Distinguishing quantum operations having few Kraus operators

Entanglement is sometimes helpful in distinguishing between quantum operations, as differences between quantum operations can become magnified when their inputs are entangled with auxiliary systems. Bounds on the dimension of the auxiliary system needed to optimally distinguish quantum operations are known in several situations. For instance, the dimension of the auxiliary space never needs to exceed the dimension of the input space [23, 14] of the operations for optimal distinguishability, while no auxiliary system whatsoever is needed to optimally distinguish unitary operations [2, 6]. Another bound, which follows from work of R. Timoney [24], is that optimal distinguishability is always possible when the dimension of the auxiliary system is twice the number of operators needed to express the difference between the quantum operations in Kraus form. This paper provides an alternate proof of this fact that is based on concepts and tools that are familiar to quantum information theorists.

[1]  A. Acín.  Statistical distinguishability between unitary operations. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[2]  M. B. Hastings.  Entropy and entanglement in quantum ground states , 2007 .

[3]  Alexei Y. Kitaev,et al.  Parallelization, amplification, and exponential time simulation of quantum interactive proof systems , 2000, STOC '00.

[4]  I. Chuang,et al.  Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: Bibliography , 2010 .

[5]  Mikhail N. Vyalyi,et al.  Classical and Quantum Computation , 2002, Graduate studies in mathematics.

[6]  Massimiliano F. Sacchi,et al.  Optimal discrimination of quantum operations , 2005 .

[7]  A. Winter,et al.  Randomizing Quantum States: Constructions and Applications , 2003, quant-ph/0307104.

[8]  Aram Wettroth Harrow,et al.  Quantum expanders from any classical Cayley graph expander , 2007, Quantum Inf. Comput..

[9]  Bill Rosgen,et al.  On the hardness of distinguishing mixed-state quantum computations , 2004, 20th Annual IEEE Conference on Computational Complexity (CCC'05).

[10]  John Watrous,et al.  Notes on super-operator norms induced by schatten norms , 2004, Quantum Inf. Comput..

[11]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Quantum circuits with mixed states , 1998, STOC '98.

[12]  Roger R. Smith,et al.  Completely Bounded Maps between C∗‐Algebras , 1983 .

[13]  John Preskill,et al.  Quantum information and precision measurement , 1999, quant-ph/9904021.

[14]  N. Langford,et al.  Distance measures to compare real and ideal quantum processes (14 pages) , 2004, quant-ph/0408063.

[15]  Dennis Kretschmann,et al.  The Information-Disturbance Tradeoff and the Continuity of Stinespring's Representation , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[16]  G M D'Ariano,et al.  Using entanglement improves the precision of quantum measurements. , 2001, Physical review letters.

[17]  Martin Mathieu.  COMPLETELY BOUNDED MAPS AND OPERATOR ALGEBRAS (Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 78) , 2004 .

[18]  Massimiliano F. Sacchi,et al.  Entanglement can enhance the distinguishability of entanglement-breaking channels , 2005 .

[19]  Jens Eisert,et al.  Quantum margulis expanders , 2007, Quantum Inf. Comput..

[20]  A. Kitaev.  Quantum computations: algorithms and error correction , 1997 .

[21]  M. B. Hastings,et al.  Random unitaries give quantum expanders , 2007, 0706.0556.

[22]  Richard M. Timoney,et al.  Computing the norms of elementary operators , 2003 .

[23]  Amnon Ta-Shma,et al.  An Explicit Construction of Quantum Expanders , 2007 .

[24]  Richard M. Timoney.  Some Formulae for Norms of Elementary Operators , 2006 .

[25]  Amnon Ta-Shma,et al.  Quantum expanders and the quantum entropy difference problem , 2007 .