Spin squeezing and entanglement

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 79, Issue 4, 2009, Pages

  Tóth, Géza ^a,b,c,d   Knapp, Christian ^e   Gühne, Otfried ^e,f   Briegel, Hans J ^e,f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY UPV EHU   (Spain)

^b BASQUE FOUNDATION FOR SCIENCE   (Spain)

^c ICFO INSTITUT DE CIENCIES FOTONIQUES   (Spain)

^d INSTITUTE OF EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE   (Hungary)

^e UNIVERSITY OF INNSBRUCK   (Austria)

^f ERICH SCHMID INSTITUTE OF MATERIALS SCIENCE   (Austria)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARBITRARY DIRECTION; BOUND ENTANGLEMENT; ENTANGLED STATE; MEAN VALUES; ORTHOGONAL DIRECTIONS; SPIN MODELS; SPIN SQUEEZING; TWO-QUBIT STATE;

QUANTUM OPTICS;

SPIN DYNAMICS;

EID: 66049163897     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.79.042334     Document Type: Article

References (77)

1. D. Bouwmeester, A. Ekert, and A. Zeilinger, The Physics of Quantum Information (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2000).
2. R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, e-print arXiv:quant-ph/0702225
3. M. Plenio and S. Virmani, Quantum Inf. Comput. 7, 1 (2007)
4. L. Amico, R. Fazio, A. Osterloh, and V. Vedral, Rev. Mod. Phys. 80, 517 (2008) 10.1103/RevModPhys.80.517
5. O. Gühne and G. Tóth, Phys. Rep. 474, 1 (2009). 10.1016/j.physrep.2009.02.004
6. M. Kitagawa and M. Ueda, Phys. Rev. A 47, 5138 (1993). 10.1103/PhysRevA.47.5138
7. D. J. Wineland, J. J. Bollinger, W. M. Itano, and D. J. Heinzen, Phys. Rev. A 50, 67 (1994). 10.1103/PhysRevA.50.67
8. A. Kuzmich, N. P. Bigelow, and L. Mandel, Europhys. Lett. 42, 481 (1998). 10.1209/epl/i1998-00277-9
9. J. Hald, J. L. Sørensen, C. Schori, and E. S. Polzik, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 1319 (1999). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.1319
10. A. Sørensen and K. Mølmer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 2274 (1999). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.2274
11. A. Sørensen, L.-M. Duan, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Nature (London) 409, 63 (2001). 10.1038/35051038
12. A. S. Sorensen and K. Molmer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 4431 (2001). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.4431
13. A. Sørensen, L.-M. Duan, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Nature (London) 409, 63 (2001). 10.1038/35051038
14. X. Wang, A. S. Sorensen, and K. Molmer, Phys. Rev. A 64, 053815 (2001). 10.1103/PhysRevA.64.053815
15. V. Meyer, M. A. Rowe, D. Kielpinski, C. A. Sackett, W. M. Itano, C. Monroe, and D. J. Wineland, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5870 (2001). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.5870
16. J. M. Geremia, J. K. Stockton, and H. Mabuchi, Science 304, 270 (2004). 10.1126/science.1095374
17. K. Hammerer, K. Mølmer, E. S. Polzik, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. A 70, 044304 (2004). 10.1103/PhysRevA.70.044304
18. K. Hammerer, E. S. Polzik, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. A 74, 064301 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevA.74.064301
19. S. R. de Echaniz, M. W. Mitchell, M. Kubasik, M. Koschorreck, H. Crepaz, J. Eschner, and E. S. Polzik, J. Opt. B: Quantum Semiclassical Opt. 7, S548 (2005). 10.1088/1464-4266/7/12/016
20. S. R. de Echaniz, M. Koschorreck, M. Napolitano, M. Kubasik, and M. W. Mitchell, Phys. Rev. A 77, 032316 (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.032316
21. Note that for Eq. 2 we assume that the mean spin points to the x direction. Without this requirement, even a pure state in which all spins point into the same direction could violate Eq. 2.
22. For a discussion about the differences of the two definitions, see K. Hammerer, A. S. Sorensen, and E. S. Polzik, e-print arXiv:0807.3358
23. For an analysis concerning the two-qubit case, see A. Messikh, Z. Ficek, and M. R. B. Wahiddin, Phys. Rev. A 68, 064301 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevA.68. 064301
24. R. F. Werner, Phys. Rev. A 40, 4277 (1989). 10.1103/PhysRevA.40.4277
25. J. K. Korbicz, J. I. Cirac, and M. Lewenstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 120502 (2005) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.120502
26. J. K. Korbicz, J. I. Cirac, and M. Lewenstein, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 259901 (E) (2005), for detailed discussions see Ref. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95. 259901
27. G. Tóth, Phys. Rev. A 69, 052327 (2004). 10.1103/PhysRevA.69. 052327
28. G. Tóth, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 24, 275 (2007). 10.1364/JOSAB.24. 000275
29. J. K. Korbicz, O. Guhne, M. Lewenstein, H. Haffner, C. F. Roos, and R. Blatt, Phys. Rev. A 74, 052319 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevA.74.052319
30. N. Kiesel, C. Schmid, G. Tóth, E. Solano, and H. Weinfurter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 063604 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.063604
31. G. Tóth, C. Knapp, O. Gühne, and H. J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 250405 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.250405
32. G. Tóth, Phys. Rev. A 71, 010301 (R) (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevA.71. 010301
33. This is the definition for singlets in condensed-matter physics. In quantum information science, the word singlet is used in a slightly different context. Singlets are pure states that are invariant under transformations of the type U N. It can be shown that all such states have zero total angular momentum and zero angular-momentum variance. In general, states that are invariant under U N are called Werner states. There are mixed Werner states that have nonzero angular-momentum variance. Finally, all multiqubit states with zero total angular momentum and zero angular-momentum variance are U N invariant. We thank A. Cabello and S. Iblisdir for discussions on this topic. See A. Cabello, J. Mod. Opt. 50, 10049 (2003)
34. T. Eggeling and R. F. Werner, Phys. Rev. A 63, 042111 (2001). 10.1103/PhysRevA.63.042111
35. H. F. Hofmann and S. Takeuchi, Phys. Rev. A 68, 032103 (2003) 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.032103
36. O. Gühne, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 117903 (2004). 10.1103/PhysRevLett. 92.117903
37. For engineering Dicke states, see, for example, Ref., R. G. Unanyan and M. Fleischhauer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 133601 (2003) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90. 133601
38. C. Thiel, J. von Zanthier, T. Bastin, E. Solano, and G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 193602 (2007) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.193602
39. A. Retzker, E. Solano, and B. Reznik, Phys. Rev. A 75, 022312 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevA.75.022312
40. J. K. Stockton, J. M. Geremia, A. C. Doherty, and H. Mabuchi, Phys. Rev. A 67, 022112 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevA.67.022112
41. O. Gühne, P. Hyllus, O. Gittsovich, and J. Eisert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 130504 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.99.130504
42. A. R. Usha Devi, M. S. Uma, R. Praphu, and A. K. Rajagopal, Phys. Lett. A 364, 203 (2007) 10.1016/j.physleta.2006.11.073
43. A. R. Usha Devi, R. Prabhu, and A. K. Rajagopal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 060501 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.060501
44. Uncertainty relations expressed with the correlation matrix of the many-qubit system have appeared recently in. Rivas and A. Luis, Phys. Rev. A 77, 022105 (2008) 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.022105. A related problem of finding criteria for physically allowed correlation matrices was considered in
45. T. Moroder, M. Keyl, and N. Lütkenhaus, J. Phys. A: Math Theor. 41, 275302 (2008). 10.1088/1751-8113/41/27/275302
46. Command OPTSPINSQ.M of the QUBIT4MATLAB V3.0 package computes the violation of Eq. 7 in these optimal directions. See G. Tóth, Comput. Phys. Commun. 179, 430 (2008). 10.1016/j.cpc.2008.03.007
47. M. Wieniak, V. Vedral, and A. Brukner, New J. Phys. 7, 258 (2005). 10.1088/1367-2630/7/1/258
48. Besides detecting entanglement, it is possible to obtain the two-qubit concurrence from measuring collective observables. See J. Vidal, Phys. Rev. A 73, 062318 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevA.73.062318
49. A. J. Coleman, Rev. Mod. Phys. 35, 668 (1963). 10.1103/RevModPhys.35.668
50. Note that a closely related problem is the symmetric extension problem, R. F. Werner, Lett. Math. Phys. 17, 359 (1989) 10.1007/BF00399761
51. B. M. Terhal, A. C. Doherty, and D. Schwab, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 157903 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.157903
52. M. Hein, J. Eisert, and H. J. Briegel, Phys. Rev. A 69, 062311 (2004). 10.1103/PhysRevA.69.062311
53. For example, the reduced states of three neighbored qubits of a ring cluster state are given by ρ= (1+ σz σx σz) /8, which is fully separable. However, the ring cluster state is the only global state that is compatible with these reduced states and is highly entangled.
54. X. Wang and B. C. Sanders, Phys. Rev. A 68, 012101 (2003). 10.1103/PhysRevA.68.012101
55. D. Jaksch, H. J. Briegel, J. I. Cirac, C. W. Gardiner, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1975 (1999) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.1975
56. G. K. Brennen, C. M. Caves, P. S. Jessen, I. H. Deutsch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 1060 (1999). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.82.1060
57. O. Mandel, M. Greiner, A. Widera, T. Rom, T. W. Hansch, and I. Bloch, Nature (London) 425, 937 (2003). 10.1038/nature02008
58. G. K. Brennen, Quantum Inf. Comput. 3, 619 (2003).
59. C. M. Alves and D. Jaksch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 110501 (2004). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.110501
60. K. G. H. Vollbrecht and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 190502 (2007). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.190502
61. K. Eckert, O. Romero-Isart, M. Rodriguez, M. Lewenstein, E. S. Polzik, and A. Sanpera, Nat. Phys. 4, 50 (2008). 10.1038/nphys776
62. I. de Vega, J. Ignacio Cirac, and D. Porras, Phys. Rev. A 77, 051804 (R) (2008). 10.1103/PhysRevA.77.051804
63. K. Zyczkowski, P. Horodecki, A. Sanpera, and M. Lewenstein, Phys. Rev. A 58, 883 (1998). 10.1103/PhysRevA.58.883
64. E. Barouch, M. McCoy, and M. Dresden, Phys. Rev. A 2, 1075 (1970) 10.1103/PhysRevA.2.1075
65. E. Barouch and M. McCoy, Phys. Rev. A 3, 786 (1971) 10.1103/PhysRevA.3. 786
66. E. Baruch and M. McCoy, Phys. Rev. A 3, 2137 (1971). 10.1103/PhysRevA.3. 2137
67. H. J. Lipkin, N. Meshkov, and A. J. Glick, Nucl. Phys. 62, 188 (1965) 10.1016/0029-5582(65)90862-X
68. T. Barthel, S. Dusuel, and J. Vidal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 220402 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.220402
69. A. Peres, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996) 10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.1413
70. M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Phys. Lett. A 223, 1 (1996). 10.1016/S0375-9601(96)00706-2
71. On the other hand, there are multipartite bound entangled states that have a negative partial transpose with respect to some bipartitions. Recent papers studying bound entanglement that has a negative partial transpose with respect to some bipartitions are D. Patanè, R. Fazio, and L. Amico, New J. Phys. 9, 322 (2007) 10.1088/1367-2630/9/9/322
72. A. Ferraro, D. Cavalcanti, A. García-Saez, and A. Acín, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 080502 (2008). The latter obtains the temperature range for bound entanglement for a chain of oscillators in the thermodynamic limit. Fully PPT bound entanglement does not appear in this system. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.080502
73. O. Rudolph, Quantum Inf. Process. 4, 219 (2005) 10.1007/s11128-005-5664-1
74. K. Chen and L.-A. Wu, Quantum Inf. Comput. 3, 193 (2003).
75. P. Millet, J. Y. Henry, F. Mila, and J. Galy, J. Solid State Chem. 147, 676 (1999). 10.1006/jssc.1999.8473
76. T. Saha-Dasgupta, R. Valentí, F. Capraro, and C. Gros, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 107201 (2005). 10.1103/PhysRevLett.95.107201
77. T. Vértesi and E. Bene, Phys. Rev. B 73, 134404 (2006). 10.1103/PhysRevB.73.134404