- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review Research

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Evidence for unexpected robustness of multipartite entanglement against sudden death from spontaneous emission

Songbo Xie*, Daniel Younis, and Joseph H. Eberly

  • Center for Coherence and Quantum Optics, and Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York 14627, USA

  • *sxie9@ur.rochester.edu
PDF

Phys. Rev. Research 5, L032015 – Published 28 July, 2023

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevResearch.5.L032015

Abstract

Entanglement is known to decay even in isolated systems, an effect attributed to spontaneous emission. This fragility of entanglement can be exacerbated by entanglement sudden death (ESD), where entanglement drops to zero abruptly within a finite time. It is natural to assume that multipartite entanglement is more vulnerable to ESD, as it involves more parties experiencing spontaneous emission. In this work, we challenge this assumption and present a contrasting observation, which provides compelling evidence that multipartite entanglement demonstrates increased robustness against ESD from spontaneous emission.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (24)

  1. Z.-H. Ma, Z.-H. Chen, J.-L. Chen, C. Spengler, A. Gabriel, and M. Huber, Measure of genuine multipartite entanglement with computable lower bounds, Phys. Rev. A 83, 062325 (2011).
  2. S. Xie and J. H. Eberly, Triangle Measure of Tripartite Entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 040403 (2021).
  3. R. Laflamme, C. Miquel, J. P. Paz, and W. H. Zurek, Perfect Quantum Error Correcting Code, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 198 (1996).
  4. A. W. Chin, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Quantum Metrology in Non-Markovian Environments, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 233601 (2012).
  5. A. Karlsson and M. Bourennane, Quantum teleportation using three-particle entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 58, 4394 (1998).
  6. T. Yu and J. H. Eberly, Finite-Time Disentanglement via Spontaneous Emission, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 140404 (2004).
  7. T. Yu and J. H. Eberly, Sudden death of entanglement, Science 323, 598 (2009).
  8. V. Coffman, J. Kundu, and W. K. Wootters, Distributed entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 61, 052306 (2000).
  9. A. R. Carvalho, F. Mintert, and A. Buchleitner, Decoherence and Multipartite Entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 230501 (2004).
  10. S. A. Hill and W. K. Wootters, Entanglement of a Pair of Quantum Bits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 5022 (1997).
  11. A. Peres, Separability Criterion for Density Matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996).
  12. S. Xie and J. H. Eberly, Managing the three-party entanglement challenge, Contemp. Phys. 62, 189 (2021).
  13. S. Xie, D. Younis, Y. Mei, and J. H. Eberly, Unraveling the mysteries of multipartite entanglement: A journey through geometry, arXiv:2304.03281.
  14. C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Mixed-state entanglement and quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824 (1996).
  15. S. Xie, Y.-Y. Zhao, C. Zhang, Y.-F. Huang, C.-F. Li, G.-C. Guo, and J. H. Eberly, Experimental Examination of Entanglement Estimates, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 150801 (2023).
  16. B. Röthlisberger, J. Lehmann, and D. Loss, Numerical evaluation of convex-roof entanglement measures with applications to spin rings, Phys. Rev. A 80, 042301 (2009).
  17. J. Eisert, F. G. Brandão, and K. M. Audenaert, Quantitative entanglement witnesses, New J. Phys. 9, 46 (2007).
  18. S. Ryu, S.-S. B. Lee, and H.-S. Sim, Minimax optimization of entanglement witness operator for the quantification of three-qubit mixed-state entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 86, 042324 (2012).
  19. W. Dür, G. Vidal, and J. I. Cirac, Three qubits can be entangled in two inequivalent ways, Phys. Rev. A 62, 062314 (2000).
  20. R. Lohmayer, A. Osterloh, J. Siewert, and A. Uhlmann, Entangled Three-Qubit States without Concurrence and Three-Tangle, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 260502 (2006).
  21. W. H. Press, B. P. Flannery, S. A. Teukolsky, and W. T. Vetterling, Numerical Recipes in FORTRAN 77: The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd ed. (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1992).
  22. T. Yu and J. H. Eberly, Evolution from entanglement to decoherence of bipartite mixed “X” states, Quantum Inf. Comput. 7, 459 (2007).
  23. S. M. Hashemi Rafsanjani, M. Huber, C. J. Broadbent, and J. H. Eberly, Genuinely multipartite concurrence of N-qubit X matrices, Phys. Rev. A 86, 062303 (2012).
  24. M. O. T. Cunha, The geometry of entanglement sudden death, New J. Phys. 9, 237 (2007).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Research 5, L032015– Published 28 July, 2023
  • Received 23 December 2022
  • Accepted 1 July 2023
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation