6
$\begingroup$

I have three qubits in subsystems $A$, $B$, $C$. System $A$ initially contains some state $\rho_A$, and $BC$ contains a bipartite pure state $|\psi\rangle_{BC}$. I apply a unitary operation $U$ acting on $\mathcal{H}_A\otimes \mathcal{H}_B$ and then I trace out system $B$, resulting in the state \begin{equation} \rho_{AC}' = \text{Tr}_B \left((U \otimes I_C)(\rho_A \otimes |\psi\rangle \langle \psi|_{BC})(U^\dagger \otimes I_C)\right) \end{equation} I would like to know, for what conditions on the choice of unitary $U$ will there necessarily exist $\rho_A$ and $|\psi\rangle$ such that the final state $\rho_{AC}'$ is not separable in the space $\mathcal{H}_A\otimes \mathcal{H}_C$?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ maybe a trivial solution but, what about if $U$ swaps $A$ and $B$. That way you effectively trace out $\rho_B$ at the end and the final state on $AC$ is precisely $|\psi\rangle$, which can be entangled $\endgroup$
    – glS
    Commented Sep 9, 2023 at 2:50
  • $\begingroup$ yes thats a good example - I am hoping for a set of conditions on $U$ such that $AC$ can be entangled. I'll edit to clarify $\endgroup$
    – forky40
    Commented Sep 9, 2023 at 3:13
  • $\begingroup$ is $\rho_{A}$ an arbitary density matrix, or a representation of a pure state? $\endgroup$ Commented Sep 9, 2023 at 8:39
  • $\begingroup$ $\rho_A$ can be an arbitrary qubit state, mixed or pure. $\endgroup$
    – forky40
    Commented Sep 9, 2023 at 15:14

2 Answers 2

2
$\begingroup$

This isn't a full solution. More a way to reduce the problem in a more general one, and possibly pinpoint the difficult question that needs answering.

Let's assume $\rho_A$ is pure, $\rho_A\equiv |\phi\rangle\!\langle \phi|$, and write the Schmidt decomposition of $|\psi\rangle_{BC}$ as $$|\psi\rangle = \sum_k \sqrt{p_k} |k,k\rangle.$$ We can always write it this way in some suitable basis for the spaces $\mathcal H_B$ and $\mathcal H_C$. Before the partial trace on $B$ the state is therefore $$|\Psi_f\rangle\equiv (U_{AB}\otimes I_C)(|\phi\rangle\otimes |\psi\rangle) = \sum_k \sqrt{p_j} \big[ (U_{AB}(|\phi\rangle_A\otimes|j\rangle_B))\otimes |j\rangle_C\big].$$ Define $V:\mathcal H_B\to \mathcal H_A\otimes \mathcal H_B$ as the isometry with action $V|j\rangle_B\equiv U_{AB}(|\phi\rangle_A\otimes|j\rangle_B)$. This is purely for notational conciseness, it's not strictly required, but allows to write the state concisely as $$|\Psi_f\rangle = \sum_k \sqrt{p_k} (V|j\rangle\otimes |j\rangle).\tag X$$ The rationale is that asking "is there a unitary $U_{AB}$ such that there are $|\phi\rangle_A$ and $|\psi\rangle_{BC}$ such that XYZ?" is the same as asking "is there an isometry $V$ such that there is $|\psi\rangle_{BC}$ such that XYZ?", and we can reduce the "elementary objects" involved in the question.

We thus translate the question in the following on: given a generic isometry $V$, are there bases for $\mathcal H_B,\mathcal H_C$ and weights $p_k\ge0, \sum_k p_k=1$ such that the $|\Psi_f\rangle$ in (X) is entangled after partial tracing $\mathcal H_B$? In this terms, this seems tightly related to the following more general question: given a tripartite state $|\Psi_{ABC}\rangle$ that is entangled in the bipartition $AB:C$, when is the reduced state $\operatorname{tr}_B[|\Psi_{ABC}\rangle\!\langle\Psi_{ABC}|]$ still entangled? I don't have a good answer for this. I would have guessed that you get a separable state whenever you have maximal entanglement in the bipartition $B:AC$, but this simple condition appears to not be quite right: in such situations you get a balanced mixture of projection onto orthogonal states in $AC$, but this can still be entangled. See eg examples below:


Consider as a toy example $|\Psi_f\rangle = |000\rangle+|111\rangle$. Then partial tracing $B$ we get $\mathbb{P}_{00}+\mathbb{P}_{11}$ where $\mathbb{P}_\psi\equiv|\psi\rangle\!\langle\psi|$, which is separable.

If instead $$|\Psi_f\rangle\equiv (|00\rangle+|11\rangle)|0\rangle+(|00\rangle-|11\rangle)|1\rangle$$ then partial tracing we get $\mathbb{P}_0\otimes\mathbb{P}_- + \mathbb{P}_1\otimes\mathbb{P}_-$ which is again separable.

Yet another example is $$|\Psi_f\rangle\equiv (|00\rangle+|11\rangle)|0\rangle+(|01\rangle+|10\rangle)|1\rangle$$ then partial tracing we get $\mathbb{P}(|00\rangle+|11\rangle)+\mathbb{P}(|01\rangle+|10\rangle)$. This is an $X$ state, which is also separable (see e.g. https://quantumcomputing.stackexchange.com/a/5565/55).

Note how in all of these examples, $B$ is maximally entangled with $AC$. As an example of this not being the case, say $$|\Psi_f\rangle \equiv |00\rangle|0\rangle+\left(\frac{|01\rangle+|10\rangle)}{\sqrt2}\right) |1\rangle = |0\rangle_B\left(|00\rangle+\frac{1}{\sqrt2}|11\rangle\right)_{AC} + \frac{1}{\sqrt2}|1\rangle_B |01\rangle_{AC},$$ where the second identity is a rewriting to highlight the entanglement features in the bipartition $B:AC$. Properly renormalising the above you see that the Schmidt coefficients in this bipartition are $(\sqrt3/2,1/2)$, and thus the entanglement is not maximal. And indeed, you can easily observe eg via partial transpose that the reduced state is entangled.

For a state that violates the pattern above, consider instead $$|\Psi_f\rangle = (V\otimes I_C) (\sqrt3/2 |00\rangle+1/2|11\rangle), \\ V|0\rangle\equiv (3/2)^{-1/2} (|00\rangle+\frac{1}{\sqrt2}|11\rangle), \qquad V|1\rangle \equiv |01\rangle. $$ Isolating $B$ you get the maximally entangled state $$|0\rangle_B\otimes|00\rangle_{AC} + |1\rangle_B\otimes\left(\frac{|01\rangle+|10\rangle}{\sqrt2}\right)_{AC}.$$ However, tracing out $B$ you still get an entangled state, as again verifiable eg via partial transpose.


The question seems related to the topic of robustness of entanglement, so a look at the topical literature there might help. Eg https://arxiv.org/abs/1809.00622 is a start.

$\endgroup$
2
$\begingroup$

This is not a fully characterised solution, but perhaps you will find it helpful...

We start by writing the initial $|\psi\rangle$ in its Schmidt basis, $$ |\psi\rangle=\alpha|00\rangle+\beta|11\rangle. $$ I'm going to assume that the input of the other qubit is pure for simplicity, though I don't think it makes much difference. Now act the unitary on it. It must produce $$ |\Psi\rangle=\alpha|0\rangle_C|\psi_0\rangle_{AB}+\beta|1\rangle|\psi_1\rangle. $$ We take the partial trace over $B$, leaving $$ \rho=|\alpha|^2|0\rangle\langle 0|\otimes A+|\beta|^2|1\rangle\langle 1|\otimes D+\alpha \beta^\star|0\rangle\langle 1|\otimes B+\alpha^\star \beta|1\rangle\langle 0|\otimes C $$ where $A,B,C,D$ are $2\times 2$ matrices relating to partial trace of $|\psi_i\rangle\langle\psi_j|$ for different $i,j$. This is just a block matrix $$ \rho=\left(\begin{array}{cc} |\alpha|^2 A & \alpha\beta^\star B \\ \alpha^\star\beta C & |\beta|^2D \end{array}\right). $$ We know that this is a density matrix, so its positive. If $A$ is invertible and $\alpha\neq 0$, then $$ \text{det}(\rho)=|\alpha|^2|\beta|^2\text{det}(A)\text{det}(D-CA^{-1}B)\geq 0. $$ Now, you can take the partial transpose, $$ \rho^{T_C}=\left(\begin{array}{cc} |\alpha|^2 A & \alpha^\star\beta C\\ \alpha\beta^\star B & |\beta|^2D \end{array}\right). $$ The state is entangled if and only if this has a negative eigenvalue. Moreover, it can have at most one negative eigenvalue (according to https://arxiv.org/abs/1304.6775), so its determinant would have to be negative. $$ \text{det}(\rho^{T_C})=|\alpha|^2|\beta|^2\text{det}(A)\text{det}(D-BA^{-1}C). $$ So, aside from the special cases identified (i.e. non-invertible $A$), the conditions on $U$ are that it creates $A,B,C,D$ such that $\text{det}(D-CA^{-1}B)<0$ even though $\text{det}(D-BA^{-1}C)\geq 0$. Quite what that means in terms of $U$, I'm not sure (yet), but it is interesting that it does not depend on the Schmidt coefficients of the initially entangled state!

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.