No Access

INFORMATION EXTRACTION VERSUS IRREVERSIBILITY IN QUANTUM MEASUREMENT PROCESSES

ERATO-SORST QCI Project, Japan Science and Technology Agency, Daini Hongo White Building 201, 5-28-3 Hongo, Bunkyo-ku, 113-0033 Tokyo, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

MASAHITO HAYASHI

Graduate School of Information Sciences, Tohoku University, Aoba-ku, Sendai, 980-8579, Japan

Search for more papers by this author

, and

MICHAŁ HORODECKI

Institute of Theoretical Physics and Astronomy, University of Gdańsk, Poland

National Quantum Information Center of Gdańsk, Sopot, Poland

Search for more papers by this author

https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219749908003852Cited by:0 (Source: Crossref)

Abstract

A quantum measurement process, when non-trivial, is not a closed evolution: the appearance of classical outcomes is usually interpreted as the evidence of some decoherence-like mechanism causing quantum superpositions to degrade into classical mixtures. Such mechanism is due to a net flow of information from the input system (measurement object), through the physical apparatus interacting with the object (measurement probe), into some environment, the latter representing all those degrees of freedom which are not directly accessible by the experimenter. For this reason, the phenomenon of state reduction induced by the measurement process generally entails an irreversible state change. The aim of our contribution is to answer the following questions : how much information a measurement is able to extract? "How much" irreversible is the state reduction due to a particular measurement process? In which way information gain and irreversibility are related?

Keywords:

References

M.-D. Choi, Lin. Algebra Appl. 10, 285 (1975), DOI: 10.1016/0024-3795(75)90075-0. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
M. Ozawa, J. Math. Phys. 25, 79 (1984), DOI: 10.1063/1.526000. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
M. Ozawa , Quantum Communications and Measurement , eds. V. P. Belavkin et al. ( Plenum Press , New York , 1995 ) . Google Scholar
M. Ozawa, Phys. Rev. A 62, 062101 (2000), DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.62.062101. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
R. L. Stratonovich, Prob. Inform. Transm. 2 (1965) 35; C. Adami and N. J. Cerf, Phys. Rev. A 56 (1997) 3470 . Google Scholar
J. P. Gordon, in Quantum Electronics and Coherent Light, Proc. Int. Schoool Phys. "Enrico Fermi", ed. by P. A. Miles (Academic, New York, 1964); D. S. Lebedev and L. B. Levitin, Inform. Contr. 9 (1966) 1 . Google Scholar
M. J. W. Hall, Phys. Rev. A 55 (1997) 100; A. Barchielli and G. Lupieri, Quant. Inform. Comput. 6 (2006) 16 . Google Scholar
A. Winter, Commun. Math. Phys. 244, 157 (2004), DOI: 10.1007/s00220-003-0989-z. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
A. S. Holevo, Probl. Inform. Transm. 9, 110 (1973). Google Scholar
H. J. Groenewold, Int. J. Theoret. Phys. 4, 327 (1971), DOI: 10.1007/BF00815357. Crossref, Google Scholar
M. Ozawa, J. Math. Phys. 27, 759 (1986), DOI: 10.1063/1.527179. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
L. Maccone, Europhys. Lett. 77, 40002 (2007), DOI: 10.1209/0295-5075/77/40002. Crossref, Google Scholar
B. Schumacher and M. A. Nielsen, Phys. Rev. A 54 (1996) 2629; S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. A 55 (1997) 1613 . Google Scholar
H. Barnum, M. A. Nielsen and B. Schumacher, Phys. Rev. A 57, 4153 (1998), DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.57.4153. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
B. Schumacher and M. D. Westmoreland, Quant. Inform. Process. 1, 5 (2002), DOI: 10.1023/A:1019653202562. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
B. Schumacher, Phys. Rev. A 54, 2614 (1996), DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevA.54.2614. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar
M. Hayashi , Quantum Information: An Introduction ( Springer-Verlag , Berlin, Heidelberg , 2006 ) . Google Scholar
F. Buscemiet al., J. Math. Phys. 46, 082109 (2005), DOI: 10.1063/1.2008996. Crossref, Web of Science, Google Scholar