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

Quantum Information Processing

Classification of the entangled states of $$2 \times L \times M \times N$$ 2 × L × M × N

Liang-Liang Sun, Junli Li, Cong‐Feng Qiao

Published Oct 1, 2014• 10 citations
Publisher
DOI
10.1007/s11128-014-0828-5

Related papers

Classification of the entangled states 2 × M × N

Junli Li, Cong‐Feng Qiao

Quantum Information Processing•Feb 11, 2012•5 citations

Classification of the entangled states of 2×L×M×N×H

Kangkang Jia, Junli Li, Cong-Feng Qiao

Journal of the Graduate School of the Chinese Academy of Sciences•May 15, 2016•0 citations

On Classification of Quantum Entangled States (量子情報と量子カオスの数理)

V. P. Belavkin, 雅則 大矢

数理解析研究所講究録•Apr 1, 2000•0 citations

Epistemic vs Ontic Classification of quantum entangled states

Enrico Giannetto

In this brief paper, starting from recent works, we analyze from a conceptual point of view this basic question: can the nature of quantum entangled states be interpreted ontologically or epistemologically? According to some works, the degrees of freedom (and the tool of quantum partitions) of quantum systems permit us to establish a possible classification between factorizable and entangled states. We suggest, that the ”choice” of degree of freedom (or quantum partitions), even if mathematically justified introduces an epistemic element, not only in the systems but also in their classification. We retain, instead, that there are not two classes of quantum states, entangled and factorizable, but only a single class of states: the entangled states. In fact, the factorizable states become entangled for a different choice of their degrees of freedom (i.e. they are entangled with respect to other observables). In the same way, there are no partitions of quantum systems which have an ontologically superior status with respect to any other. For all these reasons, both mathematical tools utilize(i.e quantum partitions or degrees of freedom) are responsible for creating an improper classification of quantum systems. Finally, we argue that we cannot speak about a classification of quantum systems: all quantum states exhibit a uniquely objective nature, they are all entangled states

•Jul 30, 2012•0 citations

Epistemic vs Ontic Classification of quantum entangled states?

Michele Caponigro, Enrico Giannetto

In this brief paper, starting from recent works, we analyze from conceptual point of view this basic question: can the nature of quantum entangled states be interpreted ontologically or epistemologically? According to some works, the degrees of freedom (and the tool of quantum partitions) of quantum systems permit us to establish a possible classification between factorizable and entangled states. We suggest, that the "choice" of degree of freedom (or quantum partitions), even if mathematically justified introduces an epistemic element, not only in the systems but also in their classification. We retain, instead, that there are not two classes of quantum states, entangled and factorizable, but only a single class of states: the entangled states. In fact, the factorizable states become entangled for a different choice of their degrees of freedom (i.e. they are entangled with respect to other observables). In the same way, there are no partitions of quantum systems which have an ontologically superior status with respect to any other. For all these reasons, both mathematical tools utilize(i.e quantum partitions or degrees of freedom) are responsible for creating an improper classification of quantum systems. Finally, we argue that we cannot speak about a classification of quantum systems: all quantum states exhibit a uniquely objective nature, they are all entangled states.

arXiv:1206.2916•Discusiones Filosóficas•Jun 13, 2012•1 citation

Entanglement classification of four-partite states under the SLOCC

S. M. Zangi, Junli Li, Cong‐Feng Qiao

Abstract We present a practical classification scheme for the four-partite entangled states under stochastic local operations and classical communication (SLOCC). By transforming a four-partite state into a triple-state set composed of two tripartite states and a bipartite state, the entanglement classification is reduced to the classification of tripartite and bipartite entanglements. This reduction method has the merit of involving only the linear constrains, and meanwhile provides an insight into the entanglement character of the subsystems.

arXiv:1701.04155•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Jun 19, 2017•19 citations
Classification of the entangled states of 2×L×M×N2 \times L \times M \times N2×L×M×N 2 × L × M × N
In this brief paper, starting from recent works, we analyze from a conceptual point of view this basic question: can the nature of quantum entangled states be interpreted ontologically or epistemologically? According to some works, the degrees of freedom (and the tool of quantum partitions) of quantum systems permit us to establish a possible classification between factorizable and entangled states. We suggest, that the ”choice” of degree of freedom (or quantum partitions), even if mathematically justified introduces an epistemic element, not only in the systems but also in their classification. We retain, instead, that there are not two classes of quantum states, entangled and factorizable, but only a single class of states: the entangled states. In fact, the factorizable states become entangled for a different choice of their degrees of freedom (i.e. they are entangled with respect to other observables). In the same way, there are no partitions of quantum systems which have an ontologically superior status with respect to any other. For all these reasons, both mathematical tools utilize(i.e quantum partitions or degrees of freedom) are responsible for creating an improper classification of quantum systems. Finally, we argue that we cannot speak about a classification of quantum systems: all quantum states exhibit a uniquely objective nature, they are all entangled states
In this brief paper, starting from recent works, we analyze from conceptual point of view this basic question: can the nature of quantum entangled states be interpreted ontologically or epistemologically? According to some works, the degrees of freedom (and the tool of quantum partitions) of quantum systems permit us to establish a possible classification between factorizable and entangled states. We suggest, that the "choice" of degree of freedom (or quantum partitions), even if mathematically justified introduces an epistemic element, not only in the systems but also in their classification. We retain, instead, that there are not two classes of quantum states, entangled and factorizable, but only a single class of states: the entangled states. In fact, the factorizable states become entangled for a different choice of their degrees of freedom (i.e. they are entangled with respect to other observables). In the same way, there are no partitions of quantum systems which have an ontologically superior status with respect to any other. For all these reasons, both mathematical tools utilize(i.e quantum partitions or degrees of freedom) are responsible for creating an improper classification of quantum systems. Finally, we argue that we cannot speak about a classification of quantum systems: all quantum states exhibit a uniquely objective nature, they are all entangled states.
Abstract We present a practical classification scheme for the four-partite entangled states under stochastic local operations and classical communication (SLOCC). By transforming a four-partite state into a triple-state set composed of two tripartite states and a bipartite state, the entanglement classification is reduced to the classification of tripartite and bipartite entanglements. This reduction method has the merit of involving only the linear constrains, and meanwhile provides an insight into the entanglement character of the subsystems.