Using the convex optimization method and Helstrom family of ensembles introduced in Ref. [1], we have discussed optimal ambiguous discrimination in qubit systems. We have analyzed the problem of the optimal discrimination of N known quantum states and have obtained maximum success probability and optimal measurement for N known quantum states with equiprobable prior probabilities and equidistant from center of the Bloch ball, not all of which are on the one half of the Bloch ball and all of the conjugate states are pure. An exact solution has also been given for arbitrary three known quantum states. The given examples which use our method include: 1. Diagonal N mixed states; 2. N equiprobable states and equidistant from center of the Bloch ball which their corresponding Bloch vectors are inclined at the equal angle from z axis; 3. Three mirror-symmetric states; 4. States that have been prepared with equal prior probabilities on vertices of a Platonic solid. Keywords: minimum-error discrimination, success probability, measurement, POVM elements, Helstrom family of ensembles, convex optimization, conjugate states PACS Nos: 03.67.Hk, 03.65.Ta
Using the well-known necessary and sufficient conditions for minimum error discrimination (MED), we extract an equivalent form for the MED conditions. In fact, by replacing the inequalities corresponding to the MED conditions with an equivalent but more suitable and convenient identity, the problem of mixed state discrimination with optimal success probability is solved. Moreover, we show that the mentioned optimality conditions can be viewed as a Helstrom family of ensembles under some circumstances. Using the given identity, MED between
N similarity transformed equiprobable quantum states is investigated. In the case that the unitary operators are generating a set of irreducible representation, the optimal set of measurements and corresponding maximum success probability of discrimination can be determined precisely. In particular, it is shown that for equiprobable pure states, the optimal measurement strategy is the square-root measurement (SRM), whereas for the mixed states, SRM is not optimal. In the case that the unitary operators are reducible, there is no closed-form formula in the general case, but the procedure can be applied in each case in accordance to that case. Finally, we give the maximum success probability of optimal discrimination for some important examples of mixed quantum states, such as generalized Bloch sphere
m-qubit states, spin-
j states, particular nonsymmetric qudit states, etc.
The minimum-error probability of ambiguous discrimination for two quantum states is the well-known {\it Helstrom limit} presented in 1976. Since then, it has been thought of as an intractable problem to obtain the minimum-error probability for ambiguously discriminating arbitrary
m quantum states. In this paper, we obtain a new lower bound on the minimum-error probability for ambiguous discrimination and compare this bound with six other bounds in the literature. Moreover, we show that the bound between ambiguous and unambiguous discrimination does not extend to ensembles of more than two states. Specifically, the main technical contributions are described as follows: (1) We derive a new lower bound on the minimum-error probability for ambiguous discrimination among arbitrary
m mixed quantum states with given prior probabilities, and we present a necessary and sufficient condition to show that this lower bound is attainable. (2) We compare this new lower bound with six other bounds in the literature in detail, and, in some cases, this bound is optimal. (3) It is known that if
m=2, the optimal inconclusive probability of unambiguous discrimination
QU and the minimum-error probability of ambiguous discrimination
QE between arbitrary given
m mixed quantum states have the relationship
QU≥2QE. In this paper, we show that, however, if
m>2, the relationship
QU≥2QE may not hold again in general, and there may be no supremum of
QU/QE for more than two states, which may also reflect an essential difference between discrimination for two-states and multi-states. (4) A number of examples are constructed.