4.2.4 A glance at quantum networks

By repeatedly using teleportation, we can communicate quantum bits between distant nodes. For example, suppose Alice, her donkey robot, and Bob are in the following situation:

Alice’s donkey robotAliceBob,\displaystyle\text{Alice's donkey robot}\;\longleftrightarrow\;\text{Alice}\;% \longleftrightarrow\;\text{Bob},

where each “\leftrightarrow” arrow indicates a maximally entangled state. That is, the joint state of our three protagonists is the following four-qubit state:

|Φ+|Φ+,\displaystyle\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle\otimes\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle,

where the middle two qubits belong to Alice – the first one is entangled with the robot and the second one with Bob.

Note that the donkey robot is not entangled with Bob directly! Nevertheless, if it had a quantum message to send to Bob then this could be done by running the teleportation procedure twice: first, we teleport the message from the donkey robot to Alice (consuming the first maximally entangled state) and subsequently from Alice to Bob (consuming the remaining maximally entangled state). This is similar to how, say, your mobile phone connects to a nearby base station, which in turn ‘repeats’ or ‘relays’ the signal to another mobile phone tower (and so forth). While quantum mechanically we cannot copy a qubit, due to the no cloning theorem (c.f. 4.1), we can still teleport it over long distances!

Entanglement is not only useful for teleportation but also for many other things. Is there also a way to use teleportation to create entanglement between Alice’s donkey robot and Bob (which they could then use for other purposes)?

Intuitively, it seems that Alice simply needs to teleport her first qubit (the one that is entangled with the donkey robot) to Bob. In Quirky, this would look as follows:

Here, we first create the two maximally entangled states and we then apply the same teleportation circuit as above (gray box). Intuitively, we might hope that this results in a maximally entangled state between the donkey robot and Bob. In the following homework, you can confirm that this is indeed the case.

Homework 4.3 (Teleporting an entangled qubit).

Confirm using Quirky that at the end of the circuit the donkey’s qubit and Bob’s qubit are in the maximally entangled state |Φ+\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle.

Hack.

A good way to verify that you have a given state |ψ\left|\psi\right\rangle, is to find a quantum operation that brings |ψ\left|\psi\right\rangle back to |0\left|0\right\rangle and then measure. If you then get 100%100\% for outcome 0, you know that you indeed had |ψ\left|\psi\right\rangle (this is because quantum operations are invertible, so whenever you know the output state of an operation there is only one possible input state). This is the same general strategy that we followed in the previous homework problem, and it generalizes to multiple qubits, too! Suppose that you have a quantum operation UU that sends some multi-qubit state |ψ\left|\psi\right\rangle back to |00\left|0\cdots 0\right\rangle. If you then get outcome 0 with certainty for each qubit, then the state you had before applying UU must have been state |ψ\left|\psi\right\rangle.

So in our case, we want to verify that the teleported state in the donkey’s and Bob’s qubit is:

|Φ+=12(|00+|11).\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\left|00\right\rangle+% \left|11\right\rangle\right).

To do so, we need to operate the state back to |00\left|00\right\rangle. The state |Φ+\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle was created by

|Φ+=CNOT12(HI)|00\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle=\mathrm{CNOT}_{1\to 2}(H\otimes I)\left|00\right\rangle

Therefore we need to first invert CNOT12\mathrm{CNOT}_{1\to 2} and then (HI)(H\otimes I). But both of these operations invert themselves! Let us check this. If we first apply a CNOT\mathrm{CNOT} gate where Bob’s qubit is the control qubit and the donkey’s qubit is the target qubit, we obtain the following state:

12(|00+|10)=12(|0+|1)|0=|+|0\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\left|00\right\rangle+\left|10\right\rangle\right)=% \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\left|0\right\rangle+\left|1\right\rangle\right)% \otimes\left|0\right\rangle=\left|+\right\rangle\otimes\left|0\right\rangle

So, if Bob can now apply a Hadamard gate to his qubit, then Bob’s and the donkey’s qubits end up in the state |00\left|00\right\rangle. Measuring both qubits (jointly) will now result in a measurement outcome of 0 with 100%100\%, which we can check with Quirky. This is done by the circuit below, where we added the final CNOT\mathrm{CNOT}, HH and measurements that we talked about above:

[Uncaptioned image]

Indeed, we see that both measurement outcomes are 0 with probability 100%, indicating that the state |Φ+\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle was indeed prepared successfully.


Alternatively, you could also look at the probabilities of joint measurement outcomes, as in the following circuit (we swapped the second and the fourth qubit so that the two qubits of interst are next to each other):

[Uncaptioned image]

We see that the outcome [00][00] arises with 100% probability.

Note that, a priori, these are two different test, because in the first one we are looking at the probabilities of the individual measurement outcomes, whereas in the second test we are looking at the probability distribution of both outcomes at the same time. However, the two tests are completely equivalent (meaning that you can use either of them to determine if the state is |00\left|00\right\rangle. This is because if pp is a probability distribution of two bits such that measuring the first bit of pp always gives 0 and measuring the second bit of pp also always gives 0, then the probability distribution must be p=[00]p=[00] (this is very intuitive – as soon as there is another term there would be some probability of outcome 1 in either the first or the second bit).


Is there an easier way to solve this problem? Some of you may have tried to put the measurements and probability boxes directly after the teleportation circuit, without applying any additional quantum operations. For example, you may have tried simply measuring qubits 1 and 4 individually. However, this provides very little information (in particular, this does not even tell you whether there are correlations between the outcomes or not). This is illustrated in the following figure:

[Uncaptioned image]

Here, qubits 1 and 2 are in the state |+|+=12(|00+|01+|10+|11)\left|+\right\rangle\otimes\left|+\right\rangle=\frac{1}{2}(\left|00\right% \rangle+\left|01\right\rangle+\left|10\right\rangle+\left|11\right\rangle), while qubits 3 and 4 are in the state |Φ+=12(|00+|11)\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|00\right\rangle+\left|11% \right\rangle). These are very different states – one is maximally entangled, while the other is a product state! But the figure shows that if we only look at the probabilities of single-qubit measurement outcomes then in each case we get two 50%50\% boxes. So simply measuring the individual qubits is not a good strategy.

We can do somewhat better by looking at the joint probabilities of measurement outcomes:

[Uncaptioned image]

In this case, we can see a difference between |+|+\left|+\right\rangle\otimes\left|+\right\rangle and |Φ+\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle. Indeed, for the first state, all four outcomes [00][00], [01][01], [10][10], and [11][11] are equally likely, while for the second state we only get [00][00] or [11][11] with equal probability. However, this does still not confirm that the state was |Φ+\left|\Phi^{+}\right\rangle! Indeed, the state could just as well have been |Φ=12(|00|11)\left|\Phi^{-}\right\rangle=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(\left|00\right\rangle-\left|11% \right\rangle), which gives the same probabilities:

[Uncaptioned image]

Indeed, all you know after the looking at the joint probabilities is that the state is either |Φ+\left|\Phi+\right\rangle or |Φ\left|\Phi^{-}\right\rangle. In order to distinguish between these two cases we first have to apply some unitary, and this is exactly what is achieved by the solution that we discussed above. Note that this is similar to the discussion in Section 2.5.1 and in particular 2.6.

In the same way, we can use teleportation to create entanglement between more and more distant nodes. E.g., suppose we are in the following situation:

Alice’s donkey robotAliceBobBob’s squirrel robot.\displaystyle\text{Alice's donkey robot}\;\longleftrightarrow\;\text{Alice}\;% \longleftrightarrow\;\text{Bob}\;\longleftrightarrow\;\text{Bob's squirrel % robot}.

If Alice first teleports her first qubit to Bob and Bob subsequently teleports his first qubit to his squirrel robot, this results in a maximally entangled state between the two robots. Let’s hope that the robots only use this entanglement for benevolent purposes!

Establishing entanglement over long distances will be an important functionality once we try to connect quantum computers in a small network or, dreaming boldly, in a future ‘quantum internet’. Several of us are already thinking hard how to realize this in practice and how to best use long-distance entanglement for interesting applications.