More communication with less entanglement

  • Pankaj Agrawal
  • Satyabrata Adhikari
  • Sumit Nandi
Regular Article


We exhibit the intriguing phenomena of “Less is More” using a set of multipartite entangled states. We consider the quantum communication protocols for the exact teleportation, superdense coding, and quantum key distribution. We find that sometimes less entanglement is more useful. To understand this phenomena we obtain a condition that a resource state must satisfy to communicate a n-qubit pure state which has m terms. We find that an appropriate partition of the resource state should have a von-Neumann entropy of log2 m. Furthermore, it is shown that some states may be suitable for exact superdense coding, but not for exact teleportation.

Graphical abstract


Quantum Information 


  1. 1.
    C. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crepeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, W.K. Wooters, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895 (1993)CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    C.H. Bennett, S. Wiesner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2881 (1992)CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    M. Murao, M.B. Plenio, V. Vedral, Phys. Rev. A 61, 032311 (2000)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    M. Hillery, V. Buzek, A. Berthiaume, Phys. Rev. A 59, 1829 (1999)CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    R. Cleve, D. Gottesman, H.K. Lo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 648 (1999)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    C.H. Bennett, G. Brassard, in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing, Bangalore, India (IEEE, New York, 1984), p. 175Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    A.K. Ekert, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991)CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    N. Gisin, G. Ribordy, W. Tittel, H. Zbinden, Rev. Mod. Phys. 74, 145 (2002)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, K. Horodecki, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009)CrossRefADSMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    G. Gour, N.R. Wallach, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 060502 (2013)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    S.S. Sharma, N.K. Sharma, Phys. Rev. A 85, 042315 (2012)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    J-L. Li, C-F. Qiao, J. Phys. A 46, 075301 (2013)CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    F. Verstreate, J. Dehaene, B. De Moor, H. Verschelde, Phys. Rev. A 65, 052112 (2002)CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    P. Agrawal, A. Pati, Phys. Rev. A 74, 062320 (2006)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. Agrawal, B. Pradhan, J. Phys. A 43, 235302 (2010)CrossRefADSMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. Eberherd, Phys. Rev. A 47, R747 (1993)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Acin, T. Durt, N. Gisin, J.I. Latorre, Phys. Rev. A 65, 052325 (2002)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    H.J. Briegel, R. Raussendorf, Phy. Rev. Lett. 86, 910 (2001)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    B. Pradhan, P. Agrawal, A. Pati, arxiv e-prints quant-ph/0705.1917
  20. 20.
    B. Pradhan, P. Agrawal, A. Pati, arxiv e-prints quant-ph/0805.2651
  21. 21.
    S. Mozes, J. Oppenheim, B. Reznik, Phys. Rev. A 71, 012311 (2005)CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© EDP Sciences, SIF, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Pankaj Agrawal
    • 1
  • Satyabrata Adhikari
    • 1
  • Sumit Nandi
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Physics, Sainik School PostBhubaneswarIndia

Personalised recommendations