Although there exists a clear definition of what separable and entangled states are, in general it is difficult to determine whether a given state is entangled or separable. Linear maps which are positive but not completely positive (PnCP) are a useful tool to investigate the entanglement of given states via separability criteria.

PnCP maps and separability criteria

Every linear map  Λ which describes a physical transformation must preserve the positivity of every state 𝜚: if this were not true, the transformed system could have negative eigenvalues, which would be in contradiction with the statistical interpretation of the eigenvalues as probabilities. In order to preserve the positivity of every state 𝜚, Λ must be a positive map. But the system  S_d could be statistically coupled to another system  S_n, called "ancilla". If we perform a physical transformation, represented by the positive map  Λ, on the system  S_d statistically coupled to the system  S_n, we must consider the action of the tensor product of the maps id_n ⊗ Λ on the compound system  S_n ⊗ S_d, where  id_n is the identity on the state space of the system  S_n. If we want  Λ to be a fully consistent physical transformation it isn't sufficient for  Λ to be positive: the tensor product id_n ⊗ Λ must be positive for every n, i.e. the map  Λ must be completely positive. Complete positivity is necessary because of entangled states of the bipartite system  S_n ⊗ S_d. If all the physical states of a bipartite system were separable, then positivity of the map  Λ would be sufficient. Indeed we know that if 𝜚 ≥ 0 is separable, then 𝜚 ≡ 𝜚_nd = ∑_ip_i𝜚_iⁿ ⊗ 𝜚_i^d, and therefore:

(id_n ⊗ Λ)[𝜚] = ∑_ip_i(id_n[𝜚_iⁿ] ⊗ Λ[𝜚_i^d]) = ∑_ip_i(𝜚_iⁿ ⊗ Λ[𝜚_i^d]) ≥ 0 .

If instead the state 𝜚 of the bipartite system is entangled (𝜚 ≡ 𝜚^ent), it cannot be written as a convex combination of product states as above, and therefore, in order to have (id_n ⊗ Λ)[𝜚^ent] ≥ 0, the tensor product id_n ⊗ Λ must be positive for every n, i.e. the map  Λ must be completely positive.

Therefore positive but not completely positive (PnCP) maps move entangled states out of the space of physical states and thus are a useful tool in the identification of separable or entangled states via separability criteria, such as the following.

Theorem [Separability criterion via PnCP maps]: A state 𝜚 ∈ 𝒮_d × d is separable if and only if (id_d ⊗ Λ)[𝜚] ≥ 0 for all PnCP maps Λ : M_d → M_d.

The following theorem provides an operationally useful separability criterion:

'A state 𝜚 ∈ 𝒮_d × d isentangled'' if and only if there exists a PnCP map  Λ such that

$$Tr[(id_d \otimes \Lambda)[P_d^+]\varrho] < 0 .$$ ' P_d⁺ is the projector onto the totally symmetric state $|\Psi_d^+\rangle = 1/\sqrt{d}\sum_{i=1}^d |i \rangle \otimes |i\rangle$. The operator  (id_d ⊗ Λ)[P_d⁺] is calledentanglement witnessand is uniquely associated to the positive map  Λ via theChoi-Jamiolkowski isomorphism''.

The most simple example of PnCP map is transposition, from which we get the PPT criterion.

But there are also two other PnCP maps that provide important separability criteria.

Reduction criterion

Since it is based on a decomposable map, this criterion is not very strong; however, it is interesting because it plays an important role in entanglement distillation and it leads to the extended reduction criterion, which we will analyze in the following subsection.

Definition: The linear map  Λ_r : 𝒮_dA × dB → 𝒮_dA × dB such that

 Λ_r[𝜚] = I(Tr𝜚) − 𝜚, with  𝜚_AB ∈ 𝒮_dA × dB and  I the identity operator, is called reduction map.

It can be easily proved that the reduction map is positive but not completely positive (PnCP) and decomposable.

Theorem [Reduction criterion]: If the state  𝜚_AB ∈ 𝒮_dA × dB is separable, then  (I ⊗ Λ_r)[𝜚_AB] ≥ 0, i.e. the following two conditions hold:

 𝜚_A ⊗ I_B − 𝜚_AB ≥ 0   I_A ⊗ 𝜚_B − 𝜚_AB ≥ 0, where  𝜚_A and  𝜚_B are the reduced density matrices of the subsystems  S_A and  S_B respectively.

Extended reduction criterion

This criterion is based on a PnCP non-decomposable map, found independently by Breuer and Hall, which is an extension of the reduction map on even-dimensional Hilbert spaces with  d = 2k. On these subspaces there exist antisymmetric unitary operations  U^T = −U. The corresponding antiunitary map  U[⋅]^TU^† maps any pure state to some state that is orthogonal to it. Therefore we can define the positive map  Λ_er as follows.

Definition: The linear map  Λ_er : 𝒮_d → 𝒮_d such that

 Λ_er[𝜚] = Λ[𝜚] − U[𝜚]^TU^† is called extended reduction map.

This map is positive but not completely positive and non-decomposable; moreover, the entanglement witness corresponding to  Λ_er can be proved to be optimal.

From  Λ_er we get the following separability condition.

Theorem [Extended reduction criterion]: If the state  𝜚 ∈ 𝒮_d × d is separable, then  (I_d ⊗ Λ_er)[𝜚] ≥ 0.

Notice that, since  Λ_er is indecomposable, it can detect the entanglement of PPT entangled states and thus turns out to be useful for the characterization of the entanglement properties of various classes of quantum states.

Other separability criteria

There are also separability criteria which are not based on PnCP maps, such as the range criterion and the matrix realignment criterion.

Range criterion

Let us consider a state  𝜚_AB where the dimensions of the two subsystem are  d_A respectively  d_B. If $\; d_A \cdot d_B >6$ then there exist states which are entangled but nevertheless PPT. Therefore, a separability criterion independent of the PPT criterion is needed in order to detect the entanglement of these states. This can be done with separability criteria based on PnCP maps where the chosen PnCP map is not decomposable. However, in (P. Horodecki, Phys. Lett. A 232, 1997) another criterion was especially formulated to detect the entanglement of some PPT states: the range criterion.

Range criterion: If the state  𝜚_AB is separable, then there exists a set of product vectors  {ψ_Aⁱ ⊗ ϕ_Bⁱ} that spans the range of  𝜚_AB, while  {ψ_Aⁱ ⊗ (ϕ_Bⁱ)^*} spans the range of the partial transpose  𝜚_AB^T_B, where the complex conjugation  (ϕ_Bⁱ)^* is taken in the same basis in which the partial transposition operation on  𝜚_AB is performed.

An interesting application of the range criterion in detecting PPT entangled states is the unextendible product basis methods.

Definition: An unextendible product basis is a set  𝒮_UPB of orthonormal product vectors in  ℋ_AB = ℋ_A ⊗ ℋ_B such that there is no product vector that is orthogonal to all of them.

Thus, from the definition it directly follows that any vector belonging to the orthogonal subspace  ℋ_UPB^⊥ is entangled and, by the range criterion, any mixed state with support contained in  ℋ_UPB^⊥ is entangled.

Matrix realignment criterion and linear contractions criteria

Another strong class of separability criteria which are independent of the separability criteria based on PnCP maps and, in particular, of the PPT criterion, is those based on linear contractions on product states.

Matrix realignment criterion or computable cross norm (CCN) criterion: If the state  𝜚_AB is separable, then the matrix  ℛ(𝜚_AB) with elements

 ⟨m|⟨μ|ℛ(𝜚_AB)|n⟩|ν⟩ ≡ ⟨m|⟨n|𝜚_AB|ν⟩|μ⟩

has trace norm not greater than 1.

The above condition can be generalized as follows.

Linear contraction criterion: If the map  Λ satisfies the condition

 ||Λ[|ϕ_A⟩⟨ϕ_A| ⊗ |ϕ_B⟩⟨ϕ_B|]||_Tr ≤ 1

for all pure product states  |ϕ_A⟩⟨ϕ_A| ⊗ |ϕ_B⟩⟨ϕ_B|, then for any separable state  𝜚_AB one has

 ||Λ[𝜚_AB]||_Tr ≤ 1.

The matrix realignment criterion is just a particular case of the above criterion where the matrix realignment map  ℛ, which permutes matrix elements, satisfies the above contraction condition on product states. Moreover, this criterion has been found to be useful for the detection of some PPT entanglement.

Related papers

• M. Keyl, Phys. Rep. 369, no.5, 431-548 (2002).

• C. H. Bennett et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 722 (1996).

• M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, R. Horodecki, Phys. Lett. A 223, 1 (1996).

• G. Lindblad, Commun. Math. Phys. 40, 147-151 (1975).

• M. D. Choi, Linear Alg. Appl. 10, 285 (1975).

• A. Jamiolkowski, Rep. Math. Phys. 3, 275 (1972).

• N. Cerf, R. Adami, Phys. Rev. A 60, 898-909 (1999).

• H.-P. Breuer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 080501 (2006).

• W. Hall, Construction of indecomposable positive maps based on a new criterion for indecomposability, e-print quant-ph/0607035.

• M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, R. Horodecki, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 574 (1997)

• C. H. Bennet et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 5385 (1999)

• D. DiVincenzo et al., Comm. Math. Phys. 238, 379 (2003)

• O. Rudolph, "Lett. Math. Phys." 70, 57 (2004)

• K. Chen, L.-A. Wu, Quantum Inf. Comp. 3, 193 (2003)

Category:Entanglement Category:Handbook of Quantum Information