For , with invertible , a pure coefficient matrix transforms as . Its unnormalized determinant is multiplied by . The invertible filter bijects pure decompositions before and after conditioning, with branch weights rescaled by their success probabilities. Taking both infima in the convex roof extension gives the displayed exact scaling. If either filter has rank one, the retained state is separable across that party.
Mixed-state concurrence of two qubits 2026-10-14
For a normalized two-qubit pure state with coefficient matrix , concurrence is . The displayed convex roof extension defines its mixed-state version. Combining decompositions proves convexity: . Every separable quantum state has a decomposition into product vectors, each with zero determinant, so its concurrence is zero.
If a convex roof extension is non-increasing on average for every pure input to a quantum instrument, then it is non-increasing on average for mixed inputs too. For an input ensemble , let and be its conditional outcome probabilities and states. Linearity of each unnormalized outcome map gives . Convexity gives . Taking the infimum over input ensembles proves the result, even when conditional outputs of pure inputs are mixed, provided the averages are well defined.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2001 iii Paper 61 3 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The resource here is one copy of a two-qubit Werner state, with the physical range . The impossibility must include successful conditional branches of local operations and classical communication; average monotonicity alone would not exclude probabilistic enhancement.
For a normalized two-qubit pure state , define its concurrence as . Its mixed-state concurrence of two qubits is the convex roof extensionCombining near-optimal decompositions proves convexity. A separable quantum state has zero concurrence, because it has a decomposition into product vectors with zero coefficient determinant.
First establish the concurrence of a two-qubit Werner state. A pure state with squared Schmidt coefficients has . In this Schmidt basis a maximally entangled state has coefficient matrix with unitary. Its overlap magnitude is at most , because . Thus the singlet overlap satisfiesAveraging any decomposition of gives .
For the reverse bound use the orthonormal triplet vectorsEach is normalized, and direct evaluation of its two-by-two coefficient determinant gives . Their equally weighted six-state mixture has cancelled singlet–triplet coherences and triplet weight , so it is exactly . Hence
Every fully specified record of an LOCC protocol gives a product Kraus operator on the original pair. Local ancillas and discarded local outcomes can be included by refining the record. Write its success probability and normalized output asFor invertible , the concurrence scaling under invertible local filters isHere is a derivation of that scaling. Each pure coefficient matrix transforms to , so its unnormalized determinant is multiplied by . If that pure component has success probability , its normalized concurrence is multiplied by , while its mixture weight becomes . Every ensemble average therefore scales by . Invertibility provides the reverse correspondence for every decomposition of , so taking both infima proves equality. If either local filter has rank one, the output is a separable quantum state and the desired bound is immediate.
It remains to show that the filter normalization cannot make this ratio exceed one. Use the Pauli matrices representationWrite the positive matrices and , so , . Taking traces givesFor completeness, squaring the middle comparison leaves , and both sides are nonnegative. This proves the single-copy Werner filtering normalization bound, and hence
Forgetting some record information or grouping several successful records mixes these branch outputs; convexity preserves the same bound. Any alleged final would therefore obey , contradicting . Thus even heralded single-copy LOCC cannot produce the specified improved Werner state. This proves that single-copy Werner filtering cannot increase concurrence. It does not forbid collective entanglement distillation from several noisy pairs; allowing additional shared entangled input copies would change the resource assumption.
Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge 2008 iii Paper 58 2 Solution Created 2026-10-03 Updated 2026-10-14
The construction is a convex roof extension. First establish its convexity, without assuming that the minimizing quantum state ensemble exists. If , choose a pure state ensemble for each whose average value of is within of . Combining these ensembles, with their weights multiplied by , gives a pure state ensemble for . Taking arbitrarily small provesAlso, for a pure state . Indeed, if and is orthogonal to its one-dimensional support, then . All terms are nonnegative, so every positive-weight has that same support and equals .
Represent outcome of the operation by a linear unnormalized map , as for a quantum instrument. Normalization is performed only after applying this map: . For any preparation ensemble , putLinearity gives . For , Bayes' theorem identifies the conditional preparation weightsOutcomes with zero probability contribute nothing; normalized states on such branches need not be defined. The conditional states may be mixed, so convexity of the convex roof is essential here.
Applying that convexity separately for each recorded outcome, and then the assumed average monotonicity for each pure preparation, yieldsThe left side depends only on the initial density operator and the operation, not on the chosen preparation ensemble. Taking the infimum of the last expression over all its pure state ensembles provesEquivalently, choose an ensemble within of the infimum and then let . This is the monotonicity of a convex roof under a quantum instrument. It uses linearity of the unnormalized branches, not a false assumption that normalized conditional states depend linearly on the input. As usual, the averages are assumed well defined; finite-valued roofs and finitely many outcomes suffice. If an input roof is , taking ensembles with averages tending to gives the same conclusion in the extended-real interpretation whenever the output average is defined.