Remarks on Conjugate Channels

Let () =

k
F
k
F

k
be a quantum channel. The Stinespring/Lindblad
representation of is equivalent to the following. Let
F() =

jk
[e
j
)e
k
[F
j
F

k
(1)
be the block matrix with blocks F
j
F

k
. Then () = Tr
1
F(). One can
dene the reverse or conjugate channel as

R
() = Tr
2
F() =

jk
[e
j
)e
k
[ Tr F
j
F

k
. (2)
This is equivalent to the denition given by Matsumoto, and allows one to
prove several useful results.
Kraus operators: First, suppose that F
k
=

m
v
km
G
m
with V V

= I. (We
do not require V to be unitary, but allow the possibility of a partial isometry
to include Kraus representations with dierent numbers of operators.) Then
() =

m
G
m
G

m
is another Kraus representation, and
Tr
2
F() = V [Tr
2
G()]V

. (3)
This gives

R
F
() = V [
R
G
()]V

=
_

V

R
G
_
() (4)
where
V
() = V V

. Thus, the eect of using a dierent Kraus represen-

tation is simply composition with conjugation by a partial isometry.
EBT maps: Recall that an EBT map can be written using Kraus operators
F
k
= [x
k
)w
k
[ with rank one so that
() =

k
[x
k
)x
k
[w
k
, w
k
), (5)
and

k
|x
k
|[w
k
)w
k
[ = I. Then
F() =

jk
[e
j
)e
k
[ [x
j
)x
k
[ w
j
, w
k
) (6)
1
Then

R
() =

jk
[e
j
)e
k
[ x
j
, x
k
) w
j
, w
k
) = X W

(7)
where denotes the Hadamard product, X is the matrix with elements
x
j
, x
k
) and W

the matrix with elements w

j
, w
k
). When the w
k
form
an orthonormal basis, is an extreme CQ channel and W

is the usual ma-

trix representative of in the O.N. basis w
k
so that
R
() = X . King
[] has shown that this implies that
R
has simultaneously diagonal Kraus
operators. Thus, the conjugate of an extreme CQ channel is a diagonal
channel. When the x
k
are O.N. so that x
j
, x
k
) =
jk
, the channel is QC and

R
() =

j
[e
j
)e
j
[ w
j
, w
j
) is also a QC channel.
The conjugate of a general EBT channel can always be written as a
Hadamard product as in (7), but with a non-standard representative W

.
An equivalent statement is that
R
() can be written with simultaneously
diagonal Kraus in a pair of bases of which only one need be O.N. More
precisely, the Kraus operators of the conjugate of an EBT map can be written
in the form
F
j
=

m
c
mj
[f
m
)v
m
[ (8)
with f
m
O.N. and v
m
a set of vectors which do not depend upon j. To see
that (7) has Kraus operators of the form (8), it suces to swtich j m and
choose c
jm
such that CC

= x
j
, x
k
).
Conversely, suppose that the Kraus operators of a map have the form
(8). Then
F() =

jk

mn
[e
j
)e
k
[ c
mj
c
nk
[f
m
)f
n
[ v
m
, v
n
) (9)
and

R
() =

jk

m
[e
j
)e
k
[c
mj
c
mk
v
m
, v
m
) (10)
= [
m
)
m
[v
m
, v
m
) (11)
where [
m
) =

j
c
mj
[e
j
). This gives an EBT map.
2
The conjugate of a channel with simultaneously diagonal Kraus operators
(in some pair of xed O.N. bases) is an extreme CQ map. To see this write
F
k
=

m
c
mk
[f
m
)e
m
[ with e
m
and f
m
O.N. Then () = (CC

) since
() =

mn
c
mk
c
nk
[f
m
)f
n
[ e
m
e
n
)
=

mn
[f
m
)f
n
[(CC

)
mn

mn
. (12)
For the conjugate one nds
F() =

jk
[e
j
)e
k
[

mn
c
mj
c
nk
[f
m
)f
n
[ e
m
e
n
) (13)
and

R
() =

jk

m
c
mj
[e
j
)e
k
[c
mk
e
m
e
m
) =

m
[
m
)
m
[ e
m
e
m
) (14)
with
m
) =

j
c
mj
[e
j
). Since the e
m
are assumed to form an O.N. basis,
this is an extreme CQ map.
The case of general CQ and QC maps is a bit more subtle than considered
above because of the possibility that some of the w
k
or x
k
might not be
distinct. To deal with these situations, recall that an EBT map can also be
written in the form introduced by Holevo,
() =

k
R
k
Tr M
k
(15)
with each R
k
a density matrix and M
k
a POVM.
For CQ maps, M
k
= [e
k
)e
k
[ with e
k
O.N. and its Kraus operators can
be chosen as F
kn
=

R
k
[f
n
)e
k
[ with f
n
any O.N. basis. Then
F() =

jk

mn
[e
j
)e
k
[ [f
m
)f
n
[
_
R
j
f
m
)f
n
_
R
k
, e
j
, e
k
) (16)
and (at least for real f
n
)

R
() =

jk

mn
[e
j
)e
k
[ [f
m
)f
n
[ f
n
_
R
k
_
R
j
f
m
) e
j
, e
k
)
=

jk
[e
j
)e
k
[
_
R
j
_
R
k

jk
(17)
3
Thus
R
() is the Hadamard product of and a positive semi-denite block
matrix. I dont believe further reduction is possible since, in general, a non-
extreme CQ map could require d
2
Kraus operators which is precisely what
we have here. However, one could also write this in the form

R
() = ( J) (18)
where has elements f
n

R
k
_
R
j
f
m
) and J denotes the matrix with all
entries equal to 1 (and is the identity with respect to the Hadamard product).
Note that up to a (? missing ?) factor of d, J = [1)1[ which has the
same spectrum as .
For QC maps
Unital qubit maps: Now consider a unital qubit channel. WLOG we can
assume that () =

3
k=0
a
k

k
with the convention that
0
= I. One
can write
=
1
2
[I +w ] =
1
2
3

k=0
w
k

k
. (19)
Then one can choose F
k
=

a
k

k
and

R
() = A
_
_
_
_
w
0
w
1
w
2
w
3
w
1
w
0
iw
3
iw
2
w
2
iw
3
w
0
iw
1
w
3
iw
2
iw
1
w
0
_
_
_
_
= 4A N
R
() (20)
where A is the matrix with elements

a
j
a
k
and N
R
() is the conjugate of
the completely noisy map for which all a
k
=
1
4
.
Moreover, this result extends to d-dimensions for the class of channels
() =
d
2
1

m=0
a
m
T
m
T

m
(21)
and T
m
is some ordering of the generalized Pauli matrices X
j
Z
k
, j, k =
0 . . . d1 with T
0
= I. The T
k
form an orthonormal basis for M
d
since
4
T
m
T

n
= d
mn
, and one can write =
1
d
d
2
1

m=0
a
m
T
m
. Everything goes through
as above.
Note that the map N
R
() always takes a pure state to a multiple of a
d-dimensional projection. Thus, although the iso-spectral property holds,
the map is not trivial. The multiplicativity of the maximal p-norm of such
maps was recently proved by Wolf and Eisert [?] (extending the Alicki-Fannes
argument for the WH channel). So the conjugate channel 4A N
R
() is a
composition of maps whose multiplicativity we know how to prove.
The special case for which all a
m
=
1
d
2
1
(1 a
0
) for all m 1 is a
depolarizing channel.
Convexity issues: The set of CPT maps : M
d
M
d
is convex and It
is natural to ask if the set of conjugate maps is also convex and if extreme
points maps to extreme points. The answer to both is negative.
First, recall that a set of Kraus operators can be obtained from the Choi
matrix

jk
[e
j
)e
k
[ ([e
j
)e
k
[); this is done by stacking the elements
of the eigenvectors associated with non-zero eigenvalues. Moreover, Choi
showed that () =

k
G
k
G

k
is an extreme point of the set of CPT maps
if and only if G

j
G
k
is a linear independent set in M
d
. This implies that
an extreme point can not require more than d Kraus operators. I believe
that these results should generalize to maps : M
m
M
n
with m =,= n,
though we need to check carefully. (The key issue for extreme points is that
when G

k
G
k
= I , then G

j
G
k
is linear independent. The set of dual maps
wrt the Hilbert-Schmidt inner product is convex with a 1-1 correspondence
between extreme points. For CPT maps, we can apply this condition when
m n. For CP maps which are unital, but not necessarily TP, it can be
applied when m n.)
For the extreme point question, consider the unital qubit map
:
1+a
2
+
1a
2

x

x
. (22)
One nds that the conjugate map is

R
:
1
2
_
I +w

1
2
_
I +

1 a
2
w
1

1
+a
3

(23)
5
The map (22) is a convex combination of unitary conjugations and, hence,
not a true extreme point of the CPT maps on qubit states. But (22) is a
true extreme point (one which is also CQ) as shown in [2].
However, Ruskai, Szarek and Werner [2] found it useful to generalize the
class of extreme points to one which contains all qubit maps which can be
written using at most two Kraus operators, and (22) belongs to this class.
One can similarly consider the class of maps : M
d
M
d
which can be
written using at most d Kraus operators. It follows easily from Matsumotos
approach that the conjugate of any such map can also be written using at
most d Kraus operators. So in this generalized sense, extreme points map to
extreme points.
For CPT maps with > d Kraus operators, the conjugate
R
: M
d
M

.
The set of these conjugate maps is a subset of the set of the convex set of
all CPT maps : M
d
M

. Since d < , the extension of Chois results

apply so that the extreme points require at most d Kraus operators. Thus,
the conjugate maps correspond to extreme points (in the generalized sense of
RSW) of the convex of the CPT maps from M
d
to M

rather than a convex

subset. The generic situation is = d
2
and all others can be embedded into
this by formally adding Kraus operators equal to zero.
Another approach can be illustrated by observing that any qubit CPT
map can be written as the convex combination of two (generalized) extreme
maps, each of which has (at most) two Kraus operators. Thus we can write
= x
1
+ (1 x)
2
so that
() = x()
1
+ (1x)
2
() (24)
= xG
1
G

1
+xG
2
G

2
+ (1x)G
3
G

3
+ (1x)G
4
G

4
If
1
() = Tr
2
U
1

1
U

1
and
2
() = Tr
2
U
2

2
U

2
with
k
= [
k
)
k
[
and
k
C
2
it does not follow that () = Tr
2
U U

for some (possibly

mixed) state M
2
and U M
4
unitary. Even in the exceptional cases
where this holds, the isospectral property of the conjugate channel breaks
down for mixed states.
Another approach would be to embed each of the representations on C
2

C
2
into C
2
C
4
by adding Kraus operators which are zero. This seems to
6
work, and would lead to a block diagonal representation of the form
() = Tr
2
U
_
x
1
(1x)
2

(25)
= Tr
2
_
U
1
0
0 U
2
_

_
x
1
0
0 (1x)
2
__
U

1
0
0 U

2
_
(26)
with U = U
1
U
2
. But we again have a mixed state. A better alternative
would be
=
_
x
1

1x
2
_
_

x
1

1x
2
_
=
_
x[
1
)
1
[
_
x(1x)[
1
)
2
[
_
x(1x)[
2
)
2
[ (1x)[
2
)
2
[
_
() = Tr
2
_
U
1
0
0 U
2
_

_
U

1
0
0 U

2
_
(27)
=
_
x U
1
[
1
)
1
[U

1
_
x(1x) U
1
[
1
)
2
[U

2
_
x(1x) U
1
[
2
)
2
[U

1
(1x) U
2
[
2
)
2
[U

2
_
By writing everything in terms of Kraus operators, one sees that the choice

1
[ =
2
[ = (11) reduces to (3). Thus, we do not seem to gain much from
this convex decomposition, except a partition of the Kraus operators.
To extend this to : M
d
M
d
, we would need to know if every CPT map
can be written as a convex combination of (at most) d generalized extreme
points. Then we would have a similar partition into d subsets of Kraus
operators (each of size at most d.) This seems like an interesting question
which as far as I know is open. Otherwise, we know only that we can
write every CPT map as a convex combination of m extreme points, each of
which can be written using d Kraus operators. However, for m > d the total
number of Kraus operators needed for the kind of partition used above could
then be dm > d
2
which is necessarily redundant.
7
A qutrit example: The following example describes a case in which the
canonical Kraus operators arising as eigenvectors of the Choi matrix do not
form a minimal set, but do allow a partition as above.
Let [0), [1), [2) be an orthonormal basis for C
3
and dene the following
four vectors as in [1].
[v
0
) =
1

3
_
+ [0) + [1) + [2)
_
[v
1
) =
1

3
_
+ [0) [1) [2)
_
[v
2
) =
1

3
_
[0) + [1) [2)
_
[v
3
) =
1

3
_
[0) [1) + [2)
_
The map with Kraus operators F
k
= [v
k
)v
k
[,
() =
3
4
3

i=0
[v
i
)v
i
[ Tr [v
i
)v
i
[ (28)
is EBT; in fact, it was shown in [1] that it is an extreme point of the the set
of qutrit EBT maps that is neither CQ nor an extreme point of the set of all
quitrit CPT maps.
A straightforward calculation yields the following set of seven (7) Kraus
operators from the Choi matrix
1

3
I,
1

3
[0)1[,
1

3
[0)2[,
1

3
[1)0[,
1

3
[1)2[,
1

3
[2)0[,
1

3
[2)1[. (29)
Moreover, () =
1
3

1
() +
1
3

2
() +
1
3

3
() with

1
() = I

2
() = 1, 1)[0)0[ + 2, 2)[1)1[ + 0, 0)[2)2[ [0)1[, [1)2[, [2)0[

3
() = 2, 2)[0)0[ + 0, 0)[1)1[ + 1, 1)[2)2[ [0)2[, [1)0[, [2)1[
the decomposition into extreme points corresponding to a partition of the
Kraus operators. Although this choice gives unital CPT maps, there are
8
other decompositions into extreme points which do not give unital maps.
For example, the choice

1
() = I

2
() =
_
1, 1) + 2, 2)
_
[0)0[ + 0, 0)[2)2[ [0)1[, [0)2[, [2)0[

3
() =
_
0, 0) + 2, 2)
_
[1)1[ + 1, 1)[2)2[ [1)2[, [1)0[, [2)1[
gives extreme points which are CPT but not unital.
The conjugate channel for this map is

R
() =
3

j,k=0
[e
j
)e
k
[ (
jk

1
4
) v
j
v
k
) (30)
References
[1] M.Horodecki, P. Shor, and M. B. Ruskai Entanglement Breaking Chan-
nels Rev. Math. Phys 15, 629641 (2003). (quant-ph/030203)
[2] M. B. Ruskai, S. Szarek, E. Werner, An analysis of completely positive
trace-preserving maps M
2
Lin. Alg. Appl. 347, 159 (2002).
[3] M.M. Wolf, J. Eisert Classical information capacity of a class of quantum
channels quant-ph/0412133
9