Home | About Journal | Web Links | E-mail Alerts | RSS RSS Icon | Browse

Entanglement-induced invariance in bilinear interactions

Source: Phys. Rev. A 80, 032329 (2009); doi:10.1103/PhysRevA.80.032329

Published 28 September 2009

KEYWORDS and PACS
Keywords
PACS
  • 03.67.Mn
    Entanglement measures, witnesses, and other characterizations (quantum information)
  • 03.67.Hk
    Quantum communication
  • YEAR: 2009
RELATED DATABASES

To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.
To view database links for this article,
you need to log in.
PUBLICATION DATA
Publisher:
AIP is a member of CrossRef APS
Stefano Olivares1,2 and Matteo G. A. Paris2,1,3
1CNISM UdR Milano Università, I-20133 Milano, Italy
2Dipartimento di Fisica, Università degli Studi di Milano, I-20133 Milano, Italy
3ISI Foundation, I-10133 Torino, Italy
We point out a symmetry exhibited by pairs of entangled states and discuss its possible applications in quantum information. More specifically, we consider quadripartite systems prepared in bipartite product states of the form |Psi>=|psi>12[direct-product]|psi>34 and let the uncorrelated subsystems 14 and 23 interact by a given unitary U14[direct-product]U23 describing two bilinear interactions: we show that entanglement between the noninteracting subsystems 12 and 34 may lead to invariance of |Psi> under the action of the unitary, i.e., make |Psi> an eigenstate of U14[direct-product]U23. We call this phenomenon entanglement induced transparency and investigate its occurrence both in continuous variable and qubit systems. We also discuss its possible applications to bath engineering, double swapping and remote inversion. ©2009 The American Physical Society
History: Received 8 May 2009; published 28 September 2009
Permalink: http://link.aps.org/abstract/PRA/v80/e032329

REFERENCES (34)

For access to fully linked references, you need to log in. For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.
  1. J. M. Raimond, M. Brune, and S. Haroche, Rev. Mod. Phys. 73, 565 (2001).
  2. D. Vitali and P. Tombesi, Phys. Rev. A 59, 4178 (1999).
  3. S. Damodarakurup, M. Lucamarini, G. DiGiuseppe, D. Vitali, and P. Tombesi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 040502 (2009).
  4. Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3306 (1997).
  5. H. J. Briegel and R. Raussendorf, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 910 (2001).
  6. W. H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 120404 (2003).
  7. W. H. Zurek, Phys. Rev. A 71, 052105 (2005).
  8. F. A. Bovino, G. Castagnoli, A. Ekert, P. Horodecki, C. M. Alves, and A. V. Sergienko, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 240407 (2005).
  9. Wang Xiang-bin, Phys. Rev. A 66, 024303 (2002)
    10. 66, 064304 (2002).
  10. Wang Xiang-bin, Fan Heng, Phys. Rev. A 68, 060302(R) (2003).
  11. M. S. Kim, W. Son, V. Buzek, and P. L. Knight, Phys. Rev. A 65, 032323 (2002).
  12. M. M. Wolf, J. Eisert, and M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 047904 (2003).
  13. Phys. Rev. A 59, 1615 (1999).
  14. G. S. Agarwal, Phys. Rev. Lett. 57, 827 (1986).
  15. V. C. Usenko and M. G. A. Paris, Phys. Rev. A 75, 043812 (2007).
  16. S. L. Braunstein et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 77, 513 (2005).
  17. G. Giedke, M. M. Wolf, O. Kruger, R. F. Werner, and J. I. Cirac, Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 107901 (2003).
  18. C. Macchiavello and G. M. Palma, Phys. Rev. A 65, 050301(R) (2002).
  19. K. Banaszek, A. Dragan, W. Wasilewski, and C. Radzewicz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 257901 (2004).
  20. D. Kretschmann and R. F. Werner, Phys. Rev. A 72, 062323 (2005).
  21. N. J. Cerf, J. Clavareau, C. Macchiavello, and J. Roland, Phys. Rev. A 72, 042330 (2005).
  22. T. A. B. Kennedy and D. F. Walls, Phys. Rev. A 37, 152 (1988).
  23. P. Tombesi and D. Vitali, Phys. Rev. A 50, 4253 (1994).
  24. N. Lütkenhaus, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A 57, 548 (1998).
ADVERTISEMENT