30.04.2013 Views

ENTANGLEMENT OF GAUSSIAN STATES Gerardo Adesso

ENTANGLEMENT OF GAUSSIAN STATES Gerardo Adesso

ENTANGLEMENT OF GAUSSIAN STATES Gerardo Adesso

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

1<br />

0.75<br />

0.5<br />

SL1<br />

0.25<br />

0<br />

(a)<br />

4.3. Entanglement versus Entropic measures 63<br />

0.25<br />

0.5<br />

SL2 SL2<br />

1<br />

0.5<br />

0<br />

1<br />

0.75<br />

2<br />

1.5<br />

E<br />

1<br />

0.8<br />

0.6<br />

0.4<br />

SL1<br />

0.2<br />

0<br />

(b)<br />

0.2<br />

0.8<br />

0.6<br />

0.4<br />

0.2<br />

0<br />

1<br />

0.8<br />

0.6<br />

0.4<br />

SL2 SL2<br />

Figure 4.1. Plot of the maximal entanglement achievable by quantum systems<br />

with given marginal linear entropies: (a) logarithmic negativity of continuous<br />

variable GMEMMS, introduced in [GA3], which saturate the upper<br />

bound of inequality (4.9); (b) tangle of two-qubit MEMMS, introduced in<br />

[GA1].<br />

This means that the two-mode states with maximal purity for fixed marginals are<br />

indeed the Gaussian maximally entangled states for fixed marginal mixednesses<br />

(GMEMMS) [GA3]. They can be seen as the CV analogues of the MEMMS [GA1].<br />

The standard form of GMEMMS can be determined by Eqs. (4.7), yielding<br />

<br />

1<br />

c± = ± −<br />

µ1µ2<br />

1<br />

µ max<br />

(4.32)<br />

In Fig. 4.1 the logarithmic negativity of GMEMMS is plotted as a function of<br />

the marginal linear entropies SL1,2 ≡ 1 − µ1,2, in comparison with the behavior of<br />

the tangle (an entanglement monotone equivalent to the entanglement of formation<br />

for two qubits [273, 59], see Sec. 1.4.2.1) as a function of SL1,2 for discrete variable<br />

MEMMS. Notice, as a common feature, how the maximal entanglement achievable<br />

by quantum mixed states rapidly increases with increasing marginal mixednesses<br />

(like in the pure-state instance) and decreases with increasing difference of the<br />

marginals. This is natural, because the presence of quantum correlations between<br />

the subsystems implies that they should possess rather similar amounts of quantum<br />

information. Let us finally mention that the “minimally” entangled states for fixed<br />

marginals, which saturate the lower bound of Eq. (4.9) (µ = µ1µ2), are just the<br />

tensor product states, i.e. states without any (quantum or classical) correlations<br />

between the subsystems. 8<br />

4.3.3. Entanglement vs Information (III) – Maximal and minimal negativities<br />

at fixed global and local purities<br />

What we have shown so far, by simple analytical bounds, is a general trend of increasing<br />

entanglement with increasing global purity, and with decreasing marginal<br />

8 Note that this is no longer true in two-qubit systems. In that instance, there exist LPTP<br />

(“less pure than product”) states, whose global purity is smaller than the product of their two<br />

marginal purities, implying that they carry less information than the uncorrelated product states.<br />

Surprisingly, they can even be entangled, meaning that they somehow encode negative quantum<br />

correlations. The LPTP states of two qubits have been discovered and characterized in [GA1].<br />

Recently, the notion of negative quantum information has been reinterpreted in a communication<br />

context [121].<br />

1<br />

2

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!