arxiv: v2 [quant-ph] 22 Sep 2008

Transcription

1 Distilling Non-Locality Manuel Forster Severin Winkler Stefan Wolf Computer Science Department, ETH Zürich, ETH Zentrum, CH-8092 Zürich, Switzerland. arxiv: v2 [quant-ph] 22 Sep 2008 Abstract. Quantum non-locality the fact that the behavior under measurements of (spatially separated) parts of a system can have a correlation unexplainable by shared classical information has proven to be a helpful resource in cryptography and communication complexity. Since non-locality is more useful if it is stronger, it is a natural question whether it can be distilled, i.e., whether strong non-local correlations can be obtained from weaker ones. We answer this question with yes by giving the first known examples of distillable non-locality. 1 Introduction When two parts of a quantum state are separated and, later, measured, then the outcomes can be correlated. This may be surprising from a physical point of view, it is much less, however, from the standpoint of information since such correlations can be explained by randomness shared when the two particles were generated. The correlations we address in this note are of a stronger kind, namely unexplainable even by shared randomness. More precisely, we study correlations between the joint behavior of the two ends of a bi-partite input-output system, characterized by a conditional probability distribution P(ab xy), where x and a stand for the input and output on the left-hand side of the system, and y and b for the corresponding values on the right-hand side. x a P(ab xy) We call such a behavior local if it is explainable by shared classical information. On the other hand, a system is signaling if it allows for message transmission in either direction. (In accordance with relativity, the joint behavior of quantum systems must be non-signaling in any case, since otherwise, superluminal message transmission would be possible.) In this note, we are interested in systems that are neither signaling nor local. John Bell was the first to realize that entangled quantum states can have a non-local behavior under measurements if x and y are the choices of the measurements to be carried out, and a and b are the measurement results. Generally, local correlations satisfy certain linear inequalities known as Bell inequalities [1]; in other words, violation of such an inequality indicates non-locality. Here, we will focus on binary inputs, binary outputs non-local systems. In the binary case all Bell inequalities are equivalent to the Clauser-Horne-Shimony-Holt (CHSH) inequalities [2]. We therefore measure the non-locality of binary systems by the maximal violation of CHSH. Motivation. Generally speaking, stronger non-locality is more useful than weak non-locality. For example, the existence of non-locality that is super-quantum to some extent would have dramatic consequences on communication complexity [3]. This extends the fact that maximal non-locality would collapse communication complexity, i.e., allows to compute every distributed Boolean function with just a constant number of communicated bits [4]. Furthermore, the violation of CHSH gives a lower bound to the uncertainty of a third party about the output bits of a non-signaling system, which is better the stronger the non-locality is. If strong violation of CHSH can be obtained by a non-interactive, classical protocol from a number of weak violations then we could amplify secrecy locally. In relativistic cryptography this is a non-trivial task in general and impossible in certain cases [5]. Another motivation is the following question: What would be a good measure of the non-locality of a system [6]? Several answers are possible, such as the amount of classical communication needed to simulate the system given that the only other resource is shared random data and the degree of violation of Bell inequalities. In certain contexts, namely secrecy amplification, one might wish that a meaningful non-locality measure cannot be distilled by a non-interactive, classical protocol. It is therefore a natural question if from weak non-local systems two parties can obtain stronger nonlocality with a non-interactive, classical protocol. y b

2 Previous Work. Non-locality distillation is obviously bounded by Tsirelson s bound [7] and by Bell s bounds. The non-locality of two copies of isotropic systems (noisy PR-boxes) cannot be distilled [8]. Further progress has been made in [9], where it is proved that there exists an infinite number of isotropic systems for which non-locality distillation cannot be achieved. It was an open question whether non-locality distillation is possible at all. Main Result. We show that non-locality distillation protocols exist and that they can be used to distill both, quantum and super-quantum non-locality. 2 Definitions We study correlations between the joint behavior of the two ends of a bi-partite input-output system, characterized by a conditional probability distribution P(ab xy), where x and a stand for the input and output on the left-hand side of the system, and y and b for the corresponding values on the right-hand side. Alice x a P(ab xy) y b Bob Definition 2.1. In general, a bi-partite system P(ab xy) fulfills Positivity: Normalization: P(ab xy) 0 a, b, x, y. P(ab xy) = 1 x, y. a,b and is non-signaling if Alice cannot signal to Bob by her choice of x and vice versa. This means that the marginal probabilities P(a x) and P(b y) are independent of y and x, respectively. Non-Signaling: P(ab xy) = b b P(ab xy) = a a P(ab xy ) P(a x) a, x, y, y, (1) P(ab x y) P(b y) b, x, x, y. (2) A party receives its output immediately after giving its input, independently of whether the other has given its input already. Note that this is possible since the system is non-signaling. Furthermore, after a system is used once it is destroyed. In the following we only consider binary non-signaling systems, i.e., a, b, x, y {0, 1}. If appropriate we represent a system by its probability distribution in matrix notation as P(ab xy) := P(00 00) P(01 00) P(10 00) P(11 00) P(00 01) P(01 01) P(10 01) P(11 01) P(00 10) P(01 10) P(10 10) P(11 10) P(00 11) P(01 11) P(10 11) P(11 11) Given P(ab xy) (P) we define the set of four correlation functions as X 0 (P) = P(00 00) + P(11 00) P(01 00) P(10 00), X 1 (P) = P(00 01) + P(11 01) P(01 01) P(10 01), X 2 (P) = P(00 10) + P(11 10) P(01 10) P(10 10), X 3 (P) = P(00 11) + P(11 11) P(01 11) P(10 11). They can be attained by a local-realistic theory 1 if and only if they satisfy the following four CHSH inequalities [2]: X i (P) + X i+1 mod 4 (P) + X i+2 mod 4 (P) X i+3 mod 4 (P) 2, i = 0, 1, 2, 3 (3) 1 A theory in which the local variables of a particle determine the results of local experiments on this particle.

3 In order to measure the non-locality of a system we introduce the CHSH-operator. Definition 2.2. We define the CHSH-operator S of a binary input, binary output system P as S[P] = max X i(p) + X i+1 mod 4 (P) + X i+2 mod 4 (P) X i+3 mod 4 (P). i {0,1,2,3} Note that S[P] > 2 indicates that the correlation P violates CHSH and is therefore called non-local. Quantum mechanics predicts violations of the CHSH inequalities (3) up to 2 2. However, this bound is only sufficient. The sufficient and necessary condition for a set of four numbers to be reached by quantum mechanics was found by Landau [10] and Tsirelson [11] (see also Masanes [12]). Lemma 2.3. A set of correlation functions X i, i = 0, 1, 2, 3, can be reached by a quantum state and some local observables if and only if they satisfy the following four inequalities: arcsinx i + arcsinx i+1 mod 4 + arcsinx i+2 mod 4 arcsinx i+3 mod 4 π. (4) Using the terms defined above we formally define a non-locality distillation protocol as follows. Definition 2.4. A non-locality distillation protocol is non-interactively executed by Alice and Bob. It simulates a binary input/binary output system P n by classical (local) operations on n non-local resource systems P, such that S[P n ] > S[P] > 2. 3 Results In the following we present a non-locality distillation protocol and distillable non-local resource systems. We will also present resource systems that are measurable on a quantum state and can be used by our protocol to distill (quantum) non-locality 2. For 0 < ε 1 we define the following non-signaling system P ε = 1/2 ε/2 ε/2 ε/2 1/2 ε/2 as our non-local distillation resource with CHSH-operator S[P ε ] = 3 (1 2ε) > 2. We define the following protocol on n non-signaling systems P as NDP n (P): ALICE NDP n (P) BOB x {0, 1} inputs y {0, 1} a 1 P(a 1 b 1 xy) b 1 a 2 P(a 2 b 2 xy) b 2... a n P(a n b n xy) b n a = n i=1 a i mod 2 outputs b = n i=1 b i mod 2 Figure 1: The outputs are a simple exclusive-or of all the outputs obtained from a parallel usage of the available non-local resource systems. 2 Note that we have chosen the two example resource systems because of their simplicity. This should not suggest that these exact systems are the only systems distillable by our protocol.

4 Theorem 3.1. For n > 1 and 0 < ε < 1/2 the protocol NDP n (P ε ) is a non-locality distillation protocol. Proof of Theorem 3.1. Obviously the protocol NDP n (P ε ) describes only classical, local operations on Alice s and Bob s side. Furthermore, NDP n (P ε ) simulates another binary input/binary output system Pε n with CHSH-operator S[P n ε ] = max X i(pε n ) + X i+1 mod 4 (Pε n ) + X i+2 mod 4 (Pε n ) X i+3 mod 4 (Pε n ) i {0,1,2,3} = X 0 (P n ε ) + X 1 (P n ε ) + X 2 (P n ε ) X 3 (P n ε ) = 3 X 3 (P n ε ) = 3 (P n ε (00 11) + P n ε (11 11) P n ε (01 11) P n ε (10 11)). Where we used that X 0 (Pε n ), X 1 (Pε n ), X 2 (Pε n ) are constant functions reaching the algebraic maximum of 1. Analogously to Pε n, let Pε n 1 denote the system simulated by NDP n 1 (P ε ). Using Pε n (00 11) = Pε n (11 11) = (1/2 ε/2)(pε n 1 (00 11) + Pε n 1 (11 11)) + ε/2(pε n 1 (01 11) + Pε n 1 (10 11)), Pε n (01 11) = P ε n n 1 (10 11) = ε/2(pε (00 11) + Pε n 1 (11 11)) + (1/2 ε/2)(pε n 1 (01 11) + Pε n 1 (10 11)) we derive S[Pε n n 1 ] = 3 (1 2ε)(Pε (00 11) + Pε n 1 (11 11) Pε n 1 (01 11) Pε n 1 (10 11)) = 3 (1 2ε)X 3 (Pε n 1 ). Therefore we have established S[P n ε ] = 3 X 3(P n ε ) = 3 (1 2ε)X 3(P n 1 ε ) = 3 (1 2ε) n 1 X 3 (P ε ) = 3 (1 2ε) n. For 0 < ε < 1/2 we can guarantee 3 (1 2ε) n > 3 (1 2ε) n 1, which implies S[P n ε ] > S[P ε ]. In the limit we have lim n S[Pε n] = lim n 3 (1 2ε) n = 3, i.e., for all 0 < ε < 1/2 we approach the system. 1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 However, one can argue that the non-locality distillation shown is purely academical since it depends on non-signaling systems that are not available in quantum mechanics (Definition 2.3). In what follows we therefore restrict the distillation resource to quantum systems. A more general parametrized non-signaling system (positivity is ensured by 0 ε, δ 1) is the following. 1/2 δ/2 δ/2 δ/2 1/2 δ/2 P ε,δ = 1/2 δ/2 δ/2 δ/2 1/2 δ/2 1/2 δ/2 δ/2 δ/2 1/2 δ/2 1/2 ε/2 ε/2 ε/2 1/2 ε/2 Note, that for δ = 0 we have P ε,δ = P ε. Theorem 3.2. There exist 0 < δ < ε < 1/2 and n > 1 such that P ε,δ is a quantum system and NDP n (P ε,δ ) is a non-locality distillation protocol. Proof of Theorem 3.2. Protocol NDP n (P ε,δ ) simulates another two input/two output system Pε,δ n. By setting δ < ε and following a similar reasoning as in the proof of Theorem 3.1 we obtain S[P n ε,δ] = X 0 (P n ε,δ) + X 1 (P n ε,δ) + X 2 (P n ε,δ) X 3 (P n ε,δ) = 3(1 2δ) n (1 2ε) n. We can find values n and 0 < δ < ε < 1/2 (example: n = 2, ε = 0.01, δ = 0.002) such that P ε,δ is at the same time distillable, i.e., 3(1 2δ) n (1 2ε) n > 3(1 2δ) (1 2ε)

5 and a quantum system, i.e., 3 arcsin(1 2δ) arcsin(1 2ε) π, arcsin(1 2δ) + arcsin(1 2ε) π. Note that Lemma 2.3 only guarantuees that the correlation functions of P ε,δ are obtainable by quantum mechanics. But Alice and Bob can make their outputs locally uniform such that the correlation functions are preserved using shared randomness. Thus P ε,δ is a quantum system if its correlation functions are obtainable by quantum mechanics. Therefore we can achieve S[P n ε,δ ] > S[P ε,δ], which means that non-locality has been distilled with quantum systems as resources. A natural follow up question concerns the maximum non-locality our protocol can distill using the quantum systems presented above. Optimal parameters n, ε, δ maximize the term S[P n ε,δ ] = 3(1 2δ)n (1 2ε) n with respect to the conditions that S[P n ε,δ ] > S[P ε,δ] and that P ε,δ is a quantum system (Lemma 2.3). The maximal non-locality that can be distilled by NDP n (P ε,δ ) is S[P nmax ε max,δ max ] = 1 + 2, where n max = 2, ε max and δ max Conclusions We have shown that non-locality of binary-input binary-output systems, measured by how strongly the CHSH inequality is violated, can be amplified. More precisely, we have shown that certain systems which violate CHSH arbitrarily weakly (achieving the value 2 + ε), but that are nevertheless not realizable by quantum physics, can be distilled to achieve a violation close to the mean (3) between the classical limit (2) and the maximal possible violation (4). Furthermore, we show that even certain quantum-mechanically achievable systems can be distilled: Interestingly, the achievable limit is then the exact mean (1 + 2) between the classical (2) and the quantum (2 2) bounds. Roughly speaking, our technique works by trading classical for non-local correlations : Diminishing certain correlations (by repetition and XORing) can in certain cases increase the value by which CHSH is violated if at the same time, other correlations are not or much less affected by the reduction. Our result complements the ones of [8] and [9], stating that the distillability of non-locality of two isotropic systems is impossible and at most very limited in general. Isotropic systems are an important special case because they are the worst case with respect to distillability, i.e., every non-signaling system can be turned into an isotropic system such that non-locality is preserved using shared randomness only (this transformation is known as twirling [13]). Therefore, these non-distillable isotropic systems cannot be used to simulate the distillable resources defined here. In other words, bipartite isotropic and non-isotropic non-signaling (and quantum) systems are in general inequivalent correlations, although they exhibit the same violation of CHSH. The present findings, together with the ones of [8, 9], raise the question whether the amount of CHSH violation is always the right measure for non-locality. We state as an open question to find alternative such measures. One possibility would be to take as a measure the maximal CHSH violation achievable, possibly after distillation. Clearly, this leads to a non-distillable measure. A particular context in which this measure is significant is when confidentiality is obtained directly from non-locality. This work was funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation (SNSF). References [1] J.S. Bell. On the Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen paradox. Physics, 1: , [2] J.F. Clauser, M.A. Horne, A. Shimony and R.A. Holt. Proposed experiment to test local hidden-variable theories. Physical Review Letters, 23: , [3] G. Brassard, H. Buhrman, N. Linden, A.A. Methot, A. Tapp, and F. Unger. A limit on nonlocality in any world in which communication complexity is not trivial. Physical Review Letters, 96:250401, [4] W. van Dam. Implausible consequences of superstrong nonlocality. arxiv:quant-ph/ v1, January 2005.

6 [5] E. Hänggi, R. Renner and S. Wolf. The impossibility of non-signaling privacy amplification. submitted to Theoretical Computer Science (Elsevier), [6] J. Barrett, N. Linden, S. Massar, S. Pironio, S. Popescu and D. Roberts. Nonlocal correlations as an information-theoretic resource. Physical Review, 71(2):022101, February [7] B.S. Tsirelson. Quantum generalizations of Bell s inequality. Letters in Mathematical Physics, 4:93 100, March [8] Anthony J. Short. No purification for two copies of a noisy entangled state, arxiv:quantph/ [9] D.D. Dukaric and S. Wolf. A limit on non-locality distillation, arxiv:quant-ph/ v1. [10] L.J. Landau. Empirical two-point correlation functions. Foundations of Physics, 18(4): , [11] B.S. Tsirelson. Some results and problems on quantum Bell-type inequalities. Hadronic Journal Supplement, 8(4): , [12] Ll. Masanes. Necessary and sufficient condition for quantum-generated correlations, arxiv:quant-ph/ v1 [13] Ll. Masanes, A. Acin and N. Gisin. General properties of nonsignaling theories. Physical Review A, 73:012112, 2005.