Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge / 2013 / iii / Paper 57 / 3

Write the system's $z$ basis as $|0⟩,|1⟩$, and use a separate pair of meter qubits in the Bell state $|{\Phi }^{+}⟩$. Alice applies a CNOT gate from system $A$ to her meter qubit; Bob simultaneously applies a CNOT gate from $B$ to his meter qubit. Flipping neither or both meter qubits preserves $|{\Phi }^{+}⟩$, while flipping exactly one gives $|{\Psi }^{+}⟩$. Hence the entanglement-assisted nondemolition parity measurement interaction produceswhere $P_{\mathrm{e}}=|00⟩⟨00|+|11⟩⟨11|$ and $P_{\mathrm{o}}=|01⟩⟨01|+|10⟩⟨10|$. Each party now measures only their meter qubit in the $z$ basis. If their binary records are $u,v$, the system Kraus operator isUnequal records verify zero total $z$ spin, since $S_z^{\mathrm{tot}}=\hslash (Z_A+Z_B)/2$ vanishes precisely on the odd sector. The probability of success is $⟨\psi |P_{\mathrm{o}}|\psi ⟩$, and the successful conditional state is $P_{\mathrm{o}}|\psi ⟩/\sqrt{⟨P_{\mathrm{o}}⟩}$. Every zero-total-$z$-spin state is left unchanged, including any coherent superposition of $|01⟩$ and $|10⟩$. Similarly the even-sector coherence is preserved. This is a quantum nondemolition measurement of the parity, rather than separate measurements of both system spins.

All quantum operations and local meter measurements can finish within the spacelike time window. Nevertheless each local meter record is individually uniform: $K_{u0}^{†}{K}_{u0}+K_{u1}^{†}{K}_{u1}=I/2$. The verification result is obtained only by comparing the records using local operations and classical communication. Thus “instantaneous” refers to the local completion of the joint measurement instrument, not instant access to its nonlocal outcome; quantum no-signalling remains intact.

Apply the modulo operation to the eigenvalues of $Z_A+Z_B$. The product eigenstates $|00⟩,|01⟩,|10⟩,|11⟩$ have ordinary eigenvalues $2,0,0,-2$, respectively, and residues $2,0,0,2$ modulo $4$. The resulting observable isUse the entanglement-assisted nondemolition parity measurement from part (a). Equal local meter records give $O=2$; unequal records give $O=0$. Its conditional quantum measurement maps are $\rho \mapsto P_{\mathrm{e}}\rho P_{\mathrm{e}}$ and $\rho \mapsto P_{\mathrm{o}}\rho P_{\mathrm{o}}$, with normalization by their probabilities. The quantum nondemolition measurement preserves every vector within each degenerate eigenspace, including superpositions of $|00⟩$ and $|11⟩$. Measuring the two system spins separately would destroy that even-sector coherence and would therefore not realize the same Lüders rule instrument. The nonlocal eigenvalue again becomes known only after local operations and classical communication compares the local records.

Assume the proposed device distinguishes the four displayed eigenstates, as an ideal rank-one projective measurement. This assumption matters: if all four had the same eigenvalue, the identity observable would admit that eigenbasis but its Lüders rule measurement would do nothing and could not signal. The printed eigenvectors alone do not exclude this degeneracy.

For the complete resolving measurement, let $c=\cos \theta$, $s=\sin \theta$, and ${\Pi }_j$ be the four rank-one projectors. If the nonlocal outcome is ignored, the nonselective projective measurement channel is ${\mathcal{D}}_{\theta }(\rho )={\sum }_j{\Pi }_j\rho {\Pi }_j$. Each listed state's local reduced density matrix is diagonal in $Z_A$, with $Z_A$ expectation $\cos 2\theta$ for either plus state and $-\cos 2\theta$ for either minus state. ConsequentlyCompute $C_{\theta }$ in its even and odd two-dimensional blocks: both have diagonal entries $\cos 2\theta ,-\cos 2\theta$ and off-diagonal entries $\sin 2\theta$. ThusandTo signal, prepare Alice in $|+⟩$ and Bob initially in $|+⟩$. Bob encodes a bit by either doing nothing or applying a local Pauli Z gate, which changes his state to $|-⟩$. Alice's input reduced density matrix is identical in both cases, but after the hypothetical instantaneous measurement her local $Z_A$ expectation isThe two probabilities for Alice's outcome $0$ are $(1\pm \sin 2\theta \cos 2\theta )/2$, so their difference is $\sin 2\theta \cos 2\theta$. It is strictly positive for $0<\theta <\pi /4$. Repeated trials let Alice infer Bob's bit while their operations are still spacelike, violating quantum no-signalling and relativistic causality. The relativistic causality constraint on an ideal nonlocal measurement therefore permits onlywithin the specified interval. The argument requires no rapid communication of the hypothetical nonlocal outcome: Alice reads her own changed local statistics. It rules out the full ideal instrument, not merely the later classical comparison of locally obtained records.

At $\theta =0$ the four eigenstates are the computational product basis, with irrelevant signs on two vectors. Alice and Bob measure their own system qubits in $Z$. These local projective measurements preserve each product eigenstate; their pair of records identifies the global outcome after local operations and classical communication.

At $\theta =\pi /4$ the four states are the Bell states. They are simultaneous eigenstates of the commuting Pauli operators $Z_A{Z}_B$ and $X_A{X}_B$: ${\Phi }^{+},{\Phi }^{-},{\Psi }^{+},{\Psi }^{-}$ have respective pairs $(+,+),(+,-),(-,+),(-,-)$. Their nonlocal parity measurements can be performed without directly distinguishing the local system spins.

Use the first shared Bell state pair to perform the entanglement-assisted nondemolition parity measurement of $Z_A{Z}_B$. Use the second shared pair for $X_A{X}_B$: both parties apply a local Hadamard gate to their system qubit, execute the same local system-to-meter CNOT gates and $z$-meter measurements, then undo the Hadamard gates. This measures $X_A{X}_B$ because $HZH=X$. The two system parity projectors commute, since anticommutation at both sites cancels:Each $P_{z,x}$ is the corresponding rank-one Bell state projector. Every complete tuple of four local meter records has system Kraus operator $P_{z,x}/2$ for its two parities. Summing the four record tuples compatible with $(z,x)$ gives the ideal outcome map $\rho \mapsto P_{z,x}\rho P_{z,x}$. The protocol is a Bell-state nondemolition measurement: an input Bell state is preserved, while an arbitrary input is projected onto the reported Bell state with the Born rule probability.

The local circuits need no adaptive communication between the laboratories, so both parties can finish inside the specified time window. Global identification of $(z,x)$ still requires later local operations and classical communication. This endpoint protocol respects quantum no-signalling, unlike the hypothetical intermediate-angle instrument in part (i).