ENTANGLEMENT OF GAUSSIAN STATES Gerardo Adesso
ENTANGLEMENT OF GAUSSIAN STATES Gerardo Adesso ENTANGLEMENT OF GAUSSIAN STATES Gerardo Adesso
40 2. Gaussian states: structural properties SV SV 5 4 3 2 1 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 SL SL Figure 2.1. Plot of the curves of maximal (red line) and minimal (blue line) Von Neumann entropy at given linear entropy for two-mode Gaussian states. All physical states lie in the shaded region between the two curves. extremal values SV min(µ) and SV max(µ) read 1 SV min(µ) = f , µ (2.48) SV max(µ) = Nf µ − 1 N . (2.49) The behaviors of the Von Neumann and of the linear entropies for two-mode Gaussian states are compared in Fig. 2.1. The instance p > 2 can be treated in the same way, with the major difference that the function Sp of Eq. (2.41) is convex with respect to any si for any value of the si’s. As a consequence we have an inversion of the previous expressions: for p > 2, the states with minimal Sp min(µ) at given purity µ are those with a fully distributed symplectic spectrum, with µ − 1 N N 1 − gp Sp min(µ) = p − 1 , p > 2 . (2.50) On the other hand, the states with maximal Sp max at given purity µ are those with a spectrum of the kind ν1 = . . . = νN−1 = 1 and νN = 1/µ. Therefore 1 1 − gp µ Sp max(µ) = , p > 2 . p − 1 (2.51) The distance |Sp max − Sp min| decreases with increasing p [GA3]. This is due to the fact that the quantity Sp carries less information with increasing p, and the knowledge of µ provides a more precise bound on the value of Sp. 2.4. Standard forms of Gaussian covariance matrices We have seen that Gaussian states of N-mode CV systems are special in that they are completely specified by the first and second moments of the canonical
2.4. Standard forms of Gaussian covariance matrices 41 bosonic operators. However, this already reduced set of parameters (compared to a true infinite-dimensional one needed to specify a generic non-Gaussian CV state) contains many redundant degrees of freedom which have no effect on the entanglement. A basic property of multipartite entanglement is in fact its invariance under unitary operations performed locally on the subsystems, Eq. (1.31). To describe entanglement efficiently, is thus natural to lighten quantum systems of the unnecessary degrees of freedom adjustable by local unitaries, and to classify states according to standard forms representative of local-unitary equivalence classes [146]. When applied to Gaussian states, the freedom arising from the local invariance immediately rules out the vector of first moments, as already mentioned. One is then left with the 2N(2N + 1)/2 real parameters constituting the symmetric CM of the second moments, Eq. (2.20). In this Section we study the action of local unitaries on a general CM of a multimode Gaussian state. We compute the minimal number of parameters which completely characterize Gaussian states, up to local unitaries. The set of such parameters will contain complete information about any form of bipartite or multipartite entanglement in the corresponding Gaussian states. We give accordingly the standard form of the CM of a completely general N-mode Gaussian state. We moreover focus on pure states, and on (generally mixed) states with strong symmetry constraints, and for both instances we investigate the further reduction of the minimal degrees of freedom, arising due to the additional constraints on the structure of the state. The analysis presented here will play a key role in the investigation of bipartite and multipartite entanglement of Gaussian states, as presented in the next Parts. 2.4.1. Mixed states Here we discuss the standard forms of generic mixed N-mode Gaussian states under local, single-mode symplectic operations, following Ref. [GA18]. Let us express the CM σ as in Eq. (2.20), in terms of 2 × 2 sub-matrices σjk, defined by ⎛ ⎞ σ ≡ ⎜ ⎝ σ11 · · · σ1N . . σ T 1N . .. . . · · · σNN each sub-matrix describing either the local CM of mode j (σjj) or the correlations between the pair of modes j and k (σjk). Let us recall the Euler decomposition (see Appendix A.1) of a generic single- mode symplectic transformation S1(ϑ ′ , ϑ ′′ , z), S1(ϑ ′ , ϑ ′′ ′ cos ϑ sin ϑ , z) = ′ − sin ϑ ′ cos ϑ ′ z 0 0 1 z ′′ cos ϑ sin ϑ ′′ − sin ϑ ′′ cos ϑ ′′ , (2.52) into two single-mode rotations (“phase shifters”, with reference to the “optical phase” in phase space) and one squeezing operation. We will consider the reduction of a generic CM σ under local operations of the form Sl ≡ N j=1 S1(ϑ ′ j ⎟ ⎠ , ϑ′′ j , zj). The local symmetric blocks σjj can all be diagonalized by the first rotations and then symplectically diagonalized (i.e., made proportional to the identity) by the subsequent squeezings, such that σjj = aj2 (thus reducing the number of parameters in each diagonal block to the local symplectic eigenvalue, determining the entropy of the mode). The second series of local rotations can then be applied to manipulate
- Page 3: Life’s Entanglement. CR Studio In
- Page 7: Abstract This Dissertation collects
- Page 10 and 11: x Contents 2.2.2.2. Symplectic repr
- Page 12 and 13: xii Contents 7.2.3. Tripartite enta
- Page 14 and 15: xiv Contents Chapter 13. Entangleme
- Page 17 and 18: Introduction About eighty years aft
- Page 19 and 20: Introduction 5 Gaussian states. Imp
- Page 21: Introduction 7 The companion Part V
- Page 24 and 25: 10 1. Characterizing entanglement a
- Page 26 and 27: 12 1. Characterizing entanglement w
- Page 28 and 29: 14 1. Characterizing entanglement W
- Page 30 and 31: 16 1. Characterizing entanglement F
- Page 32 and 33: 18 1. Characterizing entanglement a
- Page 34 and 35: 20 1. Characterizing entanglement i
- Page 36 and 37: 22 1. Characterizing entanglement e
- Page 38 and 39: 24 1. Characterizing entanglement n
- Page 40 and 41: 26 1. Characterizing entanglement p
- Page 43 and 44: CHAPTER 2 Gaussian states: structur
- Page 45 and 46: 2.1. Introduction to continuous var
- Page 47 and 48: 2.2. Mathematical description of Ga
- Page 49 and 50: 2.2. Mathematical description of Ga
- Page 51 and 52: 2.3. Degree of information encoded
- Page 53: 2.3. Degree of information encoded
- Page 57 and 58: 2.4. Standard forms of Gaussian cov
- Page 59 and 60: 2.4. Standard forms of Gaussian cov
- Page 61 and 62: 2.4. Standard forms of Gaussian cov
- Page 63: Part II Bipartite entanglement of G
- Page 66 and 67: 52 3. Characterizing entanglement o
- Page 68 and 69: 54 3. Characterizing entanglement o
- Page 71 and 72: CHAPTER 4 Two-mode entanglement Thi
- Page 73 and 74: 4.2. Entanglement and symplectic ei
- Page 75 and 76: 4.3. Entanglement versus Entropic m
- Page 77 and 78: 1 0.75 0.5 SL1 0.25 0 (a) 4.3. Enta
- Page 79 and 80: 4.3. Entanglement versus Entropic m
- Page 81 and 82: Μ Μ1Μ2 3 2 1 1 4.3. Entanglemen
- Page 83 and 84: 4.3. Entanglement versus Entropic m
- Page 85 and 86: 4.3. Entanglement versus Entropic m
- Page 87 and 88: global generalized entropy S3 globa
- Page 89 and 90: 4.4. Quantifying entanglement via p
- Page 91 and 92: 4.4. Quantifying entanglement via p
- Page 93 and 94: 4.5. Gaussian entanglement measures
- Page 95 and 96: 4.5. Gaussian entanglement measures
- Page 97 and 98: 4.5. Gaussian entanglement measures
- Page 99 and 100: 4.5. Gaussian entanglement measures
- Page 101 and 102: Ν p Σopt 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 4.5
- Page 103 and 104: GEF GEF 4 3 2 1 0 4.6. Summary and
40 2. Gaussian states: structural properties<br />
SV SV<br />
5<br />
4<br />
3<br />
2<br />
1<br />
0<br />
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1<br />
SL SL<br />
Figure 2.1. Plot of the curves of maximal (red line) and minimal (blue line)<br />
Von Neumann entropy at given linear entropy for two-mode Gaussian states.<br />
All physical states lie in the shaded region between the two curves.<br />
extremal values SV min(µ) and SV max(µ) read<br />
<br />
1<br />
SV min(µ) = f ,<br />
µ<br />
(2.48)<br />
SV max(µ) =<br />
<br />
Nf µ − 1<br />
<br />
N . (2.49)<br />
The behaviors of the Von Neumann and of the linear entropies for two-mode Gaussian<br />
states are compared in Fig. 2.1.<br />
The instance p > 2 can be treated in the same way, with the major difference<br />
that the function Sp of Eq. (2.41) is convex with respect to any si for any value<br />
of the si’s. As a consequence we have an inversion of the previous expressions: for<br />
p > 2, the states with minimal Sp min(µ) at given purity µ are those with a fully<br />
distributed symplectic spectrum, with<br />
<br />
µ − 1<br />
N N<br />
1 − gp<br />
Sp min(µ) =<br />
p − 1<br />
, p > 2 . (2.50)<br />
On the other hand, the states with maximal Sp max at given purity µ are those with<br />
a spectrum of the kind ν1 = . . . = νN−1 = 1 and νN = 1/µ. Therefore<br />
<br />
1 1 − gp µ<br />
Sp max(µ) =<br />
, p > 2 .<br />
p − 1<br />
(2.51)<br />
The distance |Sp max − Sp min| decreases with increasing p [GA3]. This is due<br />
to the fact that the quantity Sp carries less information with increasing p, and the<br />
knowledge of µ provides a more precise bound on the value of Sp.<br />
2.4. Standard forms of Gaussian covariance matrices<br />
We have seen that Gaussian states of N-mode CV systems are special in that<br />
they are completely specified by the first and second moments of the canonical