Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
School of Mathematics and Computer Science, Shanxi Datong University, Datong, Shanxi 037009, China
2
Institute for Quantum Science and Technology, and Department of Physics & Astronomy,
University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta T2N 1N4, Canada
Quantum discord has been studied extensively as a measure of non-classical correlations which
includes entanglement as a subset. Although it is well known that non-zero discord can exist without
entanglement, the origin of quantum discord is not well understood as compared to entanglement
which manifests itself more simply as higher dimensional quantum superposition. In this Letter we
explore the relation between quantum discord and the correlated bipartite coherence. Consequently,
we establish a new measure of bipartite coherence called discord-like correlated coherence, minimum
of which coincides with the original quantum discord. This demonstrates quantum discord as the
irreducible correlated bipartite coherence. In addition, the discord-like correlated coherence is shown
to admit the postulates of the quantum resource theory (QRT) although the origin quantum discord
is not a good candidate under the QRT. We also find out that the relative entropy measure induced
from the discord-like coherence is a well-defined coherence measure for bipartite states.
(1)
2
1
a
pk (k
(2)
1i
|j (i)ihi|Pj ,
(8)
d1
X
i |iihi|.
(3)
i=0
(4)
where S(k) = Tr( log2 log2 ) is the relative entropy. Cr () can be calculated to be [35]
Cr () = S(d ) S(),
(5)
(6)
(7)
(9)
(10)
3
TABLE I. The comparison of the coherence-induced discord Dc with the original quantum discord D.
Correlation
D
Dc
Free states
D0
Dc0
Free Operation
Theorem 1
Proposition 1
Ib ] =
anyPi and j and Ic [ j Uinc Pj Ib (ab )Pj Uinc
Ic [ j Pj Ib (ab )Pj Ib ]. We thus can conclude the
following.
Theorem 2. Let be set of all orthonormal basis of
Ha . Then
D(ab ) = min Dc (ab ),
(11)
Invariant Operation
Local UO
Local IUO
Measurement
a
Rank-one PPIO
inf
ab Dc0
S(ab kab ).
(12)
P
b
Dc0 and let dab =
Let
i be any state in P
P ab = i pi |iihi|
0
i |iihi| Bii Dc whenever ab =
i,j |iihj| Bij
under the reference basis {|ii} of Ha (that is, dab = (
1b )ab ). It follows that S(ab kab ) = S(dab ) S(ab ) +
S(dab kab ), and thus we get,
C r (ab ) = S(dab ) S(ab ).
(13)
It is clear that C r (ab ) fulfils (C1)(but it does not satisfies (C1 ), that is, C r (ab ) is not faithful). It satisfies
(C2a) and (C3) since the relative entropy is contractive
and jointly convex. It also fulfils (C2b) by Theorem 5
in Ref. [50] (also see the similar argument as that of
(C2b) for the original relative entropy of coherence in
[35]). That is, although Dc is not a well-defined coherence measure since they are not convex under the mixing
of states, the relative entropy measure C r is a measure
of bipartite coherence. The defect of this coherence measure is that it is not faithful, which is similar to that of
negativity as an entanglement measure [51]. So we can
also consider the symmetric discord-like measure and the
symmetric relative entropy of the discord-like quantity,
c and C r respectively. That is,
denoted by D
c (ab ) := min {Ic (ab ) Ic [(
a
b )ab ]}, (14)
D
a
b
a
b.
where the minimum is taken over all local PPIOs
c (ab ) = 0 if and only
For this symmetric measure, D
if ab is diagonal with respect to the reference basis
c0 be the set of all states with zero sym{|ii|ji}. Let D
metric discord-like measure. The corresponding relative
entropy measure is
C r (ab ) :=
inf
0
ab D
c
S(ab kab ).
(15)
That is, the symmetric measure of relative entropy coincides with the original relative entropy coherence measure.
In what follows, we discuss whether D and Dc satisfy the requirements of QRT. Let F be the set of
all free states (in all possible finite dimensions), and
Fm = F S(Hm ), where Hm = Hm1 Hm2 Hms ,
ao and Gour prodim Hmi = mi , i = 1, . . . , s. Brand
posed the following postulates [28]: (i) F is closed under tensor products; (ii) F is closed under the partial
trace of spatially separated subsystems; (iii) F is closed
4
under permutations of spatially separated subsystems;
(iv) Each Fm is a closed set; (v) Each Fm is a convex
set; (vi) The set of free operations cannot generate a
resource; they cannot convert free states into resource
states. We discuss below whether the quantum discord
and the discord-like correlation of coherence can be regarded as a quantum resource under QRT.
The free operation of quantum discord. For a Hilbert
space H we denote by B(H) and S(H) the space of all
bounded linear operators on H and the set of all quantum states on H, respectively. Recall that, a channel acting on an ndimensonal quantum system is
called an isotropic channel if it has the form () =
t() + (1 t)Tr() nI , where is either a unitary operation or unitarily equivalent to transpose [9]. If t is
nonzero, we call a nontrivial isotropic channel. A channel is called a completely decohering channel (CDC) if
(B(H)) is commutative. By Theorems 1-2 in Ref. [11]
and Theorem 1 in Ref. [8], if = a b , where a is
either a CDC or (i) a nontrivial isotropic channel (NIC)
on part A whenever dim Ha 3 and (ii) a unital channel
on part A whenever dim Ha = 2, and b is any quantum
channel on part B, then is a FOQD. For simplicity, we
call such a local channel a a local free operation of QD
(LFOQD). We show below that, the FOQDs contains the
operations above as special cases.
Theorem 3. A quantum operation : B(Ha Hb )
B(Ha Hb ) is a FOQD if and only if it has the Kraus
operators of the form
Kj = Aj Bj ,
(16)
P
P
where j Aj ()Aj is a LFOQD and j Bj ()Bj is any
quantum channel on part B.
Proof.The if part is clear.
We only need
to check the only if part. We write the Kraus
P
(j)
operators of as Kj =
k,l Akl |kihl|, where
{|ki} P
is an orthonormal basis ofPHb .
Taking
ab = i pi |ia ihia | bi , hia |ja i = ij , i pi = 1, pi > 0,
P P
P
(j)
then ab = (ab ) =
k,l Akl
j [(
j Kj Kj =
P
P
(j)
|tihs|)]
=
|kihl|)( i pi |ia ihia | bi )( s,t Ast
P
P P P
(j)
(j)
b
s,t hs|i |tiAks |ia ihia |Alt )]} |kihl|.
j [ i pi (
k,l {
P
P P
(j)
(j)
Let Akl (ab ) = j [ i pi ( s,t hs|bi |tiAks |ia ihia |Alt )].
Note that ab is a classical-quantum state, therefore,
by Theorem 3.1 in [44], Akl (ab ) are mutually commuting normal operators for any classical-quantum
state ab . That is, the action of on part A is in
fact a commutativity preserving map (or equivalently,
a normality preserving map by Corollary 1 in [45]).
P
(j)
(j)
by kl for
We denote the action
j,s,t Aks ()Alt
simplicity. It turns out from Theorem 3 in [45] that,
for any k and l, either kl (B(Ha )) is commutative, or
there exist a unitary operator Ua B(Ha ), a linear
function fkl on B(Ha ), and complex numbers tkl ,
P
(j)
(j)
= tkl Ua ()Ua + fkl ()Ia
such that
j,l,t Aks ()Alt
P
(j)
(j)
= tkl Ua ()T Ua + fkl ()Ia , where
or
j,l,t Aks ()Alt
X T denotes the transpose of X under the given basis.
P (j)
(j)
Together with the fact that j Aks ()Aks is a multiple
(j)
(j)
E Uab,E
) = j=1 ab,j |jiE hj|, where
E Ua UbE
)] = TrE [ ij Ua |iihj|Ua 1b Pj UbE (Bij
P
E )UbE
] =
ij Ua |iihj|Ua TrE [1b Pj UbE (Bij
E )UbE
], which leads to the following theorem:
Theorem 4. A quantum operation : B(Ha Hb )
B(Ha Hb ) is a PFOQD if and only if it can be expressed
as a convex combination of maps each having Kraus operators {Kj }rj=1 of the form
K j = U a Bj ,
(17)
5
where Ua is an arbitrarily given unitary operator on
Ha and {Bj }rj=1 is any Kraus operators that satisfying
P
j Bj Bj = Ib .
It is clear that the set of PFOQDs is a proper subset
of that of FOQDs. In addition, quantum discord is based
on the local von Neumann measurements a , which is in
fact a special CDC, and thus a is a special FOQD. Note
that both entanglement and coherence, the free states are
closely related to the free operations. A state is entangled if and only if it can not be prepared by LOCC, and a
state is incoherent if and only if it can not be created via
incoherent operations [35]. However, quantum discord is
defined via the local von Neumann measurements, which
is only a proper set of its free operations. More remarkably, the free states of quantum discord is not convex.
From this point of view, discord as a quantum resource
is not a good candidate.
QRT of the discord-like coherence. For convenience,
(i) an isotropic channel is called incoherent if the associated unitary operation is incoherent, (ii) a CDC is incoherent if it is a CDC up to the reference basis, and (iii)
a unital channel is incoherent if it is unital with respect
to the reference basis. We call a LFOQD incoherent if
it is incoherent in the sense of items (i)-(iii) above. By
Theorems 3-4, the following are straightforward.
Proposition 1. A quantum operation is free for
discord-like correlated coherence
if and only if it has
P
the form as Eq. (16) with j Aj ()Aj is an incoherent
LFOQD.
Proposition 2. A quantum operation is a physically
free operation for the discord-like correlated coherence if
and only if it has the form as Eq. (17) with Uj are IUOs
on Ha .
When we regard Dc0 as the free states, and consider
the operations in Proposition 1 (or Proposition 2) as the
free operations (or physically free operations), we show
below that it is a new resource under QRT.
Since Dc is a measure of bipartite systems, we assume
that Hmi = Hai Hbi , i = 1, . . . , s, and S(Hm )
is free if any reduced state in Hms is free. We check the
postulates (i)-(v) for free states item by item. (i) With no
loss of generality, we consider the case of s =
P1. If ab
S(Ha Hb ) with Dc (ab ) = 0, then ab = i pi |iihi|
bi with respect to the reference basis {|ii} of Ha . It
follows that ab abP
S(Ha Hb HP
a Hb ) can be
expressed as abab = ( i pi |iihi| bi ) ( i pi |iihi| bi )
and thus it is a free state in S(Ha Ha Hb Hb ).
(ii) and (iii) are clear. (iv) is easy to check according to
Theorem 3.1 in [44]. (v) is clear and the properties for
the free operations are guaranteed by Proposition 1 and
Proposition 2. We thus conclude that the discord-like
correlation of bipartite coherence can also be regarded as
a quantum resource (the comparison between Dc and D
is listed in Table I).
It is worth mentioning that Dc can increase un-
guoyu3@aliyun.com
[1] M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation
and Quantum information (Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge, 2000).
[2] R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K.
Horodecki, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009).
[3] O. G
uhne and G. T
oth, Phys. Rep. 474, 1 (2009).
[4] H. Ollivier and W. H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 017901
6
(2001).
[5] K. Modi, A. Brodutch, H. Cable, T. Paterek, and V.
Vedral, Rev. Mod. Phys. 84, 1655 (2012).
[6] A. Streltsov and W. H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111,
040401 (2013).
[7] X. Yang, G. Huang, and M. Fang, Opt. Commun. 341,
91-96 (2015).
[8] A. Streltsov, H. Kampermann, and D. Bru, Phys. Rev.
lett. 107, 170502 (2011).
[9] X. Hu, H. Fan, D. L. Zhou, and W. M. Liu, Phys. Rev.
A 85, 032102 (2012).
[10] Y. Guo, Sci. Rep. 6, 25241 (2016).
[11] Y. Guo and J. Hou, J. Phys. A Math. Theor. 46, 155301
(2013).
[12] A. Datta, A. Shaji, and C. M. Caves, Phys. Rev. Lett.
100, 050502 (2008).
[13] A. Brodutch, Phys. Rev. A 88, 022307 (2013).
[14] X. Su, Chin. Sci. Bull. 59, 1083-1090 (2014).
[15] B. Dakic, Y. O. Lipp, X. Ma, M. Ringbauer, S.
Kropatschek, S. Barz, T. Paterek, V. Vedral, A.
Zeilinger, C. Brukner, and P. Walther, Nature Phys. 8,
666 (2012).
[16] G. L. Giorgi, Phys. Rev. A 88, 022315 (2013).
[17] S. Pirandola, Sci. Rep. 4, 6956 (2014).
[18] J.-S. Xu, K. Sun, C.-F. Li, X.-Y. Xu, G.-C. Guo, E. Andersson, R. L. Franco, and G. Compagno, Nat. Commun.
4, 2851 (2013).
[19] R. LoFranco, B. Bellomo, E. Andersson, and G. Compagno, Phys. Rev. A 85, 032318 (2012).
[20] F. G. S. L. Brand
ao, M. Horodecki, J. Oppenheim, J.
M. Renes, and R. W. Spekkens, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111,
250404 (2013).
[21] M. Horodecki and J. Oppenheim, Nat. Commun. 4, 2059
(2013).
[22] P. Faist, F. Dupuis, J. Oppenheim, and R. Renner, Nat.
Commun. 6, 7669 (2015).
[23] G. Gour, M. P. Muller, V. Narasimhachar, R. W.
Spekkens, and N. Y. Halpern, Phys. Rep. 583, 1 (2015).
[24] I. Marvian and R. W. Spekkens, Nat. Commun. 5, 3821
(2014).
[25] S. L. Braunstein and P. van Loock, Rev. Mod. Phys. 77,
513 (2005).
[26] A. Grudka, K. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki,
R. Horodecki, P. Joshi, W. Klobus, and A. Wojcik, Phys.
Rev. Lett. 112, 120401 (2014).