1Departamento de Física, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Pres. Antonio Carlos 6627 – Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil – 31270-901.
2Institute for Quantum Optics and Quantum Information (IQOQI), Austrian Academy of Sciences, Boltzmanngasse 3, A-1090 Vienna, Austria
3Faculty of Physics, University of Vienna, Boltzmanngasse 5, 1090 Vienna, Austria
4Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics, 31 Caroline St. N, Waterloo, Ontario, N2L 2Y5, Canada
5Departamento de Física, Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, 88040-900, Brazil
6Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Caixa Postal 68528, Rio de Janeiro, RJ 21941-972, Brazil
Find this paper interesting or want to discuss? Scite or leave a comment on SciRate.
Abstract
Guided by the intuition of coherent superposition of causal relations, recent works presented quantum processes without classical common-cause and direct-cause explanation, that is, processes which cannot be written as probabilistic mixtures of quantum common-cause and quantum direct-cause relations (CCDC). In this work, we analyze the minimum requirements for a quantum process to fail to admit a CCDC explanation and present “simple” processes, which we prove to be the most robust ones against general noise. These simple processes can be realized by preparing a maximally entangled state and applying the identity quantum channel, thus not requiring an explicit coherent mixture of common-cause and direct-cause, exploiting the possibility of a process to have both relations simultaneously. We then prove that, although all bipartite direct-cause processes are bipartite separable operators, there exist bipartite separable processes which are not direct-cause. This shows that the problem of deciding weather a process is direct-cause process $textit{is not}$ equivalent to entanglement certification and points out the limitations of entanglement methods to detect non-classical CCDC processes. We also present a semi-definite programming hierarchy that can detect and quantify the non-classical CCDC robustnesses of every non-classical CCDC process. Among other results, our numerical methods allow us to show that the simple processes presented here are likely to be also the maximally robust against white noise. Finally, we explore the equivalence between bipartite direct-cause processes and bipartite processes without quantum memory, to present a separable process which cannot be realized as a process without quantum memory.
► BibTeX data
► References
[1] H. Reichenbach, The direction of time, Vol. 65 (Univ of California Press, 1991).
https://doi.org/10.2307/2216858
[2] J. Pearl, Causality, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, 2009).
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803161
[3] P. M. Illari, F. Russo, and J. Williamson, Causality in the Sciences (Oxford University Press, 2011).
https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199574131.001.0001
[4] M. S. Leifer and R. W. Spekkens, Towards a formulation of quantum theory as a causally neutral theory of bayesian inference, Phys. Rev. A 88, 052130 (2013), arXiv:1107.5849 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.88.052130
arXiv:1107.5849
[5] F. Costa and S. Shrapnel, Quantum causal modelling, New Journal of Physics 18, 1–17 (2015), arXiv:1512.07106 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/18/6/063032
arXiv:1512.07106
[6] K. Modi, Operational approach to open dynamics and quantifying initial correlations, Scientific Reports 2, 10.1038/srep00581 (2012), arXiv:1011.6138 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1038/srep00581
arXiv:1011.6138
[7] F. A. Pollock, C. Rodríguez-Rosario, T. Frauenheim, M. Paternostro, and K. Modi, Non-Markovian quantum processes: Complete framework and efficient characterization, Phys. Rev. A 97 (2018a), arXiv:1512.00589 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.97.012127
arXiv:1512.00589
[8] L. Li, M. J. Hall, and H. M. Wiseman, Concepts of quantum non-markovianity: A hierarchy, Physics Reports 759, 1–51 (2018), arXiv:1712.08879 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2018.07.001
arXiv:1712.08879
[9] S. Milz and K. Modi, Quantum Stochastic Processes and Quantum non-Markovian Phenomena, PRX Quantum 2, 030201 (2021), arXiv:2012.01894 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PRXQuantum.2.030201
arXiv:2012.01894
[10] G. Chiribella, G. M. D’Ariano, and P. Perinotti, Quantum Circuit Architecture, Phys. Rev. Lett. 101, 060401 (2008), arXiv:0712.1325 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.060401
arXiv:0712.1325
[11] G. Chiribella, G. M. D’Ariano, and P. Perinotti, Theoretical framework for quantum networks, Phys. Rev. A 80 (2009), arXiv:0904.4483 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.80.022339
arXiv:0904.4483
[12] D. Kretschmann and R. F. Werner, Quantum channels with memory, Phys. Rev. A 72, 062323 (2005), arXiv:quant-ph/0502106 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.72.062323
arXiv:quant-ph/0502106
[13] G. Gutoski and J. Watrous, Toward a general theory of quantum games, in Proceedings of the Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (2007) pp. 565–574, arXiv:quant-ph/0611234 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1145/1250790.1250873
arXiv:quant-ph/0611234
[14] K. Ried, M. Agnew, L. Vermeyden, D. Janzing, R. W. Spekkens, and K. J. Resch, A quantum advantage for inferring causal structure, Nature Physics 11, 414–420 (2015), arXiv:1406.5036 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys3266
arXiv:1406.5036
[15] J.-P. W. MacLean, K. Ried, R. W. Spekkens, and K. J. Resch, Quantum-coherent mixtures of causal relations, Nature Communications 8, 15149 (2016), arXiv:1606.04523 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms15149
arXiv:1606.04523
[16] G. Chiribella, G. M. D’Ariano, P. Perinotti, and B. Valiron, Quantum computations without definite causal structure, Phys. Rev. A 88 (2013), arXiv:0912.0195v4 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.88.022318
arXiv:0912.0195v4
[17] L. M. Procopio, A. Moqanaki, M. Araújo, F. Costa, I. Alonso Calafell, E. G. Dowd, D. R. Hamel, L. A. Rozema, Č. Brukner, and P. Walther, Experimental superposition of orders of quantum gates, Nature Communications 6, 7913 (2015), arXiv:1412.4006 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms8913
arXiv:1412.4006
[18] G. Rubino, L. A. Rozema, A. Feix, M. Araújo, J. M. Zeuner, L. M. Procopio, Č. Brukner, and P. Walther, Experimental verification of an indefinite causal order, Science Advances 3, 11 (2017), arXiv:1608.01683 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1602589
arXiv:1608.01683
[19] A. Feix and Č. Brukner, Quantum superpositions of ‘common-cause’ and ‘direct-cause’ causal structures, New Journal of Physics 19, 123028 (2017), arXiv:1606.09241 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/aa9b1a
arXiv:1606.09241
[20] C. Giarmatzi and F. Costa, Witnessing quantum memory in non-markovian processes, Quantum 5, 440 (2021), arXiv:1811.03722 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2021-04-26-440
arXiv:arXiv:1811.03722
[21] S. Milz, F. A. Pollock, T. P. Le, G. Chiribella, and K. Modi, Entanglement, non-Markovianity, and causal non-separability, New Journal of Physics 20, 033033 (2018), arXiv:1711.04065 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/aaafee
arXiv:1711.04065
[22] P. Taranto, F. A. Pollock, and K. Modi, Memory Strength and Recoverability of Non-Markovian Quantum Stochastic Processes, arXiv e-prints (2019), arXiv:1907.12583 [quant-ph].
arXiv:1907.12583
[23] P. Taranto, Memory effects in quantum processes, International Journal of Quantum Information 18, 1941002-574 (2020), arXiv:1909.05245 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219749919410028
arXiv:1909.05245
[24] S. Milz, C. Spee, Z.-P. Xu, F. Pollock, K. Modi, and O. Gühne, Genuine multipartite entanglement in time, SciPost Physics 10, 141 (2021), arXiv:2011.09340 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.10.6.141
arXiv:2011.09340
[25] J. de Pillis, Linear transformations which preserve hermitian and positive semidefinite operators, Pacific Journal of Mathematics 23, 129–137 (1967).
https://doi.org/10.2140/pjm.1967.23.129
[26] A. Jamiołkowski, Linear transformations which preserve trace and positive semidefiniteness of operators, Reports on Mathematical Physics 3, 275–278 (1972).
https://doi.org/10.1016/0034-4877(72)90011-0
[27] M.-D. Choi, Completely positive linear maps on complex matrices, Linear Algebra and its Applications 10, 285 – 290 (1975).
https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3795(75)90075-0
[28] S. Milz, F. A. Pollock, and K. Modi, An introduction to operational quantum dynamics, Open Systems & Information Dynamics 24, 1740016 (2017), arXiv:1708.00769 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1142/s1230161217400169
arXiv:1708.00769
[29] F. A. Pollock, C. Rodríguez-Rosario, T. Frauenheim, M. Paternostro, and K. Modi, Operational markov condition for quantum processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (2018b), arXiv:1801.09811 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.120.040405
arXiv:1801.09811
[30] A. Peres, Separability criterion for density matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413–1415 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9604005 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.77.1413
arXiv:quant-ph/9604005
[31] P. and Horodecki, Michał and Horodecki and R. Horodecki, Separability of mixed states: Necessary and sufficient conditions, Physics Letters, Section A: General, Atomic and Solid State Physics 223, 1–8 (1996), arXiv:quant-ph/9605038 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9601(96)00706-2
arXiv:quant-ph/9605038
[32] A. C. Doherty, P. A. Parrilo, P. A. Parrilo, and F. M. Spedalieri, Distinguishing separable and entangled states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 1879041–1879044 (2002), arXiv:quant-ph/0112007 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.187904
arXiv:quant-ph/0112007
[33] A. C. Doherty, P. A. Parrilo, and F. M. Spedalieri, Complete family of separability criteria, Phys. Rev. A 69, 20 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0308032 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.69.022308
arXiv:quant-ph/0308032
[34] G. Chiribella, G. M. D’Ariano, and P. Perinotti, Transforming quantum operations: Quantum supermaps, EPL (Europhysics Letters) 83, 30004 (2008), arXiv:0804.0180 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/83/30004
arXiv:0804.0180
[35] O. Oreshkov, F. Costa, and Č. Brukner, Quantum correlations with no causal order, Nature Communications 3, 1092 (2012), arXiv:1105.4464 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms2076
arXiv:1105.4464
[36] M. Araújo, C. Branciard, F. Costa, A. Feix, C. Giarmatzi, and Č. Brukner, Witnessing causal nonseparability, New Journal of Physics 17, 1–28 (2015), arXiv:1506.03776 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/17/10/102001
arXiv:1506.03776
[37] G. Vidal and R. Tarrach, Robustness of entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 59, 141–155 (1999), arXiv:quant-ph/9806094 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.59.141
arXiv:quant-ph/9806094
[38] M. Steiner, Generalized robustness of entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 67, 4 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0304009 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.67.054305
arXiv:arXiv:quant-ph/0304009
[39] O. Gühne and G. Tóth, Entanglement detection, Physics Reports 474, 1–75 (2009), arXiv:0811.2803 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2009.02.004
arXiv:0811.2803
[40] L. Gurvits, Classical complexity and quantum entanglement, Journal of Computer and System Sciences 69, 448–484 (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0303055 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcss.2004.06.003
arXiv:quant-ph/0303055
[41] F. G. S. L. Brandao and R. O. Vianna, Separable multipartite mixed states – operational asymptotically necessary and sufficient conditions, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2004), arXiv:quant-ph/0405063 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.220503
arXiv:quant-ph/0405063
[42] M. T. Quintino, J. Bowles, F. Hirsch, and N. Brunner, Incompatible quantum measurements admitting a local-hidden-variable model, Physical Review A 93, 10.1103/physreva.93.052115 (2016), arXiv:1510.06722 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.052115
arXiv:1510.06722
[43] F. Hirsch, M. T. Quintino, T. Vértesi, M. F. Pusey, and N. Brunner, Algorithmic Construction of Local Hidden Variable Models for Entangled Quantum States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 190402 (2016), arXiv:1512.00262 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.190402
arXiv:1512.00262
[44] M. Oszmaniec, L. Guerini, P. Wittek, and A. Acín, Simulating Positive-Operator-Valued Measures with Projective Measurements, Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, 190501 (2017), arXiv:1609.06139 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.119.190501
arXiv:1609.06139
[45] F. Hirsch, M. T. Quintino, and N. Brunner, Quantum measurement incompatibility does not imply Bell nonlocality, Phys. Rev. A 97, 012129 (2018), arXiv:1707.06960 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.97.012129
arXiv:1707.06960
[46] E. Bene and T. Vértesi, Measurement incompatibility does not give rise to Bell violation in general, New Journal of Physics 20, 013021 (2018), arXiv:1705.10069 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/aa9ca3
arXiv:1705.10069
[47] M. Nielsen and I. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information, Cambridge Series on Information and the Natural Sciences (Cambridge University Press, 2000).
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511976667
[48] D. Avis, lrs, http://cgm.cs.mcgill.ca/ avis/C/lrs.html.
http://cgm.cs.mcgill.ca/~avis/C/lrs.html
[49] Stanford ASL, vert2lcon, https://github.com/StanfordASL/KinoFMT/blob/master/vert2lcon.m.
https://github.com/StanfordASL/KinoFMT/blob/master/vert2lcon.m
[50] F. Hirsch, M. T. Quintino, T. Vértesi, M. Navascués, and N. Brunner, Better local hidden variable models for two-qubit Werner states and an upper bound on the Grothendieck constant KG(3), Quantum 1, 3 (2017), 1609.06114 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.22331/q-2017-04-25-3
arXiv:1609.06114
[51] D. Cavalcanti, L. Guerini, R. Rabelo, and P. Skrzypczyk, General Method for Constructing Local Hidden Variable Models for Entangled Quantum States, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 190401 (2016), arXiv:1512.00277 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.190401
arXiv:1512.00277
[52] D. Cavalcanti and P. Skrzypczyk, Quantum steering: A review with focus on semidefinite programming, Reports on Progress in Physics 80 (2017), arXiv:1604.00501 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6633/80/2/024001
arXiv:1604.00501
[53] J. Bavaresco, M. T. Quintino, L. Guerini, T. O. Maciel, D. Cavalcanti, and M. T. Cunha, Most incompatible measurements for robust steering tests, Phys. Rev. A 96 (2017), arXiv:1704.02994 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.96.022110
arXiv:1704.02994
[54] M. Horodecki and P. Horodecki, Reduction criterion of separability and limits for a class of distillation protocols, Phys. Rev. A 59, 4206–4216 (1999), arXiv:quant-ph/9708015 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.59.4206
arXiv:quant-ph/9708015
[55] M. Horodecki, P. W. Shor, and M. B. Ruskai, Entanglement breaking channels, Reviews in Mathematical Physics 15, 629–641 (2003), arXiv:quant-ph/0302031 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129055X03001709
arXiv:quant-ph/0302031
[56] Y. Guo, P. Taranto, B.-H. Liu, X.-M. Hu, Y.-F. Huang, C.-F. Li, and G.-C. Guo, Experimental Demonstration of Instrument-Specific Quantum Memory Effects and Non-Markovian Process Recovery for Common-Cause Processes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 230401 (2021), arXiv:2003.14045 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.230401
arXiv:2003.14045
[57] M. Ringbauer, F. Costa, M. E. Goggin, A. G. White, and A. Fedrizzi, Multi-time quantum correlations with no spatial analog, npj Quantum Information 4, 1–6 (2018).
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41534-018-0086-y
[58] P. Horodecki, Separability criterion and inseparable mixed states with positive partial transposition, Physics Letters, Section A: General, Atomic and Solid State Physics 232, 333–339 (1997), arXiv:quant-ph/9703004 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0375-9601(97)00416-7
arXiv:quant-ph/9703004
[59] J. Lofberg, Yalmip: A toolbox for modeling and optimization in matlab, https://yalmip.github.io/ (2004).
https://yalmip.github.io/
[60] M. Grant, S. Boyd, and Y. Ye, Cvx: Matlab software for disciplined convex programming, http://cvxr.com/cvx (2009).
http://cvxr.com/cvx
[61] M. ApS”, “the mosek optimization toolbox for matlab manual. version 9.0.”, http://docs.mosek.com/9.0/toolbox/index.html (2019).
http://docs.mosek.com/9.0/toolbox/index.html
[62] J. F. Sturm, Using sedumi 1.02, a matlab toolbox for optimization over symmetric cones, Optimization Methods and Software 11, 625–653 (1999), https://doi.org/10.1080/10556789908805766.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10556789908805766
arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/10556789908805766
[63] K. C. Toh, M. J. Todd, and R. H. Tütüncü, Sdpt3 — a matlab software package for semidefinite programming, version 1.3, Optimization Methods and Software 11, 545–581 (1999), https://doi.org/10.1080/10556789908805762.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10556789908805762
arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1080/10556789908805762
[64] N. Johnston, QETLAB: A MATLAB toolbox for quantum entanglement, version 0.9, http://qetlab.com (2016).
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.44637
http://qetlab.com
[65] https://github.com/marcellongvb/non_ccdc_processes (2021).
https://github.com/marcellongvb/non_ccdc_processes
[66] S. Boyd and L. Vandenberghe, Convex Optimization (Cambridge University Press, 2004).
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511804441
[67] M. Navascués, M. Owari, and M. B. Plenio, Power of symmetric extensions for entanglement detection, Phys. Rev. A 80 (2009), arXiv:0906.2731 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.80.052306
arXiv:0906.2731
[68] A. Feix, M. Araújo, and Č. Brukner, Causally nonseparable processes admitting a causal model, New Journal of Physics 18, 083040 (2016), arXiv:1604.03391 [quant-ph].
https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/18/8/083040
arXiv:1604.03391
[69] J. Bavaresco, M. Murao, and M. T. Quintino, Strict hierarchy between parallel, sequential, and indefinite-causal-order strategies for channel discrimination, (2020), arXiv:2011.08300 [quant-ph].
arXiv:2011.08300
Cited by
[1] Simon Milz and Kavan Modi, “Quantum Stochastic Processes and Quantum non-Markovian Phenomena”, PRX Quantum 2 3, 030201 (2021).
[2] Christina Giarmatzi and Fabio Costa, “Witnessing quantum memory in non-Markovian processes”, arXiv:1811.03722.
[3] Simon Milz, Cornelia Spee, Zhen-Peng Xu, Felix Pollock, Kavan Modi, and Otfried Gühne, “Genuine multipartite entanglement in time”, SciPost Physics 10 6, 141 (2021).
[4] Yu Guo, Philip Taranto, Bi-Heng Liu, Xiao-Min Hu, Yun-Feng Huang, Chuan-Feng Li, and Guang-Can Guo, “Experimental Demonstration of Instrument-Specific Quantum Memory Effects and Non-Markovian Process Recovery for Common-Cause Processes”, Physical Review Letters 126 23, 230401 (2021).
The above citations are from SAO/NASA ADS (last updated successfully 2021-09-09 16:41:27). The list may be incomplete as not all publishers provide suitable and complete citation data.
Could not fetch Crossref cited-by data during last attempt 2021-09-09 16:41:24: Could not fetch cited-by data for 10.22331/q-2021-09-09-538 from Crossref. This is normal if the DOI was registered recently.
This Paper is published in Quantum under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license. Copyright remains with the original copyright holders such as the authors or their institutions.
PlatoAi. Web3 Reimagined. Data Intelligence Amplified.
Click here to access.
Source: https://quantum-journal.org/papers/q-2021-09-09-538/
