# Quantum Computation, Complexity, and Many-Body ... - arXiv ?· Quantum Computation, Complexity, and…

Post on 14-Feb-2019

212 views

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

arX

iv:q

uant

-ph/

0512

209v

1 2

2 D

ec 2

005 Quantum Computation, Complexity, and

Many-Body Physics

Rolando D. Somma

Instituto Balseiro, S. C. de Bariloche, Argentina, and Los Alamos NationalLaboratory, Los Alamos, USA.

August 2005

Dr. Gerardo OrtizPhD Advisor

http://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0512209v1

2

To Janine and Isabel

Abstract

By taking advantage of the laws of physics it is possible to revolutionize the waywe communicate (transmit), process or even store information. It is now knownthat quantum computers, or computers built from quantum mechanical elements,provide new resources to solve certain problems and performcertain tasks moreefficiently than todays conventional computers. However,on the road to a com-plete understanding of the power of quantum computers thereare intermediatesteps that need to be addressed. The primary focus of this thesis is the under-standing of the possibilities and limitations of the quantum-physical world in theareas of quantum computation and quantum information processing.

First I investigate the simulation of quantum systems on a quantum computer(i.e., a quantum simulation) constructed of two-level quantum elements or qubits.For this purpose, I present algebraic mappings that allow one to efficiently ob-tain physical properties and compute correlation functions of fermionic, anyonic,and bosonic systems with such a computer. By studying the amount of resourcesrequired for a quantum simulation, I show that the complexity of preparing a quan-tum state which contains the desired information is crucialat the time of evalu-ating the advantages of having a quantum computer over a conventional one. Asa small-scale demonstration of the validity of these results, I show the simulationof a fermionic system using a liquid-state nuclear magneticresonance (NMR) de-vice.

Remarkably, the conclusions obtained in the area of quantumsimulations canbe extended to general quantum computations by means of the notion of gen-eralized entanglement. This is a generalization based on the idea that quantumentanglement (i.e., the existence of non-classical correlations) is a concept thatdepends on the accesible information, that is, relative to the observer. Then Ipresent a wide class of quantum computations that can be efficiently simulatedon a conventional computer and where quantum computers cannot be claimed tobe more powerful. The idea is that a quantum algorithm, performed by applying

ii

a restricted set of gates which do not create generalized entangled states relativeto small (polynomially-large) sets of observables, can be imitated using a similaramount of resources with a conventional computer. However,a similar statementcannot be obtained when generalized entangled states (relative to these sets) areinvolved, because this purely quantum phenomena cannot be easily reproducedby classical-information methods.

Finally, I show how these concepts developed from an information-theorypoint of view can be used to study other important problems inmany-body physics.To begin with, I exploit the notion of Lie-algebraic purity to identify and charac-terize the quantum phase transitions present in the Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick modeland the spin-1/2 anisotropic XY model in a transverse magnetic field. The resultsobtained show how generalized entanglement leads to usefultools for distinguish-ing between ordered and disordered phases in quantum systems. Moreover, I dis-cuss how the concept of general mean field hamiltonians naturally emerges fromthese considerations and show that these can be exactly diagonalized by using aconventional computer.

In brief, in this thesis I apply several topics developed in the context of quan-tum information theory to study the complexity of obtainingrelevant physicalproperties of quantum systems with a quantum computer, and to study differentphysical processes in quantum many-body systems.

Acknowledgements

Many people have contributed in one way or another to my PhD thesis. With-out them, this work would have been impossible. It is time then, to express mygratitude to each one who participated in this long journey.

I would first like to thank my family, starting with a special thanks to mywife Janine and our little miracle Isabel, for bringing happiness every morning,which allows me to enjoy and continue with this life. Also, Im very thankful tomy parents and siblings for their limitless support and for having provided andsustained the basis that guides me every day. Only God can explain how much Ilove everyone of them.

On the scientific side, I want to give special thanks to my PhD advisor andfriend, Dr. Gerardo Ortiz, for his dedication and for givingme the tools to realizethis work. His constant help, teachings, and his own personal passion for sciencehave been the main reasons for my achievements during this time as a PhD student.

Also, Im very thankful to everyone in the quantum information group at LosAlamos National Laboratory for sharing their knowledge andfor their dedication.They are the reason for many important results obtained in this thesis. In partic-ular, I want to thank my collaborators Howard Barnum, Many Knill, RaymondLaflamme, Camille Negrevergne, and Lorenza Viola, for theirhelp and contribu-tions. Throughout my years at Los Alamos, they have treated me as an equal as ascientist, something that is priceless.

In the same way, I want to thank my professors and administrators at the In-stituto Balseiro that, although most of my PhD studies were not performed inArgentina, they were a constant source of support. In particular, I want to thankDr. Armando A. Aligia for having helped me in many scientific and pedagogicalaspects of this thesis. Also, I want to thank Carlos Balseiro, Raul Barrachina,Manuel Caceres, Daniel Domnguez, Jim Gubernatis, Armando F. Guillermet,Karen Hallberg, Eduardo Jagla, Lisetta, Marcela Margutti,Hugo Montani andJuan Pablo Paz. Each one of them has contributed in one way or another to this

iv

work.Finally, I want to thank Andres, Seba, Sequi, the star team, and all my friends

from Buenos Aires and Bariloche, and the Ortiz, the Batistas, the Dalvits, theMachados, and every member of the Argentinean community in New Mexico.Through their support and sense of humor, we have entertained ourselves over theyears.

Contents

1 Introduction 1

2 Simulations of Physics with Quantum Computers 92.1 Models of Quantum Computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.1.1 The Conventional Model of Quantum Computation . . . . 112.1.2 Hamiltonian Evolutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172.1.3 Controlled Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2.2 Deterministic Quantum Algorithms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202.2.1 One-Ancilla Qubit Measurement Processes . . . . . . . . 212.2.2 Quantum Algorithms and Quantum Simulations . . . . . . 22

2.3 Quantum Simulations of Quantum Physics . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252.3.1 Simulations of Fermionic Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252.3.2 Simulations of Anyonic Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302.3.3 Simulations of Bosonic Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

2.4 Applications: The 2D fermionic Hubbard model . . . . . . . . .. 372.5 Quantum Algorithms: Efficiency and Errors . . . . . . . . . . . .392.6 Experimental Implementations of Quantum Algorithms . .. . . . 42

2.6.1 Liquid-State NMR Quantum Information Processor . . . .422.7 Applications: The Fano-Anderson Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46

2.7.1 Experimental Protocol and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 512.8 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

3 Quantum Entanglement as an Observer-Dependent Concept 593.1 Quantum Entanglement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63

3.1.1 Separability and von Neuman Entropy . . . . . . . . . . . 643.1.2 Mixed-State Entanglement and the Concurrence . . . . . 663.1.3 Measures of Quantum Entanglement . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

3.2 Generalized Entanglement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68

vi CONTENTS

3.2.1 Generalized Entanglement: Definition . . . . . . . . . . . 683.2.2 Generalized Entanglement and Lie Algebras . . . . . . . 693.2.3 Generalized Entanglement and Mixed States . . . . . . . 73

3.3 Relative Purity as a Measure of Entanglement in Quantum Systems 743.3.1 Two-Spin Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 743.3.2 N-Spin Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 783.3.3 Fermionic Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

3.4 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81

4 Generalized Entanglement as a Resource in Quantum Information 834.1 Quantum Entanglement and Quantum Information . . . . . . . .84

4.1.1 Quantum Cryptography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 844.1.2 Quantum Teleportation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86

4.2 Quantum Entanglement and Quantum Computation . . . . . . . .874.3 Efficient Classical Simulations of Quantum Physics . . . .. . . . 91

4.3.1 Higher Order Correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 954.4 Generalized Entanglement and Quantum Computation . . . .. . 97

4.4.1 Efficient Initial State Preparation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 984.5 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

5 Generalized Entanglement and Many-Body Physics 1015.1 Entanglement and Quantum Phase Transitions . . . . . . . . . .. 102

5.1.1 Lipkin-Meshkov-Glick Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1045.1.2 Anisotropic XY Model in a Transverse Magnetic Field . .110

5.2 General Mean-Field Hamiltonians

Recommended