arxiv:quant-ph/ v1 10 Jan 2007

Transcription

1 Blin encoing into quits J. S. Shaari a, M. R. B. Wahiin a,b, an S. Mancini c a Faculty of Science, International Islamic University of Malaysia IIUM), Jalan Gombak, 5300 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia b Cyberspace Security Laboratory, MIMOS Berha, Technology Park Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia c Dipartimento i Fisica, Università i Camerino, 603 Camerino, Italy Date: January 0, 007) We consier the problem of encoing classical information into unknown quit states belonging to any basis, of a maximal set of mutually unbiase bases, by one party an then ecoing by another party who has perfect knowlege of the basis. Working with quits of prime imensions, we point out a no-go theorem that forbis shift operations on arbitrary unknown states. We then provie the necessary conitions for reliable encoing/ecoing. arxiv:quant-ph/070055v 0 Jan 007 PACS numbers: a, c I. INTRODUCTION The iea of encoing an ecoing classical information onto an unknown quantum state is essentially relate to transformations an measurements of vectors state in a Hilbert space. Suppose that Bob picks a quit state from a given set a subset of a -imensional Hilbert space H ) an sens it to Alice who is oblivious about the state. Alice is then expecte to encoe classical information one out of symbols) by virtue of unitary transformations before sening it back to Bob who shoul ecoe by gaining full information. This task can be reliably accomplishe once the initial set of states forms a basis of H. In fact, in such a case, Alice has simply to shift the incoming state into another of the basis by an amount etermine by the symbol she wants to encoe, while Bob has to measure in project onto) the basis to retrieve Alice operation-symbol. What happen if the initial set of states comprises more than one basis, specifically a number of mutually unbiase bases MUB) [, ]? This problem is of funamental interest in quantum cryptography. For instance, blin encoing of classical information into states belonging to MUB is use in two-way eterministic quantum key istribution [3, 4, 5, 6, 7]. A crucial point to note in these protocols is that security results from the ambiguity of bases introuce by MUB. The eneavor for a more secure protocol thus entails the problem of maximizing the number of MUB over which encoing operations perform equally an ecoing may be one reliably. The maximum carinality of any set of MUB in H is exactly known to be + only when is a prime power [, ]. If, moreover, it is simply prime, a straightforwar construction of bases states exist [, ]. We henceforth restrict our attention to quits of prime imensions. Unfortunately, a nontrivial scenario alreay emerges for qubits = ), where the non existence of the universal- NOT [8, 9] forbis the ability to shift flip) arbitrary unknown qubit states while the unitary Pauli operators shift qubits in only two out of three MUB. This entails two main problems that we shall eal with in this paper: i) Can Alice blinly encoe onto an unknown state of any basis of a maximal set of MUB? ii) Can Bob efficiently ecoe the full information? We iscuss the first in terms of the generalization of a No-Go Theorem [7] which forbis the shifting of one arbitrary pure state into another in Sec.II, an we aress the secon problem in Sec.III by evising a specific protocol. In orer to quantify the figure of merit of this protocol we consier, in Sec.IV, its efficiency within a communication framework [0]. We then apply the protocol to some examples. We reserve Sec.V for conclusions. II. THE NO-GO THEOREM We start by consiering a -imensional quantum system, i.e., a quit. In its Hilbert space H we choose a basis computational basis) { j} labele by elements j Z. Moving from the = case qubit), we can introuce generalize Pauli operators X an Z such that X j = j +, ) Z j = ω j j, )

2 with ω := exp i π ). 3) Generalize Pauli operators are unitary an satisfy the anticommutation relation ZX = ωxz. 4) It is well known [, ] that in H, with prime number, there are + MUB an their states can be constructe as eigenstates of operators XZ 0, XZ, XZ,..., XZ, Z. 5) Now suppose that Bob picks one of these states, say ψt k where t = 0,,..., enotes the element within a basis an k = 0,,..., enotes the basis. Bob sens the state to Alice who is oblivious about it an she wants to encoe one of the symbols belonging to the alphabet A {0,,..., }. She therefore requires a unitary shift operator U such that ψt k Ur ψt r k, 6) where stans for the sum mo. However, in consiering a unitary operation that may shift quit states in any MUB, we arrive at the following theorem generalizing the one for qutrit [7] an extening the arguments for the nonexistence of Universal-NOT [8, 9]). Theorem There is no unitary transformation that may shift between pure orthogonal states of any MUB of prime imension. Proof. We prove the theorem by reuctio a absurum. Let us first consier the eigenvectors of operators XZ k, k = 0,..., enoting ifferent MUB, thus excluing the computational basis. They can be written as ψ k t = ω t j) ksj j, 7) where s j = j We then write the unitary transformation U acting on the computational basis as U{ 0,,..., } {a k,0,a k,,..., a k, 0}, 8) with a k,i C an i = 0,...,. Without loss of generality, we may single out a state ψ k T with inex T for any k basis) an consier the operator U acting on it U ψ T k = a k,j ω T j) ksj j + + a k, ω T k ) 0. 9) Then, for any k, the resulting vector shoul correspon to one of the other vectors of the basis orthogonal to the initial state) an we may write a k,j ω T j) ksj j + + a k, ω T k ) 0 = C k ω t j) ksj j, 0) with t T as necessary shift requirement) an C k C a global phase factor. By equating the coefficients of the same states at both sies of Eq.0), we get Taking two inexes j an j iffering by an integer i, we have a k,j = C k ω t j ) T j)+kj. ) a k,j a k,j = ω t+ki+ti, )

3 3 an for i = which must be invariant with respect to k, i.e. a k,j a k,j+ = ω t+k+t, 3) Notice however that t may be ifferent for iffering ks. Hence, we write a k,j = ak,j, k, k, k k. 4) a k,j+ a k,j+ ω t k+k+t For every term x k t k, we may fin a particular k such that thus = ω t k +k +T. 5) k = x + T)mo ), 6) ω x+t = ω t k +x+t)mo )+T, 7) = ω t k +T, 8) T = t k. 9) The last equality contraicts the shift requirement T t k, k. This completes the proof. III. REQUIREMENTS FOR RELIABLE ENCODING/ DECODING Given the result of theorem together with the fact that a unitary operator of the form XZ l may shift eigenvectors of XZ k when k l that is states in a number of MUB) [], we also have the following corollary. Corollary A unitary operation may shift a quit state to an orthogonal one in at most MUB. This results in the impossibility for Alice to reliably encoe on + MUB. An obvious example woul see Bob sening a state which is the eigenvector of XZ k an Alice cannot encoe a shift unless she knows the basis Bob use, that is k then she may use XZ l, k l). Bob on the other han coul not perfectly ecoe, since in the event he measure a shifte state he coul not iscern between the ifferent kins of transformations that woul have resulte in the same evolution. However, Bob may be able to lessen his uncertainty by sening more quits of iffering bases an in the case that Bob may euce perfectly Alice s unitary transformation, the problems of both encoing an ecoing are solve. We therefore propose the following lemma. Lemma 3 A reliably blin encoing with + MUB nees to use strings of quits from iffering MUB. Proof. Let us enote the unitary transformation to shift a state in any basis except kth as U k. The number of unitaries available to shift a quit state incluing ientity) woul be + [those of Eq.5) plus ientity operation]. Bob s initial uncertainty about unitary transformation U amounts to H U) = log + ). 0) where H stans for the Shannon entropy. Thus, the maximum information I max that Bob may gain is exactly given by Eq.0). Suppose that Bob prepares a quit state an that it unergoes Alice s unitary U i. All U i, i =,..., +, are equally probable, thus PrU i ) = +. ) Bob s subsequent measurement reveals whether the shift has taken place or not. The latter happens when the unitary is either ientity or U k. Thus, we have the following probabilities Prs = 0) = +, ) Prs = ) = +, 3)

4 4 with S is a binary ranom variable taking values to enote shift of the state s = 0 no shift, s = shift). Moreover, PrU = U i s = 0) =, 4) PrU = U i s = ) =. 5) Then, Bob s uncertainty about U) subsequent to his measurement may be calculate by using H U i S = s) = i PrU i S = s)log [PrU i S = s)], 6) so that Bob s a posteriori uncertainty results H post U) = s = + PrS = s)h U i S = s) [ log ] + + [ log )]. 7) By using Eqs.0) an 7) we get H U) H post U) < I max. 8) If Bob ha use two quits of iffering basis, with the encoing operation acting on both of them, we have to istinguish among four values of s with probabilities Moreover, Prs = 00) = +, 9) Prs = 0) = +, 30) Prs = 0) = +, 3) Prs = ) = +. 3) then Bob s a posteriori uncertainty becomes PrU = U i s = 00) =, 33) PrU = U i s = 0) =, 34) PrU = U i s = 0) =, 35) PrU = U i s = ) =, 36) H post U) = log ). 37) + Equation 37) can straightforwarly be generalize to strings of n + quits with n + 3 possible s values) as H post U) = n log n). 38) + It is easy to see that the uncertainty becomes 0, when n =, or when n =. Hence in orer for Bob to have complete information on the unitary transformation use, the number of quits sent must be at least equal to. It is worth noting that the problem of encoing is consequently solve as well.

5 5 IV. EFFICIENCY OF THE PROTOCOL Despite the fact that Alice an Bob may communicate reliably as escribe above, the protocol is far from being efficient. Let us consier the efinition of efficiency for blin encoing in the framework of communication. This efinition closely follows the work of Ref.[0]. It is well known that given a quantum system the maximally attainable classical information I in inepenent measurements) is boune by the Holevo boun [] I Sρ) i p i Sρ i ). 39) Since each quit sent an receive by Bob may perfectly be istinguishe by Bob as the states represent pure orthogonal states), he saturates the Holevo boun thus achieving, with quits, the maximal information log bits. However, given a protocol, the actual amount of information that may be share between Alice an Bob may iffer from this maximal value. If we consier the share information between Alice an Bob in the previous section, an ieal channel woul have allowe its classical capacity [] to be ) C := maxi A : B) = log. 40) + Defining efficiency to be the ratio of the perfect channel capacity to the maximal information of quits, we get log + ) log, 4) with equality only in the case for qubits = ). The ratio ecreases by increasing. In orer to achieve unitary efficiency we must force the numerator to be log or we must allow Alice to use unitary operations. Intuitively this may be unerstoo as follows: since quits are sent back an forth between Bob an Alice, the exhaustive number of coewors that may be share between them woul be. Therefore, Alice must be able to execute unitary operations for encoing while Bob must perfectly ecoe them. This means that Alice must construct unique operations that the composite system of quits of iffering MUB) coul actually iscern. We consier the compose system state of quits Ψ ψ t ψ t... ψ t 4) where the ψ i belongs to ifferent MUB. Vectors like 4) span the space of inepenent vectors. Then the encoing problem can be recast into the following form: can we fin an encoing operation on Ψ such that ψ l tl gets shifte to ψ l tl a for any integers tl [, ] an a [0, ]? The answer to this question is positive. Let us first efine the operation U + as the operation that oes not shift the state of the + )th basis which is not part of the composite system Ψ) but woul shift the states of all other quits by. If we wish to encoe a value a on a particular quit i, we nee to ensure that while quit i gets shifte by a, the others woul not be affecte by the shift. Hence we coul operate on the system Ψ the operations U a U a which shifts the quit i by a an i + the others by a + a)mo = 0. It is straightforwar to see that we coul execute a similar recipe to any other quits in Ψ. Hence, a general encoing may be written as U a U a + ) U b U b + )... U k U k +) ψ t ψ t...ψ t, 43) where a, b,...,k are ifferent values to encoe onto the relevant quits. Simple observation tells us that we may encoe in such a way all the coewors. The remaining question is whether such a combination is unique; i.e. espite the possible combinations for a string subject to the conition that no two quits in the string share a basis), one set of operations results in only one unique evolution of a string of states. This is vital as a set of operations must be recognizable by such strings of quits. Let us write Eq.43) as A Ψ Φ an suppose that another operation B gives B Ψ Φ then it obviously follows A = B. It goes without saying that other strings o not yiel the same result as that of Ψ. As long as Alice an Bob agrees to coewors to be esignate to each set of operations, they may then have a faithful encoing/ecoing proceure which is of unit efficiency. This is important since the above construction of encoing operations is one in states of known bases, while Alice nees to use these operations on unknown strings of quits.

6 6 A. The Qubit Case Consier Bob preparing two qubits states ψ t ψ t with ψ t, ψ t eigenstates of Pauli operator X an Y XZ respectively. In constructing an operation which may flip the states of both qubits, Alice makes use of Eq.43) U a x Uz a U b y Uz) b ψ ψ t t ψ t a ψt b, 44) with a, b [0, ]. We can reaily convince ourselves of the above by noticing U a x Uz a ) X a Z a, 45) ) U b y U b z Y b Z b. 46) B. The Qutrit Case Consier Bob preparing three qutrits states ψ ψ ψ 3 with the integer inices enoting ifferent MUB. In constructing operations which may flip the states of qutrits, Alice makes use of Eq.43) [ U 3 a U a 4 ) U 3 b U b 4 ) U 3 c 3 U c 4)] 3 ψ t ψ t ψ3 t 3 ψ t a ψ t b ψ 3 t 3 c, 47) with a, b, c [0,, ]. The unitary operations U i correspons to the well known shift/error operators for qutrits []. A table for the explicit evolution of the various possible states Bob may prepare uner Alice s transformation is referre to in [7]. V. CONCLUSION We have consiere the problem of blin encoing classical information into quantum states belonging to a maximal set of MUB for systems whose imensions equal to a prime number. We note that trivial encoing is essentially forbien ue to the inability of reliably shifting an unknown arbitrary quit by unitary operations. We prove this in a no-go theorem which is a generalisation of specific case treate in Ref.[7]. On the other han, Bob cannot reliably ecoe the information content of a quit unless he actually prepares an then measures a string of quits. We provie a simple information theoretic proof for this lemma. We then notice that while is the minimum number of quits that must be sent to Alice for reliable ecoing, the available generalise Pauli operations o not provie an efficient encoing protocol. Unit efficiency may be achieve with the protocol we propose for the relevant encoing an ecoing proceure. Two examples of application of this protocol has been explicitly shown. The evelope theory paves the way for the stuy of two way quantum communication in generic imension an may be useful for a number of cryptographic tasks. Acknowlegements J.S.S. is grateful to the Faculty of Science of IIUM for the facilities provie to him in unertaking his octorate programme. S.M. acknowleges financial support from European Union through the integrate project QAP IST- FET FP ). [] I. D. Ivanovic, Geometric escription of quantal state etermination, J. Phys. A 4, 34 98). [] S. Banyopahyay, P. O. Boykin, V. Roychowhury an F. Vatan, A New Proof for the Existence of Mutually Unbiase Bases, Algorithmica 34, 5 00). [3] Q.-Y. Cai, an B. W. Li, Deterministic Secure Communication Without Entanglement, Chin. Phys. Lett., ).

7 [4] F.-G. Deng, an G. L. Long, Biirectional quantum key istribution protocol with practical faint laser pulses, Phys. Rev. A 70, ). [5] M. Lucamarini, an S. Mancini, Secure Deterministic Communication without Entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, ). [6] J.S. Shaari, M. Lucamarini, M.R.B. Wahiin, Deterministic six states protocol for quantum communication, Phys. Lett. A 358, ). [7] J.S. Shaari, an M.R.B. Wahiin, Nonentagle qutrits in two way eterministic QKD, Phys. Lett. A to appear). [8] N. Gisin, an S. Popescu, Spin Flips an Quantum Information for Antiparallel Spins, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, ). [9] V. Buzek, M. Hillery, an R.F. Werner, Optimal manipulations with qubits: Universal-NOT gate, Phys. Rev. A 60, R66 999). [0] A. Cabello, Efficient Quantum Cryptography, Rec. Res. Dev. Phys., 49 00). [] M. Keyl, Funamentals ofquantum information theory, Phys. Rep. 369, 43 00). [] N.J. Cerf, T. Durt, an N. Gisin, Cloning a qutrit, J. Mo. Opt., 49, ). 7