0
$\begingroup$

I have an entangled state between Alice and Bob $|\psi\rangle_{AB}$ ( both Alice and Bob have states in Hiblert space of dimension $n$ ). Alice and Bob can only perform local meaurements. I assumed that POVM for measurements on the combined state will be of the form $E_A \otimes E_B$ where $E_A$ and $E_B$ ( both are operators on $n$ dimensional Hilbert space ) are local POVM's for Alice and Bob respectively . But the paper I am reading currently says the condition for measurement operators to be local is $[E_A,E_B]=0$ and here $E_A$ and $E_B$ are operators on $n^2$ dimensional Hilbert space. I can see my case is a specific case of the latter one but how does one explain this commuting condition for measurement operators to be local? Also can same analogy be extended to local unitary operations ?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The condition that $E_A$ and $E_B$ commute is a natural generalization of locality, but in general not the same. However, one can indeed do resource theory based on such a commutation relation. What paper are you reading? $\endgroup$ – Norbert Schuch Jun 23 '15 at 11:41
  • $\begingroup$ @NorbertSchuch arxiv.org/pdf/1303.3081v4.pdf here in the section "Self test" they have used this relation. $\endgroup$ – sashas Jun 23 '15 at 12:34
  • $\begingroup$ Where exactly? You are not being very specific. $\endgroup$ – Norbert Schuch Jun 23 '15 at 14:03
  • $\begingroup$ @NorbertSchuch sorry . Under the heading "4.2.3 Self-test of the singlet using the Mayers-Yao statist ics" ( on page 29 ) third line, it says "The locality of the measurement $[M_A,N_B]=0$ is assumed." $\endgroup$ – sashas Jun 23 '15 at 15:28
  • $\begingroup$ Locality of $M_A$ and $N_B$ certainly implies that $[M_A,N_B]=0$, so the latter is a valid property which can be used to derive properties of local measurements. Does this answer your question? $\endgroup$ – Norbert Schuch Jun 23 '15 at 15:32
1
$\begingroup$

If we consider local operators $M_A$ and $N_B$ acting on Alice's and Bob's part, respectively, then it holds that $[M_A,N_B]=0$, i.e., we can use this property in proofs involving local operations. Note that conversely, however, commutativity need not imply locality (to start with, there need not even be a tensor product structure).

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ one last doubt both $M_A$ and $N_B$ act on the hilbert space of the composite system as opposed to the tensor structure ( $m_a \otimes m_B$ ) where $m_a$ and $m_B$ both act on local hilbert spaces of alice and bob respectively. Am I right ? Is it that just $M_A=ma_a \otimes I$ and $M_B=I \otimes ma_b $ ( composite system is AB ) $\endgroup$ – sashas Jun 23 '15 at 17:19
  • $\begingroup$ @sasha Exactly, $M_A=m_A\otimes I$ and $M_B=I\otimes m_B$. It is however customary (though sloppy) to use $M_A$ both for the operator on $\mathcal H_A$ and $\mathcal H_A\otimes \mathcal H_B$. $\endgroup$ – Norbert Schuch Jun 23 '15 at 17:37

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.