Quantcast
  • Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.

News

Please welcome our new moderators!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback

Attributions

(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

122 submissions , 103 unreviewed
3,497 questions , 1,172 unanswered
4,545 answers , 19,342 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
408 active unimported users
More ...

Relevance of SIC-POVMs to quantum information

+ 13 like - 0 dislike
40 views

What is the real relevance of SIC-POVMs (symmetric informationally complete POVMs) to concrete tasks in quantum information theory? A lot of work has been put into giving explicit constructions, and yet it seems that in many concrete applications that at first glance require SIC-POVM-like objects, one can do without them using e.g. suitably chosen set of random projectors. So, my question is - if the problem of constructing SIC-POVMs in arbitrary dimensions was solved one day, would that enable solving problems which can't be solved or approximated using different techniques now?

SIC-POVMs seem to play a role in some approaches to quantum foundations (see e.g. Chris Fuchs, Bayesian approaches to QM that rely on the existence of SIC-POVMs), but it's unclear to me how "mainstream" such applications are.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
asked Oct 26, 2011 in Theoretical Physics by Marcin Kotowski (405 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Apr 19, 2014 by dimension10
While I can't say how mainstream "Quantum Bayesianism" is, I question your reservation. It's not as if they're proposing a multiverse, action at a distance or spontaneous collapse. An "interpretation-free" application of SICs would be whether one can write a state $\rho$ in terms of POVM elements $E_i$ as $$\rho = -I + d(d+1)\sum_{i=1}^{d^2}\mathrm{tr}(\rho E_i) E_i, $$ which seems to me an interesting question in itself and relevant to quantum state tomography.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
May be some examples are needed for clarification of the question, how suitably chosen set of random projectors are using instead of SIC-POVM-like objects for dimensions there SIC or MUB may be introduced? If SIC is analogue of orthonormal basis (see cite in my answer), it may be compared with using sets of random vectors instead of the orthonormal base.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
@Matty - yes, that counts, too.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
MUBs are important for tomography. But the connection between SICs and MUBs is not that concrete to my knowledge. They have analogous structure if not a direct relationship.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
When you describe SIC-like objects do you mean Mutually Unbiased Bases (MUB)?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)

2 Answers

+ 6 like - 0 dislike

Andrew Scott has shown here that SIC-POVMs are optimal (in a certain sense of the word, of course) for quantum state tomography. The intuition follows through these steps (take dim($\mathcal H$) $=d$):

  1. If a POVM is optimal it ought to be informationally complete --- so it has $n\geq d^2$ elements.
  2. It's elements also should be "as close as possible" to orthogonal so they are maximally unbiased --- this defines a special class of tight measurements.
  3. Among all tight measurements, the one with the least number of elements $n =d^2$ is best --- this essentially defines the SIC-POVMs for each dimension $d$.
This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Oct 30, 2011 by Chris Ferrie (645 points) [ no revision ]
Thanks for the answer, though my question should be interpreted as - are there scenarios where a "good enough" result can be obtained without having a SIC-POVM in hand? In other words, is the relative payoff of having a SIC-POVM, as opposed to using some other, perhaps approximate, methods, worth the difficulty of constructing them?

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Ah, well Zhu and Englert (http://arxiv.org/abs/1105.4561) have shown that just doing a product measurement with a SIC-POVM on each subsystem is "good enough". Since we have analytic constructions of SIC-POVMs for $d\leq 16$, I'm pretty sure we are covered for all conceivably sized "subsystems".

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Somewhat related, Englert _et al_ (http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.1025) have shown that $4$ MUBs probably do not exist in dimension $6$ but you can find $4$ (you can even find $7$) which are close enough to being unbiased that you probably couldn't tell given current experimental errors.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
+ 2 like - 0 dislike

I think, that such paper as http://arxiv.org/abs/0707.2071 by Fuchs et al is not only about foundations, but may illustrate some applications too.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Oct 27, 2011 by Alex V (290 points) [ no revision ]

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
p$\hbar$ysicsOver$\varnothing$low
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
To avoid this verification in future, please log in or register.




user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights
...