Search

Certifying whether an arbitrary quantum system is entangled or not, is, in general, an NP-hard problem. Though various necessary and sufficient conditions have already been explored in this regard for lower dimensional systems, it is hard to extend them to higher dimensions. Recently, an ensemble bagging and convex hull approximation (CHA) approach (together, BCHA) was proposed and it strongly suggests employing a machine learning technique for the separability-entanglement classification problem. However, BCHA does only incorporate the balanced dataset for classification tasks which results in lower average accuracy. In order to solve the data imbalance problem in the present literature, an exploration of the Boosting technique has been carried out, and a trade-off between the Boosting and Bagging-based ensemble classifier is explored for quantum separability problems. For the two-qubit and two-qutrit quantum systems, the pros and cons of the proposed random under-sampling boost CHA (RUSBCHA) for the quantum separability problem are compared with the state-of-the-art CHA and BCHA approaches. As the data is highly unbalanced, performance measures such as overall accuracy, average accuracy, F-measure, and G-mean are evaluated for a fair comparison. The outcomes suggest that RUSBCHA is an alternative to the BCHA approach. Also, for several cases, performance improvements are observed for RUSBCHA since the data is imbalanced., Comment: Comments are welcome

Quantum measurement not only can destroy coherence but also can create it. Here, we estimate the maximum amount of coherence, one can create under a complete non-selective measurement process. For our analysis, we consider projective as well as POVM measurements. Based on our observations, we characterize the measurement processes into two categories, namely, the measurements with the ability to induce coherence and the ones without this ability. Our findings also suggest that the more POVM elements present in a measurement that acts on the quantum system, the less will be its coherence creating ability. We also introduce the notion of raw coherence in the POVMs that helps to create quantum coherence. Finally, we find a trade-off relation between the coherence creation, entanglement generation between system and apparatus, and the mixedness of the system in a general measurement setup., Comment: 8 pages, 4 figures, updated manuscript, and one new author, Gautam Sharma, added

We address the question: Given an arbitrary initial state and a general physical interaction what is the minimum time for reaching a target entangled state? We show that the minimum time is inversely proportional to the quantum mechanical uncertainty in the non-local Hamiltonian. We find that the presence of initial entanglement helps to minimize the waiting time. Furthermore, we find that in a bi-local rotating frame the entangling capability is actually a geometric quantity. We give an universal bound for the time average of entanglement rate for general quantum systems. The time average of entanglement rate does not depend on the particular Hamiltonian, rather on the fluctuation in the Hamiltonian. There can be infinite number of nonlocal Hamiltonians which may give same average entanglement rate. We also prove a composition law for minimum time when the system evolves under a composite Hamiltonian., Comment: Latex, 9 pages, no figs

The universal quantum work relation connects a functional of an arbitrary observable averaged over the forward process to the free energy difference and another functional averaged over the time-reversed process. Here, we ask the question if the system is driven out of equilibrium by a different Hamiltonian rather than the original one during the forward process and similarly during the reversed process then how accurate is the quantum work relation. We present an inequality that must be satisfied when the system is driven out by such a trial Hamiltonian. This also answers the issue of accuracy of the Jarzynski relation with a trial Hamiltonian. We have shown that the correction term can be expressed as the averages of the difference operator between the accurate and trial Hamiltonians. This leads to a generalized version of the Bogoliubov inequality for the free energy differences., Comment: Latex file, 10 pages, no figs