Advertisement

Quantum Fisher information matrix in Heisenberg XY model

  • L. Bakmou
  • A. SlaouiEmail author
  • M. Daoud
  • R. Ahl Laamara
Article
  • 37 Downloads

Abstract

The quantum Fisher information matrix provides us with a tool to determine the precision, in any multiparametric estimation protocol, through quantum Cramér–Rao bound. In this work, we study simultaneous and individual estimation strategies using the density matrix vectorization method. Two special Heisenberg XY models are considered. The first one concerns the anisotropic XY model in which the temperature T and the anisotropic parameter \(\gamma \) are estimated. The second situation concerns the isotropic XY model submitted to an external magnetic field B in which the temperature and the magnetic field are estimated. Our results show that the simultaneous strategy of multiple parameters is always advantageous and can provide a better precision than the individual strategy in the multiparameter estimation procedures.

Keywords

Quantum estimation Quantum Fisher information matrix Quantum Heisenberg XY model 

Notes

References

  1. 1.
    Giovannetti, V., Lloyd, S., Maccone, L.: Quantum metrology. Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 010401 (2006)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Giovannetti, V., Lloyd, S., Maccone, L.: Advances in quantum metrology. Nat. Photon. 5, 222 (2011)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Helstrom, C.W.: Quantum Detection and Estimation Theory. Academic Press, Cambridge (1976)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Huelga, S.F., Macchiavello, C., Pellizzari, T., Ekert, A.K., Plenio, M.B., Cirac, J.I.: Improvement of frequency standards with quantum entanglement. Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3865 (1997)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Escher, B.M., de Matos Filho, R.L., Davidovich, L.: General framework for estimating the ultimate precision limit in noisy quantum-enhanced metrology. Nat. Phys. 7, 406 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Joza, R., Abrams, D.S., Dowling, J.P., Williams, C.P.: Quantum clock synchronization based on shared prior entanglement. Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2010 (2000)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Abbott, B.P., et al.: Observation of gravitational waves from a binary black hole merger. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 061102 (2016)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ballester, M.A.: Entanglement is not very useful for estimating multiple phases. Phys. Rev. A 70, 032310 (2004)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Monras, A.: Optimal phase measurements with pure Gaussian states. Phys. Rev. A 73, 033821 (2006)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Aspachs, M., Calsamiglia, J., Muñoz Tapia, R., Bagan, E.: Phase estimation for thermal Gaussian states. Phys. Rev. A 79, 033834 (2009)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nation, P.D., Blencowe, M.P., Rimberg, A.J., Buks, E.: Analogue Hawking radiation in a dc-SQUID array transmission line. Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 087004 (2009)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Weinfurtner, S., Tedford, E.W., Penrice, M.C.J., Unruh, W.G., Lawrence, G.A.: Measurement of stimulated Hawking emission in an analogue system. Phys. Rev. Lett. 106, 021302 (2011)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aspachs, M., Adesso, G., Fuentes, I.: Measurement of stimulated Hawking emission in an analogue system. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 151301 (2010)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wasilewski, W., Jensen, K., Krauter, H., Renema, J.J., Balabas, M.V., Polzik, E.S.: Quantum noise limited and entanglement-assisted magnetometry. Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 133601 (2010)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cai, J., Plenio, M.B.: Chemical compass model for avian magnetoreception as a quantum coherent device. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 230503 (2013)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Monras, A., Illuminati, F.: Measurement of damping and temperature: Precision bounds in Gaussian dissipative channels. Phys. Rev. A 83, 012315 (2011)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Correa, L.A., Mehboudi, M., Adesso, G., Sanpera, A.: Individual quantum probes for optimal thermometry. Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 220405 (2015)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Boss, J., Cujia, K., Zopes, J., Degen, C.: Quantum sensing with arbitrary frequency resolution. Science 356, 837 (2017)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Einstein, A., Podolsky, B., Rosen, N.: Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys. Rev. 47, 777 (1935)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bell, J.S.: On the Einstein Podolsky Rosen paradox. Physics 1, 195 (1964)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hill, S., Wootters, W.K.: Entanglement of a pair of quantum bits. Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 5022 (1997)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Giorda, P., Paris, M.G.: Gaussian quantum discord. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 020503 (2010)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Ollivier, H., Zurek, W.H.: Quantum discord: a measure of the quantumness of correlations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 017901 (2001)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mancino, L., Cavina, V., De Pasquale, A., Sbroscia, M., Booth, R.I., Roccia, E., Gianani, I., Giovannetti , V., Barbieri, M.: Geometrical bounds on irreversibility in open quantum systems. arXiv:1801.05188
  25. 25.
    Paris, M.G.A.: Quantum estimation for quantum technology. Int. J. Quantum Inf. 07, 125 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Braunstein, S.L., Caves, C.M.: Statistical distance and the geometry of quantum states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 72, 3439 (1994)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kay, S.M.: Fundamentals of Statistical Signal Processing: Estimation Theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1993)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Holevo, A.S.: Statistical Structure of Quantum Theory, Lecture Notes in Physics, vol. 61. Springer, Berlin (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Genoni, M.G., Paris, M.G.A., Adesso, G., Nha, H., Knight, P.L., Kim, M.S.: Optimal estimation of joint parameters in phase space. Phys. Rev. A 87, 012107 (2013)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Humphreys, P.C., Barbieri, M., Datta, A., Walmsley, I.A.: Quantum enhanced multiple phase estimation. Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 070403 (2013)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yuan, H., Fung, C.H.F.: Fidelity and Fisher information on quantum channels. New J. Phys. 19, 113039 (2017)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Liu, J., Jing, X., Wang, X.: Phase-matching condition for enhancement of phase sensitivity in quantum metrology. Phys. Rev. A 88, 042316 (2013)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yuen, H., Lax, M.: Multiple-parameter quantum estimation and measurement of nonselfadjoint observables. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 19, 740 (1973)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Matsumoto, K.: When is an input state always better than the others?: Universally optimal input states for statistical inference of quantum channels (2012). arXiv:1209.2392
  35. 35.
    Řháček, J., Hradil, Z., Koutný, D., Grover, J., Krzic, A., Sánchez-Soto, L.L.: Optimal measurements for quantum spatial superresolution. Phy. Rev. A 98, 012103 (2018)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Ragy, S., Jarzyna, M., Demkowicz-Dobrzański, R.: Compatibility in multiparameter quantum metrology. Phys. Rev. A 94, 052108 (2016)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Spagnolo, N., Aparo, L., Vitelli, C., Crespi, A., Ramponi, R., Osellame, R., Mataloni, P., Sciarrino, F.: Quantum interferometry with three-dimensional geometry. Sci. Rep. 2, 862 (2012)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zhang, L., Chan, K.W.C.: Quantum multiparameter estimation with generalized balanced multimode NOON-like states. Phys. Rev. A 95, 032321 (2017)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Cheng, J.: Quantum metrology for simultaneously estimating the linear and nonlinear phase shifts. Phys. Rev. A 90, 063838 (2014)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Pezzé, L., Smerzi, A.: Entanglement, nonlinear dynamics, and the Heisenberg limit. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 100401 (2009)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Rivas, Á., Luis, A.: Precision quantum metrology and nonclassicality in linear and nonlinear detection schemes. Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 010403 (2010)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Li, N., Luo, S.: Entanglement detection via quantum Fisher information. Phys. Rev. A 88, 014301 (2013)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Girolami, D., Souza, A.M., Giovannetti, V., Tufarelli, T., Filgueiras, J.G., Sarthour, R.S., Soares-Pinto, D.O., Oliveira, I.S., Adesso, G.: Quantum discord determines the interferometric power of quantum states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 210401 (2014)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhang, G.F.: Thermal entanglement and teleportation in a two-qubit Heisenberg chain with Dzyaloshinski–Moriya anisotropic antisymmetric interaction. Phys. Rev. A 75, 034304 (2007)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gilchrist, A., Terno, D.R., Wood, C.J.: Vectorization of quantum operations and its use. arXiv:0911.2539
  46. 46.
    Schacke, K.: On the Kronecker product. Master’s thesis, University of Waterloo (2004)Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Banchi, L., Giorda, P., Zanardi, P.: Quantum information-geometry of dissipative quantum phase transitions. Phys. Rev. E 89, 022102 (2014)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Sommers, H.J., Zyczkowski, K.: Bures volume of the set of mixed quantum states. J. Phys. A 36, 10083 (2003)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Šafránek, D.: Simple expression for the quantum Fisher information matrix. Phys. Rev. A. 97, 042322 (2018)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Matsumoto, K.: A new approach to the Cramér–Rao-type bound of the pure-state model. J. Phys. A Math. Gen. 35, 3111 (2002)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Crowley, P.J., Datta, A., Barbieri, M., Walmsley, I.A.: Tradeoff in simultaneous quantum-limited phase and loss estimation in interferometry. Phys. Rev. A. 89, 023845 (2014)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Korepin, V.E., Bogoliubov, N.M., Izergin, A.G.: Quantum Inverse Scattering Method and Correlation Functions, pp. 63–79. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Wang, X., Zanardi, P.: Quantum entanglement and Bell inequalities in Heisenberg spin chains. Phys. Lett. A 301, 1–6 (2002)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kamta, G.L., Starace, A.F.: Anisotropy and magnetic field effects on the entanglement of a two qubit Heisenberg \(XY\) chain. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 107901 (2002)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ha, Z.N.C.: Quantum Many-Body Systems in One Dimension. World Scientific, Singapore (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    DiVincenzo, D.P., Bacon, D., Kempe, J., Burkard, G., Whaley, K.B.: Universal quantum computation with the exchange interaction. Nature 408, 339 (2000)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Loss, D., DiVincenzo, D.P.: Quantum computation with quantum dots. Phys. Rev. A 57, 120 (1998)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Imamoglu, A., Awschalom, D.D., Burkard, G., DiVincenzo, D.P., Loss, D., Sherwin, M., Small, A.: Quantum information processing using quantum dot spins and cavity QED. Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4204 (1999)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Raussendorf, R., Briegel, H.J.: A one-way quantum computer. Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5188 (2001)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Ye, E.J., Hu, Z.D., Wu, W.: Scaling of quantum Fisher information close to the quantum phase transition in the XY spin chain. Phys. B Condens. Matter 502, 151–154 (2016)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Prussing, J.E.: The principal minor test for semidefinite matrices. J. Guidance Control Dyn. 9, 121–122 (1986)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Slaoui, A., Daoud, M., Ahl Laamar, R.: The dynamics of local quantum uncertainty and trace distance discord for two-qubit \(X\) states under decoherence: a comparative study. Quantum Inf. Process. 17, 178 (2018)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Slaoui, A., Shaukat, M.I., Daoud, M., Ahl Laamara, R.: Universal evolution of non-classical correlations due to collective spontaneous emission. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 133, 413 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Kim, S., Li, L., Kumar, A., Wu, J.: Characterizing nonclassical correlations via local quantum Fisher information. Phys. Rev. A 97, 032326 (2018)ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Krishnamoorthy, A., Menon, D.: Matrix inversion using Cholesky decomposition. In: SPA, pp. 70–72. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.LPHE-MS, Faculty of SciencesMohammed V University of RabatRabatMorocco
  2. 2.Department of Physics, Faculty of SciencesUniversity Ibn TofailKenitraMorocco
  3. 3.Centre of Physics and Mathematics (CPM)Mohammed V University of RabatRabatMorocco

Personalised recommendations