arxiv: v5 [quant-ph] 8 Mar 2016

Transcription

1 Minimum Error Discrimination for an Ensemble of Linearly Independent Pure States Tanmay Singal 1 and Sibasish Ghosh 1 1 Optics and Quantum Information Group,The Institute of Mathematical Sciences, CIT Campus, Taramani, Chennai, , India arxiv: v5 [quant-ph] 8 Mar 016 Abstract Inspired by the work done by Belavkin [BelavkinV.P.,Stochastics,1, ], and independently by Mochon, [Phys.Rev.A73,0338,006], we formulate the problem of minimum error discrimination of any ensemble of n linearly independent pure states by stripping the problem of its rotational covariance and retaining only the rotationally invariant aspect of the problem. This is done by embedding the optimal conditions in a matrix equality as well as matrix inequality. Employing the implicit function theorem in these conditions we get a set of first-order coupled ordinary non-linear differential equations which can be used to drag the solution from an initial point where solution is known to another point whose solution is sought. This way of obtaining the solution can be done through a simple Taylor series expansion and analytic continuation when required. Thus, we complete the work done by Belavkin and Mochon by ultimately leading their theory to a solution for the minimum error discrimination problem of linearly independent pure state ensembles. We also compare the computational complexity of our technique with a barrier-type interior point method of SDP and show that our technique is computationally as efficient as actually, a bit more than the SDP algorithm, with the added advantage of being much simpler to implement. Keywords: minimum error discrimination, quantum state discrimination, linearly independent pure state ensembles, pretty good measurement, implicit function theorem 1 Introduction In the class of quantum state discrimination problems minimum error discrimination MED is one of the oldest. The problem arises because nonorthogonal states aren t perfectly distinguishable. Thus any measurement aimed at distinguishing among states cannot hope to do so without some error. Different measurement strategies have different performance strength measured in terms of the average probability of success. Given that the states cannot be distinguished perfectly there must be some measurement criterion which gives the maximum probability of success. To find what this measurement strategy is, is the problem of MED. The setting in MED is as follows: Alice has a fixed ensemble of states {ρ 1, ρ,, ρ n } where ρ i are positive semi-definite operators of trace 1 acting on some Hilbert space H of dimension n. She selects one of these states ρ i, say with probability p i {p 1, p,, p n } p i refered to as apriori probabilities and gives it to Bob. Bob knows that Alice has selected the state from the set {ρ i } n with apriori probabilities p i and his job is to figure out which state he has been given using an n-element POVM. In MED, Bob s measurement strategy is constrained in the following way: > 0, n p i = 1, p i s are there is a one-to-one correspondence between elements in Alice s ensemble {p i, ρ i } n and Bob s POVM elements {E i } n where E i 0, and n E i = 1 n, which is the identity operator acting on H so that when the i-th measurement outcome clicks, Bob infers Alice gave him the i-th state from her ensemble. Since ρ 1, ρ,, ρ n don t generally lie on orthogonal supports, errors are likely to occur. Bob s job is to find the optimal POVM for minimizing the average probability of this error or equivalently maximizing the average probability of success. There are other variants to the quantum state discrimination problem [8], [13], [33]. The most popular among them is called unambiguous state discrimination, in which, if one has to perform state stanmay@imsc.res.in sibasish@imsc.res.in 1

2 discrimination over an ensemble of n states {p i, ρ i } n, the measurement strategy used has n+1 outcomes, where, just as in the MED case, there is a one-to-one correspondence between ensemble elements ρ i and the i-th POVM element E i. Furthermore, the POVM must be constrained so that when Alice sends Bob the i-th state, the j-th POVM element won t click where j i, n + 1. The trade-off is that Bob can say nothing about the state which Alice gave him when the n + 1-th POVM element clicks. Heuristically one expects that one cannot discriminate unambiguously among a set of linearly dependent states; this was proven true later [11]. Coming back to MED, necessary and sufficient conditions for the optimal POVM for any ensemble were given by Holevo [1] and Yuen et al. [34] independently. Yuen et al. cast MED into a convex optimization problem for which numerical solutions are given in polynomial time 1. While there are quite a number of numerical techniques to obtain the optimal POVM [14, 18,, 31], for very few ensembles has the MED problem been solved analytically. Some of these include an ensemble of two states [17], ensembles whose density matrix is maximally mixed state [34], equiprobable ensembles that lie on the orbit of a unitary, [3, 5, 1], and mixed qubit states [1, 15]. In [16], many interesting properties of the MED problem have been elucidated using geometry of N qudit states. An upper bound for the optimal success probability was given in []. Comparing the existing results for MED with that of the unambiguous state discrimination problem, it is seen that the latter has been solved for more kinds of ensembles ensembles than the former [4, 8, 11, 19, 0, 7, 8, 9]. Linearly Independent Pure State Ensembles: For an ensemble of n linearly independent pure states n-lip, given by P {p i, ψ i ψ i } n where ψ i s span H, certain properties which the optimal POVM should satisfy has been given in the literature on MED already: i The optimal POVM is a unique rank one projective measurement [17, 3, 6]. ii The optimal POVM for MED of P is the pretty good measurement PGM of another ensemble, Q {q i > 0, ψ i ψ i } n [6, 7, 6]. Note that the i-th state in P and Q are the same for all 1 i n, whereas the probabilities are generally not. Additionally, in [6], it is explicitly shown that the ensembles P, Q are related through an invertible map. To formalize this invertible relation between P and Q we will now introduce a few definitions. Definition 1. E is the set of all ensembles comprising of n LI pure states. Hence, any ensemble in E is of the form P = {p i > 0, ψ i ψ i } n where ψ 1, ψ,, ψ n are LI. E is a n n 1 real parameter set. Definition. P is the set of all rank one projective measurements on the states of H; an element in P is of the form { v i v i } n where v i v j = δ ij, 1 i, j n. P is an nn 1 real parameter set. From point i above we see that the optimal POVM for P E is a unique element in P. Thus, one can define the optimal POVM map, P, in the following way: Definition 3. P : E P is such that P P is the optimal POVM for MED of P E. Let P GM denote the PGM map, i.e., P GM : E P is such that P GM Q i.e. refer to [6], P GM Q = { ρ 1 q q i ψ i ψ i ρ 1 q } n, where ρ q = n q i ψ i ψ i. is the PGM of Q E, Then ii above says that there exists an invertible map, which we label by R, which can be defined in the following way: Definition 4. R : E E is a bijection such that P P = P GM R P, P E. 1 Knowing R would solve the problem of MED for LI pure state ensembles. While the existence of the invertible function R has been proven [6, 6], unfortunately, it isn t known - neither analytically nor computationally for arbitrary ensemble P. Fortunately R 1 is known [6, 7, 6] i.e., having fixed the 1 That is, polynomial in dimh. While i is subsumed by ii as the PGM of the ensemble Q is a rank-one projective measurement, it is beneficial to, separately, emphasize it.

3 states { ψ i } n one can give p i in terms of the q i : let G q > 0 represent the gram matrix of the ensemble Q, i.e., G q ij = q i q j ψ i ψ j, and let G q 1 represent the positive square root of Gq ; let G denote the gram matrix of P, i.e., G ij = p i p j ψ i ψ j, 1 i, j n; then diagonal elements of G can be written as functions of q i and matrix elements of G 1 q where C is the normalization constant 3, This tells us what R 1 is: G ii = p i = C q i 1 G q C = j=1 ii q j G q 1, 1 i n, jj 1 R 1 {q i, ψ i ψ i } n = {p i, ψ i ψ i } n, where p i and q i are related by equation. It is more convenient to define R 1 and R on the set of gram matrices, which we will denote by G. Definition 5. G is the set of all positive definite n n matrices of trace one. Note 4 that G is convex and is also open in R n 1. Define R 1 G : G G by R 1 G G q = G, using relation. We know that R 1 is invertible on E from [6]; this implies that R 1 G is invertible on G, i.e., R G exists. Equation tells us that R 1 G is continuous in G. Since G R n 1 is open 5, the invariance of domain theorem [5] tells us that R 1 G is a homeomorphism on G. This means that R G is also continuous on G. To be able to express what R is one needs to be able to solve the n equations for q i in terms of p j s and ψ j s. These equations are too complicated for one to hope to solve: to begin with one doesn t even have an explicit closed form expression for G 1 in terms of the matrix elements of G for arbitrary n. Even for the cases when n = 3, 4, where one can obtain such a closed form expression for G 1, the nature of the equations is too complicated to solve analytically. This tells us that it is hopeless to obtain q i as a closed form expression in terms of {p i, ψ i } n. A similar sentiment was expressed earlier [3]. While a closed form expression of the solution seems too difficult to obtain and even if obtained, too cumbersome to appreciate giving an efficient technique to compute q i from {p i, ψ i } n establishes that the relation given by equation 1 along with technique to compute q i provides a solution for MED of an ensemble of n-lips. To achieve such a technique we recast the MED problem for any ensemble P in terms of a matrix equation and a matrix inequality using the gram matrix G of P. The matrix equation and the inequality are equivalent to the optimality conditions that the optimal POVM has to satisfy, i.e., the optimal conditions given by Yuen et al [34]. Recasting the problem in this form gives us three distinct benefits. 1 It helps us to explicitly establish that the optimal POVM for P is given by the PGM of another ensemble of the form Q i.e., relation in equation 1 is made explicit in the matrix equality and matrix inequality conditions. MED is actually a rotationally invariant problem, i.e., the optimal POVM, {E i } n, varies covariantly under a unitary transformation, U, of the states: ψ i ψ i U ψ i ψ i U = E i UE i U. 3 q i > 0, 1 i n. This comes from the definition of E and that {q i, ψ i ψ i } n G E. Also, 1 > 0, 1 i n. ii This is because G 1, being the positive square root of G gram matrix for the linearly independent vectors { q i ψ i } n is positive definite and the diagonal elements of a positive definite matrix have to be greater than zero. 4 Associating each G G with an n n density matrix of rank n, we see that G is the same as the interior of the generalized Bloch sphere for n dimensional systems. Hence G R n 1. 5 The topology of G is that which is induced on it by the Hilbert-Schmidt norm. Note that this is equivalent to the Euclidean metric of R n 1. 3

4 This makes it desirable to subtract out the rotationally covariant aspect of the solution and, so, cast the problem in a rotationally invariant form. This is achieved through the aforesaid matrix equality and inequality. 3 It gives us a technique to compute q i. For 3 we need to compute R G G for a given G G. This is done by using the analytic implicit function theorem which tells us that R G is an analytic function on G. Specifically, we will vary G from one point in G, at which we know what the action of R G is, to another point in G, at which we want to know what the action of R G is. Further on, since our technique rests on the theory of the MED problem for n-lip ensembles, it is expected that the algorithm our technique offers is computationally as efficient as or more efficient than existing techniques. We show that this is indeed the case, particularly by directly employing Newton s method to solve the matrix inequality. This adds to the utility of our technique. The paper is divided into the following sections. In Section we go into detail about what MED is and elaborate on the optimality conditions, and specify what they look like for n-lips. In Section 3 we recast the MED problem for LI pure states in a rotationally invariant form. In Section 4 IFT is employed to solve the rotationally invariant conditions, which were developed in the previous section; in subsection 4.4 of section 4 the computational complexity of our algorithm is compared with a standard SDP technique. We conclude the paper in section 5. The MED Problem: The Conditions of Optimality When the states ψ i are pairwise orthogonal, i.e., ψ i ψ j = 0, 1 i, j n, one can perfectly distinguish among them by performing the projective measurement { ψ i ψ i } n. In general the states { ψ i } n aren t pairwise orthogonal and in such a case, it may happen that despite being given ψ i, one s measurement output is j, leading to an error. The average probability of such errors, P e, is then given by P e = p i ψ i E j ψ i, 3a i,j=1 i j and the average probability of success P s is given by P s = p i ψ i E i ψ i, 3b where {E j } n j=1 represents an n element POVM n-povm. Note that P s + P e = 1. Our task is to maximize P s by choosing an appropriate POVM in the set of n-element POVMS. We refer to the maximum value of P s as Ps max. The maximum success probability Ps max is given by P max s = Max {P s {E j } n j=1is an n-povm}. 4 The set of n-povms is convex, i.e., if {E i } n and {E i }n are n-povms, then so is {pe i+1 pe i }n, 0 p 1. Hence MED is a constrained convex optimization problem. To every such a constrained convex optimization problem called the primal problem there is a corresponding dual problem which provides a lower bound if the primal problem is a constrained minimization or an upper bound if the primal problem is a constrained maximization to the quantity being optimized called the objective function. Under certain conditions these bounds are tight implying that one can obtain the solution for the primal problem from its dual. We then say that there is no duality gap between both problems. For MED, there is no duality gap between the primal and dual problems; thus the dual problem can be solved to obtain the optimal POVM [34]. The dual problem is given as follows [34]: Min TrZ, subject to: Z p i ψ i ψ i, 1 i n. 5 Then Ps max is given by Ps max = Min T rz. Also the optimal n-povm, {E i } n will satisfy the complementary slackness condition: Z p i ψ i ψ i E i = 0, 1 i n. 6 4

5 Now summing over i in equation 6 and using the fact that n E i = 1 n we get the following. From equation 6 we get Z = p i ψ i ψ i E i = E i p i ψ i ψ i. 7 E j p j ψ j ψ j p i ψ i ψ i E i = 0, 1 i, j n. 8 Conditions 6 and 8 are equivalent to each other. Z, given by equation 7, has to satisfy another condition Z p i ψ i ψ i, 1 i n. 9 Thus the necessary and sufficient conditions for the n-element POVM {E i } n to maximize P s are given by conditions 8 or 6 and 9 together. 3 Rotationally Invariant Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for MED We wish to obtain the optimal POVM which is a rank-one projective measurement for MED of an ensemble P = {p i, ψ i ψ i } n, where { ψ i } n is a LI set. Let ψ i p i ψ i, 1 i n. Since { ψ i } n is a LI set, corresponding to this set there exists a unique set of vectors { ũ i } n H such that 6 : ψ i ũ j = δ ij, 1 i, j n. 10 { Let G denote the gram matrix of ψ } n i. The matrix elements of G are hence given by G ij = ψ i ψ j, 1 i, j n. 11 { T rg = 1. Since ψ } n i is a LI set, G > 0. The gram matrix corresponding to the set { ũ i } n is G 1. Any orthonormal basis { v i } n of H can be represented as: v i = G 1 U j=1 ji ũ j, 1 where G 1 is the positive square root of G and U is an n n unitary matrix. U captures the unitary degree of freedom of the orthonormal basis { v i } n. Any such orthonormal basis corresponds to a rank-one projective measurement: { v i } n { v i v i } n. 13 Using this rank-one projective measurment for MED, the average probability of success is given by: P s = ψ i v i = G 1 U. 14 Let { w i w i } n be a rank-one projective measurement, which is also a solution for the n-povm {E i } n in condition 8. Here w i w j = δ ij for i, j = 1,,, n. Let an n n unitary matrix W be related to the rank-one projective measurement { w i w i } n in the following way. w i = G 1 W j=1 ii ji ũ j. 15 { } 6 n Given a set of n LI vectors ψi one can obtain the corresponding set of vectors { ũ i } n in the following way: fix a basis to work in, arrange ψi as rows in a matrix which we call V. V is invertible since its rows are LI. The columns of V 1 correspond to the vectors ũ i in our chosen basis. 5

6 The unitary matrix W is fixed upto right-multiplication with a diagonal unitary matrix, which changes the phases of w i. We will soon fix the phases of w i which will ensure that W will be unique. Thus equation 8 can be rewritten as: w j ψ j ψ j ψ i ψ i w i = 0, 1 i, j n. 16 Using equation 15 in equation 16: G 1 W G 1 W jj ji = G 1 W G 1 W, 1 i, j n. 17 ij ii The diagonal elements of the matrix G 1 W can be made non-negative by appropriately fixing the phases of the w i vectors in the following way: right-multiply W with a diagonal unitary W, whose diagonal elements will be phases. From equation 15 it is seen that right-multiplying W with W merely changes the phases of the ONB vectors w i, and that they will still satisfy equation 16. We can vary the phases in W so that the diagonals of G 1 WW are non-negative. We absorb W into W. After this absorption, the n n unitary W which is associated with the rank-one projective measurement { w i w i } n, is unique. Continuing, we see that equations 17 now take the following form. G 1 W G 1 W G ji = 1 W jj ii G 1 W, 1 i, j n. 18 ij Let D = Diagd 11, d,, d nn be the real diagonal matrix of G 1 W, i.e., d ii = G 1 W, 1 i n. 19 ii From equation 18 and the fact that the diagonals of G 1 W are all real, we infer that the matrix DG 1 W is hermitian. Left multiplying the LHS and RHS by DG 1 W gives DG 1 W W G 1 D = 0. 0 DG 1 W DGD = 0 = X DGD = 0, 1 where X DG 1 W, X = X and note that D is the diagonal of X. In the MED problem, we are given the gram matrix G of the ensemble P. To solve condition 8 for MED of P we need to solve for X in equation 1. Knowing X tells us what G 1 W is, which can be used in equation 15 to obtain { w i w i } n. Equation 1 came from assuming that { w i w i } n represented some n-povm which satisfied condition 8. For { w i w i } n to be the optimal POVM it needs to satisfy condition 9 too; this will impose another condition on the solution for X in equation 1. Theorem 3.1. Let X be a solution for X in equation 1. Then X corresponds to the optimal POVM for MED of P 1 if it is positive definite. Also, R G G = T rd DGD, where D is the square root of G the diagonal of X. Proof. We relate d ii, defined in equation 19, to the probability q i mentioned in equation. In section 1 it was mentioned that the optimal POVM for MED of P is the PGM of an ensemble R P = Q = {q i, ψ i ψ i } n see definition 4. This means that [6] 1/ w i = ψ j ψ j ψ i, 1 i n, where ψ i q i ψ i and n j=1 j=1 ψ j ψ j 1/ > 0. Define ũ i to be such that ψ i ũ j = δ ij, 1 i, j n. G q is the gram matrix corresponding to the ensemble Q. It can be verified that G 1 q is the gram matrix of the vectors { ũ i } n, i.e., G 1 q = ij ũ i ũ j, 1 i, j n. This implies that 6

7 ψ j ψ j j=1 1/ = ũ j ũ j j=1 1/ = G 1 q i,j=1 ij ũ i ũ j. 3 Note that since the LHS in equation 3 is positive definite, the RHS in equation 3 should also be positive definite and that can only be true if G 1 q > 0. One can verify the above equation by squaring on both sides 7. Substituting the above in equation gives w i = = G 1 q j=1 j=1 ji ũ j pj qj G 1 q ji ũ j, 1 i n, 4 where ũ i = p i qi ũ i, 1 i n since ψ i = q i pi ψ i. Since { ũ i } n is a basis for H, on comparing equations 4 and 15 we obtain G 1 pj W = G 1 q, 1 i, j, n, 5a qj Using equation we get that ji = d jj = ji pj G 1 q, 1 j n. 5b qj jj pj d jj = p j G 1 q = C, 1 j n, 6 qj q j jj pj where C is the positive constant that appears in equation. Since d jj qj = C, 1 j n, using equations 5a and 6 we get that X ji = DG 1 W = d jj G 1 W G ji ji = C 1 q, 1 i, j, n, ji that is, X is equal to the product of a positive constant C and G 1 q, which implies that X > 0. Also from equation 1 it follows that DGD = C G q, i.e., the gram matrix of R P = Q DGD is given by T rd G, i.e., R G G = X T r X = DGD T rd G. 7 The converse of theorem 3.1 is proved in the following. Theorem 3.. If X is a solution for X in equation 1 and X is positive definite, then X corresponds to the optimal POVM for MED of the ensemble P. Also, X is unique, i.e., there is no other X such that it is a solution for X in equation 1 and X > 0. 7 That ψ i and ũ j are related by ψ i ũ n j = δ ij implies that j=1 ũ j ψ j = 1 n. This can be seen from n n the fact that if η = j=1 α j ũ j is any vector in H, then j=1 ũ n j ψ j η = η. That j=1 ũ j ψ j = n n 1 n is true implies that j=1 ũ j ũ j k=1 n ψ k ψ k = 1 n. Hence j=1 ũ j ũ j is the inverse of { } n k=1 n { } ψ k ψ k. Also, since G q is the gram matrix of ψ j and G 1 q is the gram matrix of ũ n j we j=1 j=1 n get that G 1 i,j=1 q ũ i ũ n j = j=1 ũ j ũ j. ij 7

8 Proof. Let X be a solution for X in equation 1 and let X be positive definite. Equating D 1 X with G 1 W see below equation 1 and employing it in equation 15, we obtain { w i w i } n to be the rank-one projective measurement corresponding to solution X. We want to prove that { w i w i } n is the optimal POVM. For this purpose we borrow a result from Mochon s paper. Equation 33 in Mochon s paper [6] tells us that the positive operator Z, defined in equation 7, is a scalar times the positive square root of the density matrix of the ensemble R P, i.e., n Z = C q i ψ i ψ i 1. 8 We will compute n p i w i w i ψ i ψ i and show that it is equal to C n q i ψ i ψ i 1, thereby proving that n p i w i w i ψ i ψ i is equal to Z. This will then imply that { w i w i } n is the optimal POVM. Since w i = n k=1 D 1 X ki ũ k and ũ k = n j=1 G 1 jk ψ j, using equation 1 it s easily verified that w i = n j=1 DX 1 ji ψ j. Then w i w i ψ i ψ i = DX 1 D ji ψ j ψ i > 0. 9 j, Squaring the RHS in equation 9 and employing equation 1 we get that DX 1 D ij ψ i ψ j i,j=1 = d ii ψ i ψ i. 30 d ii Consider the probability k i p i n j=1 d jj p, 1 i n. Thus n k i ψ i ψ i is the average state of j the ensemble K = {k i, ψ i ψ i } n. The matrix elements of the gram matrix, G k of K are then given by G k ij = k i k j ψ i ψ j = i,j=1 1 n l=1 d ll p l d ii ψ i ψ j d jj. 1 This tells us that G k = T rd G DGD; using equation 1 we get that the positive square root of G k is G 1 1 k = X and, hence, T rd G d ii = X ii = T rd G G 1 k see equation 19. Thus k i and p i are related by the equation ii k i p i = C G 1 k, 1 i n, 31 ii where C is the normalization constant given by C = T rd G. We see that p i are related to the k i in the exact same way that p i are related to q i from equation. Below definition 1, it was mentioned that if P and K are two ensembles with the same states with apriori probabilities p i and k i, which are related by equation 31, we get that R 1 K = P. Since R 1 is a bijection, this implies that K = R P = Q and k i = q i, 1 i n, where q i is the apriori probability of states in Q as given in equation. This also implies that C = C. From equation 8 we get that the RHS of equation 30 equates to n w i w i ψ i ψ i = n d ii ψ i ψ i = C q i ψ i ψ i = Z. Then the fact that n w i w i ψ i ψ i is positive definite tells us that w i w i ψ i ψ n i = C q i ψ i ψ i 1 = Z. 3 8

9 Note that the ONB { w i } n was constructed from X, which solves for X in equation 1 and which is positive definite. That n w i w i ψ i ψ i is equal to C n q i ψ i ψ i 1, which we already know is equal to Z [6], implies that { w i w i } n is the optimal POVM. Thus { w i w i } n is the optimal POVM. Since { w i w i } n is the unique optimal POVM for MED of P so is the n tuple d 11, d,, d nn unique to the MED of P, 8. This implies that D = Diagd 11, d,, d nn is unique, which implies that DGD is unique and since the positive square root of DGD is also unique, that tells us that X is unique too. Theorem 3. tells us that for MED of any P E, X is unique. But note that if ψ i underwent a rotation by unitary U then it can be inferred from equation 1 that the solution for X won t change since G doesn t change. This implies that X is a function of G in G. Let the matrix elements of X be given by the following equation d 11 d 1 + id 1 d 13 + id 31 d 1n + id n1 d 1 id 1 d d 3 + id 3 d n + id n X = d 13 id 31 d 3 id 3 d 33 d 3n + id n3, d 1n id n1 d n id n d 3n id n3 d nn where d kl are the real and imaginary parts of the matrix elements of X. Since X is a function on G, d kl are also functions on G. Definition 6. Let Q denote the set of all positive definite n n matrices. Thus G Q. Using G and Q we formalize X as a function on G. Definition 7. X : G Q is such that X G solves equation 1 X G DG G DG = 0. 34a Let s denote d kl : G R to be the real and imaginary parts of matrix elements of X G, i.e., and DG Diagd 11 G, d G,, d nn G. d kl G Re X G kl, 1 k < l n, 34b d ii G X G ii, 1 i n, 34c d kl G Im X G lk, 1 l < k n, 34d Note that if one knows the real n-tuple d 11 G, d G,, d nn G, then using equation 1 one can compute X G. Thus we have reformulated the MED problem for linearly independent pure states in a rotationally invariant way: Rotationally Invariant Necessary and Sufficient Conditions: Let G be the gram matrix corresponding to an n-lip: {p i, ψ i ψ i } n. To solve MED for this n-lip, one needs to find real and positive n-tuple d 11 G, d G,, d nn G such that, when arranged in the diagonal matrix DG = Diagd 11 G, d G,, d nn G, the diagonal of the positive square root of DGGDGis DG. 4 Solution for the MED of LI Pure State Ensembles X is a function on G such that X G is a solution for X in equation 1, and is positive definite. We need to compute X G for a given G G. We employ the Implicit Function Theorem IFT for this. 8 Note that d ii = w i ψi, thus if { w i w i } n is unique, so must the n-tuple d 11, d,, d nn. 9

10 4.1 Functions and Variables for IFT In this subsection, we will introduce the functions and variables which are part of the IFT technique. Let the unknown hermitian matrix X in equation 1 be represented by x 11 x 1 + ix 1 x 13 + ix 31 x 1n + ix n1 x 1 ix 1 x x 3 + ix 3 x n + ix n X = x 13 ix 31 x 3 ix 3 x 33 x 3n + ix n3, x 1n ix n1 x n ix n x 3n ix n3 x nn where x kl R, 1 k, l n. Define F on G H n, where H n is the real vector space of all n n hermitian matrices. Definition 8. FG, X X DXGDX, 36 where X is of the form given in equation 35 and DX Diag x 11, x,, x nn. We define the matrix elements of F as functions of G and x ij, 1 i, j n. f 11 f 1 + if 1 f 13 + if 31 f 1n + if n1 f 1 if 1 f f 3 + if 3 f n + if n F = f 13 if 31 f 3 if 3 f 33 f 3n + if n3, f 1n if n1 f n if n f 3n if n3 f nn where, for i < j, f ij and f ji represent the real and imaginary parts of F ij respectively, and f ii represents the diagonal element F ii, and for j < i, f ji and f ij represent the real and imaginary parts of F ij respectively. Then using definition 36 and equation 35 we get for i < j i 1 f ij G, x = x ki x kj + x ik y jk + k=1 j 1 k=i+1 x ik x kj x ki x jk + k=j+1 x ik x jk + x ki x kj +x ij x ii + x jj xii x jj Re G ij, 38a i 1 f ji G, x = x ki x jk x ik x kj + k=1 and for the diagonal elements we get j 1 k=i+1 x ik x jk + x ki x kj + k=j+1 x ik x kj + x ki x jk +x ji x ii + x jj xii x jj Im G ij, 38b f ii G, x = i 1 x ki + x ik n + k=1 k=i+1 x ik + x ki + x 4 ii x ii G ii, 38c where x x 11, x 1,, x nn i.e., x is the real n -tuple of the x ij -variables. Finally, we define the Jacobian of the functions f ij with respect to the variables x ij ; this Jacobian matrix has the matrix elements J G, x ij,kl f ij G, x x kl, 1 i, j, k, l n. 39 Note that since the f ij functions and the x ij variables are both n in number, this Jacobian matrix is an n n square matrix. 10

11 4. Implementing IFT Let G 0 G be a gram matrix whose MED for which we know the solution, that is, we know the values of x ij = d ij G 0, 1 i, j n see definition 7. Substituting x ij = d ij G 0, 1 i, j n in equation 35 gives us that X = X G 0 see equations 33 and definition 7, and substituting X = X G 0 into equation 36 gives see theorem 3., i. F G 0, X = X G 0 = 0. This equation tells us that X = X G 0 is a solution for X in equation 1 when G = G 0. ii. X = X G 0 > 0. IFT, which is a well known result in functional analysis [4], then tells us the following. Implicit Function Theorem: Consider the following inequality: Det JG 0, dg 0 0, where dg 0 = d 11 G 0, d 1 G 0,, d 1n G 0, d 1 G 0,, d nn G If the inequality 40 is true, then IFT tells us that there exists an open neighbourhood I G0 in G containing G 0, such that for each i, j, where 1 i, j n, there exists an open interval I ij in R containing the real number d ij G 0, such that one can define the function φ ij : I G0 I ij, such that 1. φ ij s are continuously differentiable in I G0,. φ ij G 0 = d ij G 0, 1 i, j n, and 3. the following equation holds true for 1 i, j n and G I G0 : f ij G, φg = 0, where φg = φ 11 G, φ 1 G,, φ nn G. 41 Thus to use the IFT for our purpose we need to prove the following. Theorem 4.1. Det J G, dg 0, G G. Proof. This proof is divided into two parts: a. To show that JG, dg is a linear transformation on the real space H n of n n complex hermitian matrices: Proof of a.: First note that JG, dg is the Jacobian of the function F with respect to the variable X equation 36. Let x ij be assigned the value d ij G for all 1 i, j n. Now let x ij = d ij G x ij = d ij G + ǫδx ij be an arbitrary perturbation, where ǫ is an infinitesimal positive real number and δx ij are real, 1 i, j n. As a result of this perturbation we have the following i x ii G = d ii G d ii G + ǫd ii Gδx ii + Oǫ, and ii X = X G X = X G + ǫδx + Oǫ where d 11 Gδx 11 δx 1 + iδx 1 δx 13 + iδx 31 δx 1n + iδx n1 δx 1 iδx 1 d Gδx δx 3 + iδx 3 δx n + iδx n δx = δx 13 iδx 31 δx 3 iδx 3 d 33 Gδx 33 δx 3n + iδx n3. 4a δx 1n iδx n1 δx n iδx n δx 3n iδx n3 d nn Gδx nn For the sake of brevity, for the rest of this proof, we will denote DG by D, X G by X, and JG, dg by J G. Define: D δ Diagδx 11, δx,, δx nn. 4b 11

12 Thus we get the following. F G, X + ǫδx = F G, X + ǫ δxx + X δx D δ GD DGD δ + Oǫ = ǫ δxx D δ D 1 X + X δx X D 1 D δ + Oǫ = ǫj G δx + Oǫ, 4c where equation 1 was employed in the second step above, and J G δx = δxx D δ D 1 X + X δx X D 1 D δ = δxx D δ D 1 X + δxx D δ D 1 X. 4d Thus it is seen that J G is a linear transformation on the space of n n complex hermitian matrices H n. b. If the action of JG, dg on some n n complex hermitian matrix δx is 0 then δx itself must be 0. Proof of b.: From equation 4d it is clear that J G δx = 0 if and only if δxx D δ D 1 X is anti-hermitian. Let s assume that δxx D δ D 1 X is anti-hermitian. That is, δxx D δ D 1 X = X δx + X D 1 D δ = X 1 δx X 1 D δ D 1 X = δxx 1 + X D 1 D δ X 1. 43a Let X = n g i g i g i be the spectral decomposition of X. Then the ij-th matrix element of the matrix in equation 43a, in the { g i } n basis, is given by 1 g i g i δx g j g j g i g i D δ D 1 g j = 1 g j g i δx g j + g i g j g i D δ D 1 g j = g i δx g j = g i + g j g i + g j g i D δ D 1 g j. 43b Multiplying the above number by g i g j and summing over i, j from 1 to n gives δx = g i D δ D 1 g j g i + g j g i g j. g i + g j i,j=1 43c Let { k } n k=1 represent the standard basis, then k g j is complex number occuring in the k-th entry of g j. Using equations 4b and 4a we get g i D δ D 1 g j = 1 n l=1 g i l l g j δx ll d ll G. The diagonal elements of δx are then given by δx kk = 1 k g i g j k g i + g j g i l l g j δx ll g l=1 i,j=1 i + g j d ll G 43d 1 = OΛO δx ll kl d ll G, l=1 where O is an n n matrix with matrix elements given by O k,ij = k g i g j k, Λ is an n n diagonal matrix with matrix elements Λ ij,kl = δ ik δ jl g i + g j g i + g j. It is easy to check that rows of O are orthogonal. Since Λ > 0 and O is of rank n, the matrix 1 OΛO positive definite. 1

13 Consider δx 11 δx D δx.. δx nn Then equation 43d can be rewritten as 1 1 OΛO D D δx = 0 = D 1 OΛO D D δx = 0 43e 43f Let Λ be an n n diagonal matrix whose matrix elements are given by Λ ij,kl = δ ikδ jl g i g j g i + g j. Since Λ > 0, 1 OΛ O is positive definite. After some amount of tedious algebra we find that the following equation holds true. D = 1 O Λ + Λ O. 43g Hence D 1 OΛO = 1 OΛ O > 0. This implies that for equation 43f to be true D δx = 0. This implies see equation 43e δx ii = 0, which implies that d ii Gδx ii = 0, which implies that x ii = 0, i.e., D δ = 0. Substituting D δ = 0 in equation 43c gives δx = 0. Hence, demanding J G δx = 0 leads to the conclusion that δx = 0. This means that J G is non-singular, which then implies that Det J G 0. This proves the theorem. Theorem 4.1 implies that IFT holds true for all G 0 G, i.e., for all G 0 G one can define these φ ij functions so that the points 1.,. and 3. mentioned in IFT are satisfied. The third point in IFT, i.e., equation 41, tells us that for any G I G0, FG, X = 0, when x ij = φ ij G, 1 i, j n. This is equivalent to stating that if one obtains the φ ij functions, defined in some open neighbourhood I G0 of G 0, then x ij = φ ij G, 1 i, j n, gives us some solution for X in equation 1 for any G I G0. If it is true that assigning x ij = φ ij G, 1 i, j n, implies that X > 0, then obtaining the φ ij functions in some open neighbourhood I G0 of G 0 gives us the solution for MED of all G I G0. Theorem 4.. When G I G0 and x ij = φ ij G, 1 i, j n, then X > 0. Proof. Suppose not. Let there be some G 1 I G0 such that when x ij = φ ij G 1, 1 i, j n, then X has some non-positive eigenvalues. Let Gt 1 tg 0 + tg 1 be a linear trajectory in G. Gt starts from G 0 when t = 0 and ends at G 1 when t = 1. Note that eigenvalues of X are continuous functions of x ij, and when restricting x ij to be such that x ij = φ ij G, 1 i, j n, then x ij are continuous functions over I G0. Thus the eigenvalues of X are continuous over I G0, whenever x ij = φ ij G. This implies the following. i. When x ij = φ ij G0 1 i, j n, all eigenvalues of X are positive. ii. When x ij = φ ij G1 1 i, j n, some eigenvalues of X are non-positive. The intermediate value theorem tells us that since φ ij s are continuous over I G0, i. and ii. imply that there must be some t 0, 1], such that i. X > 0, when x ij = φ ij Gt, for all t [0, t, ii. for all t t, 1], X is not necessarily positive definite, when x ij = φ ij Gt, and finally iii. X has some 0 eigenvalues when x ij = φ ij Gt, i.e., when t = t. 13

14 When t < t then X > 0, which also implies that X = X Gt holds true for the interval t [0, t. X G Since T rx G = R GG 9 X we get that T rx = R G Gt, when t < t. Since R G is continuous on G 10 and eigenvalues of X are continuous in I G0, it follows that when t = t, X T rx = R G Gt. From iii. above it is seen that when t = t, X is singular; this implies that R G Gt is singular as well, which is a contradiction since we know that R G is a function from G to G and all gram matrices in G are positive definite. This contradiction arose from the assumption that when x ij = φ ij G 1, X is not positive definite. This proves the theorem. Theorem 4. tells us that for any starting point G 0 G, if we take any point G I G0, the φ ij s obey the equality: φ ij G = d ij G, 1 i, j n. Given this fact, from here onwards, we will represent the implicit functional dependence φ ij by d ij itself. We can make a stronger statement about the behaviour of the functions d ij on G. It is easier to do so if we define trajectories, like the one defined in the proof of theorem 4. in G, and prove results about the behaviour of the d ij s with respect to the independent variable t. For that purpose, let G 0, G 1 G be distinct; define a linear trajectory in G from G 0 to G 1, G : [0, 1] G as Gt = 1 tg 0 + tg We now apply the implicit function theorem to FGt, X, where X represents the variables whose implicit dependence we seek and t is the independent variable. The analytic implicit function theorem [4] tells us that if f ij Gt, x are analytic functions of the variables t and x kl, then φ kl Gt which are equal to d kl Gt should also be analytic functions of the variable t [0, 1]. Equations 38a, 38b and 38c tell us that f ij Gt, x are multivariate polynomials in the variables t and x kl, which implies that the f ij s are analytic functions of t and x kl. Thus d kl Gt are analytic functions of the variable t. This implies that, more generally, d kl are analytic functions over G. 4.3 Taylor Series and Analytic Continuation The fact that d kl are analytic functions on G allows us to Taylor expand d kl from some point in G to another point. Let us assume that we want to find the solution for MED of some gram matrix G 1 G, and that we know the solution for MED of G 0 G. Then we define a trajectory as was done in equation 44. We will now show that using equation 34a we can obtain the derivatives of d kl Gt, upto any order, with respect to t; this allows us to Taylor expand the d kl Gt function about the point t = 0. Analytically continuing from t = 0 to t = 1 allows us to obtain the values of d kl Gt at t = 1. First we show how to obtain the first order derivatives of d kl G. with respect to t. We will abbreviate DGt = d 11 Gt, d Gt,, d nn Gt as Dt for convenience. Similarly X Gt will be abbreviated as X t. It will be useful to denote separately the matrix of off-diagonal elements of X t. Thus define Nt X t Dt. Equation 34a can be re-written as Dt + Nt = DtGtDt. Let dgt dt = G 1 G 0. Taking the total first order derivative on both sides of equation 34a gives Dt + Nt Dt ddt dt + dnt + Dt ddt + dnt Dt + Nt dt dt dt DtGt ddt dt ddt GtDt dt where ddt d d11 t =, d d t,, d d nnt, dt dt dt dt dnt = d dt dt d klt + id lk t when k < l, kl = Dt Dt, 45 9 See equation 7 in the proof of theorem 3.1 in section See description below definition 5 in section 1. 14

15 dnt dt dnt dt ii kl = 0, and = d dt d lkt id kl t when k > l. Thus we get n coupled ordinary differential equations. By substituting the values of d kl 0 in equation 45 one can solve for d d klt dt t=0. The second order derivatives can be obtained in a similar fashion: taking the total derivative of LHS and RHS of the equation 45 with respect to t i.e. the second order derivative of the LHS of equation 34a we get a set of n coupled second order differential equations. Setting t = 0 and using the values of d kl 0 and d d klt dt t=0, one can solve the resulting linear equations to obtain the values of the unknowns d d kl t dt t=0. Continuing in this manner one can obtain the values of the derivatives of d kl t upto any order, at the point t = 0. In the following equation we give the k-th order derivative of equation 34a for this purpose. Dt + Nt Dt dk Dt dt k + dk Nt dt k + Dt dk Dt dt k + dk Nt dt k Dt + Nt DtGt dk Dt dt k dk Dt dt k GtDt k 1 k = Dt d + Nt Dt d Dt dt l1 dt k l1 + h.c. + + k k 1 l =1 k 1 m 1=1 l 1=1 l 1 k d Dt + Nt d Dt + Nt dt k1 dt k k1 k 1 m =0 l k m 1 d Dt Gt d Dt dt m1 dt k m1 k d Dt d Dt. dt m dt k m m 46 By substituting the values of all derivatives at t = 0, one can expand the d kl functions about the point t = 0. Analytic continuation is straightforward: by using the aforementioned Taylor expansion about t = 0, one obtains the value of d kl at some t = δt > 0; one can then use the aforementioned method to obtain the values of derivatives of d kl at t = δt and Taylor expand the d kl functions from δt to t > δt. In this manner one can Taylor expand and analytically continue d kl s from t = 0 to the point t = 1. The need for analytic continuation raises the following question: what is the radius of convergence for the Taylor series about some point t in the interval [0, 1]? The LHS of equations 45 and 46 gives us a hint: d k Dt dt k and dk Nt dt k scale proportionally to the k-th power of i.e., d k Dt ν = dt k, dk Nt dt k ν k dk Dt dt k, ν k dk Nt dt k. 47 This tells us that we need to keep small to ensure that either G 1 falls within the radius of convergence of the d kl functions when expanded about the point G 0 or the number of times one is required to analytically continue from t = 0 to t = 1 is low. It is very difficult to obtain the exact radius of convergence for every point in G since the value of the radius of convergence differs for different points in G 11. For a given G 1 for which we wish to find the solution, it is desirable to find a G 0 so that G 1 falls within the radius of convergence of the d kl functions, when expanded about G 0. In the following we give a method to find such a G 0 for a given G Particularly as one gets closer to points near the boundary of G which lies outside G, the radius of convergence becomes smaller. 15

16 4.3.1 Starting point which generally doesn t require analytic continuation Let G 0 G be some gram matrix with the property that the diagonal of the positive definite square root of G 0, i.e., G 1 0 has the property G 1 0 G 11 = 1 0 G = = 1 0 nn. Substituting G 1 = G 1 0, along with W = 1 n and D = G n in the LHS of equation 0 gives us the RHS of equation 0, i.e., 11 they all satisfy equation 0. It is also seen that when D = G n, then X = DG 1 0 is a solution for the equation 1 for G = G 0, and since D is a multiple of 1 n, X > 0. Thus, when the diagonal of G 1 0 is a multiple of 1 n, the solution for the MED of corresponding gram matrix G 0 is known 1. Thus for a given G 1, we want to find a starting point G 0 such that the diagonal elements of G 1 0 are all equal. For this purpose expand the positive square root of G 1 i.e., G 1 1 in an ONB of H n, which 1 comprises of n and the generalized Gell-Man matrices σ lk where 1 l, k n[9]. Here the σ lk matrices are defined as l k + k l, when l < k, σ lk = i l k i k l, when l > k, 48 l ll+1 j=1 j j l l + 1 l + 1 δ lk, when 1 l n 1 All generalized Gell-Mann matrices in equation 48 have Hilbert-Schmidt norm. Let G 1 1 following expansion in these Gell-Mann matrices. have the G 1 1 = γ 1 n 1 σ jj + β j + n j=1 l,k=1 l =k σ lk ζ lk, 49 where ζ lk, β j, γ are real numbers. Note that γ > 0 s G 1 1. Based upon this define G 1 0 as where κ = γ + j β j. G 1 0 = κ 1 + σ lk ζ lk, 50 n l k It is easily verified that T rg 0 = 1. One needs to check if G 1 0 > 0 or not. Generally, it is true that G 1 0 > 0. But if some eigenvalues of G 1 are close to 0, this may not hold. Suppose it holds as is generally the case, d ii 0 = κ, d kl 0 = Re G 1 0, when k < l, d kl 0 = Im G 1 0, when k > l. G 1 kl lk generally falls within the radius of convergence of all d kl functions about the starting point G 0. In such circumstances one doesn t need analytic continuation; one can straightforwardly calculate d kl 1 from the Taylor series about t = 0. If G 1 0, obtained this way, isn t positive definite, then this method fails and one needs another starting point Starting points which generally require analytic continuation Another possible starting point is an ensemble of equiprobable orthogonal states; this ensemble s gram matrix is G 0 = 1 n where d 1 ij0 = δ ij n. To drag the solution from G 0 to G 1 one needs to divide the [0, 1] interval into subintervals and analytically continue the d kl s from the starting point of each subinterval to its corresponding ending point. Here it needs to be ensured that one doesn t overshoot beyond the radius of convergence of any of the d kl functions at the starting point of each subinterval. For this purpose it was found that it generally suffices to divide [0, 1] into n subintervals. Generally the smaller the intervals, the lower the value of error. 1 This result is well known. It corresponds to those cases when mathscrr P = P. 16

17 4.3.3 Error-Estimation There is a simple method to estimate the degree of error in the process; this is based on the fact that when the solution, i.e., d kl 1 s are substituted in the LHS of equation 1 one should obtain the zero matrix, which isn t what we get due to errors. Thus the value of the Hilbert-Schmidt norm of the quantity on the LHS, i.e., the value of D1 + N1 D1G1D1 gives us an estimate of the degree of error which has accumulated into the solution. The closer D1 + N1 D1G1D1 is to 0, the lower the error. Note that one cannot decrease the error significantly by increasing the order upto which the Taylor series is expanded beyond a order of expansion. On the other hand error rates can be substantially reduced by decreasing the size of the subintervals. Thus having solved for d kl 1 with a high degree of accuracy, one can now obtain the optimal POVM. In the following we present an example for n = 5. Note that while the precision of the starting point is upto 0 significant digits, only the first 6 significant digits have been displayed. For lack of space sometimes quantities have been displayed with upto only 4 significant digits. ψ 1 = ψ 3 = ψ 5 = i i i i i i i i i i i i ψ = ψ 4 = The corresponding ũ i states are given by: i ũ 1 = i ũ = i i ũ 3 = ũ 5 = i i i i i i i i ũ 4 = i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i The gram matrix for the ensemble { ψ i } 5, i.e., G 1 is given by:. G 1 = i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i

18 G 1 0 = Then using equation 50, we have i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i We see that all the diagonal elements of G 1 0 are all equal. Also G 1 0 > 0. Thus d ii 0 is equal to the diagonal elements of G and d kl 0 are assigned values of the off-diagonal elements of G 0 when i j. Here = G 1 G 0 = /5 = This gives us the indication that t = 1 lies within the radius of convergence of the implicitly defined functions d kl about the point t = 0 and that no analytic continuation is required at any intermittent point. Upon employing the Taylor series expansion and expanding the series upto 10-th term, we obtain the solution for X 1 = D1 + N1: X 1 = D1 + N1 = i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i X 1 > 0 holds true. d 11 1 = , d 1 = , d 33 1 = , d 44 1 = , d 55 1 = The maximum success probability, Ps max = n d ii1 = X 1 D1G1D1 = For lack of space the projectors w i w i aren t given here. Instead we give the ONB { w i } n : w 1 = w 3 = w 5 = i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i w = w 4 = i i i i i i i i i i Despite having satisfied the rotationally invariant conditions refer theorem 3., we would like to see if both the conditions 8 and 9 are satisfied. Instead of checking condition 8 we check if Z, from equation 7, is hermitian or not. We first use { w i } n to compute the operator Z. We measure the non-hermiticity of Z as 1 Z Z, which takes the value for our example. That Z is hermitian within error and satisfies equation 7 implies that equations 6 or equivalently equations 8 are satisfied. Additionally we find that 1 i n, all except one eigenvalue of Z p i ψ i ψ i are positive. For each i = 1,,, n the non-positive eigenvalue of Z p i ψ i ψ i is either 0 or of the order 10 10, showing that the condition 9 is also satisfied. Thus we have demonstrated an example of obtaining the optimal POVM for MED of an ensemble of 5 LI states. 4.4 Algorithms: Computational Complexity In the following we outline the algorithm for the Taylor series expansion method, which gives us the solution for the MED of a given n-lip ensemble. The method has already been elucidated in detail. 18