View
223
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Quantum communication from Alice to Bob
Quantum communication from Alice to Bob
Andreas Winter, Bristol
quant-ph/0308044quant-ph/0308044Aram Harrow, MIT
Igor Devetak, USC
outline
• Introduction– basic concepts and resource inequalities – historical overview of quantum information
theory
• A family of protocols– Rederive and connect old protocols– Prove new protocols (parents)
• Optimal trade-off curves
the setting•two parties: Alice and Bob
•one-way communication from Alice to Bob
•we want asymptotic communication rates
AliceBob
(noisy) classical communication
(noisy) quantum communication
(noisy) shared entanglement
or classical correlations
cbit [c!c] 1 noiseless bit channel
ebit [qq] the state (|0iA|0iB + |1iA|1iB)/p2
qubit [q!q] 1 noiseless qubit channel
noisystate
{qq} noisy bipartite quantum state AB
noisychannel
{q!q}N noisy cptp map: N:HA’!HB
Information processing resources may be:
• classical / quantum c / q
• noisy / noiseless (unit) { } / [ ]
• dynamic / static ! / ¢
examples of bipartite resources
Church of the larger Hilbert space
static AB ) purification |iABE s.t. AB = trEABE.
If AB=i pi |iihi|AB, then |iABE=i ppi |iiE |iiAB.
|iAA’
UN
A
A0 B
E
|iABE
Channel N:HA’!HB ) isometric extension UN:HA’!HB HE s.t. N() = trEUN().
Use a test source |iAA’ and define |iABE = (IA UN)|iAA’
information theoretic quantities
von Neumann entropy: H(A) = -tr [A log A]
mutual information: I(A:B) = H(A) + H(B) – H(AB)
coherent information: Ic(AiB) = H(B) – H(AB) = -H(A|B)
conditional mutual information:
I(A:B|X) = H(A|X) + H(B|X) – H(AB|X)
= I(A:BX) – I(B:X)
resource inequalitiesExample: classical noisy channel coding [Shannon]
{c!c}N > I (A:B)p [c!c]Meaning there exists an asymptotic and approximate protocol transforming the LHS into the RHS.
For any >0 and any R<I(A:B) and for sufficiently large n there exist encoding and decoding maps E: {0,1}nR ! Xn and D: Xn ! {0,1} nR such that for any input x2{0,1}nR
(D ¢ N n ¢ E)|xi ¼ |xi
The capacity is given by maxp I(A:B)p, where p is a distribution on AB resulting from B = N(A).
resource inequalitiesExample: quantum channel coding
{q!q}N > Ic(AiB) [q!q]Meaning there exists an asymptotic and approximate protocol transforming the LHS into the RHS.
For any >0 and any R<Ic(AiB) and for sufficiently large n there exist encoding and decoding maps E: H2
nR ! HA’ n and D: HB
n ! H2 nR such that for any input |
i2H2 n,
(D ¢ N n ¢ E)|i ¼ |i
The capacity is given by limn!1 (1/n) max Ic(AiB), where the maximization is over all arising from N
n.
first generation: semi-classical
Characterized by:
•Results depend only on average density matrix
•Protocols can be analyzed by looking at one party’s stateExamples:
Schumacher compression: [PRA 51, 2738 (1995)]
RA + S() [q!q] > RB
entanglement concentration/dilution: [BBPS, quant-ph/9511030]
= S(A) [qq]
remote state preparation: [BDSSTW, quant-ph/0006044]
S(B) [c!c] + S(B) [qq] > EAB = {pi, |iiB}
first generation techniques
semi-classical reductions:
Schmidt decomposition: |iAB=i ppi |aiiA|biiB matrix diagonalization: = i pi |viihvi|
Typical sequences: p a probability distribution
p-typical sequences i1,…,in have |#{ij = x} – npx| < n for all x
# of p-typical sequences is ¼exp(n(S(p)+))
each has probability exp(-n(S(p) ))Typical projectors and subspaces: a state with spectrum p
= I typical |vIihvI| projects onto a typical subspace
where I=i1,…,in is a typical sequence and |vIi=|vi1i…|vini
2nd generation: CQ ensembles
HSW theorem: [H, IEEE IT 44, 269 (1998); SW, PRA 56, 131 (1997)]
E = i pi |iihi|A iB {c!q} > [c!c]
I(A:B) = S(ipii) - iS() = (E)
Entanglement assisted channel capacity: [BSST, quant-ph/0106052]
{q!q} + H(A) ebits > I(A:B) [c!c]
RSP of entangled states: [BHLSW, quant-ph/0307100]
H(A) [qq] + I(A:B) [c!c] > E = i pi |iihi|X |iihi|AB
Measurement compression: [Winter, quant-ph/0109050]
I(X:R)[c!c] + H(X|R) [cc] > T:A! AEXAXB on |iAR
2nd generation techniques
conditionally typical subspaces: E = i pi |iihi|A iB
Compressing B requires S(B) qubits, but if you know (or have) A then you need
S(B|A) = S(AB) – S(A) = i pi S(i) qubits.
The difference is S(B)-S(B|A) = S(A)+S(B)-S(AB) = I(A:B) = .
operator Chernoff bounds: [AW, quant-ph/0012127]
X1,…,Xn i.i.d. Hermitian matrices s.t. 06Xi6I and =EXi>I
3rd generation: fully quantum
•quantum channel capacity: {q!q} > Ic(AiB)
•super-dense coding of quantum states
•double and triple-tradeoff curves:
N > R [c!c] + Q[q!q] + E[qq]
•unification of different protocols
•entanglement distillation using limited quantum or classical communication
3rd generation techniques
derandomization: If the output state is pure, [cc] inputs are unnecessary.
piggybacking: Time-sharing protocol Px with probability px allows an extra output of I(X:B) [c!c]. [DS, quant-ph/0311131]
coherent classical communication: [H, quant-ph/0307091]
Modify protocols to obtain [[c!c]]: |xiA!|xiA|xiB
use coherent TP and SD to get 2 [[c!c]] = [q!q] + [qq].
main result #1: parent protocols
father: {q!q} + ½ I(A:E) [qq] > ½ I(A:B) [q!q]
mother: {qq} + ½ I(A:E) [q!q] > ½ I(A:B) [qq]
Basic protocols combine with parents to get children.
(TP) 2[c!c] + [qq] > {q!q}
(SD) [q!q] + [qq] > 2[c!c]
(QE) [q!q] > [qq]
the family tree
{q!q} + ½ I(A:E) [qq] > ½ I(A:B) [q!q]
{qq} + ½ I(A:E) [q!q] > ½ I(A:B) [qq]
{q!q} + H(A) [qq] > I(A:B) [c!c]
BSST, [IEEE IT 48, 2002], E-assisted cap.
{q!q} > Ic(AiB) [q!q]
L/S/D, quantum channel cap.
{qq} + H(A) [q!q] > I(A:B) [c!c]
H3LT, [QIC 1, 2001], noisy SD
{qq} + I(A:B) [c!c] > Ic(AiB) [q!q]
DHW, noisy TP
SD
QE
TP SD
TP
{qq} + I(A:E) [c!c] > Ic(AiB) [q!q]
DW, entanglement distillation
TP
(TP) 2[c!c] + [qq] > {q!q}
(SD) [q!q] + [qq] > 2[c!c]
(QE) [q!q] > [qq]
coherent classical communication
rule I:
X + C [c!c] > Y ) X + C/2 ([q!q] – [qq]) > Y
rule O:
X > Y + C [c!c] ) X > Y + C/2 ([q!q] + [qq])Whenever the classical message in the original protocol is almost uniformly distributed and is almost decoupled from the remaining quantum state of Alice, Bob and Eve.
based on PRL 92, 097902 (2004)
generating the parents
{q!q} + ½ I(A:E) [qq] > ½ I(A:B) [q!q]
{qq} + ½ I(A:E) [q!q] > ½ I(A:B) [qq]
{q!q} + H(A) [qq] > I(A:B) [c!c]
BSST, [IEEE IT 48, 2002], E-assisted cap.
{q!q} > Ic(AiB) [q!q]
L/S/D, quantum channel cap.
{qq} + H(A) [q!q] > I(A:B) [c!c]
H3LT, [QIC 1, 2001], noisy SD
{qq} + I(A:B) [c!c] > Ic(AiB) [q!q]
DHW, noisy TP
SD
QE
TP SD
TP
{qq} + I(A:E) [c!c] > Ic(AiB) [q!q]
DW, entanglement distillation
TP
O OI
I(A:B)/2
[BSST; quant-ph/0106052]
H(A)+I(A:B)
main result #2: tradeoff curves
Q: q
ub
its sen
t per u
se o
f ch
an
nel
E: ebits allowed per use of channel
Ic(A>B)
[L/S/D]
qubit > ebit bound
45o
example: quantum channel capacity with limited entanglement
father trade-off curve
Q: q
ub
its sen
t per u
se o
f ch
an
nel
E: ebits allowed per use of channel
Ic(AiB)
[L/S/D]
45o
I(A:E)/2 = I(A:B)/2 - Ic(AiB)
I(A:B)/2
father
mother trade-off curve
{qq} + ½ I(A:E) [q!q] > ½ I(A:B)[qq]
preprocessing instrument T:A!AE’X
{qq} + ½ I(A:EE’|X) [q!q] + H(X)[c!c] > ½ I(A:B|X)[qq]
H(X) [c!c]measurement
compressionI(X:BE) [c!c] + H(X|BE) [cc]
I(X:BE) [c!c]derandomization
½ I(X:BE) ([q!q] – [qq])rule I
{qq} + ½ (I(A:EE’|X) + I(X:BE)) [q!q] > ½ (I(A:B|X) + I(X:BE)) [qq]
converse proof techniques
Holevo bound/data processing inequality:
X Q Y: I(X:Y) 6 I(X:Q)
Fano/Fannes inequality: error on n qubits makes entropy change by O((n+log(1/)).
unnamed identity that shows up everywhere:
I(X:AB) = H(A) + Ic(AiBX) – I(A:B) + I(X:B)
quantum data processing inequality: [quant-ph/9604022]
RQ RQ’E1 RQ’’E1E2: H(R)=Ic(RiQ)>Ic(RiQ’) > Ic(RiQ’’)
what’s left
• In quant-ph/0308044, we prove similar tradeoff curves for the rest of the resource inequalities in the family.
• Remaining open questions include
– Finding single-letter formulae (i.e. additivity)
– Reducing the optimizations over instruments
– Addressing two-way communication
– Multiple noisy resources
– Reverse coding theorems