The entangling time with the spectral half-width of the interaction #
The interaction H of QSL.Qudit.arccos_le_entangling_time is only defined up to a multiple of the
identity: c • 1 = (c • 1) ⊗ 1 is a local term, and can be absorbed into the local control Aₖ.
Hence the bound arccos λ ≤ J · ∑ τₖ holds with J any bound of the shifted norm ‖H − c • 1‖,
c real. For H Hermitian with spectrum in [m, M] the choice c = (m + M) / 2 gives the
spectral half-width (M − m) / 2 (this spectral fact is taken as a hypothesis here, not proved).
For the two-qubit Heisenberg interaction H = XX + YY + ZZ (spectrum {1, −3}), H + 1 = 2 · SWAP,
so ‖H − (−1) • 1‖ = 2 instead of ‖H‖ = 3. The Bell vector then needs total time T ≥ π / 8.
This matches the Heisenberg entangling time π / 8 of Dür, Vidal, Cirac, Linden and Popescu; that
this time is achievable is their result and is not formalized here.
Main results #
QSL.Qudit.arccos_le_entangling_time_shift:arccos λ ≤ J · ∑ τₖwhenever‖H − c • 1‖ ≤ JQSL.Qudit.arccos_le_entangling_time_halfWidth: the spectral half-width versionQSL.Qudit.pi_div_four_le_entangling_time_shift: Bell vector,π / 4 ≤ J · ∑ τₖQSL.Qudit.pi_div_four_le_entangling_time_local,QSL.Qudit.pi_div_four_le_entangling_time_shift_local: the same when the target is(P ⊗ Q) · bellPairwithP, Qunitary (any gate locally equivalent to CNOT, e.g. IBM's ECR)QSL.Qudit.heisenberg_shift_norm:‖heisenberg − (−1) • 1‖ = 2QSL.Qudit.pi_div_eight_le_heisenberg_time: Bell vector under the Heisenberg interaction needs∑ τₖ ≥ π / 8
References #
- W. Dür, G. Vidal, J. I. Cirac, N. Linden, S. Popescu, Entanglement capabilities of nonlocal Hamiltonians, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 137901.
(C, shifted) Entangling-time bound with a shifted interaction. As arccos_le_entangling_time,
but with ‖H − c • 1‖ ≤ J for some real c in place of ‖H‖ ≤ J. The identity part of H is a
local term and is absorbed into the control.
(C, spectral half-width) If ‖H − ((m + M)/2) • 1‖ ≤ (M − m)/2 — which holds for Hermitian H
with all eigenvalues in [m, M]; this spectral fact is taken as a hypothesis — then
arccos λ ≤ ((M − m)/2) · ∑ τₖ. For the Heisenberg interaction XX + YY + ZZ (spectrum
{1, −3}) the half-width is 2, versus ‖H‖ = 3.
(D, shifted) Bell vector: with ‖H − c • 1‖ ≤ J, preparing (e_{i₀ j₀} + e_{i₁ j₁}) / √2 from
a unit product vector takes J · ∑ τₖ ≥ π / 4.
Targets locally equivalent to the Bell vector #
Local unitaries do not change the overlap bound with unit product vectors: if every unit
product vector has overlap at most lam with Φ, the same holds for (P ⊗ Q) Φ.
(D, local) Bell vector up to local unitaries: if the evolution maps a unit product vector to
(P ⊗ Q) · bellPair with P, Q unitary, then π / 4 ≤ J · ∑ τₖ.
This applies to every two-qubit gate locally equivalent to CNOT on the qubit subspace, e.g. IBM's
echoed cross-resonance gate ECR = (local) · CNOT · (local): such a gate maps some product state
to a local unitary applied to a Bell state, hence needs J · T ≥ π / 4. (The ECR matrix itself is
not formalized.)
(D, local, shifted) As pi_div_four_le_entangling_time_local, with ‖H − c • 1‖ ≤ J.
The two-qubit Heisenberg interaction #
‖XX + YY + ZZ − (−1) • 1‖ = 2 (the spectral half-width), whereas ‖XX + YY + ZZ‖ = 3.
Bell vector under the Heisenberg interaction with arbitrary local control (two qubits, no
ancilla): the total time is at least π / 8. Dür–Vidal–Cirac–Linden–Popescu (2001) show that
π / 8 is achievable for this interaction; only the lower bound is proved here.