Before we begin our detailed discussion of optical quantum information processing, we need to introduce certain figures of merit that quantify how well our information processor is performing. For a quantum computer, the time and resources it takes to complete a task are good measures, but we are faced with the problem that we do not know what the final design for a quantum computer will be. We therefore need additional figures of merit that are applicable in a wide range of situations. We first introduce the concept of the ‘density operator’, which will be used to describe quantum states about which we have incomplete knowledge. We then define the ‘fidelity’, which is used for assessing how close we are to a particular desired quantum state, and we discuss different measures of entanglement. The later part of the chapter will focus on figures of merit that are particularly relevant for assessing optical states, namely the first-order correlation functions, and the visibility of interference phenomena. Density operators and superoperators Classical physics often confronts us with situations where we can say only a limited amount about the state of a system: we can measure certain ‘bulk’ variables such as the temperature and pressure, but we do not know all of the details of the microscopic make-up of the state. For example, we typically have very little knowledge of the positions and velocities of all the atoms that constitute the system.
Before we begin our detailed discussion of optical quantum information processing, we need to introduce certain figures of merit that quantify how well our information processor is performing. For a quantum computer, the time and resources it takes to complete a task are good measures, but we are faced with the problem that we do not know what the final design for a quantum computer will be. We therefore need additional figures of merit that are applicable in a wide range of situations. We first introduce the concept of the ‘density operator’, which will be used to describe quantum states about which we have incomplete knowledge. We then define the ‘fidelity’, which is used for assessing how close we are to a particular desired quantum state, and we discuss different measures of entanglement. The later part of the chapter will focus on figures of merit that are particularly relevant for assessing optical states, namely the first-order correlation functions, and the visibility of interference phenomena. Density operators and superoperators Classical physics often confronts us with situations where we can say only a limited amount about the state of a system: we can measure certain ‘bulk’ variables such as the temperature and pressure, but we do not know all of the details of the microscopic make-up of the state. For example, we typically have very little knowledge of the positions and velocities of all the atoms that constitute the system.
This thesis fathoms the possibilities and limitations of measurements in quantum optics. After a short introduction to the general aspects of measurements in quantum mechanics, it presents three examples of a measurement process in concrete applications to quantum optics. For one, while operators describing quantities of interest might have a simple theoretical form, it is often hard to actually implement a measurement of their expectation values experimentally. This situation is encountered in the first part which is devoted to the measurement of quantum statistical properties of a light beam. In contrast to classical optics, these statistics are not fully determined by first- and second-order correlations. Instead, higher-order correlations, usually described by non-Hermitian operators, are necessary to characterize the quantum state completely. A particular example is the N-photon Fock state, for which only a measurement of the Nth-order correlations allows for a full characterization. Here, we present a new method how to measure an important class of Nth-order correlations for arbitrary N in a single spatial mode with two polarizations with limited experimental resources. The second part is again centered around the realization of specific measurement operators for photon correlation measurements. However, in contrast to the previous chapter, these measurements are not an end in their own, but are designed to create specific quantum states as a consequence of the measurement process: A suitable measurement of photons emitted by a number of atoms allows to transfer the atoms into long-lived entangled states. We find that with this method it is possible to entangle two remote atomic qubits to an arbitrary and well-defined degree. Furthermore, we show how to generate two families of quantum states in an arbitrary number of remote atomic qubits: one family consists of all -- symmetric and non-symmetric -- total angular momentum eigenstates in N remote qubits, the other is a family of cluster states. It is also systematically investigated whether the technique of quantum state engineering by projective measurements allows for the creation of any arbitrary state. We find explicit solutions for the case of two and three qubits, while it is shown that no solution exist for N > 6. We conclude the section by proving that with some changes in the setup, this measurement-based quantum state engineering technique allows to create the same states among the scattered photons themselves rather than among the emitting atoms. The last part is devoted to the amount of information one is able to gain about a given system when performing a measurement. The corresponding limits of information are investigated at the example of the duality that arises in a two-way interferometer between the visibility of the interference pattern and the knowledge about the path of the interfering object. We show that there exist correlations between the phase difference the interfering object acquires on its way through the interferometer and the amount of which-way information retrievable from certain observables of the which-way detector. In this way, the which-way information becomes a phase-dependent quantity. In particular, we find that for certain values of the phase shift, the amount of extractable which-way information can be larger than allowed by phase-independent measurement. This property is put to use to find the optimal observable for the which-way detector readout in dependence on the phase of the interfering object. Following this strategy, we are able to gain more which-way information than previously thought possible.
A computer is a physical device that helps us process information by executing algorithms. An algorithm is a well-defined procedure, with finite description, for realizing an information-processing task. An information-processing task can always be translated into a physical task. When designing complex algorithms and protocols for various information-processing tasks, it is very helpful, perhaps essential, to work with some idealized computing model. However, when studying the true limitations of a computing device, especially for some practical reason, it is important not to forget the relationship between computing and physics. Real computing devices are embodied in a larger and often richer physical reality than is represented by the idealized computing model. Quantum information processing is the result of using the physical reality that quantum theory tells us about for the purposes of performing tasks that were previously thought impossible or infeasible. Devices that perform quantum information processing are known as quantum computers. In this book we examine how quantum computers can be used to solve certain problems more efficiently than can be done with classical computers, and also how this can be done reliably even when there is a possibility for errors to occur. In this first chapter we present some fundamental notions of computation theory and quantum physics that will form the basis for much of what follows. After this brief introduction, we will review the necessary tools from linear algebra in Chapter 2, and detail the framework of quantum mechanics, as relevant to our model of quantum computation, in Chapter 3. In the remainder of the book we examine quantum teleportation, quantum algorithms and quantum error correction in detail. We are often interested in the amount of resources used by a computer to solve a problem, and we refer to this as the complexity of the computation. An important resource for a computer is time. Another resource is space, which refers to the amount of memory used by the computer in performing the computation. We measure the amount of a resource used in a computation for solving a given problem as a function of the length of the input of an instance of that problem.
The concept of a quantum state represents one of the most fundamental pillars of the paradigm of quantum theory.'3 Contrary to its mathematical elegance and convenience in calculations, the physical interpretation of a quantum state is not so transparent. The problem is that the quantum state (described either by a state vector, or density operator or a phase-space probability density distribution) does not have a well defined objective status, i.e. a state vector is not an objective property of a particle. According to Peres (see,1 p. 374): "There is no physical evidence whatsoever that every physical system has at every instant a well defined state. .. In strict interpretation of quantum theory these mathematical symbols [i.e., state vectorsi represent statistical information enabling us to compute the probabilities of occurrence of specific events." Once this point of view is adopted then it becomes clear that any "measurement" or a reconstruction of a density operator (or its mathematical equivalent) can be understood exclusively as an expression of our knowledge about the quantum mechanical state based on a certain set of measured data. To be more specific, any quantum-mechanical reconstruction scheme is nothing more than an a posteriori estimation of the density operator of a quantum-mechanical (microscopic) system based on data obtained with the help of a macroscopic measurement apparatus.3 The quality of the reconstruction depends on the "quality" of the measured data and the efficiency of the reconstruction procedure with the help of which the data analysis is performed. In particular, we can specify three different situations. Firstly, when all system observables are precisely measured. In this case the complete reconstruction of an initially unknown state can be performed (we will call this the reconstruction on the complete observation level) . Secondly, when just part of the system observables is precisely measured then one cannot perform a complete reconstruction of the measured state. Nevertheless, the reconstructed density operator still uniquely determines mean values of the measured observables (we will denote this scheme as reconstruction on incomplete observation levels) . Finally, when measurement does not provide us with sufficient information to specify the exact mean values (or probability distributions) but only the frequencies of appearances of eigenstates of the measured observables, then one can perform an estimation (e.g. reconstruction based on quantum Bayesian inference) which is the "best" with respect to the given measured data and the a priori knowledge about the state of the measured system.
The subject of this thesis, quantum estimation theory, is inspired by recent developments, both practical and theoretical, in the new field of quantum information and computation. The main task of quantum estimation theory, the subject of this thesis, is that given many identical copies of an unknown quantum system one wants to guess or estimate what the system is. This is done by performing an measurement and analyzing the data obtained from it.
A quantum state is represented by a density matrix. In some cases one does not need to know the whole density matrix, sometimes a partial characterization is enough. Chapter 2 of this thesis is about optimally estimating the spectrum, i.e. the eigenvalues, of a density matrix. This is useful, for example, for estimating the entanglement of a bipartite pure state. The results of chapter 2 tell us that one can optimally estimate bipartite entanglement with LOCC measurements on one of the two parties.
Unitary operations transform density matrices to density matrices. They are the gates of quantum information processing. Suppose one has one such unitary operation but one does not know what it does. In order to characterize it one needs to know how it transforms any input state. In order to know how a particular state is transformed, one can prepare that state, feed it to the unitary many times, and measure the output. One state is, of course, not enough. It turns out that the unitary can be completely characterized with a finite set of states, this is known as quantum process tomography. Unfortunately, in many cases it is difficult to have available in the lab all the input states needed to perform quantum process tomography. It is here where entanglement comes to the rescue. One pair of maximally entangled qubits, where one of them is used as input for the unitary gate and the other is left untouched, is sufficient. All the information about the unknown gate is contained in the joint output state. This is the problem treated in chapter 3. Now the output state needs to be measured. Again, one could measure the two qubits separately (LOCC) or jointly (collective measurement). Is there anything to gain by performing joint measurements? The answer is yes, optimal collective measurements are at least 3 times more accurate than any LOCC measurement.
Chapter 4 treats the problem of estimating commuting unitary gates. There it is shown that this extra information makes it unnecessary to use an entangled input state and to use collective measurements at the output.
In chapters 3 and 4 it is assumed that only one copy of the unitary gate is available. If, however, more than one copy (say N ) are available at the same time one could use an N-fold entangled state as input. If no entanglement is used, classical statistics tells us that the error of the estimation is proportional to 1/√N. In the literature, it has been shown that by using an entangled state in the input one can achieve an error proportional to 1/N. However, this has been shown only for qubit gates. In chapter 5 important steps are taken in the direction of showing the same thing for a general unitary gate, but this remains an open problem.
The astute reader might have formed the impression that quantum in formation science is a rather qualitative discipline because we have not, as yet, explained how to quantify quantum information. There are three good reasons for leaving this important question until the final chapter. Firstly, quantum information theory is technically demanding and to treat it at an earlier stage might have suggested that our subject was more complicated than it is. Secondly, there is the fact that many of the ideas in the field, such as teleportation and quantum circuits, are unfamiliar and it was important to present these as simply as possible. Finally, and most importantly, the theory of quantum information is not yet fully developed. It has not yet reached, in particular, the level of completeness of its classical counterpart. For this reason we can answer only some of the many questions we would like a quantum theory of information to address. Having said this, we can say that however, there are beautiful and useful mathematical results and it seems certain that these will continue to form an important part of the theory as it develops. We noted in the introduction to Chapter 1 that ‘quantum mechanics is a probabilistic theory and so it was inevitable that a quantum information theory would be developed’. A presentation of at least the beginnings of a quantitative theory is the objective of this final chapter. The entropy or information derived from a given probability distribution is, as we have seen, a convenient measure of the uncertainty associated with the distribution. If many of the probabilities are large, so that many of the possible events are comparably likely, then the entropy will be large. If one probability is close to unity, however, then the entropy will be small. It is convenient to introduce entropy in quantum mechanics as a measure of the uncertainty, or lack of knowledge, of the form of the state vector. If we know that our system is in a particular pure state then the associated uncertainty or entropy should be zero. For mixed states, however, it will take a non-zero value.
Fidelity is a figure of merit widely employed in quantum technology in order to quantify similarity between quantum states and, in turn, to assess quantum resources or reconstruction techniques. Fidelities higher than, say, 0.9 or 0.99, are usually considered as a piece of evidence to say that two states are very close in the Hilbert space. On the other hand, on the basis of several examples for qubits and continuous variable systems, we show that such high fidelities may be achieved by pairs of states with considerably different physical properties, including separable and entangled states or classical and nonclassical ones. We conclude that fidelity as a tool to assess quantum resources should be employed with caution, possibly combined with additional constraints restricting the pool of achievable states, or only as a mere summary of a full tomographic reconstruction.