Kraus representation of quantum evolution and fidelity as manifestations of Markovian and non-Markovian forms

Physical Review A - Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics

Volumn 82, Issue 4, 2010, Pages

  Rajagopal, A K ^a   Usha Devi, A R ^a,b   Rendell, R W ^a  

^a Inspire Institute Inc   (United States)

^b BANGALORE UNIVERSITY   (India)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DENSITY MATRIX; INITIAL STATE; MARKOVIAN; NON-MARKOVIAN; NON-MARKOVIAN DYNAMICS; NON-MARKOVIAN FEATURES; QUANTUM EVOLUTION;

EID: 78650926106     PISSN: 10502947     EISSN: 10941622     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.82.042107     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007).
2. D. Chruscinski and A. Kossakowski, e-print arXiv: 1006.2764.
3. M. M. Wolf, J. Eisert, T. S. Cubitt, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.150402 101, 150402 (2008).
4. H.-P. Breuer, E.-M. Laine, and J. Piilo, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.210401 103, 210401 (2009);
5. E.-M. Laine, J. Piilo, and H.-P. Breuer, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.81.062115 81, 062115 (2010).
6. A. Rivas, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.050403 105, 050403 (2010).
7. K. Kraus, Ann. Phys. (NY) APNYA6 0003-4916 10.1016/0003-4916(71)90108-4 64, 311 (1971);
8. W. F. Stinespring, Proc. Am. Math. Soc. PAMYAR 0002-9939 10.2307/2032342 6, 211 (1955);
9. E. C. G. Sudarshan, P. M. Mathews, and J. Rau, Phys. Rev. PHRVAO 0031-899X 10.1103/PhysRev.121.920 121, 920 (1961).
10. J. Preskill, Quantum Information and Computation, Lecture Notes for Physics Vol. 229 (Springer, Berlin, 1998) [http://www.theory.caltech.edu/people/ preskill/ph229].
11. C. A. Rodriguez-Rosario and E. C. G. Sudarshan, e-print arXiv: 0803.1183 [quant-ph].
12. G. Lindblad, Commun. Math. Phys. CMPHAY 0010-3616 10.1007/BF01608499 48, 119 (1976).
13. V. Gorini, A. Kossakowski, and E. C. G. Sudarshan, J. Math. Phys. JMAPAQ 0022-2488 10.1063/1.522979 17, 821 (1976).
14. R. Jozsa, J. Mod. Opt. JMOPEW 0950-0340 10.1080/09500349414552171 41, 2315 (1994).
15. T. Yu and J. H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.140403 97, 140403 (2006).
16. T. Yu and J. H. Eberly, Opt. Commun. OPCOB8 0030-4018 10.1016/j.optcom.2009.10.042 283, 676 (2010).
17. A. K. Rajagopal, K. L. Jensen, and F. W. Cummings, Phys. Lett. A PYLAAG 0375-9601 10.1016/S0375-9601(99)00404-1 259, 285 (1999);
18. R. W. Rendell and A. K. Rajagopal, Phys. Rev. A PLRAAN 1050-2947 10.1103/PhysRevA.67.062110 67, 062110 (2003).
19. A. K. Rajagopal, A. R. Usha Devi, R. W. Rendell, and M. Steiner, e-print arXiv: 0709.1212.
20. D. Chruscinski and A. Kossakowski, Phys. Rev. Lett. PRLTAO 0031-9007 10.1103/PhysRevLett.104.070406 104, 070406 (2010).
21. Under non-Markovian evolutions, correlations between system and environment could result in not completely positive dynamical maps [8] and this forms the basis of the non-Markovianity measure proposed recently [5].
22. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chaung, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2002).
23. Note that in the case of Markovian dynamics, the inequality (10) is obeyed when t and τ are interchanged.
24. 2). In the limit when fidelity (overlap between two states) approaches the value unity, the trace distance vanishes.