How to calculate density matrix for the GHZ state

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the calculation of the density matrix for the Greenberger-Horne-Zeilinger (GHZ) state, focusing on both the full density matrix and its reduced form when the system is divided into subsystems. Participants explore the mathematical representation of the GHZ state and the implications of its density matrix in quantum mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents the GHZ state and its corresponding density matrix, detailing the transition from the state vector to the density matrix representation.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of a reduced density matrix by separating the Hilbert space into two subsystems, GHZA and GHZBC, and provides a specific form of the reduced density matrix.
  • Some participants express confusion regarding the interpretation of the reduced density matrix and how it relates to the original density matrix, particularly in terms of probabilities and interference.
  • There is a discussion about the correct application of the Kronecker product in the context of constructing the density matrix for the subsystems, with one participant identifying a mistake in the order of the matrices used in the product.
  • Participants seek clarification on how to validate the decomposition of the density matrix into subsystems and the reasoning behind associating specific terms with subsystem A.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the mathematical representation of the GHZ state and its density matrix, but there is ongoing debate and confusion regarding the interpretation and calculation of the reduced density matrix, with no consensus reached on some aspects of the decomposition process.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations in the discussion regarding the assumptions made about the subsystems and the interpretation of the density matrices, as well as unresolved steps in the mathematical derivations presented.

Agrippa
Messages
77
Reaction score
10
The GHZ state is:

[itex]|\psi> = \frac{|000> + |111>}{\sqrt2}[/itex]

To calculate density matrix we go from:

[itex]GHZ = \frac{1}{2}(|000> + |111>)(<000| + <111|)[/itex]
[itex]GHZ = \frac{1}{2}( |000><000| + |111><111| + |111><000| + |000><111|)[/itex]

To:

[itex]GHZ<br /> = 1/2[<br /> \left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> +<br /> \left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> +<br /> \left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> +<br /> \left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> <br /> ][/itex]

And finally to:

[itex] GHZ = 1/2\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)[/itex]

But I see another author (p2) separates the Hilbert space into two subsystems GHZA⊗GHZBC and gets a "reduced" density matrix:

[itex] GHZ_A⊗GHZ_{BC} = 1/4\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)[/itex]

Can anyone explain what this final matrix represents, and how one calculates it?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
That density matrix represents the mixed state:
[itex]\frac{1}{4}\big(|0,0,0\rangle\langle 0,0,0|+|0,1,1\rangle\langle 0,1,1|+|1,0,0\rangle\langle 1,0,0|+|1,1,1\rangle\langle 1,1,1|\big)[/itex]
or more simply:
[itex]\frac{1}{4}\big(|0\rangle\langle 0|+|1\rangle\langle 1|\big)\otimes\big(|0,0\rangle\langle 0,0|+|1,1\rangle\langle 1,1|\big)[/itex]
To figure that out, system [itex]A[/itex] separates the density matrix into four equal square blocks (of size 4x4)
Of each block, system [itex]B[/itex] separates the density matrix into four equal square sub-blocks (of size 2x2)
Of each sublock, the state of system [itex]C[/itex] associated to those particular amplitudes of A and B are given.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Agrippa
jfizzix said:
That density matrix represents the mixed state:
[itex]\frac{1}{4}\big(|0,0,0\rangle\langle 0,0,0|+|0,1,1\rangle\langle 0,1,1|+|1,0,0\rangle\langle 1,0,0|+|1,1,1\rangle\langle 1,1,1|\big)[/itex]
Thanks. I can (roughly, without yet drawing it up) see how you've constructed this expression from the final matrix I drew up.
jfizzix said:
or more simply:
[itex]\frac{1}{4}\big(|0\rangle\langle 0|+|1\rangle\langle 1|\big)\otimes\big(|0,0\rangle\langle 0,0|+|1,1\rangle\langle 1,1|\big)[/itex]
Hmmm, I'm trying to work through this equation but am getting the wrong result:
[itex] 1/4\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> \otimes<br /> 1/4\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> = 1/4\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)[/itex]
But perhaps I'm just making a simple mistake somewhere. At least, I can kind of see what you've done: you've tried to find a density matrix that corresponds to system A, and a density matrix corresponding to system BC, such that putting them together (##\otimes##) gives you the final matrix from my first post.
jfizzix said:
To figure that out, system [itex]A[/itex] separates the density matrix into four equal square blocks (of size 4x4)
Of each block, system [itex]B[/itex] separates the density matrix into four equal square sub-blocks (of size 2x2)
Of each sublock, the state of system [itex]C[/itex] associated to those particular amplitudes of A and B are given.
Unfortunately I don't quite follow you here. In particular, the talk of systems A and B separating the matrix into blocks, and the talk of the state of C being given (but not A or B (or A versus BC)?). Does it relate in some way to the calculation I just made above?
My main confusion is this: take the original density matrix for the pure state. I understand that the diagonal terms represent probabilities for measurement outcomes: 0.5 and 0.5. I also understand (to a lesser degree) that the off-diagonal terms represent the system's ability to exhibit interference. So the density matrix for a pure state like GHZ has a clear interpretation. But how does one interpret the "reduced" density matrix for GHZA⊗GHZBC?
 
Agrippa said:
Hmmm, I'm trying to work through this equation but am getting the wrong result:
[itex] 1/4\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> \otimes<br /> 1/4\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> = 1/4\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)[/itex]
But perhaps I'm just making a simple mistake somewhere.

It is a simple mistake, easily rectified.
What's here the kronecker product in reverse order. If [itex]X[/itex] is the first matrix you have here, and [itex]Y[/itex] is the second matrix, then to get [itex]X\otimes Y[/itex], you should make a big matrix out of (in this case 4) copies of [itex]Y[/itex], and then multiply each copy of [itex]Y[/itex] by the corresponding entry in [itex]X[/itex].
It looks like that you've done instead is make a big matrix out of... 16 copies of [itex]X[/itex], and then multiplied them by the corresponding entries of [itex]Y[/itex].
In short, you've found [itex]Y\otimes X[/itex] instead of [itex]X\otimes Y[/itex].
 
jfizzix said:
It is a simple mistake, easily rectified.
What's here the kronecker product in reverse order. If [itex]X[/itex] is the first matrix you have here, and [itex]Y[/itex] is the second matrix, then to get [itex]X\otimes Y[/itex], you should make a big matrix out of (in this case 4) copies of [itex]Y[/itex], and then multiply each copy of [itex]Y[/itex] by the corresponding entry in [itex]X[/itex].
It looks like that you've done instead is make a big matrix out of... 16 copies of [itex]X[/itex], and then multiplied them by the corresponding entries of [itex]Y[/itex].
In short, you've found [itex]Y\otimes X[/itex] instead of [itex]X\otimes Y[/itex].
Yes I see the mistake now, thanks. What I still don't understand is the relationship between original density matrix and the reduced density matrix. In particular, we know that the density matrix of the GHZ state is:
[itex]\frac{1}{2}( |000><000| + |111><111| + |111><000| + |000><111|)[/itex]
We now want to break the system down into two systems (A and BC). But how do we know that this:
[itex]\frac{1}{4}\big(|0\rangle\langle 0|+|1\rangle\langle 1|\big)\otimes\big(|0,0\rangle\langle 0,0|+|1,1\rangle\langle 1,1|\big)[/itex]
is a valid way to decompose the system? Why, for example, do we associate ##\frac{1}{4}\big(|0\rangle\langle 0|+|1\rangle\langle 1|\big)## with subsystem A? How do we know that this expression in any way represents subsystem A?
 
Agrippa said:
Yes I see the mistake now, thanks. What I still don't understand is the relationship between original density matrix and the reduced density matrix. In particular, we know that the density matrix of the GHZ state is:
[itex]\frac{1}{2}( |000><000| + |111><111| + |111><000| + |000><111|)[/itex]
We now want to break the system down into two systems (A and BC). But how do we know that this:
[itex]\frac{1}{4}\big(|0\rangle\langle 0|+|1\rangle\langle 1|\big)\otimes\big(|0,0\rangle\langle 0,0|+|1,1\rangle\langle 1,1|\big)[/itex]
is a valid way to decompose the system? Why, for example, do we associate ##\frac{1}{4}\big(|0\rangle\langle 0|+|1\rangle\langle 1|\big)## with subsystem A? How do we know that this expression in any way represents subsystem A?

The product
[itex]\frac{1}{4}\big(|0\rangle\langle 0|+|1\rangle\langle 1|\big)\otimes\big(|0,0\rangle\langle 0,0|+|1,1\rangle\langle 1,1|\big)[/itex]

is not a valid decomposition of the GHZ state:
[itex]\frac{1}{2}( |000><000| + |111><111| + |111><000| + |000><111|)[/itex]

The GHZ state is not separable into such a product or any other product. It's about as entangled as three-particle spin states get.

If one were to measure particle A of the GHZ state (in the 0/1 basis), the state one would get as a result would be:
[itex]\frac{1}{2}\big(|0\rangle\langle 0|\otimes|0,0\rangle\langle 0,0|+|1\rangle\langle 1|\otimes |1,1\rangle\langle 1,1|\big)[/itex]
 
jfizzix said:
The GHZ state is not separable into such a product or any other product. It's about as entangled as three-particle spin states get.
But in decoherence theory, isn't it standard to separate an entangled state into system state and environment state? I thought that something like that must be going on here. For example, I thought that GHZA⊗GHZBC amounted to something like treating systems B&C as the environment. Is that not right? I'm trying to figure out how to calculate the (reduced) density matrix called 'GHZA⊗GHZBC' from just the density matrix of the GHZ state.

(In case it helps, I'm ultimately trying to understand a particular definition of (integrated) information of a quantum state (see e.g. page 2), which is calculated via a function of the density matrix of the state and the reduced density matrices of its decompositions.)

jfizzix said:
If one were to measure particle A of the GHZ state (in the 0/1 basis), the state one would get as a result would be:
[itex]\frac{1}{2}\big(|0\rangle\langle 0|\otimes|0,0\rangle\langle 0,0|+|1\rangle\langle 1|\otimes |1,1\rangle\langle 1,1|\big)[/itex]
That's useful, thanks. I've calculated it as follows:
[itex] 1/2\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> \otimes<br /> 1/2\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> +<br /> 1/2\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> \otimes<br /> 1/2\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)<br /> = 1/2\left( \begin{array}{cc}<br /> 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\<br /> 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1\\<br /> \end{array} \right)[/itex]
I interpret the diagonal values as representing probabilities (0.5 chance for |000> and 0.5 chance for |111>) and the off-diagonal values as capacity for interference, which is zero given that we now have an eigenstate (either |000> or |111>).
But then I wonder what the two additional 1's on the diagonal of GHZA⊗GHZBC represent; and why the diagonal contains all ones in the case of GHZA⊗GHZB⊗GHZC = I/8.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
894