4.4 Article

Not All Entangled States are Useful for Ancilla-Assisted Quantum Process Tomography

期刊

ANNALEN DER PHYSIK
卷 534, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/andp.202100550

关键词

ancilla-assisted quantum process tomography; bound entangled states; entanglement detection

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [11734015]
  2. K.C. Wong Magna Fund in Ningbo University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article investigates the applicability of entangled states in quantum process tomography and finds that not all entangled states are suitable for ancilla-assisted quantum process tomography (AAQPT). The relationship between the realignment operation used in entanglement detection and the usefulness of a bipartite state for AAQPT is derived. Examples of entangled states that cannot be used for AAQPT are presented. Experimental verification is performed on the IBM platform.
It is well known that one can extract all the information of an unknown quantum channel by means of quantum process tomography, such as standard quantum-process tomography and ancilla-assisted quantum process tomography (AAQPT). Furthermore, it is shown that entanglement is not necessary for AAQPT; there exist separable states that are also useful for it. Surprisingly, in this work we find that not all entangled states are useful for AAQPT; there also exist some entangled states that are useless. The realignment operation used in entanglement detection can be related to the question whether a bipartite state is useful for AAQPT. The relationship between them is derived and the process of extracting the complete information of an unknown channel by the realignment operation shown. Based on this relationship, examples of a two-qutrit entangled state and a two-qutrit bound entangled state are presented. Both of these two examples are entangled but they cannot be used for AAQPT. Last but not the least, experimental verification is been performed on the IBM platform.

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

4.4
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