4
$\begingroup$

Is the purity $\mathrm{Tr}[\rho(t)^2]$ of a quantum state $\rho(t)$ that evolves according to a time-independent Lindbladian $\partial_t \rho = \mathcal{L}[\rho]$ convex in time $t$?

I suspect the the answer is "no" in general, but I wonder whether there are any useful characterizations of the kinds of Lindbladians which lead to purities that are convex in time. The furthest I have gotten on my own is a sufficient condition which I suspect is not a necessary condition: if the map $\mathcal{L}^\dagger \mathcal{L} - \mathcal{L}\mathcal{L}^\dagger$ is positive ($\mathcal{L}^\dagger$ is the adjoint of $\mathcal{L}$), then the purity is convex in time. I arrived at this condition by expressing the second time derivative of purity as $\partial_t^2 \mathrm{Tr}[\rho(t)^2] = \mathrm{Tr}[\rho(t) ((\mathcal{L} + \mathcal{L}^\dagger)^2 + \mathcal{L}^\dagger \mathcal{L} - \mathcal{L} \mathcal{L}^\dagger)[\rho(t)]]$.

I'd also be interested in similar characterizations for any entanglement monotones of the form $\mathrm{Tr}[f(\rho(t))]$, where $f$ is a convex function.

Thanks!

Edit: this is a cross post from https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/4927440/are-there-any-useful-convexity-properties-of-quantum-dynamical-semigroups.

$\endgroup$
0

1 Answer 1

4
$\begingroup$

The following is only a partial answer: While your argument rightly shows that normal $\mathcal L$ (which means $e^{t\mathcal L}$ is unital) is sufficient for convex purity, numerics suggest this even holds for all time-independent Markovian unital processes.

Note that time independence is essential here: while unitality is equivalent to decreasing purity this is logically independent from convexity. In fact it is easy to write down an example of a time-dependent Markovian process with decreasing, but non-convex purity: consider the Lindbladian $\mathcal L(t)$ generated only by $V(t)=\sin(t)\sigma_x$. Because $V(t)$ is Hermitian $L(t)$ generates a unital process. Moreover, $\rho_0={\rm diag}(2/3,1/3)$ evolves like $$ \rho(t)=e^{\int_0^tL(s)\,ds}\rho_0=\begin{pmatrix} \frac12+\frac{1}{6} e^{\sin (t) \cos (t)-t} & 0 \\ 0 & \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{6} e^{\sin (t) \cos (t)-t} \end{pmatrix} $$ so the purity

enter image description here

—while of course decreasing—is not convex. The underlying mechanism here is that the factor $\sin(t)$ introduces varying speed of the evolution of $\rho_0$ towards the maximally mixed states which interferes with convexity. NB: the reason your proof does not work in the time-dependent realm anymore is that you get extra derivatives $\frac d{dt}L(t)$ which mess up the structure.


The other point of my post is to confirm your suspicion that there exist time-independent Markovian processes where the purity is not convex in $t$. Numerical search yielded the following counterexample: $\rho_0={\bf1}/2$ and our Lindbladian $\mathcal L$ is generated by one operator (in the usual way): $$ V=\begin{pmatrix}1&1\\0&1\end{pmatrix} $$ Then the eigenvalues of $e^{tL}(\rho_0)$ evolve as

enter image description here

which leads to the following (non-convex!) purity

enter image description here

This behaviour also shows when looking at the trajectory of $\rho(t)$ in the Bloch ball:

enter image description here

(dynamics start in the middle and end up in the fixed point ((2/3,-1/3),(-1/3,1/3)). The reason for the oscillation in the purity is the little swirl the dynamics do in the end:

enter image description here

$\endgroup$
11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @nlupugla 1. Not sure what you mean, I specified a Lindbladian in my counterexample (through 1 Lindblad-$V$) which is, of course, what characterizes CPTP dynamics. 2. That's fair and I must admit I don't know how I missed that in your question. But yes, your argument does indeed show the (strictly stronger) statement that $L$ being normal is enough; my bad! I adjusted my answer accordingly. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 6 at 21:27
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Neat that there are examples with such a behavior. Can this be understood as a combination of Hamiltonian evolution and damping towards a specific point on the Bloch sphere (I would imagine if the two are in-plane, the state would spiral around the equilibrium position)? $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 7 at 8:10
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @NorbertSchuch Indeed, using standard methods (1, 2) it's easy to see that the $L$ induced by $V$ from my answer is equivalent to a Lindbladian with (traceless) Lindblad-V $|0\rangle\langle 1|$ & Hamiltonian $-\sigma_y/2$. So as dissipation drives the maximally mixed state to the ball's edge the Hamiltonian induces this spiraling; but only together do $H$ and $V$ leave ((2/3,-1/3),(-1/3,1/3)) invariant (i.e. this attractive fixed point is neither a fixed point of the $H$ nor the $V$ part individually) $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 7 at 9:46
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @FrederikvomEnde Ah, thanks for the clarification regarding the Lindbladian. I misunderstood and thought your Lindbladian was just a left-multiplication by $V$. $\endgroup$
    – nlupugla
    Commented Jun 7 at 13:34
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @nlupugla Ah, ok: So you care about a case where it is not monotonous, yet convex. Sounds even more tricky, I would think. Maybe it makes more sense if you ask a new question with your specific model, rather than asking a very general question (not that this is bad, on the contrary: but given Frederik's answer it seems likely there isn't a simple answer). $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 7 at 17:32

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.