PROOF: Quantum Fidelity with pure states

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship of quantum fidelity between two pure states in quantum mechanics, specifically exploring how to express this relationship mathematically. Participants are attempting to derive the expression for quantum fidelity, Tr(ρ1ρ2), and clarify the steps involved in the calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant states that the quantum fidelity between two pure states can be expressed as |⟨ψ1|ψ2⟩|^2 and seeks to show this is equivalent to Tr(ρ1ρ2).
  • Another participant suggests expressing both states in the same orthonormal basis to facilitate the calculations.
  • A participant expresses their findings after expressing the states in a basis and calculating |⟨ψ1|ψ2⟩|^2, leading to a summation of probabilities.
  • Another participant challenges the use of square roots in the expansion of the states, emphasizing that the coefficients are complex numbers.
  • There is a discussion about the trace operation and its properties, with participants providing insights on how to compute the trace correctly.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about their final result involving the trace operation, while another confirms the correctness of the final expression derived.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the mathematical expressions involved, but there remains uncertainty regarding specific steps in the calculations and the application of the trace operation. The discussion reflects multiple viewpoints on how to approach the problem, and no consensus is reached on all aspects of the derivation.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the correctness of their calculations, particularly regarding the application of the trace operation and the handling of complex coefficients. There are also unresolved questions about the assumptions made during the derivation.

Alex Dingo
Messages
6
Reaction score
1
Hi, I'm currently working on showing the relation of quantum fidelity:

The quantum “fidelity” between two pure states ρ1 = |ψ1⟩⟨ψ1| and ρ2 = |ψ2⟩⟨ψ2| is given by |⟨ψ1|ψ2⟩|^2.
Show that this quantity may be written as Tr(ρ1ρ2).

I've been following the wikipedia page on fidelity but can't understand it.

If I assume the statement is true and start from the Tr(ρ1ρ2) = Tr(|ψ1⟩⟨ψ1|ψ2⟩⟨ψ2|) I'm trying to find how I can reduce this, perhaps with summations to arrive at |⟨ψ1|ψ2⟩|^2 - can anyone suggest which direction to go in?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Try expressing both states in the same orthonormal basis.

Thanks
Bill
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DarMM
bhobba said:
Try expressing both states in the same orthonormal basis.

Thanks
Bill
Hi Bill,

If I express Ψ1=∑√(p(x))|x> and Ψ2=∑√(q(x))|x> such that they are both expressed in the basis of x and compute |⟨ψ1|ψ2⟩|^2 I find Is equal to ∑[√p(x)√q(x)]^2 <x|x> such that I am left with Σp(x)q(x) which is a summation of their probabilities over x. Can I then relate the relation that the sum of p(x) and p(x) is 1 to make the link between the final result of Tr(p1p2) or have I made a mistake?
Thanks,
Alex.
 
Alex Dingo said:
If I express Ψ1=∑√(p(x))|x> and Ψ2=∑√(q(x))|x> such that they are both expressed in the basis of x and compute |⟨ψ1|ψ2⟩|^2 I find Is equal to ∑[√p(x)√q(x)]^2 <x|x> such that I am left with Σp(x)q(x) which is a summation of their probabilities over x.
First, get rid of those square roots, which don't make any sense, since the expansion coefficients are complex numbers:
$$
\psi_1 = \sum_n p_n | n \rangle
$$
with ##p_n \in \mathbb{C}##.

After you have done that and calculated ##| \langle \psi_1 | \psi_2 \rangle |^2##, do it also for the trace of ##\rho_1 \rho_2## over the same basis.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: bhobba
DrClaude said:
First, get rid of those square roots, which don't make any sense, since the expansion coefficients are complex numbers:
$$
\psi_1 = \sum_n p_n | n \rangle
$$
with ##p_n \in \mathbb{C}##.

After you have done that and calculated ##| \langle \psi_1 | \psi_2 \rangle |^2##, do it also for the trace of ##\rho_1 \rho_2## over the same basis.
Hi DrCloud,

So the result for calculating ##| \langle \psi_1 | \psi_2 \rangle |^2## I found it equat to ##\Sigma p^2_n q^2_n ##. As for the calculation with the trace. I find
## Tr(\rho_1 \rho_2) = Tr(\langle n | \Sigma p^2_n |n\rangle \langle n | \Sigma q^2_n |n\rangle ##

From this point I can take the summations outside the trace and which leave ## \Sigma p^2_n q^2_n Tr( \langle n|n \rangle \langle n|n \rangle) ##
Although this final result with a number inside the trace I'm not sure I've done correctly.

Thanks,
Alex.
 
Alex Dingo said:
From this point I can take the summations outside the trace and which leave ## \Sigma p^2_n q^2_n Tr( \langle n|n \rangle \langle n|n \rangle) ##
Although this final result with a number inside the trace I'm not sure I've done correctly.
You seem to be holding on too long to the trace operation. Consider
$$
\mathrm{Tr}(\hat{A}) = \sum_n \langle n | \hat{A} | n \rangle
$$
 
DrClaude said:
You seem to be holding on too long to the trace operation. Consider
$$
\mathrm{Tr}(\hat{A}) = \sum_n \langle n | \hat{A} | n \rangle
$$

Hi,
Okay this makes more sense, I forgot about this relationship.

I have computed this with ##\hat{A} = p1p2##
I find that ## \mathrm{Tr}(p1p2)=\Sigma\langle n | p_n|n\rangle \langle n | p_n q_n |n \rangle \langle n| q_n | n \rangle ##
which reduces to ## \Sigma p_n^2 q_n^2 ## as desired ?
 
Alex Dingo said:
I find that ## \mathrm{Tr}(p1p2)=\Sigma\langle n | p_n|n\rangle \langle n | p_n q_n |n \rangle \langle n| q_n | n \rangle ##
I'm not sure how you got there (that is, I can't vouch that you did everything right), but the final result is correct.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K