|
|
|
Effects of classical random external field on the dynamics of entanglement in a four-qubit system |
| Edwige Carole Fosso1,2, Fridolin Tchangnwa Nya2, Lionel Tenemeza Kenfack1, and Martin Tchoffo1,3,† |
1 Research Unit of Condensed Matter, Electronic and Signal Processing, Department of Physics, Dschang School of Sciences and Technology, University of Dschang, PO Box:67 Dschang, Cameroon;
2 Material Science Research Group, Physics Laboratory, Department of Physics, Post Graduate School, University of Maroua, PO Box:814 Maroua, Cameroon;
3 Centre d'Etudes et de Recherches en Agronomie et en Biodiversite, Faculte d'Agronomie et des Sciences Agricoles, Universite de Dschang, Cameroun |
|
|
|
|
Abstract We investigate the dynamics of entanglement through negativity and witness operators in a system of four non-interacting qubits driven by a classical phase noisy laser characterized by a classical random external field (CREF). The qubits are initially prepared in the GHZ-type and W-type states and interact with the CREF in two different qubit-field configurations, namely, common environment and independent environments in which the cases of equal and different field phase probabilities are distinguished. We find that entanglement exhibits different decaying behavior, depending on the input states of the qubits, the qubit-field coupling configuration, and field phase probabilities. On the one hand, we demonstrate that the coupling of the qubits in a common environment is an alternative and more efficient strategy to completely shield the system from the detrimental impacts of the decoherence process induced by a CREF, independent of the input state and the field phase probabilities considered. Also, we show that GHZ-type states have strong dynamics under CREF as compared to W-type states. On the other hand, we demonstrate that in the model investigated the system robustness's can be greatly improved by increasing the number of qubits constituting the system.
|
Received: 09 April 2021
Revised: 21 May 2021
Accepted manuscript online: 16 June 2021
|
|
PACS:
|
03.67.Mn
|
(Entanglement measures, witnesses, and other characterizations)
|
|
Corresponding Authors:
Martin Tchoffo
E-mail: mtchoffo2000@yahoo.fr
|
Cite this article:
Edwige Carole Fosso, Fridolin Tchangnwa Nya, Lionel Tenemeza Kenfack, and Martin Tchoffo Effects of classical random external field on the dynamics of entanglement in a four-qubit system 2021 Chin. Phys. B 30 110310
|
[1] Vedral V 2002 Rev. Mod. Phys. 74 197
[2] Uman K, Rehman J Ur and Hyundong S 2020 Sci. Rep. 10 1
[3] Esteve D, Raimond J M and Dalibard J 2004 Quantum entanglement and information processing: lecture notes of the Les Houches Summer School 2003 (Elsevier)
[4] Timpson C G 2004 arXiv: 0412063 [quant-ph]
[5] Kenfack L T, Tchoffo M and Fai L C 2017 Euro. Phys. J. Plus 132 91
[6] Korolkova N and Leuchs G 2019 Reports on Progress in Physics 82 056001
[7] Einstein A, Podolsky B and Rosen N 1935 Phys. Rev. 47 777
[8] Schrodinger E 1935 Naturwissenschaften 23 1
[9] Gisin N, Ribordy G, Tittel W and Zbinden H 2002 Rev. Mod. Phys. 74 145
[10] Bennett C H and DiVincenzo D P 2000 Nature 404 247
[11] Xie C, Liu Y, Xing H, Chen J and Zhang Z 2015 Quantum Inf. Process. 14 653
[12] Murao M, Jonathan D, Plenio M B and Vedral V 1999 Phys. Rev. A. 59 156
[13] Ollivier H and Zurek W H 2001 Phys. Rev. Lett. 88 017901
[14] Werlang T and Rigolin G 2010 Phys. Rev. A 81 044101
[15] Werlang T, Trippe C, Ribeiro G A P and Rigolin G 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 105 095702
[16] Li Y C and Lin H Q 2011 Phys. Rev. A 83 052323
[17] Mazzola L, Piilo J and Maniscalo S 2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 200401
[18] Vasile R, Olivares S, Paris M G A and Maniscalco S 2009 Phys. Rev. A 80 062324
[19] Paz J P and Roncaglia A J 2008 Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 220401
[20] Nielsen M A and Chuang I 2002 Quantum computation and quantum information (American Association of Physics Teachers)
[21] Cao Y, Romero J, Olson J P, et al. 2019 Chem. Rev. 119 10856
[22] Ma X S, Liu G S and Wang A M 2010 Commun. Theor. Phys. 54 79
[23] Kenfack L T, Tchoffo M, Jipdi M N, Fuoukeng G C and Fai L C 2018 J. Phys. Commun. 2 055011
[24] Franco R L, Bellomo B, Andersson E and Compagno G 2012 Phys. Rev. A. 85 032318
[25] Kenfack L T, Tchoffo M and Fai L C 2019 Int. J. Theor. Phys. 58 4278
[26] Kenfack L T, Tchoffo M, Fouokeng G C and Fai L C 2017 Int. J. Quant. Inf. 15 1750038
[27] Kenfack L T, Tchoffo M, Fouokeng G C and Fai L C 2018 Quantum Inf. Process. 17 1
[28] Guo Y, Fang M, Zhang S and Liu X 2015 Phys. Scr. 90 035103
[29] Metwally N, Eleuch H and Obada A S 2016 Laser Phys. Lett. 13 105206
[30] Weinstein Y S 2009 Phys. Rev. A 79 012318
[31] Mazzola L, Maniscalco S, Piilo J, Suominen K A, and Garraway B M 2009 Phys. Rev. A 79 042302
[32] Beggi A, Buscemi F and Bordone P 2016 Quantum Inf. Process. 15 3711
[33] Wei J L, Li X L, Zhang X Z and Guo J L 2016 Quant. Inf. Process. 15 2425
[34] Kenfack L T, Tchoffo M, Fai L C and Fouokeng G C 2017 Physica B 511 123
[35] Carvacho G, Graffitti F, DAmbrosio V, Hiesmayr B C and Sciarrino F 2017 Scientific reports 7 1
[36] Reusch A, Sperling J and Vogel W 2015 Phys. Rev. A. 91 042324
[37] Guhne O and Tóth G 2009 Physics Reports 474 1 |
| No Suggested Reading articles found! |
|
|
Viewed |
|
|
|
Full text
|
|
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
|
Cited |
|
|
|
|
Altmetric
|
|
blogs
Facebook pages
Wikipedia page
Google+ users
|
Online attention
Altmetric calculates a score based on the online attention an article receives. Each coloured thread in the circle represents a different type of online attention. The number in the centre is the Altmetric score. Social media and mainstream news media are the main sources that calculate the score. Reference managers such as Mendeley are also tracked but do not contribute to the score. Older articles often score higher because they have had more time to get noticed. To account for this, Altmetric has included the context data for other articles of a similar age.
View more on Altmetrics
|
|
|
