Fidelity between a pure state and an arbitrary state

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of fidelity in quantum mechanics, specifically the fidelity between a pure state and an arbitrary state. The original poster attempts to derive the fidelity formula and expresses confusion regarding their calculations and expected results.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the derivation of the fidelity formula and question the validity of the original poster's method. Some suggest that the spectral decomposition of a projector is straightforward, while others express confusion about the nature of projectors and their properties.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the original poster's approach, noting that while the method may be confusing, it is not fundamentally incorrect. There is ongoing exploration of the properties of projectors and their relation to the fidelity calculation.

Contextual Notes

Participants discuss the definition of projectors and their mathematical properties, particularly in relation to density matrices and the conditions they must satisfy. There is a recognition of differing interpretations regarding the nature of certain operators in the context of quantum mechanics.

Emil_M
Messages
45
Reaction score
2
\

Homework Statement


Show that the Fidelity between one pure state [itex]|\Psi\rangle[/itex] and one arbitrary state [itex]\rho[/itex] is given by [itex]F(|\Psi\rangle , \rho)=\sqrt{\langle\Psi|\rho|\Psi\rangle}[/itex] .

Homework Equations


The quantum mechanical fidelity is defined as [itex] \begin{equation*}<br /> F(\rho,\sigma):= Tr{ \sqrt{\rho^{\frac{1}{2}} \sigma \rho^{\frac{1}{2}}}}<br /> \end{equation*}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution


The operator corresponding to [itex]|\Psi\rangle[/itex] is [itex]\sigma=|\Psi\rangle\langle\Psi|[/itex].
We can make use of the spectral decomposition of [itex]\sigma[/itex] in order to write
[itex] \begin{equation*}<br /> \sigma=\sum_{j=1}^N s_j |j\rangle\langle j|<br /> \end{equation*} [/itex]
It follows, that the Fidelity [itex]F(\sigma, \rho)[/itex] is given by
\begin{align*}
F(\sigma, \rho) & =Tr{\sqrt{\left(|\Psi\rangle\langle\Psi|\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}\rho\left(|\Psi\rangle\langle\Psi|\right)^{\frac{1}{2}}}} \\
&= Tr{\sqrt{|\Psi\rangle\langle\Psi|\rho|\Psi\rangle\langle\Psi|}}\\
&= Tr{\sqrt{\langle\Psi|\rho|\Psi\rangle\;|\Psi\rangle\langle\Psi|}}\\
&= Tr{\sqrt{\langle\Psi|\rho|\Psi\rangle\sum_{j=1}^N s_j |j\rangle\langle j|}}\\
&=\sqrt{\langle\Psi|\rho|\Psi\rangle} \; Tr \sum_{j=1}^N \sqrt{s_j} |j\rangle\langle j|\\
&=\sqrt{\langle\Psi|\rho|\Psi\rangle} \; \sum_{k,j=1}^N \sqrt{s_j} \langle k|j\rangle\langle j|k\rangle\\
&=\sqrt{\langle\Psi|\rho|\Psi\rangle} \; \sum_{j=1}^N \sqrt{s_j}
\end{align*}
This is not the expected result, so I have made a mistake somewhere along the way. I would be really thankful if somebody were to spot it!

Thanks in advance
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, the easiest way to go about doing it is to realize that
[tex]\sqrt{\langle \psi | \rho | \psi\rangle |\psi\rangle \langle \psi| } = \sqrt{\langle \psi | \rho | \psi\rangle} \sqrt{ |\psi\rangle \langle \psi| } = \sqrt{\langle \psi | \rho | \psi\rangle} |\psi\rangle \langle \psi|[/tex]
and so the trace becomes trivial.

Your method is confusing, but there isn't anything wrong with it. When you perform a spectral decomposition of a projector into its diagonal basis, well its just itself isn't it? So, all the coefficients are zero except for one which is unity. So, the summation in your final expression is indeed 1.
 
Thanks!
 
Fightfish said:
Well, the easiest way to go about doing it is to realize that
[tex]\sqrt{\langle \psi | \rho | \psi\rangle |\psi\rangle \langle \psi| } = \sqrt{\langle \psi | \rho | \psi\rangle} \sqrt{ |\psi\rangle \langle \psi| } = \sqrt{\langle \psi | \rho | \psi\rangle} |\psi\rangle \langle \psi|[/tex]
and so the trace becomes trivial.

Your method is confusing, but there isn't anything wrong with it. When you perform a spectral decomposition of a projector into its diagonal basis, well its just itself isn't it? So, all the coefficients are zero except for one which is unity. So, the summation in your final expression is indeed 1.

I still don't get it. Why is it a given that [itex]|\Psi\rangle \langle\Psi|[/itex] is a projector?

Thanks!
 
Well, any operator of the form [itex]\hat{P}_{\alpha} = |\alpha \rangle \langle \alpha |[/itex], when acted upon any state ket [itex]|\beta \rangle[/itex], yields the component of [itex]|\beta \rangle[/itex] along the "direction" of [itex]|\alpha \rangle[/itex]. So, the operator [itex]\hat{P}_{\alpha}[/itex] is said to project [itex]|\beta \rangle[/itex] into the "direction" of [itex]|\alpha\rangle[/itex], and that's why it is known as a projector.
 
Yes, but a projector has to respect the condition [itex]P^2=P[/itex]. And the density matrix corresponding to a general qubit, for example, [itex]|\Psi\rangle = a|0\rangle+b|1\rangle[/itex] is thus not a projector, is it?
 
Emil_M said:
Yes, but a projector has to respect the condition [itex]P^2=P[/itex]. And the density matrix corresponding to a general qubit, for example, [itex]|\Psi\rangle = a|0\rangle+b|1\rangle[/itex] is thus not a projector, is it?
[itex]|\Psi\rangle \langle \Psi | \Psi \rangle \langle \Psi | = ?[/itex]
 
right :)
Thanks for taking the time, don't know why I was so confused.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K