Quick Navigation

Topics

Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations Quantum Foundations

Non-LocalityneqQuantum Entanglement

arXiv
Authors: Xingyu Guo, Chen-Te Ma

Year

2021

Paper ID

61705

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

99

Citations

N/A

Abstract

The unique entanglement measure is concurrence in a 2-qubit pure state. The maximum violation of Bell's inequality is monotonically increasing for this quantity. Therefore, people expect that pure state entanglement is relevant to the non-locality. For justification, we extend the study to three qubits. We consider all possible 3-qubit operators with a symmetric permutation. When only considering one entanglement measure, the numerical result contradicts expectation. Therefore, we conclude "Non-LocalityneqQuantum Entanglement". We propose the generalized R-matrix or correlation matrix for the new diagnosis of Quantum Entanglement. We then demonstrate the evidence by restoring the monotonically increasing result.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2021 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • The unique entanglement measure is concurrence in a 2-qubit pure state.

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

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #61705 #68413 Emergent Operational Entangleme... #68467 Hong-Ou-Mandel interference of ... #68463 Full characterization of inform... #68461 Agreement and Compatibility in ...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

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.