Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

Operations on quantum systems with orthogonally decomposed Hilbert space

Johan Åberg

Published Jan 1, 2003• 0 citations
OpenAlex

Related papers

A note on the optimality of decomposable entanglement witnesses and completely entangled subspaces

Remigiusz Augusiak, Jordi Tura, Maciej Lewenstein

Entanglement witnesses (EWs) constitute one of the most important entanglement detectors in quantum systems. Nevertheless, their complete characterization, in particular with respect to the notion of optimality, is still missing, even in the decomposable case. Here we show that for any qubit–qunit decomposable EW (DEW) W , the three statements are equivalent: (i) the set of product vectors obeying ⟨ e , f | W | e , f ⟩ = 0 spans the corresponding Hilbert space, (ii) W is optimal, and (iii) W = Q Γ , with Q denoting a positive operator supported on a completely entangled subspace (CES) and Γ standing for the partial transposition. While implications (i)⇒(ii) and (ii)⇒(iii) are known, here we prove that (iii) implies (i). This is a consequence of a more general fact saying that product vectors orthogonal to any CES in span after partial conjugation the whole space. On the other hand, already in the case of the Hilbert space, there exist DEWs for which (iii) does not imply (i). Consequently, either (i) does not imply (ii) or (ii) does not imply (iii), and the above transparent characterization, obeyed by qubit–qunit DEWs, does not hold in general.

arXiv:1012.3786•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Apr 27, 2011•39 citations

Quantum Systems in Finite-Dimensional Hilbert Spaces

Gianluca Stefanucci

Springer eBooks•Jan 1, 2024•0 citations

Quantum States in Hilbert Space

Hans Luth

Graduate texts in physics•Jan 1, 2015•0 citations

Reduction of the Hilbert space in strongly correlated systems

Myung-Hoon Chung, Jae-Hoon Kwon

Defining commutation relations between symmetry operators and fundamental operators, we set up the symmetry group for a many-particle Hamiltonian. Using the irreducible representations of the symmetry group, we decompose the Hilbert space. We discuss the advantage of this approach to find the dimensions of reduced Hilbert spaces in numerical exact diagonalization.

Journal of Mathematical Physics•Sep 26, 2002•0 citations

Quantum States in Hilbert Space

Hans Luth

Graduate texts in physics•Oct 22, 2012•0 citations

Decomposing the SWAP quantum gate

Yorick Hardy, W.‐H. Steeb

Quantum gates are represented by unitary operators on a Hilbert space. We consider the unitary operators on and describe the component operators on each Hilbert space in the product space. From these criteria we derive a decomposition for a specific class of unitary operators such that each operator in the product has Schmidt rank bounded by 2. This decomposition directly yields the XOR (controlled NOT) implementation of the SWAP operation.

Journal of Physics A Mathematical and General•Jan 24, 2006•9 citations
Entanglement witnesses (EWs) constitute one of the most important entanglement detectors in quantum systems. Nevertheless, their complete characterization, in particular with respect to the notion of optimality, is still missing, even in the decomposable case. Here we show that for any qubit–qunit decomposable EW (DEW) W , the three statements are equivalent: (i) the set of product vectors obeying ⟨ e , f | W | e , f ⟩ = 0 spans the corresponding Hilbert space, (ii) W is optimal, and (iii) W = Q Γ , with Q denoting a positive operator supported on a completely entangled subspace (CES) and Γ standing for the partial transposition. While implications (i)⇒(ii) and (ii)⇒(iii) are known, here we prove that (iii) implies (i). This is a consequence of a more general fact saying that product vectors orthogonal to any CES in span after partial conjugation the whole space. On the other hand, already in the case of the Hilbert space, there exist DEWs for which (iii) does not imply (i). Consequently, either (i) does not imply (ii) or (ii) does not imply (iii), and the above transparent characterization, obeyed by qubit–qunit DEWs, does not hold in general.