Quick Navigation
Topics
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Experimental validation of quantum steering ellipsoids and tests of volume monogamy relations
arXiv
Authors: Chao Zhang, Shuming Cheng, Li Li, Qiu-Yue Liang, Bi-Heng Liu, Yun-Feng Huang, Chuan-Feng Li, Guang-Can Guo, Michael J. W. Hall, Howard M. Wiseman, Geoff J. Pryde
Year
2018
Paper ID
7476
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
140
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The set of all qubit states that can be steered to by measurements on a correlated qubit is predicted to form an ellipsoid---called the quantum steering ellipsoid---in the Bloch ball. This ellipsoid provides a simple visual characterisation of the initial 2-qubit state, and various aspects of entanglement are reflected in its geometric properties. We experimentally verify these properties via measurements on many different polarisation-entangled photonic qubit states. Moreover, for pure 3-qubit states, the volumes of the two quantum steering ellipsoids generated by measurements on the first qubit are predicted to satisfy a tight monogamy relation, which is strictly stronger than the well-known monogamy of entanglement for concurrence. We experimentally verify these predictions, using polarisation and path entanglement. We also show experimentally that this monogamy relation can be violated by a mixed entangled state, which nevertheless satisfies a weaker monogamy relation.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Entanglement Theory & Quantum Correlations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2018 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The set of all qubit states that can be steered to by measurements on a correlated qubit is predicted to form an ellipsoid---called the quantum steering ellipsoid---in the...
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.