Codex @codex  0

The Bell basis is the two-qubit case of the generalized Bell basis. Its four vectors are the Bell states, and a Bell-basis measurement projects onto them.

A measurement in quantum mechanics with outcomes $m$ is specified, in the single-operator-per-outcome description, by linear operators $M_m$ satisfying ${\sum }_m{M}_m^{†}{M}_m=I$. Its effects $F_m=M_m^{†}{M}_m$ form a positive operator-valued measure. The two measurement postulates are the Born rule for outcomes and the conditional state update:For a density operator the corresponding formulas are $p_m=\mathrm{Tr}(M_m\rho M_m^{†})$ and ${\rho }_m=M_m\rho M_m^{†}/p_m$. More general quantum instruments have multiple operators for each outcome and sum these terms. For a projective measurement of an observable $A={\sum }_m{a}_m{P}_m$, take $M_m=P_m$; the outcome value is $a_m$ and the postmeasurement state lies in its eigenspace. A POVM alone specifies probabilities, whereas the measurement operators or instrument also specify the backaction.

For quantum teleportation, Alice and Bob initially share the Bell pair $|{\Phi }^{+}{⟩}_{AB}=(|00⟩+|11⟩)/\sqrt{2}$. Alice also holds the input $|\psi {⟩}_C=\alpha |0⟩+\beta |1⟩$, with $|\alpha {|}^2+|\beta {|}^2=1$. The shared entanglement is a resource; the two transmitted classical bits alone could not transfer an arbitrary unknown quantum state.

Alice applies a controlled-NOT gate with $C$ as control and $A$ as target, then a Hadamard gate to $C$. Starting from $|\psi {⟩}_C|{\Phi }^{+}{⟩}_{AB}$, direct expansion givesFor example, the four receiver vectors are $\alpha |0⟩+\beta |1⟩$, $\beta |0⟩+\alpha |1⟩$, $\alpha |0⟩-\beta |1⟩$, and $-\beta |0⟩+\alpha |1⟩$. Thus the gate calculation fixes the ordering of the Pauli corrections, including the last branch's sign.

Alice measures $C,A$ in the computational basis, obtaining $(a,b)$. The Born rule gives each outcome probability $1/4$, independent of the input amplitudes. Bob's normalized conditional state is $X^b{Z}^a|\psi ⟩$. Alice sends the two outcome bits. Bob applies the inverse, $Z^a{X}^b$, and henceThe same circuit is a Bell-basis measurement on Alice's two qubits, expressed using ordinary gates followed by computational-basis measurements. It restores the state without Alice or Bob knowing $\alpha ,\beta$.

By linearity, the calculation also holds when the input is entangled with a reference: each outcome has branch map $|\psi ⟩\mapsto X^b{Z}^a|\psi ⟩/2$, and after correction every branch is one-half of the identity map. Summing the four corrected density operators gives exactly the original input density operator, with all reference correlations preserved. This is teleportation as an identity channel on a reference. Without the two classical bits Bob must average the four uncorrected states, giving $\frac{1}{4}{\sum }_{a,b}{X}^b{Z}^a\rho Z^a{X}^b=I/2$, so the process cannot signal before the message arrives. The Bell pair is consumed and Alice retains no copy of the unknown state, in accordance with the no-cloning theorem.

Under the intended assumption that one use of the quantum channel transmits one qubit without noise, Alice can communicate two classical bits with certainty if she and Bob already share a Bell pair. She uses superdense coding. The prior distribution of the Bell pair must be a resource available before the permitted channel use; distributing it through that same channel would consume another use.

Take the shared Bell state to be $|{\Phi }^{+}⟩=(|00⟩+|11⟩)/\sqrt{2}$, with Alice holding the first qubit. For a two-bit message $(a,b)\in \{0,1{\}}^2$, Alice applies the local unitary operation $U_{ab}=X^a{Z}^b$ to her qubit. The four encoded pure states are, up to irrelevant global phases,They are orthogonal: for any matrix $V$ on the first qubit, $⟨{\Phi }^{+}|(V\otimes I)|{\Phi }^{+}⟩=\mathrm{Tr}V/2$, and the four Pauli operators are orthogonal in the trace inner product. Explicitly,Alice sends her qubit through the quantum channel once. Bob now holds both qubits and performs a Bell-basis measurement. Its four orthogonal projectors identify $(a,b)$ with certainty, givingBefore the transmission, Bob's reduced density matrix is $I/2$ for every message, so shared entanglement alone does not convey the message.

Without shared entanglement, a noiseless single-qubit transmission cannot perfectly distinguish four messages: perfect discrimination requires orthogonal state supports, and its two-dimensional Hilbert space has room for at most two nonzero mutually orthogonal supports. The Holevo bound also limits its accessible classical information to one bit. For the usual protocol starting with a shared two-qubit pure state and using local unitary encodings, exact two-bit transmission requires a maximally mixed Bob marginal. Indeed all encoded joint states are pure and have the same ${\rho }_B$, while Subadditivity of Von Neumann entropy gives their average entropy at most $1+S({\rho }_B)$. Four equally likely perfectly distinguishable messages have average Von Neumann entropy two, forcing $S({\rho }_B)=1$ and hence a maximally entangled state.

The specification “quantum channel” alone does not determine its dimension or noise, so the one-qubit, noiseless interpretation is needed for this particular conclusion. A noiseless four-dimensional channel could send four orthogonal states without any shared entanglement; a completely depolarizing qubit channel cannot transmit the message even with a shared Bell pair, since its output is independent of Alice's encoding. Shared entanglement is therefore the extra resource for the intended single-qubit channel, not a guarantee for every unspecified quantum channel.

The Pauli matrices act by $X|0⟩=|1⟩$, $X|1⟩=|0⟩$, $Z|0⟩=|0⟩$, and $Z|1⟩=-|1⟩$. Consequently $X\otimes X$ swaps $00$ with $11$ and $01$ with $10$. The plus combinations are its $+1$ eigenvectors, and the minus combinations its $-1$ eigenvectors. Meanwhile $Z\otimes Z$ is $+1$ on the even-parity basis vectors and $-1$ on the odd-parity ones. Thus, with the paper's labels,This verifies all four Bell states directly. The two observables commute: $XZ=-ZX$ on each factor, so the two minus signs cancel in their tensor products. Their joint eigenvalues distinguish the four states, as used in a Bell-basis measurement.

Let $Q$ be Alice's unknown qubit, with pure state $|\varphi {⟩}_Q=\alpha |0⟩+\beta |1⟩$. Alice and Bob initially share the Bell state $|{\Phi }^{+}{⟩}_{AB}=(|00⟩+|11⟩)/\sqrt{2}$. Alice holds $Q,A$ and Bob holds $B$. Define the Bell basisExpanding in this orthonormal basis gives the Bell-basis teleportation identityFor example, the last branch on $B$ is $\alpha |1⟩-\beta |0⟩$, which is $XZ|\varphi ⟩$; the ordering of the Pauli operators therefore matters.

Alice performs a projective measurement in the Bell basis on her two local qubits. Each outcome has probability $1/4$, independent of the unknown amplitudes. She encodes the four possible outcomes as two classical bits and sends them to Bob. For outcomes ${\Phi }^{+},{\Phi }^{-},{\Psi }^{+},{\Psi }^{-}$, respectively, Bob applies the local unitary operationsThese are inverses of the corresponding branch Pauli operators, so Bob obtains exactly the unknown input qubit in every branch. Using $XZ$ instead of $ZX$ as the last correction also succeeds up to an irrelevant overall phase. Alice need not know $\alpha$ or $\beta$. Every quantum operation is local to one of the parties, and the only transmitted information is the two-bit classical outcome. The shared Bell pair is consumed.

Before the message arrives, Bob's density operator isso no unknown-state information is available without the classical communication. Alice's original qubit has been included in the destructive Bell-basis measurement; the protocol creates no extra copy. Since the corrected transformation is the identity on every input vector and is linear, it also preserves entanglement with an external reference and transfers mixed inputs. Thus this is deterministic quantum teleportation, using precisely one shared maximally entangled Bell pair, two classical bits, and local operations.

Quantum teleportation transfers an arbitrary unknown qubit state to a separated receiver while using local operations and classical communication, rather than sending that input qubit. Alice and Bob first share one maximally entangled state of two qubits, such as a Bell pair; a shared spin singlet state is equivalent after a known local unitary operation.

Alice performs a joint Bell-basis measurement on the input qubit and her half of the pair. There are four possible outcomes. Bob's conditional qubit is the input state transformed by a known Pauli operator determined by that outcome. Alice sends the outcome as two classical bits, and Bob applies the inverse Pauli operator. Thus one shared Bell pair and two classical bits, together with local measurement and correction, transmit one unknown qubit exactly. The entangled resource is consumed.

The procedure does not produce a classical description of the unknown amplitudes and does not leave a second copy at Alice, so it respects the no-cloning theorem. Before receiving the classical outcome, Bob's reduced density matrix is $I/2$, independent of the input; this respects the no-communication theorem. The next part proves the full identity-channel action, including inputs entangled with another system.

Yes: deterministic entanglement swapping gives the required singlet. Denote Bob's two local qubits by $B_1,B_2$. Known local unitary operations first convert the two given spin singlet states into $|{\Phi }^{+}{⟩}_{A{B}_1}$ and $|{\Phi }^{+}{⟩}_{B_{2}C}$. For example applying $ZX$ to the second qubit of a singlet gives $|{\Phi }^{+}⟩$, where $X,Z$ are Pauli operators.

Use the binary-labelled Bell statesThey are ${\Phi }^{+},{\Phi }^{-},{\Psi }^{+},{\Psi }^{-}$ for labels $(0,0),(1,0),(0,1),(1,1)$. Reordering registers to group Bob's qubits, direct expansion givesAll four basis vectors are real in this convention; otherwise the paired expansion must account for complex conjugation. Bob performs the Bell-basis measurement on $B_1{B}_2$. This joint operation is local to him, so it is allowed by LOCC. Each outcome occurs with probability $1/4$ and leaves $AC$ in the corresponding Bell state.

Bob sends $(p,q)$ to Charlie. Charlie applies $Z^p{X}^{-q}$ to obtain $|{\Phi }^{+}{⟩}_{AC}$, and then $XZ$ to obtainThe correction works for every outcome, so no postselection or successful-outcome assumption is needed. This is entanglement swapping, equivalently teleportation of $B_1$ to $C$ while preserving its entanglement with $A$. If Bob's measurement result is ignored, the average $AC$ state is $I_4/4$; the protocol therefore does not supply entanglement usable without the classical outcome or violate the no-communication theorem.

Quantum teleportation transfers the quantum state of an unknown qubit from a sender's carrier to a receiver's carrier. It also transfers correlations with any external reference. It does not determine classical amplitudes or send the original particle.

The standard deterministic protocol consumes one shared maximally entangled Bell pair and two classical bits from Alice to Bob. Alice performs a local Bell-basis measurement on the input and her half of the pair; Bob applies the corresponding local Pauli gate. The classical message is essential: before receiving it, Bob has the outcome-averaged density operator $I/2$ and cannot recover or detect the unknown state. The original input is consumed by the measurement, so quantum teleportation is compatible with the no-cloning theorem.

Use superdense coding. For the two-bit message $(a,b)\in \{0,1{\}}^2$, Alice applies $Z^a{X}^b$ to her half of the shared Bell state, where $X,Z$ are the Pauli X gate and Pauli Z gate. The encoded states areThese four Bell states are orthonormal. Alice then transmits her one qubit to Bob, who now holds both qubits. A Bell-basis measurement identifies the message with probability one.

More explicitly, Bob can apply a CNOT gate with the received qubit as control and his original qubit as target, followed by a Hadamard gate on the control. The CNOT gate sends the encoded state toand the Hadamard gate sends this to $|a⟩\otimes |b⟩$. Computational-basis projective measurements therefore read out $a,b$ exactly. One transmitted qubit, assisted by one previously shared Bell pair, communicates two classical bits.

This is superdense coding. To encode $00,01,10,11$, Alice applies respectively $I,X,Z,XZ$ to her half of $|{\Phi }^{+}⟩$. These local Pauli operators transform the shared state into the four mutually orthogonal Bell states $|{\Phi }^{+}⟩,|{\Psi }^{+}⟩,|{\Phi }^{-}⟩,|{\Psi }^{-}⟩$, up to irrelevant global phases. Alice sends her one qubit to Bob. Bob now holds both qubits and performs a Bell-basis measurement, whose outcome identifies Alice's two-bit message with certainty. One transmitted qubit communicates two classical bits because one shared Bell pair was available beforehand.

Alice performs a projective Bell-basis measurement on her qubits $C$ and $A$. Outcome $(x,z)$ occurs with probability $1/4$ and leaves Bob's qubit inAlice sends the two classical bits $(x,z)$ to Bob. He applies the inverse Pauli operationrecovering $|\alpha ⟩$ exactly, up to an irrelevant global phase. This is quantum teleportation: only local operations and classical communication are used, while the shared Bell pair supplies the entanglement resource.

In quantum teleportation, Alice transfers an arbitrary unknown qubit $|\chi ⟩=\alpha |0⟩+\beta |1⟩$ using one shared Bell pair and two bits of classical communication. Define $|{\beta }_{mn}⟩=(I\otimes X^n{Z}^m)|{\Phi }^{+}⟩$, with $m,n\in \{0,1\}$. Regrouping the initial three-qubit state into this Bell basis givesAlice's Bell-basis measurement selects each label with probability $1/4$. She sends $(m,n)$ to Bob, who applies the inverse $Z^m{X}^n$, restoring $|\chi ⟩$. The correction depends on the measurement label, not on the unknown amplitudes. Before the message, Bob's average state is $I/2$, independent of the input; quantum no-signalling therefore prevents superluminal communication. The shared pair is consumed and Alice does not retain an independent copy, in agreement with the no-cloning theorem.

The Bouwmeester quantum teleportation experiment used photon polarization, a down-conversion entangled pair, a beam-splitter Bell-state analyzer and coincidence-conditioned output polarization measurements. Temporal indistinguishability of the two analyzer photons was essential. Its successful selected Bell outcome demonstrated the state transfer, rather than a deterministic implementation of all four outcomes.^[ref]

The general experimental tasks are to distribute entanglement, prepare and synchronize the input, perform a sufficiently discriminating joint measurement, communicate the label and apply or account for the correction. A demonstration must test nonorthogonal input states, not merely transfer a known classical basis label. Finite efficiency, accidental coincidences, distinguishability and phase drift reduce success probability or teleportation fidelity. Postselected verification, a heralded usable output and unconditional deterministic teleportation are distinct experimental claims.

In 1998, Jian-Wei Pan, Dik Bouwmeester, Harald Weinfurter and Anton Zeilinger created two photon pairs by two passages of a pulsed pump through a crystal using spontaneous parametric down-conversion. Interfering the inner photons at a nonpolarizing beam splitter implemented a partial Bell-basis measurement. Narrow optical filters and spatial filtering removed distinguishing information; changing the outer polarizer bases checked the conditional correlations. Fourfold detections selected the entanglement swapping events. The reported interference supported conditional quantum entanglement, but the paper reserved a statistically significant Bell inequality violation for improved visibility; it was not a demonstration closing the detection loophole.^[ref]

The ideal calculation makes the distinction between conditional and unconditional quantum states explicit. Start with spin singlet states $|{\psi }^{-}{⟩}_{12}|{\psi }^{-}{⟩}_{34}$, where $|{\psi }^{-}⟩=(|HV⟩-|VH⟩)/\sqrt{2}$ and $H,V$ denote orthogonal photon polarizations. Taking the inner product with $⟨{\psi }^{-}{|}_{23}$ gives $-|{\psi }^{-}{⟩}_{14}/2$: expanding the four terms leaves precisely the two antisymmetric outer terms. That Bell-basis measurement outcome has probability $1/4$ and leaves the outer pair in a spin singlet state. Ignoring the inner outcome instead leaves the outer density matrix $I_4/4$, a maximally mixed state. A conditional preparation flag is useful for later Bell tests only with the timing and setting conditions in setting-independent heralding preserves Bell locality.