arxiv: v3 [quant-ph] 29 Apr 2015

Transcription

1 Dynamical entanglement puriication using chains o atoms and optical cavities Denis Gonţa 1, and Peter van Loock 1, 1 Optical Quantum Inormation Theory Group, Max Planck Institute or the Science o Light, Günther-Scharowsky-Str. 1, Building 26, Erlangen, Germany (Dated: October 16, 2018 In the ramework o cavity QED, we propose a practical scheme to puriy dynamically a bipartite entangled state using short chains o atoms coupled to high-inesse optical cavities. In contrast to conventional entanglement puriication protocols, we avoid CNOT gates, thus reducing complicated pulse sequences and superluous qubit operations. Our interaction scheme works in a deterministic way, and together with entanglement distribution and swapping, opens a route towards eicient quantum repeaters or long-distance quantum communication. arxiv: v3 [quant-ph] 29 Apr 2015 PACS numbers: Hk, Pq, Mn I. INTRODUCTION In classical data transmission, repeaters are used to ampliy the data signals (bits when they become weaker during their propagation. In long-distance optical-iber systems, or instance, repeaters are used to compensate or the intensity losses caused by scattering and absorption o light pulses propagating along the ibre. In contrast to classical inormation, the above procedure is impossible to realize when the transmitted data signals carry bits o quantum inormation (qubits. In an optical-iber system, a qubit can be encoded into a single photon which cannot be ampliied or cloned without destroying quantum coherence associated with this qubit [1, 2]. Thereore, the photon has to propagate along the entire length o the iber which causes an exponentially decreasing probability to detect this photon at the end o the channel. To avoid the exponential decay o a photon wavepacket and preserve its quantum coherence, the concept o a quantum repeater was proposed [3]. According to this concept, a large set o entangled photon pairs is distributed over suiciently short iber segments. The two protocols (i entanglement puriication [4, 5] and (ii entanglement swapping [6] are employed to extend the short-distance entangled photon pairs over the entire length o the channel. With the help o entanglement swapping, two entangled pairs o neighboring segments are combined into one entangled pair, gradually increasing the distance o shared entanglement. The entanglement puriication enables one to distill high-idelity entangled pairs rom a larger set o low-idelity entangled pairs by means o local operations perormed in each o the repeater nodes and classical communication between these nodes. The resulting entangled photon pair distributed between the end points o the photonic channel can then be used or quantum teleportation [7] or quantum key distribution [8]. denis.gonta@mpl.mpg.de peter.vanloock@mpl.mpg.de Owing to the ragile nature o quantum correlations and inevitable photon loss in the transmission channel, it still poses a serious challenge or experimentalists to outperorm the direct transmission o photons along the iber. Up to now, only individual building blocks o a quantum repeater have been experimentally demonstrated including bipartite entanglement puriication [9, 10], entanglement swapping [11, 12], and entanglement distribution between two neighboring nodes [13, 14]. Nevertheless, motivated both by the impressive experimental progress and theoretical advances, various revised and improved implementations o repeaters or its building-blocks have been proposed [15 28]. Practical schemes or implementing a quantum repeater are not straightorward. The two mentioned protocols, entanglement puriication and entanglement swapping, require easible and reliable quantum logic, such as single- and two-qubit gates. Due to its complexity and high demand o physical resources, entanglement puriication is the most delicate and cumbersome part o a quantum repeater. In one o the puriication protocols [5], two repeater nodes A and B share a inite set o low-idelity entangled pairs grouped into elementary blocks o two qubit pairs as displayed in Fig. 1(a. Each entangled pair is given by the Werner state [29] ρ AB = Φ + AB ( Φ AB + Ψ+ AB + Ψ AB, (1 being diagonal in the usual Bell basis, with Φ ± AB φ ± AB φ± AB, Ψ± AB ψ± AB ψ± AB. The idelity F(ρ AB Tr [ Φ + ] AB ρab = > 0.5 (2 is assumed to be above the threshold value o 1/2. Both qubit pairs (rom each elementary block are assumed to interact locally, i.e., such that the interaction occurs only within one single repeater node (A and B as indicated by grey ellipses in Fig. 1(a. More speciically, the qubit pairs 1 A 2 A and 1 B 2 B are irst rotated with help o single-qubit gates U ± = 1 2 (I ± ι σ x, with the usual Pauli operators, and aterwards interact by means

2 2 FIG. 2. (Color online (a Sequence o steps or the proposed puriication scheme using a single elementary block containing three low-idelity entangled pairs. See text or description. (b Quantum circuit that corresponds to the interaction depicted above by grey ellipses. 2 B. In this case, the (unmeasured qubit pair 1 A 1 B is described by the Bell-diagonal density operator ρ s that implies the idelity (we drop super- and subscripts AB FIG. 1. (Color online (a Sequence o steps or the conventional puriication protocol described in the text. In the upper part, repeater nodes A and B share a set o low-idelity entangled pairs grouped into elementary blocks o our qubits, and the grey ellipses indicate local interactions occurring within each repeater node. In the middle part, one qubit pair (inside each elementary block is projectively measured and the results are compared with a predeined outcome. In the lower part, all successully puriied qubit pairs are collected and the puriication takes place one more time. (b Quantum circuit that corresponds to the interaction indicated above by grey ellipses. See description o gates in the text. o CNOT gates as shown in Fig. 1(b. By means o the latter gate, qubit 1 A (1 B acts as control qubit and qubit 2 A (2 B as target qubit. While the control qubit does not change its state under the CNOT gate, the target qubit is lipped once the control qubit is set to the excited state. In order to simpliy our urther discussions, the entire sequence o quantum gates indicated by grey ellipses shall be reerred to below as the puriication gate. Ater the puriication gate is perormed, qubits 2 A and 2 B are projected on the computational basis { 0, 1 } and the outcome o these projections is exchanged between the two nodes by means o classical communication [see the middle part o Fig. 1(a]. Entanglement puriication is successul i the outcome o projections reads {0, 0} or {1, 1} or qubits 2 A and F(ρ s Tr [ Φ + ρ s ] = , (3 such that F(ρ s > F(ρ or any > 0.5. The entanglement puriication is unsuccessul i the mentioned outcome o projections reads {0, 1} or {1, 0} and the qubit pair 1 A 1 B must be discarded. Successully puriied pairs, in contrast, are collected rom all blocks in order to carry out the next puriication round as illustrated in the lower part o Fig. 1(a. At every puriication round, high-idelity entangled pairs are distilled rom a larger set o low-idelity pairs and the described procedure can be straightorwardly extended to more subsequent puriication rounds once a suicient amount o elementary blocks is provided at the input. Obviously, any practical puriication scheme has to be resource-eicient and involve experimentally easible qubit operations. The above puriication protocol, however, involves cumbersome CNOT gates which pose a serious challenge or most physical realizations o qubits, involving complicated pulse sequences along with superluous qubit operations [10, 30 34]. In the current work, we present a more practical bipartite puriication scheme that exploits the natural dynamics o spin chains and can be straightorwardly realized in the ramework o cavity QED. In contrast to conventional puriication protocols (such as described above, in our puriication scheme, (i each elementary block contains three qubit pairs as displayed in Fig. 2(a, (ii single-qubit U ± rotations together with CNOT gates are replaced by Heisenberg XY interactions as shown in Fig. 2(b, and (iii two qubit pairs

3 3 rom each elementary block are projectively measured out ater the interaction [see the right part o Fig. 2(a]. Entanglement puriication is successul i the combined outcome o the projections coincides with a predeined outcome that is determined by the Heisenberg XY model (see Section II C. Although we increase the number o qubit pairs inside each elementary block in our scheme, in every puriication gate we avoid the direct use o CNOT gates together with single-qubit rotations and hence the need or complicated pulse sequences and extra qubit operations. The interaction based on the Heisenberg XY model, moreover, describes the natural dynamics o spin chains that is characteristic or many physical realizations o qubits. It can be deterministically obtained in the ramework o cavity QED by using short chains o atoms coupled to the same cavity mode o a high-inesse optical resonator (see Res. [32, 35] or the simplest case with two atoms. In the present work, we develop an experimentally easible puriication scheme which exploits a cavitymediated interaction between atoms that produces a Heisenberg XY type evolution. This results in a more resource- and time-eicient protocol i compared with conventional approaches. Following the recent developments in cavity QED, moreover, we briely point to and discuss a ew practical issues related with the implementation o our puriication scheme and the main limitations which may arise on the experimental side. By combining our puriication scheme with entanglement distribution and swapping protocols, a reasonably practical implementation o resource- and time-eicient quantum repeaters or long-distance quantum communication using chains o atoms and optical resonators may be possible. The paper is organized as ollows. In the next section, we irst outline our puriication scheme. We analyze the atomic evolution that is mediated by the cavity ield in subsection II.A. In subsection II.B, we derive the eective Hamiltonian that governs this evolution and we identiy it with the Heisenberg XY model. In subsection II.C, we apply the dynamics o the derived Hamiltonian to our puriication scheme and determine the main properties which are relevant or our scheme. In subsections II.D - II.E, we discuss several issues which ollow rom the analysis perormed in the preceding subsections and which are crucial or our puriication scheme. We discuss one issue related to the implementation o our puriication scheme in subsection II.F, while a short summary and outlook are given in section III. II. PURIFICATION PROTOCOL WITHOUT CNOT GATES The main physical resources o our puriication scheme are: (i chains o atoms, (ii high-inesse optical cavities, and (iii detectors or projective measurement o atomic states. In Fig. 3(a we show a scheme o the proposed quantum repeater segment including two neighbor- FIG. 3. (Color online (a Scheme o an experimental setup that realizes the proposed puriication scheme and is incorporated into a quantum repeater segment with two neighboring nodes. See text or description o components. (b Detailed view o the puriication block that is indicated by a rectangle in the above experimental setup. In the upper and lower parts o this igure a magniication o side (y z plane and top (x z plane views are shown, respectively. See text or description. (c Structure o three-level atom in the Λ-type coniguration. ing nodes (A and B and combining entanglement puriication and distribution protocols in a single experimental setup. In this setup, each repeater node consists o one optical cavity C 1 (C 2 acting along the y-axis, a laser

4 4 FIG. 4. (Color online Sequence o steps or the modiied entanglement puriication scheme that its the experimental setup rom Fig. 3 and which utilizes one single elementary block. This block contains three entangled qubit pairs: (i one permanent qubit pair that encodes the distilled qubits and (ii two temporary qubit pairs which are employed to increase the entanglement idelity o the permanent pair. See text or detailed description. beam L 1 (L 4, a chain o atoms transported by means o an optical lattice along the along the z-axis, one stationary atom trapped inside the cavity with the help o a vertical lattice, laser beams L 2 (L 5 and L 3 (L 6 which act along the y-axis, a magneto-optical trap (MOT, a detector D 1 (D 2 connected to the neighboring node through a classical communication channel, and a CCD camera. First we shall connect the puriication scheme introduced in the previous section with the experimental setup rom Fig. 3(a to clariy the role o each element. Obviously, the sequence o steps in Fig. 1 with an elementary block displayed in Fig. 2 cannot be directly applied to our experimental setup since it would require one individual cavity or each elementary block and, thereore, an unreasonable demand o physical resources. Instead, we shall consider a modiied sequence that is illustrated in Fig. 4 which perectly its into our proposed experimental setup. By this sequence, repeater nodes A and B share only one elementary block in which the qubit pair P A P B is a permanent pair and the other two pairs are introduced in the block temporarily in a successive ashion. Initially, there is only one permanent pair in the block that is characterized by the idelity F(ρ 0 > 1/2 and supplemented by two extra temporary pairs 1 A 1 B and 2 A 2 B, both characterized by the idelity F(ρ > 1/2. Using these three qubit pairs, the sequence displayed in Fig. 2 can now be applied and in the case o successul puriication, the increased idelity F(ρ 1 o pair P A P B, with F(ρ 1 > F(ρ 0, is obtained. Ater the projected pairs 1 A 1 B and 2 A 2 B are replaced with two resh entangled pairs 3 A 3 B and 4 A 4 B, the puriication steps are repeated. While the permanent qubit pair encodes the distilled entangled qubit pair and stores it or the subsequent puriication rounds, temporary qubit pairs are used to increase gradually the idelity o the permanent pair. Below we shall associate permanent qubits with stationary atoms trapped inside cavities C 1 and C 2 and temporary qubits with atoms in the chain, inserted into the horizontal lattices and transported along the z-axis [see Fig. 3(a]. According to our experimental setup, this identiication implies that atoms pass sequentially through the cavity and only two atoms rom the chain can couple simultaneously to the same cavity mode. These two atoms together with the stationary (trapped atom, thereore, provide an atomic triplet in each repeater node as required or our puriication scheme. Right beore each atom rom node A enters the cavity, it becomes entangled with the respective atom rom node B as depicted in Fig. 3(a by wavy lines, such that each entangled pair is described by Eqs. (1-(2. This entanglement is generated (non-locally by means o an entanglement distribution block, indicated in Fig. 3(a by a rectangle. This entanglement distribution may be realized in various ways [26, 36, 37], where our puriication protocol here does not depend on any speciic choice or the entanglement distribution. During the transition o an atomic pair through the cavity, the triplet o atoms undergoes a cavity-mediated (Heisenberg XY evolution in each o the repeater nodes, which shall be reerred to below as the (new puriication gate. According to the sequence in Fig. 4, urthermore, the puriication sequence is completed once the states o a (conveyed atomic pair are projectively measured and the outcome o projections is pairwise exchanged between the repeater nodes in order to decide i the puriication was successul or not. In our experimental scheme, the latter projections are perormed by means o a laser beam L 3 (L 6 and a CCD camera in each o the repeater nodes as displayed in Fig. 3(a. While the laser beam L 3 (L 6 removes atoms in a given quantum state rom the chain without aecting atoms in the other state (so-called push-out technique [38], the CCD camera is used to detect the presence o remaining atoms via luorescence imaging and determine,

5 5 thereore, the state o each atom that leaves the cavity. Assuming that the puriication was successul, the next atomic pair rom the chain enters the cavity (in each repeater node and the next puriication round occurs with the same stationary atom (permanent qubit. In the unsuccessul case, however, the stationary atoms should be re-initialized and the entire sequence rom Fig. 4 should be re-started. A. Evolution o atoms due to cavity-mediated interaction We recall that each repeater node disposes N atomic pairs inserted into an optical lattice such that atoms within one pair are separated by a distance d and the distance between two neighboring pairs is adjusted such that only one atomic pair can be coupled simultaneously to the same cavity mode [see Fig. 3(b]. The entire chain is conveyed with a constant velocity υ along the z-axis such that their position vectors r i (t = {0, 0, z o i + υ t} cross the cavity at the anti-node (y = 0 and where z o i denotes the initial position o the i-th atom outside the cavity. Both velocity υ and inter-atomic distance d can be controlled experimentally by adjusting the shit in the requencies o the two counter-propagating laser beams and by selecting a proper wavelength o the optical lattice, respectively [41]. Apart rom N atomic pairs, moreover, each repeater node contains one stationary atom trapped inside the cavity by a lattice acting along the y-axis. As displayed in Fig. 3(b, the position vector r s = {0, l, l} o this atom crosses the cavity at the anti-node (y = l and is located in the same y z plane as the atomic chain. Each atom in our setup is a three-level atom in the Λ-type coniguration as displayed in Fig. 3(c encoding a single qubit by means o states 0 and 1. In order to protect the qubit against decoherence caused by the ast-decaying excited state e, the states 0 and 1 are (typically understood as stable ground and long-living metastable states or two hyperine levels o the ground state. We recall, urthermore, that the puriication gate rom Fig. 2 is based on the Heisenberg XY interaction that is produced deterministically by coupling two-level atoms to the same mode o a high-inesse resonator in our scheme. Due to the encoding scheme rom Fig. 3(c, however, the detuned optical cavity is coupled to the atomic transition 0 e, while the atomic qubit is stored by means o states 0 and 1. In order to couple the atomic qubit to the cavity, thereore, an intermediate excitation coupled to the 1 e transition is urther required in order to transer coherently the electronic population o atoms rom the qubit-storage states { 0, 1 } to the cavity-active states { 0, e }. For this reason, the laser beam L 1 (L 4 is introduced in our experimental setup and coupled resonantly to the 1 e transition. Right ater the atomic pair is loaded into the cavity, this laser beam is switched on or a short time period that is equivalent to a π/2 Rabi pulse. Under the action o this pulse, the laser ield couples simultaneously to the atomic triplet (atomic pair rom the chain and stationary atom and transers coherently the electronic population o each atom rom the qubit-storage to cavity-active states. This coherent transer, in turn, couples the atomic triplet to the cavity and activates the cavity-mediated evolution within this atomic triplet. In the same ashion, one additional laser pulse applied ater the operational time that is required or the puriication gate, transers coherently the atomic population rom the cavity-active to qubitstorage states backwards and stops the cavity-mediated evolution. By switching appropriately on and o the laser beam L 1 (L 4, thereore, we can precisely control the duration o the cavity-mediated evolution once the atomic pair is conveyed into the the cavity. Beore we turn to the Hamiltonian that governs the evolution o atoms coupled to the same cavity mode, it is important to explain the mechanism o cavity-mediated evolution o an atomic triplet. Let us consider, or instance, three atoms prepared initially in the product state: e 1, 0 2, 0 3, where the subscripts 1 and 2 correspond to the atomic pair rom the chain with position vectors r 1 (t and r 2 (t, respectively, while the subscript 3 corresponds to the stationary atom with position vector r 3 r s. In this case, composite atomic states evolve according to the sequences: e 1, 0 2, 0 3 ; 0 0 1, 0 2, 0 3 ; 1 0 1, e 2, 0 3 ; 0 01, 0 2, e 3 ; 0, (4 i there were initially no photons in the cavity. The middle part o the above sequence describes the cavity-mediated interaction between the atoms realized by means o a single-photon exchange. In order to avoid the (ast decaying cavity-excited state 0 1, 0 2, 0 3 ; 1 and ensure that the cavity remains (almost unpopulated during the entire evolution, we require a rather large detuning between the atomic 0 e i transition and the resonant requency o the cavity ield (ω E ω 0 ω g( r i, i = 1, 2, 3, (5 where ω is the resonant requency o the cavity ield and g( r = g exp [ (z 2 + x 2 /w 2] (6 is the (position-dependent atom-cavity coupling 1. This position-dependence is caused by the variation o the transversal cavity ield along atomic trajectories, where 1 Gaussian beam that is ormed inside a cavity depends on the y-coordinate by means o width o Gaussian beam, radius o curvature, and Guoy phase [55]. To a good approximation, however, we can neglect this dependence i the distance between two cavity anti-nodes (to which atomic pair and stationary atom are coupled is relatively small.

6 6 g denotes the vacuum Rabi requency and w is the cavity ield waist as seen in Fig. 3(b. With help o condition (5, the sequence (4 reduces to the eective sequence e 1, 0 2, , e 2, , 0 2, e 3, (7 where the (ast decaying cavity-excited state has been omitted. By composing eective sequences or the remaining (three-qubit product states, we conclude that this evolution preserves the number o excitations in the system and all composite atomic states can be divided in our decoupled (non-overlapping sub-spaces: (i 0 1, 0 2, 0 3, (ii e 1, 0 2, 0 3, 0 1, e 2, 0 3, 0 1, 0 2, e 3, (iii e 1, e 2, 0 3, 0 1, e 2, e 3, e 1, 0 2, e 3, and (iv e 1, e 2, e 3. This conclusion implies, moreover, that the states rom groups (i and (iv remain trapped with regard to the cavity-mediated evolution. B. Eective Hamiltonian associated with the cavity-mediated evolution While the eective sequence (7 displays the cavitymediated evolution o three atoms, we still have to analyze this evolution quantitatively in order to understand how to control it in practice. For this purpose, we shall adiabatically eliminate the intermediate state which we omitted in the eective sequence and shall derive an eective Hamiltonian that governs the evolution associated with this sequence. For three identical atoms which are coupled simultaneously to the same cavity mode, the evolution o the combined triplet-cavity system is governed by the Jaynes-Cummings Hamiltonia H JC (t = a a ι g k (t k=1 (a σ k a σ k. (8 In this Hamiltonian, a and a denote the annihilation and creation operators or a cavity photon that acts upon the Fock states n, while σ i = 0 i e and σ i = e i 0 are the atomic lowering and raising operators, respectively. Moreover, = (ω E ω 0 ω reers to the detuning as displayed in Fig. 3(c and the atom-cavity couplings g i (t g( r i = g exp [ (z o i + υ t 2 /w 2], i = 1, 2, g 3 (t g( r s = g exp [ l 2 /w 2], (9 have been introduced, such that z o 1 z o 2 = d. The time evolution governed by this Hamiltonian, urthermore, is described by the Schrödinger equation ι d ψ(t dt = H JC (t ψ(t. (10 As we explained above, all composite atomic states are divided in our decoupled sub-spaces such that evolution (10 preserves the number o excitations in the system. Thereore, we can consider one particular ansatz or the wave-unction ψ(t = c 0 (t 0 1, 0 2, 0 3 ; 1 + c 1 (t e 1, 0 2, 0 3 ; 0 + c 2 (t 0 1, e 2, 0 3 ; 0 + c 3 (t 0 1, 0 2, e 3 ; 0, (11 that is based on sequence (4. In the above ansatz, we assume that c 0 (t,..., c 3 (t are the complex and normalized amplitudes, such that c 0 (0 = 0. Using ansatz (11, the Schrödinger equation (10 gives rise to the closed system o equations ι ċ 0 (t = c 0 (t + ι g k (t c k (t, k=1 (12a ċ i (t = g i (t c 0 (t, i = 1, 2, 3, (12b which describes the evolution o the coupled atoms-cavity system that is governed by the Hamiltonian (8, and where dot denotes the time derivative. According to the sequence (7, the state 0 1, 0 2, 0 3 ; 1, remains (almost unpopulated once the atom-cavity detuning is chosen properly [see Eq. (5]. In order to separate the evolution o unpopulated states rom Eqs. (12, we apply the adiabatic elimination procedure which assumes an adiabatic behavior o the amplitudes c 0 (t and, hence, to a good approximation vanishing o its time derivatives (see, or instance, Re. [42]. We exploit this derivative ċ 0 (t = 0 and obtain with help o Eq. (12a an equation or c 0 (t which we insert into Eq. (12b. The remaining three eective equations, ι ċ k (t = j=1 g k (t g j (t c j (t, (13 describe only the amplitudes c 1 (t, c 2 (t, c 3 (t which correspond to the states e 1, 0 2, 0 3, 0 1, e 2, 0 3, 0 1, 0 2, e 3, respectively. Above equations which we derived rom Eqs. (12 by using the adiabatic elimination procedure, in turn, can be derived directly rom the Schrödinger equation ι d φ(t dt = H(t φ(t, (14 φ(t = c 1 (t e 1, 0 2, 0 3 +c 2 (t 0 1, e 2, 0 3 +c 3 (t 0 1, 0 2, e 3, associated with the eective Hamiltonian g k (t 2 H(t = e k e + H(t, (15 H(t = k=1 i,j=1 (i j g i (t g j (t ( σ i σ j + σ j σ i, (16 describing the evolution due to the eective sequence (7, and where H(t is the dipole-dipole interaction that describes the cavity-mediated energy exchange between the

7 7 atoms. As a summary, we have shown that the evolution o an atomic triplet coupled to the detuned cavity ield is reduced to the evolution o atoms which interact via single-photon exchange in such a manner that the cavityexcited state remains (almost unpopulated. The Hamiltonian (15 is complicated to handle analytically since it contains time-dependent (atom-cavity couplings (9. In order to simpliy our urther analysis and approximate reasonably well the evolution given by the Hamiltonian (15, we calculate irst the mean values o atom-cavity couplings and consider these instead o the time-dependent couplings in the above Hamiltonian. In order to proceed, we assume that the atomic triplet interacts with the cavity ield during the entire transition time, in which the atomic pair is conveyed through the (waist region w o the cavity ield. We note, moreover, that the irst term in the Hamiltonian (15 doesn t contribute to the cavity-mediated energy exchange between the atoms that is essential or our protocol. Thereore, we ignore this term while calculating the mean values o atom-cavity couplings and we integrate the Eq. (14 with H(t being replaced by H(t ι d φ(t dt = H(t φ(t. (17 To a good approximation, the commutator [ H(t 1, H(t 2 ] vanishes or all t 1 and t 2 because o a rather large detuning in the denominator o Eq. (16 as compared to the quadratic atom-cavity coupling in the nominator [see Eq. (5]. In a high-inesse cavity, moreover, the Gaussian envelope (9 describes quite well the strength o the atom-cavity coupling and, thereore, we can saely integrate Eq. (17 rom t to t + U( = exp [ ι ] H(t dt = exp [ ι H t ], (18 where t π w/υ is the eective interaction time, and the asymptotic Hamiltonian H is deined in the orm H = g2 e l2 /w 2 C ij (σ i σ j + σ j σ i, (19 i,j=1 (i j with the coupling-terms C 13 = C 31 = C 23 = C 32 = 1, and C 12 = C 21 = 1 [ 2 l 2 d 2 ] exp 2 2 w 2. (20 By inserting the mean atom-cavity couplings rom the asymptotic Hamiltonian (19 into the eective Hamiltonian (15, we obtain the mean Hamiltonian in the orm H M = g2 e k e + k=1 ( σ i σ j + σ j σ i, (21 i,j=1 (i j where g g e l2 /2 w 2 is the mean atom-cavity coupling, and where we assumed that distances d and l are adjusted such that C 12 = C 21 = 1. In an appropriate interaction picture, urthermore, the mean Hamiltonian (21 can be expressed in the simpliied orm H I = g2 = J 2 i,j=1 (i j i=1 ( σ i σ j + σ j σ i ( σ x i σi+1 x + σ y i σy i+1, (22 which coincides with the isotropic Heisenberg XY interaction Hamiltonian with periodic boundary conditions, i.e., σ x 4 = σ x 1 and σ y 4 = σy 1 [43], and where J g2 / is the coupling between three spins. This coupling, moreover, can be positive or negative depending on the sign o the atom-cavity detuning [see Fig. 3(c]. To summarize this section, we calculated irst the eective Hamiltonian (15 starting rom Eqs. (10, (11 with help o the adiabatic elimination procedure. Secondly, we obtained the mean values o atom-cavity couplings rom the asymptotic Hamiltonian (19 and derived the mean Hamiltonian (22. We stress, moreover, that the ansatz (11 is based on those composite atomic states rom group (ii which involve one single excitation. It can be shown, however, that Hamiltonian (22 preserves the number o excitations in the system and it describes correctly the atomic evolution that is based on the composite atomic states rom groups (i, (iii, and (iv. C. Dynamics o Heisenberg XY model and puriication protocol In the previous subsection, we identiied the cavitymediated evolution o an atomic triplet with the evolution o three spins which interact by means o the isotropic Heisenberg XY Hamiltonian with periodic boundary conditions. In the ramework o cavity QED, thereore, the puriication gate that is required or our scheme can be deterministically realized by coupling an atomic triplet to the same (detuned cavity mode or a predeined time period. In this section, we shall analyze the evolution governed by the Heisenberg XY Hamiltonian (22 and determine its properties along with necessary operational times. Earlier we explained that right beore each atomic pair rom node A enters the cavity, it becomes entangled pairwise with another atomic pair rom node B as depicted in Fig. 3(a by wavy lines. We denote two conveyed pairs o atoms in the nodes A and B with labels 1, 2 and 4, 5, respectively, while the stationary atoms are labeled by 3 and 6, respectively. By this notation, the conveyed atomic pairs are described by the density operators ρ 1,4 and ρ 2,5, while the pair o stationary atoms is described by the density operator ρ 3,6. Since each puriication round should lead to a gradual growth o entangle- ment idelity (or the stationary atoms, we distinguish

8 The evolution associated with the Hamiltonian (22, 8 FIG. 5. (Color online (a Fidelity F (t, 0.75 as a unction o operational time t 0 with ixed input idelity = (b Fidelity F (T, (solid curve as a unction o input idelity with ixed operational time given by Eq. (32. Behavior o Eq. (3 (dashed curve obtained in the conventional (CNOTbased puriication protocol ater one puriication round. Fidelity (dot-dashed curve obtained ater two (successul puriication steps using the scheme C rom Re. [46] (see discussions in the text. (c Fidelity F (T,, as a unction o input idelities and associated with the conveyed atomic pairs and the stationary atomic pair, respectively, with the operational time T given by Eq. (32. the initial idelities o conveyed atomic pairs rom the idelity o stationary atoms. U I (t = e ι H I t = 8 e ι E k t k k, (23 k=1 is completely determined by the energies E k and vectors k given in the cavity-active basis { 0, e }, which satisy the equality H I k = E k k with orthogonality and completeness relations k k = δ kk and k k = I, respectively. This eigenvalue problem has been exactly solved with help o the Jordan-Wigner transormation [44] and its respective solutions have been presented in the literature (see, or instance, Re. [45]. Since the evolution operator (23 acts on the states o one atomic triplet that is pairwise entangled with another atomic triplet (in the neighboring node, we have to consider the composite evolution operator U(t = 8 k,k =1 e ι (E k+e k t k A k B k A k B. (24 According to this evolution operator, the state o both atomic triplets in nodes A and B is described by the sixqubit density operator ( ρ 1 6 (t,, = U(t ρ 1,4 ρ 2,5 ρ 3,6 U (t, (25 where the states o each atomic triplet have been coherently mapped rom the qubit-storage basis { 0, 1 } to the cavity-active basis { 0, e } by means o the laser beam L 1 (L 4. Recall that in order to inalize one puriication round, we map back the states o both atomic triplets rom the cavity-active basis { 0, e } to the qubit-storage basis { 0, 1 } and project both (conveyed atomic pairs once they leave their cavities. This implies that ater an evolution time t = t 0, during which the atoms evolved due to cavity-mediated interaction and that is ollowed by the mapping { 0, e } { 0, 1 }, the state o both atomic triplets in nodes A and B is described by the density operator ρ 1 6 (t 0,, = 64 i,j=1 ρ 1 6 ij (t 0,, V i V j, (26 where the composite six-qubit vectors V i are given in the computational (qubit-storage basis { 0, 1 } and satisy the orthogonality and completeness relations V i V j = δ ij and V i V i = I, respectively. Once both (conveyed atomic pairs leave their cavities, the projective measurements o their states is perormed and the whole sequence o steps leads to the density operator and the probability o success, α,β ρ 3,6 (t 0,, = ρ1 6 αβ (t 0,, P succ (t 0,, Ṽα Ṽβ, (27 P succ (t 0,, = Tr α,β αβ (t 0,, Ṽα Ṽβ, ρ 1 6

9 9 that describes only the state o stationary atoms, and where the Greek indices run over our values i 1, i 2, i 3, i 4 or j 1, j 2, j 3, j 4 such that Ṽα 0 1, 1 2, 0 4, 1 5 V α 0 or Ṽα 1 1, 0 2, 1 4, 0 5 V α 0, respectively. As we shall see below, one o the two outcomes (o projective measurements, {0 1, 1 2, 0 4, 1 5 } or {1 1, 0 2, 1 4, 0 5 }, (28 is the necessary condition to complete successully one puriication round and increase the entanglement idelity associated with the stationary atoms. According to the six-qubit density operator (25, we have routinely computed the matrix elements ρ 1 6 αβ (t 0,, which, however, are rather bulky to be displayed here. The irst relevant result we obtain with help o these matrix elements is that the density operator (27 preserves the diagonal orm in the Bell basis, ρ 3,6 (t 0,, = F Φ F 3 ( Φ 36 + Ψ Ψ 36. (29 Unlike the conventional puriication protocol, thereore, the puriied state (29 is a Werner state that is completely characterized by the idelity F ( ρ 3,6 = F (t 0,,, where the unctions F (t 0, F (t 0,, and P succ (t 0, P succ (t 0,, have the orm 38 F 8 + 8( cos(6 J t 0 12(4 1 cos(12 J t 0 (t 0, = ( cos(6 J t 0 4( cos(12 J t 0, (30 P succ (t 0, = (1 + 2 [ ( cos(6 J t 0 + 4( cos(12 J t 0 ] /972. (31 In Fig. 5(a, we display F (t 0, as a unction o t 0 or the input idelity = It is clearly seen that ater the time interval t 0 = T that satisies (n = 0, 1, 2,..., J T = π ( n + 1, ( this idelity reaches its maximum value = This equality, thereore, sets the operational time that is required or execution o the puriication gate and which makes the output idelity F (T, increase with regard to its input value. Corresponding to this operational time, urthermore, the idelities F (T,, and F (T, along with the success probabilities P succ (T,, and P succ (T, take the ollowing simpliied orm, F (T,, = ( ( ( (5 64 2, F (T, = , (33 P succ (T,, = 59 + ( ( , 972 P succ (T, = ( /972. (34 The irst two expressions describe quantitatively how the input idelity o stationary atoms is modiied due to one single (and successul round o our puriication scheme. In Fig. 5(b, we compare the idelity F (T, (solid curve with the idelity given by Eq. (3 (dashed curve that is obtained due to a single successul puriication round in the conventional (CNOT-based protocol. This comparison shows that the increase o idelity in our scheme is almost twice as large as or the conventional protocol. This nice result, however, originates merely rom the act that our scheme requires one extra qubit pair or a single puriication round. Being projectively measured right ater the irst pair, this extra pair leads to a stronger entanglement distillation o the stationary atoms in the case o successul puriication. In order to motivate the latter conclusion, recall that we considered the puriication sequence displayed in Fig. 4 that its perectly our experimental setup rom Fig. 3. In act, this sequence is similar to scheme C o W. Dür and co-authors, as presented in Re. [46], using CNOT gates and reshly prepared entangled pairs or every single puriication step (so-called entanglement pumping. In this (CNOT-based scheme, thereore, the number o atomic pairs required or two puriication rounds (one permanent pair and two successive temporary pairs coincides with the number o atomic pairs as required or one single puriications round in our scheme. For this equal amount o atomic resources, we plotted in Fig. 5(b the idelity (dot-dashed curve obtained ater two (successul puriication rounds using the scheme C by W. Dür and co-authors. It is clearly seen that this idelity deviates only slightly rom the idelity (solid curve obtained ater one single puriication round in our scheme. Apparently, our puriication scheme is useul only i each round leads to a gradual growth o entanglement idelity (o yjr stationary atoms with regard to the respective idelity obtained in the previous round, i.e., < F 1 (T,, < F 2 (T,, F 1 <... < F n (T,, F n 1. (35 In Fig. 5(c, we displayed the output idelity F (T,, obtained or one single and successul puriication round. This idelity exhibits growth or (one and the same input idelity o the conveyed atomic pairs and (growing idelity = F n 1 (T,, F n 2 o the stationary atomic pair, which was obtained in the previous puriication

10 10 round. The behavior o output idelity F n (T,, F n 1 that is obtained in the n-th puriication round, thereore, is in agreement with the sequence (35 and ensures that each successul round leads to a gradual growth o idelity. D. Remarks on the entanglement distribution between stationary atomic qubits Recall that right beore each atomic pair rom node A enters the cavity, it becomes entangled (pairwise with another atomic pair rom node B, such that the conveyed atomic pairs are described by the density operators ρ 1,4 and ρ 2,5. We assumed, moreover, that the pair o stationary atoms is initially described by the density operator ρ 3,6, however, without explaining how this entangled state is initially created. In this section, we suggest that there is no need to introduce an additional entanglement distribution device in our experimental setup in order to entangle stationary atoms prior to the puriication rounds. Instead, we prepare initially two atoms in the product state ρ 3,6 0 = 0 3, , 0 6 and start our puriication protocol. It can be shown that the irst successul round transorms the above product state into an entangled state described by ρ 3,6 = A( Φ + 3,6 + B( ( Ψ + 3,6 + Ψ 3,6 + C( Φ 3,6 + D( ( φ + 3,6 φ 3,6 + φ 3,6 φ+ 3,6 (36 being o-diagonal in the Bell basis with A( = > 1/2, such that F(ρ 3,6 > F(ρ3,6 0. Obviously, the above state is no longer a Werner state like in Eq. (29. We veriied, however, that the unction D(, which describes o-diagonal contributions, becomes negligibly small ater a ew successul rounds. Thereore, we succeed to entangle remotely two stationary atoms by means o local (in each repeater node interactions, such that the input idelity o the conveyed atomic pairs is mapped (almost completely to the output idelity o the stationary atomic pair. The output idelity A( =, plays the role o the input idelity or the next puriication round and leads to a gradual growth o entanglement idelity in agreement with the sequence (35. We have veriied, moreover, that the output idelities due to the initial state (36 coincide (almost with the output idelities F n (T,, F n 1 due to the state (29. The price we pay or one extra (successul puriication round prior to the main sequence o rounds, thereore, is eiciently compensated by a more moderate demand o physical resources in our puriication scheme. E. Saturation o entanglement puriication and optimal number o rounds Recall that instead o the sequence rom Fig. 1, we considered a modiied sequence displayed in Fig. 4, simi- FIG. 6. (Color online Behavior o (a F (, n and (b F (, n as unctions o input idelity and number n o puriication rounds. (c Final idelity F (, n + as a unction o initial idelity with ixed numbers: n = 4 (solid curve and n = 1 (dashed curve o puriication rounds. lar to the scheme C that was proposed and discussed by W. Dür and co-authors with help o CNOT gates [46]. Using this scheme, it has been pointed out that regardless o the number o (successul puriication rounds, the inal idelity is bounded by a ixed point that is smaller than the respective point due to the sequence rom Fig. 1.

11 11 Similarly, the inal idelity F n (T,, F n 1 that is obtained at the end o sequence (35 is also bounded by a ixed point in our scheme. In this section, we shall reer to this property as the saturation o entanglement puriication and we will calculate the optimal number o (successul puriication rounds that is required to reach closely this ixed point in a resource-eicient way. While the sequence (35 displays the gradual growth o entanglement idelity, we still have to analyze this growth quantitatively in order to understand how much the output idelity increases with each puriication round. For this purpose, we shall consider the ollowing sequence, < F 1 (T,, <... < F n (T,, F n 1 + F (, n. (37 In Fig. 6(a, we show the unction F (, n that describes the dierence between the inal idelity F n (T,, F n 1 ater n (successul rounds and the initial idelity (n = 0. It is clearly seen that during the irst our successul rounds, this unction exhibits a notably ast growth which, however, saturates aterwards and yields a rather minor increase with regard to the idelity F 4 (T,, F 3. In order to estimate the relative growth o idelity that is obtained with each puriication round, in Fig. 6(b we display the unction F. Remarks on the implementation o our puriication scheme In our puriication scheme, short chains o two atoms (in each repeater node have to be transported with a constant velocity along the experimental setup and coupled to the cavity ield in a well controllable ashion. For this purpose, two basic devices are required to store the atoms and transport them coherently into the cavity, namely, (i a magneto-optical trap (MOT that plays the role o an atomic source and (ii an optical lattice (conveyor belt that transports atoms into the cavity rom the MOT with a certain position and velocity control over the atomic motion. These two tools, combined with a high-inesse optical cavity in the same experimental setup [47 49], enable one to store initiated atoms in the MOT and insert them into the optical lattice or urther transportation through the cavity. It has been experimentally demonstrated that an optical lattice preserves the coherence o transported atoms and can be utilized as a holder o a quantum register. Moreover, by encoding the quantum inormation by means o hyperine atomic levels, a storage time o the order o seconds has been reported in Res. [38, 50]. The number-locked insertion technique [51], urthermore, allows to extract atoms rom the MOT and insert a predeined pattern o them into an optical lattice with a single-site precision. F (, n = F n (T,, F n 1 F n 1 (T,, F n 2, (38 III. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION where F 0. This unction shows quantitatively how much the output idelity increases with each puriication round in dependence upon both the input idelity and the number o rounds n. This time it is clearly seen that the relative growth o idelity has its maximum or = 0.75 and it mostly vanishes ater six successive rounds or all values o. In dependence upon the input idelity, thereore, the surace rom Fig. 6(b enables one to determine the optimal number o (successul puriication rounds n that is required to reach closely the ixed point given by F (, n +. Corresponding to n = 4 puriication rounds, or which the inal idelity reaches its saturation level, in Fig. 6(c, we display the idelity F (, n+ or n = 4 rounds (solid curve and the idelity obtained or n = 1 round (dashed curve. By comparing these two curves, we conclude that the increase o inal idelity due to our successive rounds is notably larger i compared to the case o one single puriication round. We stress, inally, that W. Dür and co-authors have demonstrated in Re. [46] that errors and aulty quantum operations may lead to a situation, in which the ixed point in scheme C oversteps the respective ixed point o the conventional protocol based on the sequence rom Fig. 1. We expect that a similar behavior may exist in our scheme as well, however, this analysis is beyond the scope o the present paper. In this paper, an experimentally easible scheme was proposed to puriy dynamically entanglement o two atoms which are trapped in two remote optical cavities. Our scheme utilizes chains o low-idelity entangled atomic pairs which are coupled sequentially to both remote optical cavities. In contrast to conventional puriication protocols, we avoid CNOT gates and hence reduce the need or complicated pulse sequences and superluous qubit operations. Our puriication mechanism exploits: (i cavity-mediated interactions between atoms producing Heisenberg XY evolutions governed by the Hamiltonian (22 and (ii projective measurements o atomic states. A detailed experimental setup was proposed in Fig. 3 and a complete description o all necessary steps and manipulations was provided. A comprehensive analysis o the idelity obtained ater multiple puriication rounds was perormed and the optimal number o rounds was determined by means o Fig. 6. Following recent developments in cavity QED, moreover, we briely pointed to and discussed a ew practical issues related to the implementation o our puriication scheme, including the main limitations which may arise on the experimental side. We stress that although the proposed puriication scheme is experimentally easible, its complete realization still poses a serious challenge. Being the most delicate and cumbersome part o a quantum repeater, entanglement puriication as proposed

12 12 in this paper opens a route towards practical implementations o resource- and time-eicient quantum repeaters or long-distance quantum communication using chains o atoms and optical resonators. In our experimental setup, each atom rom node A is assumed to become entangled with another atom rom node B right beore they enter their respective cavities. This entanglement is generated (non-locally with help o an entanglement distribution block as indicated in Fig. 3(a by a rectangle. Since we consider only atoms and optical resonators as the physical resources or our repeater protocol, we suggest or entanglement distribution the scheme proposed in Re. [26] that allows to entangle non-locally two (threelevel atoms in neighboring repeater nodes. By this scheme, a coherent-state light pulse interacts with the irst coupled atom-cavity system in node A, such that the optical ield accumulates a phase conditioned upon the atomic state. Ater this, the light pulse propagates to repeater node B, where it interacts with the second coupled atom-cavity system and accumulates another phase conditioned upon the state o the atom located in this node. Finally, the phase-rotated coherent state is measured via homodyne detection and an entangled state is non-locally generated through postselection between the atoms belonging to repeater nodes. The controlled phase rotation required or this scheme can be realized by means o a dispersive interaction o a single atom coupled to a high-inesse cavity in each repeater node. A detailed inclusion o this entanglement distribution scheme into our experimental setup is beyond the scope o this paper and will be subject o our next work. In a recent paper by K. Maruyama and F. Nori [53], a puriication mechanism similar to ours and based on the natural dynamics o spin chains has been proposed. In contrast to our approach, however, the puriication mechanism o that reerence exploits the Heisenberg XYZ model with open boundary conditions which cannot be straightorwardly realized in the ramework o cavity QED. Although the time behavior o our output idelity F (t, is dierent rom the respective time behavior ound by K. Maruyama and F. Nori (compare Fig. 5(a with Fig. 3 rom Re. [53], the Heisenberg XYZ dynamics leads to the same expression (33 or a properly chosen interaction time. Apart rom the simpliied Hamiltonian utilized in our work, perectly adapted to the cavity QED ramework, the operational time that is required or one puriication gate in our scheme is three times aster compared to the Heisenberg XYZ-based dynamics employed by K. Maruyama and F. Nori. Finally, we would like to mention Re. [54] by A. Casaccino and co-authors in which an entanglement puriication protocol based on the Heisenberg XY interaction has also been considered. In contrast to our scheme and the scheme o K. Maruyama and F. Nori, however, in that reerence an abstract approach based on the spin dynamics on networks o various topologies has been analyzed. Using this general approach, the authors concluded that the maximum eiciency o entanglement puriication is obtained only by means o networks with no isolated nodes. The requirement o no isolated nodes corresponds to the periodic boundary conditions in our approach [see Eq. (22] and, thereore, we conirmed in our paper the main standpoints o A. Casaccino and co-authors rom a particular point o view using cavity QED settings. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We thank the DFG or support through the Emmy Noether program. In addition, we thank the BMBF or support through the QuOReP program. [1] W. K. Wootters and W. H. Zurek, Nature 299, 802 (1982. [2] D. Dieks, Phys. Lett. A 92A, 271 (1982. [3] H.-J. Briegel, W. Dür, J. I. Cirac, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5932 (1998. [4] C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 722 (1996. [5] D. Deutsch, A. Ekert, R. Jozsa, C. Macchiavello, S. Popescu, and A. Sanpera, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2818 (1996. [6] M. Zukowski, A. Zeilinger, M. A. Horne, and A. K. Ekert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 4287 (1993. [7] C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crépeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895 (1993. [8] N. Gisin, G. Ribordy, W. Tittel, and H. Zbinden, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 145 (2002. [9] Z. Zhao, T. Yang, Y.-A. Chen, A.-N. Zhang, and J.- W. Pan, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, (2003. [10] R. Reich et al., Nature 443, 838 (2006. [11] T. Yang et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, (2006. [12] H. de Riedmatten et al., Phys. Rev. A 71, (R (2005. [13] Z.-S. Yuan, Y.-A. Chen, B. Zhao, S. Chen, J. Schmiedmayer, and J.-W. Pan, Nature 454, 1098 (2008. [14] C.-W. Chou et al., Science 316, 1316 (2007. [15] N. Sangouard, R. Dubessy, and C. Simon, Phys. Rev. A 79, (2009. [16] B. Zhao, M. Müller, K. Hammerer, and P. Zoller, Phys. Rev. A 81, (2010. [17] Y. Han, B. He, K. Heshami, C.-Z. Li, and C. Simon, Phys. Rev. A 81, (2010. [18] J. B. Brask, I. Rigas, E. S. Polzik, U. L. Andersen, and A. S. Sørensen, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, (2010. [19] C. Simon, H. de Riedmatten, and M. Azelius, Phys. Rev. A 82, (R (2010. [20] A. G. Fowler et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, (2010. [21] J. B. Brask, L. Jiang, A. V. Gorshkov, V. Vuletic, A. S. Sørensen, and M. D. Lukin, Phys. Rev. A 81,