Optimal Verification of Entangled States with Local Measurements.

Consider the task of verifying that a given quantum device, designed to produce a particular entangled state, does indeed produce that state. One natural approach would be to characterize the output state by quantum state tomography, or alternatively, to perform some kind of Bell test, tailored to the state of interest. We show here that neither approach is optimal among local verification strategies for 2-qubit states. We find the optimal strategy in this case and show that quadratically fewer total measurements are needed to verify to within a given fidelity than in published results for quantum state tomography, Bell test, or fidelity estimation protocols. We also give efficient verification protocols for any stabilizer state. Additionally, we show that requiring that the strategy be constructed from local, nonadaptive, and noncollective measurements only incurs a constant-factor penalty over a strategy without these restrictions.

[1]  Masahito Hayashi,et al.  Verification of hypergraph states , 2017 .

[2]  R. Blume-Kohout,et al.  Minimax Quantum Tomography: Estimators and Relative Entropy Bounds. , 2016, Physical review letters.

[3]  S. Kulik,et al.  Experimental adaptive quantum tomography of two-qubit states , 2015, 1510.05303.

[4]  Masahito Hayashi,et al.  Verifiable Measurement-Only Blind Quantum Computing with Stabilizer Testing. , 2015, Physical review letters.

[5]  Peter van Loock,et al.  3/4-Efficient Bell measurement with passive linear optics and unentangled ancillae. , 2014, Physical review letters.

[6]  J. O'Brien,et al.  On the experimental verification of quantum complexity in linear optics , 2013, Nature Photonics.

[7]  M. Murao,et al.  Precision-guaranteed quantum tomography. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[8]  Aephraim M. Steinberg,et al.  Adaptive quantum state tomography improves accuracy quadratically. , 2013, Physical review letters.

[9]  Miguel Navascues,et al.  Robust Self Testing of Unknown Quantum Systems into Any Entangled Two-Qubit States , 2013 .

[10]  杉山 太香典.  Finite sample analysis in quantum estimation , 2013 .

[11]  V. Man'ko,et al.  Description and measurement of observables in the optical tomographic probability representation of quantum mechanics , 2012 .

[12]  Steven T. Flammia,et al.  Quantum tomography via compressed sensing: error bounds, sample complexity and efficient estimators , 2012, 1205.2300.

[13]  V. I. Man'ko,et al.  Towards higher precision and operational use of optical homodyne tomograms , 2012, 1203.2974.

[14]  T. H. Yang,et al.  Robust self-testing of the singlet , 2012, 1203.2976.

[15]  Yi-Kai Liu,et al.  Direct fidelity estimation from few Pauli measurements. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[16]  David Poulin,et al.  Practical characterization of quantum devices without tomography. , 2011, Physical review letters.

[17]  D. Gross,et al.  Efficient quantum state tomography. , 2010, Nature communications.

[18]  Stephen Becker,et al.  Quantum state tomography via compressed sensing. , 2009, Physical review letters.

[19]  A. Lvovsky,et al.  Continuous-variable optical quantum-state tomography , 2009 .

[20]  O. Gühne,et al.  03 21 7 2 3 M ar 2 00 6 Scalable multi-particle entanglement of trapped ions , 2006 .

[21]  G. Tóth,et al.  Entanglement detection in the stabilizer formalism , 2005, quant-ph/0501020.

[22]  G. Tóth,et al.  Detecting genuine multipartite entanglement with two local measurements. , 2004, Physical review letters.

[23]  A. Yao,et al.  Self testing quantum apparatus , 2003, Quantum Inf. Comput..

[24]  M. Lewenstein,et al.  Detection of entanglement with few local measurements , 2002, quant-ph/0205089.

[25]  N. Lutkenhaus,et al.  Maximum efficiency of a linear-optical Bell-state analyzer , 2000, quant-ph/0007058.

[26]  N. Yoran,et al.  Methods for Reliable Teleportation , 1998, quant-ph/9808040.

[27]  G. Vidal,et al.  LOCAL DESCRIPTION OF QUANTUM INSEPARABILITY , 1998 .

[28]  R. Stephenson.  A and V , 1962, The British journal of ophthalmology.