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
4,544 answers , 19,342 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
408 active unimported users
More ...

What is the physical difference between states and unital completely positive maps?

+ 2 like - 0 dislike
38 views

Mathematically, completely positive maps on C*-algebras generalize positive linear functionals in that every positive linear functional on a C*-algebra $A$ is a completely positive map of $A$ into $\mathbb{C}$. Furthermore, we have the Stinespring construction as a powerful generalization of the GNS construction.

Certainly, the relationship between completely positive maps and positive linear functionals can only go so far. I am curious about what physics has to say about this analogy/generalization. It seems that completely positive maps should serve as generalized states of a quantum system, but I've mostly seen cp maps arise in the discussion of quantum channels and quantum operations. I'd like to know precisely in what sense a completely positive map can be viewed as a generalized physical state.

Question: What is a completely positive map, physically? Particularly, in what precise sense can a completely positive map be regarded as a generalized (physical) state?

If there are nice survey papers discussing the above relationship, such a reference may serve as an answer to my question.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
asked Apr 7, 2012 in Theoretical Physics by Jon Bannon (20 points) [ no revision ]

3 Answers

+ 5 like - 0 dislike

There is an isomorphism between quantum channels and states known as the Jamiołkowski isomorphism, and so you can link properties of one with properties of the other.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Apr 8, 2012 by Joe Fitzsimons (3,555 points) [ no revision ]
No problem. Hope it helps.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
I've somehow been reincarnated as a new me...but I wanted to thank you for this answer. It's precisely the sort of thing I've been looking for.

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

If you pass one side of a maximally entangled state into the channel, you get the state defined by the Jamiołkowski isomorphism (neglecting normalization). I think this is as close as you can get to a physical interpretation.

Note that if you pass the maximally entangled state through the channel and keep (don't trace out) the channel's environment, you get the channel ket, which is a tripartite pure state. The three subsystems correspond to channel input, channel output, and channel environment output (a.k.a. the indices on Kraus operators). Tracing out the environment on the channel ket gives the Jamiołkowski state, while tracing out the channel output part of the channel ket gives the Jamiołkowski state for the complimentary channel. These statements are all true regardless of whether the channel is unital. If the channel is unital then the subsystem of the channel ket corresponding to channel output will be fully entangled. The subsystem corresponding to channel input is always fully entangled for a trace preserving channel.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Apr 8, 2012 by Dan Stahlke (70 points) [ no revision ]
There is a good [blog post](http://www.njohnston.ca/2009/10/the-equivalences-of-the-choi-jamiolkowski-isomorphism-part-ii/) by Nathaniel Johnston which outlines the parallels between various types of channels and the corresponding states. I link to part 2 because that one in turn links to part 1.

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
Thank you for this useful answer.

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

As a consequence of Choi's theorem on completely positive maps, they can be physically interpreted as follows: In the context of quantum information theory, the operators ${V_j}$ are Kraus operators, which are not necessarily unique in terms of the states. Any square root factorization of the Choi matrix $B^*B$ gives such a matrix. Because of the Kraus operators, the linear functionals are restricted to the eigenstates of the Choi matrix. Here is source that continues to discuss this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Completely_positive

This post has been migrated from (A51.SE)
answered Apr 7, 2012 by Jaivir Baweja (40 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$\hbar$ys$\varnothing$csOverflow
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
...