Two observables A and B of an n-level system (i.e., a quantum system with n-dimensional state space) are called complementary, if knowledge of the measured value of A implies maximal uncertainty of the measured value of B, and vice versa. Such observables exist for all n, but no classification (up to equivalence) of all possible pairs of complementary observables is known except for n\ensuremath{\le}4. Complementary observables are conjectured to satisfy an ``entropic'' uncertainty relation of the strongest possible form. This relation has been verified for n\ensuremath{\le}4 by explicit calculations. A recent attempt of substantiating the widespread interpretation of uncertainty relations in terms of mutual disturbances between measurements is criticized.
Two observables A and B of an n-level system (i.e., a quantum system with n-dimensional state space) are called complementary, if knowledge of the measured value of A implies maximal uncertainty of the measured value of B, and vice versa. Such observables exist for all n, but no classification (up to equivalence) of all possible pairs of complementary observables is known except for n\ensuremath{\le}4. Complementary observables are conjectured to satisfy an ``entropic'' uncertainty relation of the strongest possible form. This relation has been verified for n\ensuremath{\le}4 by explicit calculations. A recent attempt of substantiating the widespread interpretation of uncertainty relations in terms of mutual disturbances between measurements is criticized.
Observables in quantum mechanics are generally complementary, that is, they reveal mutually incompatible pieces of information about a given system. This property is not only a fundamental tenet of the quantum formalism, but also a key component in quantum cryptographic protocols. As such it has fuelled much research into finding sets of highly complementary observables. In its strongest form -- the one we consider in this work -- the information between complementary observables is not merely incompatible but mutually exclusive: maximal information about one observable implies no information about the other, and vice versa. Maximal sets of non-degenerate complementary observables are known to exist in systems of prime power dimension such as n-qubit systems. Here, we study complementarity of degenerate observables, specifically we prove that observables associated with the n-qubit Pauli group also exhibit complementarity under this restriction: first, we obtain a criterion for two such observables to be complementary and, second, we relate maximal sets of complementary observables with informational pure state complementarity equalities, further studied in two companion papers. Equivalently, these results can be formulated in terms of maximal complementary sets of (not necessarily maximal) Abelian subgroups of the Pauli group linking with (possibly coarse-grained) mutually unbiased bases. Finally, we prove that these complementarity sets entail strong entropic uncertainty relations.
We postulate the existence of a universal uncertainty relation between the quantum and classical mutual informations between pairs of quantum systems. Specifically, we propose that the sum of the classical mutual information, determined by two mutually unbiased pairs of observables, never exceeds the quantum mutual information. We call this the complementary-quantum correlation (CQC) relation and prove its validity for pure states, for states with one maximally mixed subsystem, and for all states when one measurement is minimally disturbing. We provide results of a Monte Carlo simulation suggesting that the CQC relation is generally valid. Importantly, we also show that the CQC relation represents an improvement to an entropic uncertainty principle in the presence of a quantum memory, and that it can be used to verify an achievable secret key rate in the quantum one-time pad cryptographic protocol.
The so-called preparation uncertainty that occurs in the quantum world can be understood well in purely operational terms, and its existence in any given theory, perhaps differently than in quantum mechanics, can be verified by examining only measurement statistics. Namely, one says that uncertainty occurs in some theory when for some pair of observables, there is no preparation that would exhibit deterministic statistics for both of them. However, the right-hand side of the uncertainty relation is not operational anymore if we do not insist that it is just the minimum of the left-hand side for a given theory. For example, in quantum mechanics, it is some function of two observables that must be computed within the quantum formalism. Also, while joint nonmeasurability of observables is an operational notion, the complementarity in Bohr's sense (i.e., in terms of information needed to describe the system) has not yet been expressed in purely operational terms. Here we propose a general operational framework that provides answers to the above issues. We introduce an operational definition of complementarity and further postulate that complementary observables have to exhibit uncertainty, which means that we propose to put the (operational) complementarity as the right-hand side of the uncertainty relation. In particular, we identify two different notions of uncertainty and complementarity for which the above principle holds in the quantum-mechanical realm. We also introduce postulates for the general measures of uncertainty and complementarity. In order to define quantifiers of complementarity we first turn to the simpler notion of independence that is defined solely in terms of the statistics of two observables. Importantly, for clean and extremal observables---i.e., ones that cannot be simulated irreducibly by other observables---any measure of independence reduces to the proper complementary measure. Finally, as an application of our general framework we define a number of complementarity indicators and show that they can be used to state uncertainty relations. One of them, assuming some natural symmetries, leads to the Tsirelson bound for the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequality. Lastly, we show that for a single system a variant of information causality called the information content principle, under the above symmetries, can be interpreted as an uncertainty relation in the above sense.
Quantum uncertainty relations impose fundamental limits on the joint knowledge that can be acquired from complementary observables: Perfect knowledge of a quantum state in one basis implies maximal indetermination in all other mutually unbiased bases (MUBs). Uncertainty relations derived from joint properties of the MUBs are generally assumed to be uniform, irrespective of the specific observables chosen within a set. In this work, we demonstrate instead that the uncertainty relations can depend on the choice of observables. Through both experimental observation and numerical methods, we show that selecting different sets of three MUBs in a five-dimensional quantum system results in distinct uncertainty bounds, i.e., in varying degrees of complementarity, in terms of both entropy and variance.
Abstract Quantum entanglement is regarded as one of the core concepts, which is used to describe the non-classical correlation between subsystems, and entropic uncertainty relation plays a vital role in quantum precision measurement. It is well known that entanglement of formation can be expressed by von Neumann entropy of subsystems for arbitrary pure states. An interesting question is naturally raised: is there any intrinsic correlation between the entropic uncertainty relation and quantum entanglement? Or if the relation can be applied to estimate the entanglement. In this work, we focus on exploring the complementary relation between quantum entanglement and the entropic uncertainty relation. The results show that there exists an inequality relation between both of them for an arbitrary two-qubit system, and specifically the larger uncertainty will induce the weaker entanglement of the probed system, and vice versa. Besides, we use randomly generated states as illustrations to verify our results. Therefore, we claim that our observations might offer and support the validity of using the entropy uncertainty relation to estimate quantum entanglement.