ISSN 1063-7397, Russian Microelectronics, 2009, Vol. 38, No. 3, pp. 199–205. © Pleiades Publishing, Ltd., 2009.

Original Russian Text © A.Yu. Chernyavskiy, 2009, published in Mikroelektronika, 2009, Vol. 38, No.3, pp. 217–223.

QUANTUM-COMPUTING DEVICES

The Computable Measure of Quantum Entanglement

of Multiqubit States
A. Yu. Chernyavskiy
Institute of Physics and Technology, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, 117218 Russia
e-mail: chernyavskiy@gmail.com
Received September 23, 2008

Abstract—The search for adequate measures of the entanglement of pure quantum states for an arbitrary num-
ber of subsystems is one of the priority problems of quantum information science. In this paper, I present the
computable measure of entanglement of an arbitrary quantum state. The measure is the generalization of the
von Neumann entropy to an arbitrary number of subsystems.
PACS: 0.67.Mn
DOI: 10.1134/S106373970903007X

1. INTRODUCTION In this study, we present the measure of entangle-

Numerical characterization of quantum entangle-
ment is one of the priority problems in quantum infor-
mation theory. A complete study and classification has
been performed for the entanglement of pure states of
two qudits. Among other things, the criterion for deriv-
ing one such state from the other by local operations
and classical communications (LOCC) [1] has been
found. However, to date, only a few results have been
obtained for a larger number of subsystems. These
results are briefly listed below.
The classification of pure three-qubit states is com-
pletely described in terms of stochastic LOCC
(SLOCC) [2].
For mixed states, the conditions of monotony of the
measures of entanglement with respect to LOCC are
well understood (e.g., [3, 4])
In different studies (e.g., [6–8]), some measures of
entanglement of pure and mixed states and some crite-
ria of success of states for quantum computations are
presented.
ment of pure multiparticle states. The main advantages
of this measure of entanglement are as follows:
(1) This measure is based on the representation of a
state that is fully in agreement with the Schmidt expan-
sion for the case of two subsystems.
(2) The algorithm of calculation of this measure has
been implemented.
It should be noted that finding adequate measures of
entanglement for pure multiparticle states is probably
one of the most intricate problems of the theory of
quantum entanglement, since this problem is practi-
cally equivalent to the search for counterparts of vari-
ous matrix expansions for high-order tensors.
2. ENTANGLEMENT OF TWO-PARTICLE STATES
The entanglement of pure states of two particles has
been much studied. It is determined by the Schmidt
coefficients of this state [1, 5].
Theorem 2.1 Let |ψ〉 be the pure state of the com-
posed system AB. Then, there exist such orthonormalized
states |iÄ〉 of the system A and |iB〉 of the system B that

|ψ〉 = ∑ λ |i
i
i A 〉|i B 〉, (1)

where λi ∈
, λi > 0, and ∑λ = 1. The coefficients λi For the measure of entanglement, the entropy of the
2
i
i Schmidt coefficients squared (the von Neumann
entropy of the states of the subsystem ρÄ and ρB) is
are referred to as the Schmidt coefficients. commonly taken:

H sh ( λ ) = ∑ λ ln λ .
2 2
i i
i

199
200 CHERNYAVSKIY

Let us settle some orthonormalized basis set |iÄ〉 of basis set |jB〉 of the space of the subsystem Ç. Let the
the space of the subsystem Ä and the orthonormalized state |ψ〉 in this basic set be

|ψ〉 = ∑a
i, j
ij |i A 〉| j B 〉.

We introduce the notation for the entropy of the set |iÄ〉 ⊗ |jB〉:
results of orthogonal measurements of |ψ〉 in the basic

H |i A 〉, | j B 〉 ( |ψ〉 ) = H ( a ij ) = ∑a
2 2
ij ln a ij .
i, j

Theorem 2.2 Let |ψ〉 be the pure state of the com- orthogonal measurements of this state is minimal in the
posed system AB. Then the entropy of the results of the basic sets corresponding to the Schmidt expansion; i.e.,

H sh ( |ψ〉 ) = min H |i A 〉, | j B 〉 ( |ψ〉 ),

|i A 〉, | j B 〉

where the minimum is taken over all possible basic sets Note 2.3. The above property of the Schmidt expan-
of the spaces çÄ and çÇ corresponding to the sub- sion (Theorem 2.2) can be reformulated in the follow-
systems A and B of the state |ψ〉. ing manner: let |ψ〉 be the pure state of the composed
system AB; then, in any fixed basic set |iÄ〉 and |jB〉,

H sh ( |ψ〉 ) = min H |i A 〉, | j B 〉 ( U A ⊗ U B |ψ〉 ),

U A, U B

where the minimum is taken over all unitary transfor- H = H1 ⊗ H2 ⊗ … ⊗ Hn.

mations UÄ and UB acting in the spaces çÄ and HB,
respectively.
By analogy with the case of two subsystems, I intro-
3. ENTANGLEMENT duce the notation for the entropy of the results of
OF MULTIPARTICLE STATES
orthogonal measurements of the state |ψ〉 in some
We now consider multiparticle states. Let |ψ〉 ∈ ç,
where basic set

|i〉 H = |i 1 〉 H 1 ⊗ |i 2 〉 H 2 ⊗ … ⊗ |i n 〉 H n (2)

of the space ç. Let |ψ〉 = ∑

|i〉 H
a i |i〉 H be the representation of |ψ〉 in the basic set (2). Then

( |ψ〉 ) = ∑a
2 2
H |i1 〉 H |i 2 〉 H …|i n 〉 H i ln a i .
1 2 n
i

RUSSIAN MICROELECTRONICS Vol. 38 No. 3 2009

 THE COMPUTABLE MEASURE OF QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT 201

Definition 3.1. By the measure of entanglement of onal measurements (in some settled basic set (2)) is
the state |ψ〉 in terms of the minimal entropy of orthog- meant

E H min ( |ψ〉 ) = min H |i1 〉 H |i 2 〉 H …|i n 〉 H ( U 1 ⊗ U 2 ⊗ … ⊗ U n |ψ〉 ),

U 1, U 2, …, U n 1 2 n

where the minimum is taken over all unitary transfor- |i 1 〉 H 1 ⊗ |i 2 〉 H 2 ⊗ … ⊗ |i n 〉 H n .

mations U1, U2, …, Un acting in the spaces H1, H2, …, çn,
respectively. Property 3.3. The measure of entanglement EHmin is
invariant under transformations acting in the spaces
Note 3.2. The measure of entanglement EH min is H1, H2, …, çn (follows from Definition 3.1).
independent of the chosen basic set Property 3.4.

EHmin(|ψ〉 ⊗ |φ〉) = max(EHmin(|ψ〉), EHmin(|φ〉).

In the informational sense, this measure is the mini- 4. THE METHOD OF CALCULATION
mum quantity of physical resources (in bits) required OF EHmin FOR n-QUBIT STATES
on average to store the results of measurements of the
state. Let us consider the state of n qubits

|ψ〉 = ∑ a i1 i2 …in |i 1 i 2 …i n 〉.
i 1, i 2, …, i n = 0

Then where Ui is a single-qubit operator acting upon the ith

qubit and
E H min ( |ψ〉 ) = min H ( U 1 ⊗ U 2 ⊗ … ⊗ U n |ψ〉 ),
U 1, U 2, …, U n

H ( |ψ〉 ) = ∑
2 2
a i1, i2, …, in ln a i1, i2, …, in .
i 1, i 2, …, i n = 0

The operator Ui can be represented as

⎛ i ( –βi – δi ) i ( –β + δ ) ⎞
cos γ i – e i i sin γ i
U i ( β i, δ i, γ i ) = ⎜ ⎟,
e
(3)
⎜ i ( βi – δi ) i(β + δ ) ⎟
⎝ e sin γ i e i i cos γ i ⎠

where βi, δi, and γi are real numbers. Thus, the search for EHmin(|ψ〉) is reduced to minimi-
zation of the function of 3n variables

f ( β 1, δ 1, γ 1, β 2, δ 2, γ 2, …, β n, δ n, γ n ) =
= H ( U 1 ( β 1, δ 1, γ 1 ) ⊗ U 2 ( β 2, δ 2, γ 2 ) ⊗ … ⊗ U n ( β n, δ n, γ n )|ψ〉 ).

Because of the necessity of finding the global mini- 1, 3n ) from the set βi, δi, γi is encoded with ngen real
mum of the function f, we chose the genetic algorithm
∑
n gen
genes gij, (j = 1, n gen ) by the rule pi =
1– j
for the optimization procedure. Each parameter pi (i = j=1
100 g ij .

RUSSIAN MICROELECTRONICS Vol. 38 No. 3 2009

202 CHERNYAVSKIY

Mutation of the chromosome g1, 1, …, g 3n, ngen is defined by the probabilities

P ( g i, j = g i, j ) = ( 1 – p mut ), P ( g i, j = g i, j + ξ ) = p mut ,
m m

m m 1 1
where g 1, 1 , …, g 3n, n is the chromosome after the muta- The cross between the two chromosomes g 1, 1 , …, g 3n, n
tion, pmut is the probability of mutation, and ξ is a ran- 2 2 r r
and g 1, 1 , …, g 3n, n is the chromosome g 1, 1 , …, g 3n, n ,
dom quantity uniformly distributed over [–1/2, 1/2]. where the probability is

1
P ( g i, j = g i, j ) = P ( g i, j = g i, j ) = --- .
r 1 r 2
2

For the fitness function, we took the function

–f(β1, δ1, γ1, β2, δ2, γ2, …, βn, δn, γn).

Description of the algorithm (4) The npopulation – nwinners chromosomes obtained in

(1) The initial population is constituted by npopulation
of random chromosomes, whose genes are random
quantities uniformly distributed over [0, 1].
(2) From the population, nwinners chromosomes with
the maximum fitness function are chosen; from these
chromosomes, npopulation – nwinners random pairs are cho-
sen.
(3) In each pair chosen in item 2, the chromosomes
are crossed, and the result of the crossing is subjected
to mutation.
item 3 and the nwinners chromosomes chosen in item 2
are announced as being the next population.
(5) Starting from item 2, the process is repeated 2
nevolutions times, and it is considered that the result of the
procedure is the chromosome from the last generation
with the maximum fitness function.
5. THE METHOD OF CALCULATION
OF EH min FOR n-QUDIT STATES
Let us consider the state of n qudits

d–1

|ψ〉 = ∑ a i1, i2, …, in |i 1 i 2 …i n 〉.

i 1, i 2, …, i n = 0

Then

E H min ( |ψ〉 ) = min H ( U 1 ⊗ U 2 ⊗ … ⊗ U n |ψ〉 ),

U 1, U 2, …, U n

where Ui is the d-dimensional operator acting upon the

ith qudit and

d–1

H ( |ψ〉 ) = ∑
2 2
a i1, i2, …, in ln a i1, i2, …, in .
i 1, i 2, …, i n = 0

In order to calculate ç(|ψ〉), it is necessary to parametrize the d-dimensional unitary matrices Ui.

RUSSIAN MICROELECTRONICS Vol. 38 No. 3 2009

 THE COMPUTABLE MEASURE OF QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT 203

The issue of good parametrization of an arbitrary
unitary matrix remains open; however, there exist some
alternate versions of such parametrization.
Taking into account the only light dependence of
genetic algorithms on the scope of the optimization
problem to be solved, we chose the most simply imple-
mented procedure of parametrization of the matrices
Ui. The procedure is described below.
Let U ⊂ U(n) and A = ajk be a square matrix of order n.
For an arbitrary matrix Ä, its singular decomposi-
tion is A = USV, where U and V are n × n unitary matri-
ces and S is a diagonal matrix. It is also obvious that, for
an arbitrary matrix U, there exists a matrix Ä, such that
the singular decomposition of Ä is A = USV, and we can
parametrize U with the use of n2 complex numbers ajk.
Thus, the problem of calculating EH min for the
n-qudit state

E H min ( |ψ〉 ) = min H ( U 1 ⊗ U 2 ⊗ … ⊗ U n |ψ〉 ),

U 1, U 2, …, U n

is reduced to the problem of optimization of the function of nd2 complex variables:

E H min ( |ψ〉 ) = min H ( U 1 ⊗ U 2 ⊗ … ⊗ U n |ψ〉 ),

a ijk

where aijk are the matrix elements of the matrix Äi and 6. CALCULATION OF EH min
Ui is the left-hand multiplier in the singular decomposi- OF PARTICULAR STATES
tion of the matrix Äi = UiSV.
The method of solving such problem is based on the In what follows, we consider specific measures of
same genetic algorithm as that used in Section 4. entanglement EH min for some states important for quan-
The application of alternative methods to the param- tum information theory.
etrization of unitary matrices and investigation of the Below we introduce a definition.
convergence of the used genetic algorithm in relation to
the type of parametrization are interesting subjects of Definition 6.1. The state |ψ〉 represented in terms of
further studies. the standard computational basic set as

d–1

|ψ〉 = ∑ a i1 i2 …in |i 1 i 2 …i n 〉,
i 1, i 2, …, i n = 0

is said to be the canonical state with respect to the measure EH min, if

EH min(|ψ〉) = Hmes(|ψ〉),

where Hmes(|ψ〉) = ∑ 6.1 The Entanglement of W States

d–1 2 2
i 1, i 2, …, i n = 0
a ij ln a ij is the
Let us consider the W(n) states
entropy of the results of measurements in the standard
computational basic set.

1
|W〉 = ------- ( |0…01〉 + |0…10〉 + |1…00〉 )
n

and the generalized W̃ (n) states

|W̃ ( n )〉 = a 1 |0…01〉 + a 2 |0…10〉 + a n |1…00〉,

∑ Below, we formulate the results obtained by numer-

n 2
where ai = 1.
i=1 ical experiments.

RUSSIAN MICROELECTRONICS Vol. 38 No. 3 2009

204 CHERNYAVSKIY

Property 6.2.

n
E H min ( W̃ ( n ) ) = H mes ( W̃ ( n ) ) = ∑a
2 2
i ln a i .
1

Property 6.3.

E H min ( W ( n ) ) = H mes ( W ( n ) ) ln ( 1/n ).

Correspondingly, from Properties 6.2 and 6.3, it fol- 6.2 The Entanglement of GHZ States
lows that the states W(n) and W̃ (n) are canonical with Let us consider the generalized Greenberger–
Horne–Zeilinger (GHZ) states
respect to EH min. |GHZ〉 = a0|0…00〉 + a1|1…11〉.
Corollary 6.4. The generalized GHZ states are ca-
nonical with respect to the measure EH min.

E H min ( |GHZ〉 ) = E H min ( a 0 |00〉 + a 1 |11〉 ) = a 0 ln a 0 + a 1 ln a 1 .

2 2 2 2

6.3 The States of Grover’s type

Let us consider the states

|G〉 = ∑ a i1 i2 …in |i 1 i 2 …i n 〉,
i 1, i 2, …, i n = 0

where

⎧ g0 ,
a i1 i2 …in = ⎨
∏i = 0 k

⎩ gt , ∏i ≠ 0 k

and 6.4 General Properties of the Measure

EH min: Results of Calculations
( N – 1 ) ⋅ g 0 + g t = 1.
2 2

We assume that the coefficients g0 and gt are real,

and then we study the dependence of EH min(|G〉) on the Definition 6.5. We introduce the relation of equiv-
coefficient g0. unit
The figure shows the corresponding dependences alence ≈ with respect to single-qubit transforma-
plotted for three-, four-, five-, and six-qubit states. tions:

unit
|ψ〉 ≈ |φ〉 ⇔ ∃U 1, U 2, …, U n : |ψ〉 = U 1 ⊗ U 2 ⊗ … ⊗ U n |φ〉.

Property 6.6. Let the states

1 1

|ψ 1 〉 = ∑ a i1 i2 …in |i 1 i 2 …i n 〉, |ψ 2 〉 = ∑ b i1 i2 …in |i 1 i 2 …i n 〉
i 1, i 2, …, i n = 0 i 1, i 2, …, i n = 0

RUSSIAN MICROELECTRONICS Vol. 38 No. 3 2009

 THE COMPUTABLE MEASURE OF QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENT 205

6 REFERENCES
1. Nilsen, M. A. and Chuang, I. L., Quantum Computation
5 and Quantum Information, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge
University Press, 2000.

4 n=6 2. Dur, W., Vidal, G., Cirac, J.I., Three qubits can be entan-
gled in two inequivalent ways, Phys. Rev., A, 2000,
n=5 vol. 62, 062314; quant-ph/0005115v2.
3
3. Horodecki, M., Simplifying monotonicity conditions for
n=4 entanglement measures, Open Syst. Inf. Dyn., 2005,
2 vol. 12, pp. 231–239; quant-ph/0412210v1.
4. Bennet, C.H., DiVincenzo, D.P., Smolin, J., and Wot-
1 n=3 ters, W.K., Mixed-state entanglement and quantum error
correction, Phys.Rev. A, 1996, vol. 54, no, 5, pp. 3824−3851,
quant-pH9604024.
5. Preskill, J., Lecture Notes for Physics 229: Quantum
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 Information and Computation, Pasadena CA: California
Inst. Technol., 1998.
Entanglement of the states of Grover’s type.
6. Pleino M. B., Logarithmic negativity: A full entangle-
ment monotone that is not convex, Phys. Rev. Lett., 2005,
be canonical with respect to the measure EH min and let vol. 95, 090503; quant-ph/0505071v2.
unit
the relation |ψ1〉 ≈ |ψ2〉 be valid. 7. Vidal, G. and Werner, R.F., Computable measure of
entanglement, Phys. Rev., A, 2002, vol. 65, 032314;
Then the sets { a i1 i2 …in } and { a i1 i2 …in } are
2 2 quant-ph/0102117v1.
equal. The coefficients involved in these sets are the 8. Akulin, V., Burkov, A., Chernyavskiy, A., Darnir, A.,
analog of the Schmidt coefficients for an arbitrary state Ozhigov, Y., and Valiev, K., Ion trap quantum computa-
unit tions: control and success criterion, Quantum Computers
|φ〉 ≈ |ψ1〉. and Computing, 2006, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 107–124.

RUSSIAN MICROELECTRONICS Vol. 38 No. 3 2009