Further results on the cross norm criterion for separability

Quantum Information Processing

Volumn 4, Issue 3, 2005, Pages 219-239

  Rudolph, Oliver ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PAVIA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Bound entangled states; Greatest cross norm; Quantum entanglement; Separability criteria; Tensor norm

Indexed keywords

COMPUTATIONAL METHODS; TENSORS;

BOUND ENTANGLED STATES; GREATEST CROSS NORM; QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT; SEPARABILITY CRITERIA; TENSOR NORM;

QUANTUM THEORY;

EID: 25444516025     PISSN: 15700755     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11128-005-5664-1     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. D. Bruß, Characterizing entanglement, J. Math. Phys. 43, 4237-4251 (2002).
2. M. J. Donald, M. Horodecki, and O. Rudolph, The uniqueness theorem for entanglement measures, J. Math. Phys. 43, 4252-4272 (2002).
3. O. Rudolph, A separability criterion for density operators, J. Phys. A Math. Gen. 33, 3951-3955 (2000).
4. O. Rudolph, A new class of entanglement measures, J. Math. Phys. 42, 5306-5314 (2001).
5. B. M. Terhal and K. G. H. Vollbrecht, The Entanglement of Formation for Isotropic States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2625-2628 (2000).
6. A. Peres, Separability criterion for density matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413-1415 (1996).
7. M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Separability of mixed states: necessary and sufficient conditions, Phys. Lett. A 78, 1-8 (1996).
8. M. Horodecki and P. Horodecki, Reduction criterion of separability and limits for a class of protocols of entanglement distillation, Phys. Rev. A 59, 4206-4216 (1999).
9. M. A. Nielsen and J. Kempe, Separable states are more disordered globally than locally, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5184-5187 (2001).
10. K. G. H. Vollbrecht and M. M. Wolf, Conditional entropies and their relation to entanglement criteria, J. Math. Phys. 43, 4299-4306 (2002).
11. k √Pk|Xk ⊗ ηk is called maximally entangled if Pk =1/d for all k. Loosely speaking a bound entangled state is an entangled state that cannot be transformed to maximally entangled pure form by local operations assisted by classical communication (LOCC operations). It is known that any entangled state that satisfies the PPT criterion is bound ntangled. Entangled states that are not bound entangled are also called distillable or free entangled.
12. G. Vidal and R. Tarrach, Robustness of entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 59, 141-155 (1999).
13. E. Schmidt, Zur Theorie der linearen und nichtlinearen Integralgleichungen. I. Teil: Entwicklung willkürlicher Funktionen nach Systemen vorgeschriebener, Math. Ann. 63, 433-476 (1907).
14. A. Ekert and P. L. Knight, Entangled quantum systems and the Schmidt decomposition, Am. J. Phys. 63, 415-423 (1995).
15. R. Schatten, Norm Ideals of Completely Continuous Operators, 2nd edn (Berlin, Springer, 1970).
16. N. E. Wegge-Olsen, K-Theory and C*-Algebras (Oxford University Press, Oxford 1993).
17. R. V. Kadison and J. R. Ringrose, Fundamentals of the Theory of Operator Algebras I & II, (Academic Press, Orlando, 1983 & 1986).
18. D. Pérez-García, Deciding separability with a fixed error, Phys. Lett. A 330, 149-154 (2004).
19. L. Gurvits, Classical complexity and quantum entanglement, J. Comput. Sys. Sci. 69, 448-484 (2004).
20. O. Rudolph, Further results on the cross norm criterion for separability, quant-ph/0202121 v1.
21. R. Horodecki and M. Horodecki, Information-theoretic aspects of inseparability of mixed states, Phys. Rev. A 54, 1838-1843 (1996).
22. C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Mixed state entanglement and quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824-3851 (1996).
23. P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Bound entanglement can be activated, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1056-1059 (1999).