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

International Journal of Quantum Chemistry

Density matrix formulation of quantum theory and its physical interpretation

Frederik Jozef Belinfante

Published Jan 1, 1980• 14 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Abstract The fundamentals of the theory of density matrices are reviewed. The density matrix is introduced first in terms of state vectors for pure states over which a probability distribution is given. It is then shown that the applications of the density matrix do not require knowledge of the particular probability distribution over pure states that may have been used for its original determination. It is stressed that density matrices, like state vectors, describe ensembles rather than single systems, as determinism in quantum theory (except for some conservation laws) is of a statistical character only. The entropy of a quantum‐mechanical system is defined as the average per system of the entropy of an ensemble of systems described by the quantum‐mechanical (pure or mixed) state. For pure states this entropy is zero, in agreement with the fact that state vectors constitute the maximal information that can be given about a quantum‐mechanical system. As the entropy should be independent of the particular probability distribution over pure states that may have been used to form the mixed state, it is calculated from statistical considerations about an imaginary ensemble in which the eigenvalues of the density matrix are probabilities over pure states given by the eigenfunctions of the density matrix. The entropy is calculated for a mixture of two nonorthogonal states. The time evolution of the density matrix, in general, is not a unitary transformation, as observable systems are not closed and therefore in the Hamiltonian contain unknown external parameters that are not the same for the entire mixture. Therefore transitions between pure states and mixed states take place. Those from pure to mixed states take place spontaneously and irreversibly under increase of entropy. Transitions from mixed states to pure states can be fabricated; an example is given. As Wigner's thought experiment of mixing coherently the two beams from a Stern‐Gerlach apparatus according to estimates of Bohm should be impossible by loss of coherence in the gradient magnetic field, it is indicated how Wigner's ideas may be realized by using, instead, polarized light beams from birefringent crystals. After a brief review of the quantum theory of measurements and the various arguments usually given for the reducibility of state after the measurement, Wigner's argument against blind use of these arguments is interpreted as a limit of validity of the familiar probability rule of quantum theory, which should not be applied after an unsuccessful measurement. By splitting light beams coherently by glass plates, one can by the same apparatus have measurements both of the relative intensities of two coherent beams, and of interference effects between the two beams. This shows that complementarity applies to the individual systems in the beam, as they reach the glass plate where a choice must be made between two complementary possibilities of future measurement. Finally, by describing Schrödinger's cat by a density matrix and asking about its time dependence, it is shown that, if it were possible to measure the interference effects between living and dead cats used by some people as a justification for writing down a state vector for the cat, then this measurement could be used to revive some dead cats.

DOI
10.1002/qua.560170102

Related papers

The Density Matrix Formalism

Bernard d’Espagnat

Along with an elementary description of the well-known density matrix formalism and of its application to the description of quantum-statistical ensembles, this chapter includes the proofs of a few propositions that are especially useful for understanding most of the developments. In the new formulation, ensembles are directly described by density matrices, observables are still described by Hermitean operators, and the rules giving the statistical distribution and the mean values of the predicted measurement results are, respectively, expressions. When stated in this manner, the rules of quantum mechanics apply directly not only to pure states but also to mixtures. This is a distinct advantage. In the case of mixtures defined by their density matrices, the new formulation also has another merit. If two proper mixtures are described by the same density matrix, any state vector representing a subensemble of one of these mixtures can be expressed as a linear combination of the state vectors representing the subensembles of the other mixture.

CRC Press eBooks•Mar 5, 2018•1 citation

The Density Matrix Formalism

Bernard d’Espagnat

In quantum physics, we often need to consider ensembles that are not pure cases, that is, that cannot be described by state vectors. This is so, for instance, when an ensemble is composed of several subensembles that are described by nonequivalent state vectors. It also happens in most cases in which we consider ensembles of definite subsystems of some larger systems. The density matrix—or "statistical operator"—formalism is one that makes it possible to deal with such situations swiftly and efficiently. The rules apply only to ensembles that can be described by state vectors. These rules entail as consequences new expressions for quantum probabilities and mean values, which can be called the—derived— "statistical operator rules." However, it is also possible to formulate the statistical operator rules directly instead. The Heisenberg "uncertainty" relations imply that in general f(x,p) cannot be interpreted as really being a joint probability distribution.

CRC Press eBooks•May 4, 2018•1 citation

Quantum Probability

Heinz‐Peter Breuer, Francesco Petruccione

Abstract This chapter develops the fundamental notions and concepts of the probabilistic and statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics. It begins with a brief review of the mathematical structure given by a Hilbert space of state vectors and an algebra of observables represented by selfadjoint operators. Special emphasis is laid on the connection between the spectral representation of a selfadjoint operator and a corresponding random variable that describes the possible measurement outcomes. The chapter further introduces the concepts of a composite quantum system, of the reduced density matrix, and of entangled quantum states. A section on quantum entropies is included, as well as the mathematical formulation of the generalized theory of quantum measurements in terms of completely positive quantum operations and effects.

•Jan 25, 2007•0 citations

The Postulates of Quantum Mechanics

F. S. Levin

In this chapter the basic concepts of quantum theory are formulated via a self-consistent set of six postulates. These six postulates deal with the following: operator images of physical observables; properties of state vectors and wave functions; the connection with experimental measurements; coordinate-space forms of those operators having classical analogs; the primary dynamical equation of quantum mechanics; and the completeness of the eigenvectors of observables. The postulates are the framework on which the edifice of quantum mechanics is constructed. A separate section is devoted to the statement of each postulate and to a few examples chosen to illustrate or apply it. A comprehensive set of applications is presented in Chapters 6 and 7, where various 1-D systems are used as the vehicles for illustrating the postulates. The basic theory of this chapter is extended and developed in Chapters 8 and 9. Since probability is a key interpretational concept, a brief introduction to this topic is given in an appendix. We emphasize that our formulation of quantum theory (in this chapter and throughout this book) is restricted to the case of pure states. This is not a major restriction. It means that, when we consider ensembles of individual quantum systems (e.g., single particles, atoms, nuclei, etc.), all of the systems in the ensemble are assumed to be in the same quantum state, not necessarily an eigenstate of a quantal operator. Ensembles for which this assumption does not hold are described by a density operator or density matrix rather than by a pure state; treatments of such cases can be found in references cited later.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Dec 3, 2001•0 citations

Density Matrices

Reinhold A. Bertlmann, Nicolai Friis

Abstract In this chapter we discuss statistical mixtures of pure quantum states, resulting in so-called mixed states, and their representation using density operators. The properties of density operators for pure and mixed states are analysed and we examine their time evolution governed by the Liouville-von Neumann equation. As particular examples of interest we consider the density operators for thermal states, focusing on harmonic oscillators and the application of this model to calculate the average photon number for the modes of the electromagnetic field at thermal equilibrium. We then turn to two-level systems, or qubits, which are of particular relevance in quantum information theory and we inspect the geometry of the state space of density operators as a convex subspace of the Hilbert-Schmidt space. Finally, we take a closer look at density operators for bipartite systems which forms the mathematical basis for considering entanglement in later chapters.

•Sep 7, 2023•0 citations

Experimental quantum state learning with pairs of photons

C. Pria Dobney, Johan Henaff, Allen Kasum +5 more

Tomography allows one to estimate the density matrix describing the state an ensemble of quantum systems are prepared in (for example, polarization tomography determines the polarization state of a beam of identically prepared photons). In general, it is not possible to uniquely decompose the density matrix into its pure state components. Agarwal et al. proposed a protocol which, for a mixture composed of any two pure states of a qubit (with arbitrary probabilities), allows an observer to infer not only the density matrix but the identity of those specific pure states and their weights - the additional requirement being that the qubits arrive in pairs, where both qubits in each pair are in the same state. We experimentally demonstrate this learning-from-pairs concept using photons in the polarization degree of freedom. We use tomography to measure a sequence of single photons and make use of their time-of-arrival information to 'pair up' the photons after the measurement. From here we are able to infer the photons' polarization states and their respective probabilities, and we demonstrate this for various different choices of polarization states and ratios. Finally, we investigate our ability to discriminate between two equal mixtures of distinct pairs of orthogonal polarization states. We find that on the order of approx. 10e4 photons is typically enough to achieve tomography fidelities of approximately 0.9999. This is sufficient to discriminate between two different preparations of the same mixed state, differing by angles of less than 5 degrees between the pure states used in the two preparations.

quant-pharXiv:2606.16932•Jun 16, 2026•0 citations
Abstract The fundamentals of the theory of density matrices are reviewed. The density matrix is introduced first in terms of state vectors for pure states over which a probability distribution is given. It is then shown that the applications of the density matrix do not require knowledge of the particular probability distribution over pure states that may have been used for its original determination. It is stressed that density matrices, like state vectors, describe ensembles rather than single systems, as determinism in quantum theory (except for some conservation laws) is of a statistical character only. The entropy of a quantum‐mechanical system is defined as the average per system of the entropy of an ensemble of systems described by the quantum‐mechanical (pure or mixed) state. For pure states this entropy is zero, in agreement with the fact that state vectors constitute the maximal information that can be given about a quantum‐mechanical system. As the entropy should be independent of the particular probability distribution over pure states that may have been used to form the mixed state, it is calculated from statistical considerations about an imaginary ensemble in which the eigenvalues of the density matrix are probabilities over pure states given by the eigenfunctions of the density matrix. The entropy is calculated for a mixture of two nonorthogonal states. The time evolution of the density matrix, in general, is not a unitary transformation, as observable systems are not closed and therefore in the Hamiltonian contain unknown external parameters that are not the same for the entire mixture. Therefore transitions between pure states and mixed states take place. Those from pure to mixed states take place spontaneously and irreversibly under increase of entropy. Transitions from mixed states to pure states can be fabricated; an example is given. As Wigner's thought experiment of mixing coherently the two beams from a Stern‐Gerlach apparatus according to estimates of Bohm should be impossible by loss of coherence in the gradient magnetic field, it is indicated how Wigner's ideas may be realized by using, instead, polarized light beams from birefringent crystals. After a brief review of the quantum theory of measurements and the various arguments usually given for the reducibility of state after the measurement, Wigner's argument against blind use of these arguments is interpreted as a limit of validity of the familiar probability rule of quantum theory, which should not be applied after an unsuccessful measurement. By splitting light beams coherently by glass plates, one can by the same apparatus have measurements both of the relative intensities of two coherent beams, and of interference effects between the two beams. This shows that complementarity applies to the individual systems in the beam, as they reach the glass plate where a choice must be made between two complementary possibilities of future measurement. Finally, by describing Schrödinger's cat by a density matrix and asking about its time dependence, it is shown that, if it were possible to measure the interference effects between living and dead cats used by some people as a justification for writing down a state vector for the cat, then this measurement could be used to revive some dead cats.
Along with an elementary description of the well-known density matrix formalism and of its application to the description of quantum-statistical ensembles, this chapter includes the proofs of a few propositions that are especially useful for understanding most of the developments. In the new formulation, ensembles are directly described by density matrices, observables are still described by Hermitean operators, and the rules giving the statistical distribution and the mean values of the predicted measurement results are, respectively, expressions. When stated in this manner, the rules of quantum mechanics apply directly not only to pure states but also to mixtures. This is a distinct advantage. In the case of mixtures defined by their density matrices, the new formulation also has another merit. If two proper mixtures are described by the same density matrix, any state vector representing a subensemble of one of these mixtures can be expressed as a linear combination of the state vectors representing the subensembles of the other mixture.
In quantum physics, we often need to consider ensembles that are not pure cases, that is, that cannot be described by state vectors. This is so, for instance, when an ensemble is composed of several subensembles that are described by nonequivalent state vectors. It also happens in most cases in which we consider ensembles of definite subsystems of some larger systems. The density matrix—or "statistical operator"—formalism is one that makes it possible to deal with such situations swiftly and efficiently. The rules apply only to ensembles that can be described by state vectors. These rules entail as consequences new expressions for quantum probabilities and mean values, which can be called the—derived— "statistical operator rules." However, it is also possible to formulate the statistical operator rules directly instead. The Heisenberg "uncertainty" relations imply that in general f(x,p) cannot be interpreted as really being a joint probability distribution.
Abstract This chapter develops the fundamental notions and concepts of the probabilistic and statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics. It begins with a brief review of the mathematical structure given by a Hilbert space of state vectors and an algebra of observables represented by selfadjoint operators. Special emphasis is laid on the connection between the spectral representation of a selfadjoint operator and a corresponding random variable that describes the possible measurement outcomes. The chapter further introduces the concepts of a composite quantum system, of the reduced density matrix, and of entangled quantum states. A section on quantum entropies is included, as well as the mathematical formulation of the generalized theory of quantum measurements in terms of completely positive quantum operations and effects.
In this chapter the basic concepts of quantum theory are formulated via a self-consistent set of six postulates. These six postulates deal with the following: operator images of physical observables; properties of state vectors and wave functions; the connection with experimental measurements; coordinate-space forms of those operators having classical analogs; the primary dynamical equation of quantum mechanics; and the completeness of the eigenvectors of observables. The postulates are the framework on which the edifice of quantum mechanics is constructed. A separate section is devoted to the statement of each postulate and to a few examples chosen to illustrate or apply it. A comprehensive set of applications is presented in Chapters 6 and 7, where various 1-D systems are used as the vehicles for illustrating the postulates. The basic theory of this chapter is extended and developed in Chapters 8 and 9. Since probability is a key interpretational concept, a brief introduction to this topic is given in an appendix. We emphasize that our formulation of quantum theory (in this chapter and throughout this book) is restricted to the case of pure states. This is not a major restriction. It means that, when we consider ensembles of individual quantum systems (e.g., single particles, atoms, nuclei, etc.), all of the systems in the ensemble are assumed to be in the same quantum state, not necessarily an eigenstate of a quantal operator. Ensembles for which this assumption does not hold are described by a density operator or density matrix rather than by a pure state; treatments of such cases can be found in references cited later.
Abstract In this chapter we discuss statistical mixtures of pure quantum states, resulting in so-called mixed states, and their representation using density operators. The properties of density operators for pure and mixed states are analysed and we examine their time evolution governed by the Liouville-von Neumann equation. As particular examples of interest we consider the density operators for thermal states, focusing on harmonic oscillators and the application of this model to calculate the average photon number for the modes of the electromagnetic field at thermal equilibrium. We then turn to two-level systems, or qubits, which are of particular relevance in quantum information theory and we inspect the geometry of the state space of density operators as a convex subspace of the Hilbert-Schmidt space. Finally, we take a closer look at density operators for bipartite systems which forms the mathematical basis for considering entanglement in later chapters.
Tomography allows one to estimate the density matrix describing the state an ensemble of quantum systems are prepared in (for example, polarization tomography determines the polarization state of a beam of identically prepared photons). In general, it is not possible to uniquely decompose the density matrix into its pure state components. Agarwal et al. proposed a protocol which, for a mixture composed of any two pure states of a qubit (with arbitrary probabilities), allows an observer to infer not only the density matrix but the identity of those specific pure states and their weights - the additional requirement being that the qubits arrive in pairs, where both qubits in each pair are in the same state. We experimentally demonstrate this learning-from-pairs concept using photons in the polarization degree of freedom. We use tomography to measure a sequence of single photons and make use of their time-of-arrival information to 'pair up' the photons after the measurement. From here we are able to infer the photons' polarization states and their respective probabilities, and we demonstrate this for various different choices of polarization states and ratios. Finally, we investigate our ability to discriminate between two equal mixtures of distinct pairs of orthogonal polarization states. We find that on the order of approx. 10e4 photons is typically enough to achieve tomography fidelities of approximately 0.9999. This is sufficient to discriminate between two different preparations of the same mixed state, differing by angles of less than 5 degrees between the pure states used in the two preparations.