrcσρ cσs1{2 @2  Fpσ, ρq ™ Bures distance: dBupρ, σq    2 ¡2 — Fpρ, σq ¨1 2 [Bures ’69] ãÑ has metric of the Petz form with fpxq  x 1 2 ãÑ smallest contractive Riemannian distance [Petz ’96] ãÑ coincides with the Fubiny-Study metric on PH for pure states ãÑ dBupρ, σq2 is jointly convex in pρ, σq ™ dBupρ, σq  sup dclaspp, qq with sup over all measurements giving outcome k with proba pk (for state ρ) and qk (for state σ) [Fuchs ’96]  
Bures distance and Fisher information In quantum metrology, the goal is to estimate an unknown parameter φ by measuring the output states ρoutpφq  e¡iφH ρ eiφH and using a statistical estimator depending on the measurement results (e.g. in quantum interferometry: estimate the phase shift φ1 ¡φ2) ãÑ precision ∆φ  e¡§ § § fxφestyφ fφ § § § ¡1 φest ¡φ ©2i1{2 φ The smallest precision is given by the quantum Cr´amer-Rao bound p∆φqbest  1c N cFpρ,Hq , Fpρ, Hq  4dBupρ, ρ  dρq2 , dρ  ¡irH, ρs N = number of measurements Fpρ, Hq= quantum Fisher information [Braunstein & Caves ’94]     Summary CONTRACTIVE RIEMANNIAN METRICS: Classical Quantum Interpretation Bures ds2 Bu Q. metrology unique: Õ ... (Fisher information) ds2 clas  ¸ k dp2 k pk Ñ ds2 S  ¡d2 S Loss of information (Fisher) × ... when merging 2 states Hellinger ds2 Hel Q. state discrimination ... with many copies  
Outlines Entangled and non-classical states Contractive distances on the set of quantum states  Geometrical measures of quantum correlations     Geometric approach of quantum correlations ρ CA C ABS CAB B Geometric entanglement: Epρq  min σsep€SAB dpρ, σsepq2 Geometric quantum discord : DApρq  min σA-cl€CA dpρ, σA-clq2 Properties: EpρΨq  DApρΨq for pure states ρΨ Ð for Bures distance E is convex Ð if d2 is jointly convex Entanglement monotonicity: EpΦA ˜ ΦBpρqq ¤ Epρq for any TPCP maps ΦA and ΦB acting on A and B (also true for DA but only when ΦApρAq  UA ρA U¦ A). Ð if d is contractive     Bures geometric measure of entanglement EBupρq  dBupρ, SABq2  2 ¡2 — Fpρ, SABq with Fpρ, SABq  maxσsep€SAB Fpρ, σsepq = maximal fidelity between ρ and a separable state. ÝÑ Main physical question: determine Fpρ, SABq explicitely. pb: it is not easy to find the geodesics for the Bures distance! ™ The closest separable state to a pure state ρΨ is a pure product state, so that FpρΨ, SABq  max|ϕy,|χy |xϕ ˜χ|Ψy|2 Ñ easy! ™ For mixed states ρ, Fpρ, SABq coincides with the convex roof [Streltsov, Kampermann and Bruß’10] Fpρ, SABq  maxt|Ψiy,ηiu ° i piFpρΨi , SABq Ñ not easy! max. over all pure state decompositions ρ  ° i pi|ΨiyxΨi| of ρ.     The two-qubit case Assume that both subsystems A and B are qubits, HA HB C2 .
Concurrence: [Wootters ’98] Cpρq  maxt0, λ1 ¡λ2 ¡λ3 ¡λ4u with λ2 1 ¥ λ2 2 ¥ λ2 3 ¥ λ2 4 the eigenvalues of ρ σy ˜σy ρ σy ˜σy σy  ¢ 0 ¡i i 0  = Pauli matrix ρ = complex conjugate of ρ in the canonical (product) basis.
Then [Wei and Goldbart ’03, Streltsov, Kampermann and Bruß’10] Fpρ, SABq  1 2   1   — 1 ¡Cpρq2 ¨     Quantum State Discrimination 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111111111111111111 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 | |ψ ψ2 > 1 > >3 ψ| APPARATUS MEASUREMENT ? "ancilla" |0>  A receiver gets a state ρi randomly chosen with probability ηi among a known set of states tρ1, ¤¤¤ , ρmu.  To determine the state he has in hands, he performs a measurement on it. ãÑ Applications : quantum communication, cryptography,...  If the ρi are u, one can discriminate them unambiguously  Otherwise one succeeds with probability PS  ° i ηi trpMiρiq Mi = non-negative operators describing the measurement, ° i Mi  1. |ψ >2 |ψ >1 Π2 Π1 Open pb (for n ¡ 2): find the optimal measurement tMopt i u and highest success probability Popt S .     Bures geometric quantum discord The square Bures distance DApρq  dBupρ, CAq2 to the set CA of A-classical states is a geometric analog of the quantum discord characterizing the “quantumness” of states (actually, the A-classical states are the states with zero discord)
Popt S p|αiyq optimal success proba. in discriminating the states ρi  η¡1 i cρ |αiyxαi|˜1 cρ with proba ηi  xαi|trBpρq|αiy, where t|αiyu orthonormal basis of HA.
The geometric quantum discord is given by solving a state discrimination problem [Spehner and Orszag ’13] DApρq  2 ¡2 maxt|αiyu ˜ Popt S p|αiyq     Closest A-classical states to a state ρ
The closest A-classical states to ρ are σρ  1 F pρ,CAq ° i |αopt i yxαopt i |˜xαopt i |cρ Πopt i cρ |αopt i y [Spehner and Orszag ’13] where tΠopt i u is the optimal von Neumann measurement and t|αopt i yu the orthonormal basis of HA maximizing Popt S , i.e. Fpρ, CAq  nA¸ i1 ηopt i trpMopt i ρopt i q.
ρ can have either a unique or an infinity of closest A-classical states.     The qubit case
If A is a qubit, HA C2 , and dim HB  nB, then Fpρ, CAq  1 2 max }u}1 3 1 ¡tr Λpuq 2 nB¸ l1 λlpuq A [Spehner and Orszag ’14] λ1puq ¥ ¤¤¤ ¥ λ2nB puq eigenvalues of the 2nB ¢2nB matrix Λpuq  cρ σu ˜1 cρ with u € R3 , }u}  1, and σu  u1σ1  u2σ2  u3σ3 with σi Pauli matrices. c2 c1 ρ ρσ L J I K τ στ στ c3 ρ Η−+Η c1 2=c N G+−G M σρ     Conclusions & perspectives  Conclusions: ™ Contractive Riemannian distances on the set of quantum states provide useful tools for measuring quantum correlations in bipartite systems. ™ Major challenges are ãÑ compute the geometric measures for simple systems ãÑ compare the measures obtained from different distances and look for universal properties  References: - Review article: D. Spehner, J. Math. Phys. 55, 075211 (’14) - D. Spehner, M. Orszag, New J. Phys. 15, 103001 (’13) - D. Spehner, M. Orszag, J. Phys. A 47, 035302 (’14) - R. Roga, D. Spehner, F. Illuminati, arXiv:1510.06995