4.8 Article

Multicopy Adaptive Local Discrimination: Strongest Possible Two-Qubit Nonlocal Bases

期刊

PHYSICAL REVIEW LETTERS
卷 126, 期 21, 页码 -

出版社

AMER PHYSICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.210505

关键词

-

资金

  1. INSPIREFaculty Fellowship from the Department of Science and Technology, Government of India
  2. CSIR [09/093(0170)/2016EMR-I]
  3. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11675136]
  4. Foundational Questions Institute [FQXiRFP3-1325]
  5. Hong Kong Research Grant Council [17300918]
  6. John Templeton Foundation [61466]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The research focuses on the discrimination of composite quantum states, revealing that an ensemble containing N pairwise orthogonal pure states can be perfectly distinguished under certain conditions. Examples of orthonormal bases in two-qubit Hilbert space requiring three copies for adaptive discrimination were provided, and the varying number of copies needed for discrimination under different schemes were analyzed.
Ensembles of composite quantum states can exhibit nonlocal behavior in the sense that their optimal discrimination may require global operations. Such an ensemble containing N pairwise orthogonal pure states, however, can always be perfectly distinguished under an adaptive local scheme if (N - 1) copies of the state are available. In this Letter, we provide examples of orthonormal bases in two-qubit Hilbert space whose adaptive discrimination require three copies of the state. For this composite system, we analyze multicopy adaptive local distinguishability of orthogonal ensembles in full generality which, in turn, assigns varying nonlocal strength to different such ensembles. We also come up with ensembles whose discrimination under an adaptive separable scheme require less numbers of copies than adaptive local schemes. Our construction finds important application in multipartite secret sharing tasks and indicates toward an intriguing superadditivity phenomenon for locally accessible information.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据