Scribd
Upload
120 views

Exercise Sheet 3: Quantum Information - Summer Semester 2020

This exercise sheet provides problems related to quantum information concepts. Problem 1 involves computing reduced density operators and Schmidt decompositions for bipartite quantum states. Problem 2 distinguishes between maximally entangled and classically correlated states using parity measurements. Problem 3 examines steering of measurements between two entangled qubits by relating local projective measurements to Schmidt bases.

Uploaded by

Kiran Adhikari
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
120 views

Exercise Sheet 3: Quantum Information - Summer Semester 2020

This exercise sheet provides problems related to quantum information concepts. Problem 1 involves computing reduced density operators and Schmidt decompositions for bipartite quantum states. Problem 2 distinguishes between maximally entangled and classically correlated states using parity measurements. Problem 3 examines steering of measurements between two entangled qubits by relating local projective measurements to Schmidt bases.

Uploaded by

Kiran Adhikari
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Exercise Sheet 3

Quantum Information - Summer Semester 2020


RWTH Aachen
Valentin Bruch, Fernando Martinez, Pedro Parrado
Due: 27 April 2020, 12.00

Problem 1 Schmidt Decomposition (3, 3, 2)


(a) Compute the reduced density operators ρA and ρB of the following states and from these
calculate the Schmidt coefficients:
|00i − |01i + |10i − |11i 1 
|ψ1 i = , |ψ2 i = 8 |00i + 4 |01i + i |10i + 13i |11i
2 c
√
with c = 5 10.
Hint: Remember from exercise sheet 2, problem 2 that the eigenvalues of ~r · ~σ are ±k~rk.
(b) Compute the Schmidt decomposition of the following states:
|00i + |11i + |21i 1 
|ψ3 i = √ , |ψ2 i = 8 |00i + 4 |01i + i |10i + 13i |11i .
3 c

(c) Two qubits A and B are in a pure entangled state |ψAB i. The reduced state on qubit A
has purity TrA ρ2A = 58 . What is the qualitative connection between purity and Schmidt
coefficients? Calculate the Schmidt coefficients of the state |ψAB i.

Problem 2 Quantum entanglement vs. classical correlation: Parity


measurements (2, 3, 2, 3, 2, 4)
Consider a composite system AB. By doing projective measurements we want to distinguish the
maximally entangled pure quantum state and the maximally correlated classical mixed state:
1 ? 1
ρcl =
  
ρ= |00iAB + |11iAB h00|AB + h11|AB ↔ |00ih00|AB + |11ih11|AB .
2 2
(a) Show that local measurements on A or B cannot distinguish these states.
Hint: Which quantity determines the statistics of local measurements on A?
(b) We thus have to measure on both subsystems to distinguish ρ and ρcl . Consider the
Z-parity observable ZA ⊗ ZB and the X-parity observable XA ⊗ XB , which measure cor-
relations of the two qubits.1 Are these simultaneously measurable? What is their action
on the 4 so-called Bell states
ψ := √1 |00i ± |11i ψ := √1 |01i ± |10i
+  − 
± AB AB , ± AB AB ?
2 2

(c) Express the states ρ and ρcl in the Bell basis.


(d) Show that the effect operators {EZ+ , EZ− } of a projective Z-parity measurement with
outcomes +1 and −1 can be written as
1
EZ± = (1A ⊗ 1B ± ZA ⊗ ZB )
2
and express these effect operators in the Bell basis.
1
These nonlocal observables will turn out to be important in the stabilizer formalism of quantum error correction.

1
Exercise sheet 3 Quantum Information SS2020 27 April 2020, 12.00

(e) Calculate the measurement statistics for Z-parity measurements on both states and show
that both ρ and ρcl show maximal correlations of the two subsystems.
(f ) Show that by contrast the statistics for the X-parity measurement are completely un-
correlated for ρcl but are still maximally correlated for ρ, which indicates that quantum
correlations can be stronger than classical ones.

Problem 3 Quantum steering of 2 entangled qubits (2, 1, 2, 3, 1, 2)


Consider two qubits A and B in the entangled state

|ψAB i = √12 α |0i + β |1i ⊗ |0i + √1


 
2
α |0i − β |1i ⊗ |1i

with complex amplitudes α, β ∈ C. To illustrate the steering of measurements performed by A


on this state by measurements of B we need to find the Schmidt decomposition of |ψAB i.
(a) Calculate the reduced
√density √
operators on subsystems A and B. From these compute the
Schmidt coefficients λ1 and λ2 .
(b) Show that the marginal states you computed in (a) are proper density operators. Which
assumption about α and β is required here, that you could have seen directly from |ψAB i?
(c) Find the Schmidt bases for A and B. Check explicitly that the Schmidt coefficients of (a)
and the Schmidt bases reproduce the state |ψAB i including all phase factors.
We now turn to steering. From here on assume α, β ∈ R with the constraints found in (b).
(d) Suppose B wants to simulate the following projective measurement {PA± } with outcome
b = ± made by A:
PA± = 12 (1A ± XA )
Determine the measurement {PB± } that B has to do following the recipe from the lecture
slides on steering.
(e) Which observables do the measurements {PA± } and {PB± } in (d) correspond to?
(f ) We now consider the unitaries required in the steering equation

(PA± ⊗ 1B ) |ψAB i = (VA± ⊗ UB± ) · (1A ⊗ PB± ) |ψAB i .

Show that2 in the special case β = 0:

VA± = |±i h0|A + |∓i h1|A , UB± = |±i h0|B + |∓i h1|B .

2
The solution is not unique. You should only show that this is one possible solution.

You might also like