Quick Navigation
Topics
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
A comparison of old and new definitions of the geometric measure of entanglement
arXiv
Authors: Lin Chen, Martin Aulbach, Michal Hajdusek
Year
2013
Paper ID
33368
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
176
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Several inequivalent definitions of the geometric measure of entanglement (GM) have been introduced and studied in the past. Here we review several known and new definitions, with the qualifying criterion being that for pure states the measure is a linear or logarithmic function of the maximal fidelity with product states. The entanglement axioms and properties of the measures are studied, and qualitative and quantitative comparisons are made between all definitions. Streltsov et al. [New J. Phys 12 123004 (2010)] proved the equivalence of two linear definitions of GM, whereas we show that the corresponding logarithmic definitions are distinct. Certain classes of states such as "maximally correlated states" and isotropic states are particularly valuable for this analysis. A little-known GM definition is found to be the first one to be both normalized and weakly monotonous, thus being a prime candidate for future studies of multipartite entanglement. We also find that a large class of graph states, which includes all cluster states, have a "universal" closest separable state that minimizes the quantum relative entropy, the Bures distance and the trace distance.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Entanglement Theory & Quantum Correlations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2013 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Several inequivalent definitions of the geometric measure of entanglement (GM) have been introduced and studied in the past.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.