Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Search
2000 character limit reached

On the power of one pure steered state for EPR-steering with a pair of qubits

Published 21 Dec 2022 in quant-ph | (2212.10825v2)

Abstract: As originally introduced, the EPR phenomenon was the ability of one party (Alice) to steer, by her choice between two measurement settings, the quantum system of another party (Bob) into two distinct ensembles of pure states. As later formalized as a quantum information task, EPR-steering can be shown even when the distinct ensembles comprise mixed states. Consider the scenario where Alice and Bob each have a qubit and Alice performs dichotomic projective measurements. In this case, the states in the ensembles to which she can steer form the surface of an ellipsoid ${\cal E}$ in Bob's Bloch ball. Further, let the steering ellipsoid ${\cal E}$ have nonzero volume. It has previously been shown that if Alice's first measurement setting yields an ensemble comprising two pure states, then this, plus any one other measurement setting, will demonstrate EPR-steering. Here we consider what one can say if the ensemble from Alice's first setting contains only one pure state $\mathsf{p}\in{\cal E}$, occurring with probability $p_\mathsf{p}$. Using projective geometry, we derive the necessary and sufficient condition analytically for Alice to be able to demonstrate EPR-steering of Bob's state using this and some second setting, when the two ensembles from these lie in a given plane. Based on this, we show that, for a given ${\cal E}$, if $p_\mathsf{p}$ is high enough [$p_{\sf p} > p_{\rm max}{{\cal E}} \in [0,1)$] then any distinct second setting by Alice is sufficient to demonstrate EPR-steering. Similarly we derive a $p_{\rm min}{{\cal E}}$ such that $p_\mathsf{p}>p_{\rm min}{{\cal E}}$ is necessary for Alice to demonstrate EPR-steering using only the first setting and some other setting. Moreover, the expressions we derive are tight; for spherical steering ellipsoids, the bounds coincide: $p_{\rm max}{{\cal E}} = p_{\rm min}{{\cal E}}$.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (53)
  1. Can Quantum-Mechanical Description of Physical Reality Be Considered Complete? Phys Rev. 1935;47:777–780.
  2. Schrödinger E. Discussion of Probability Relations between Separated Systems. Math Proc Camb Philos Soc. 1935;31(04):555.
  3. Steering, Entanglement, Nonlocality, and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Paradox. Phys Rev Lett. 2007;98:140402.
  4. Entanglement, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations, Bell nonlocality, and steering. Phys Rev A. 2007;76:052116.
  5. Quantum Steering Ellipsoids. Phys Rev Lett. 2014;113:020402.
  6. Quantum steering ellipsoids, extremal physical states and monogamy. New Journal of Physics. 2014;16(8):083017.
  7. Einstein–Podolsky–Rosen steering and the steering ellipsoid. J Opt Soc Am B. 2015;32(4):A40–A49.
  8. Nguyen HC, Vu T. Necessary and sufficient condition for steerability of two-qubit states by the geometry of steering outcomes. EPL (Europhysics Letters). 2016;115(1):10003.
  9. Colloquium: The Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox: From concepts to applications. Rev Mod Phys. 2009;81:1727–1751.
  10. Quantum steering. Rev Mod Phys. 2020;92:015001.
  11. Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen steering and quantum steering ellipsoids: Optimal two-qubit states and projective measurements. Phys Rev A. 2017;95:012320.
  12. Sufficient criterion for guaranteeing that a two-qubit state is unsteerable. Phys Rev A. 2016;93:022121.
  13. Nguyen HC, Vu T. Nonseparability and steerability of two-qubit states from the geometry of steering outcomes. Phys Rev A. 2016;94:012114.
  14. Volume monogamy of quantum steering ellipsoids for multiqubit systems. Phys Rev A. 2016;94:042105.
  15. Geometric steering criterion for two-qubit states. Phys Rev A. 2018;97:012130.
  16. Geometric local-hidden-state model for some two-qubit states. Phys Rev A. 2018;98:052345.
  17. Necessary condition for steerability of arbitrary two-qubit states with loss. Journal of Optics. 2018;20(3):034008.
  18. Baker TJ, Wiseman HM. Necessary conditions for steerability of two qubits from consideration of local operations. Phys Rev A. 2020;101:022326.
  19. Quantification of quantumness in neutrino oscillations. The European Physical Journal C. 2020;80(3):275.
  20. Experimental criteria for steering and the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Phys Rev A. 2009;80:032112.
  21. Experimental EPR-steering using Bell-local states. Nature Physics. 2010;6(11):845–849.
  22. Pusey MF. Negativity and steering: A stronger Peres conjecture. Phys Rev A. 2013;88:032313.
  23. Quantifying Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Steering. Phys Rev Lett. 2014;112:180404.
  24. Algorithmic Construction of Local Hidden Variable Models for Entangled Quantum States. Phys Rev Lett. 2016;117:190402.
  25. Algorithmic construction of local models for entangled quantum states: Optimization for two-qubit states. Phys Rev A. 2018;98:022115.
  26. General Method for Constructing Local Hidden Variable Models for Entangled Quantum States. Phys Rev Lett. 2016;117:190401.
  27. Cavalcanti D, Skrzypczyk P. Quantum steering: a review with focus on semidefinite programming. Reports on Progress in Physics. 2016;80(2):024001.
  28. Geometry of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Correlations. Phys Rev Lett. 2019;122:240401.
  29. Analog of the Clauser–Horne–Shimony–Holt inequality for steering. JOSA B. 2015;32(4):A74–A81.
  30. Girdhar P, Cavalcanti EG. All two-qubit states that are steerable via Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt-type correlations are Bell nonlocal. Phys Rev A. 2016;94:032317.
  31. Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations and Bell correlations in the simplest scenario. Phys Rev A. 2017;95:062111.
  32. Steering Bell-diagonal states. Scientific reports. 2016;6(1):1–10.
  33. Quantum steerability based on joint measurability. Scientific reports. 2017;7(1):1–8.
  34. Nguyen HC, Luoma K. Pure steered states of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen steering. Phys Rev A. 2017;95:042117.
  35. All-Versus-Nothing Proof of Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Steering. Scientific Reports. 2013;3(1):2143.
  36. Experimental Demonstration of the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen Steering Game Based on the All-Versus-Nothing Proof. Phys Rev Lett. 2014;113:140402.
  37. The simplest demonstrations of quantum nonlocality. New Journal of Physics. 2012;14(11):113020.
  38. Nielsen MA, Chuang I. Quantum computation and quantum information. Cambridge University Press; 2010.
  39. Bengtsson I, Zyczkowski K. Geometry of Quantum States: An Introduction to Quantum Entanglement. Cambridge University Press; 2006.
  40. One-to-One Mapping between Steering and Joint Measurability Problems. Phys Rev Lett. 2015;115:230402.
  41. Joint measurement of two unsharp observables of a qubit. Phys Rev A. 2010;81:062116.
  42. Ungar AA. Barycentric calculus in Euclidean and hyperbolic geometry: A comparative introduction. World Scientific; 2010.
  43. Richter-Gebert J. Perspectives on projective geometry: a guided tour through real and complex geometry. Springer; 2011.
  44. Complete Classification and Efficient Determination of Arrangements Formed by Two Ellipsoids. ACM Trans Graph. 2020;39(3).
  45. Agoston MK. Computer Graphics and Geometric Modeling: Mathematics-ISBN: 1-85233-817-2. Springer-Verlag London Ltd; 2005.
  46. Hartley R, Zisserman A. Multiple view geometry in computer vision. Cambridge university press; 2003.
  47. Perspective and Projective Geometry. Princeton University Press; 2019.
  48. Casse R. Projective geometry: an introduction. OUP Oxford; 2006.
  49. Yu T, Eberly JH. Evolution from Entanglement to Decoherence of Bipartite Mixed “X” States. Quantum Info Comput. 2007;7(5):459–468.
  50. Werner RF. Quantum states with Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen correlations admitting a hidden-variable model. Phys Rev A. 1989;40:4277–4281.
  51. Rau ARP. Algebraic characterization of X-states in quantum information. Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical. 2009;42(41):412002.
  52. Inequivalence of entanglement, steering, and Bell nonlocality for general measurements. Phys Rev A. 2015;92:032107.
  53. Quantum correlations of two-qubit states with one maximally mixed marginal. Phys Rev A. 2014;90:024302.
Citations (3)

Summary

No one has generated a summary of this paper yet.

Paper to Video (Beta)

No one has generated a video about this paper yet.

Whiteboard

No one has generated a whiteboard explanation for this paper yet.

Open Problems

We haven't generated a list of open problems mentioned in this paper yet.

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Tweets

Sign up for free to view the 1 tweet with 0 likes about this paper.