QINP

Quantum Inf Process (2015) 14:1973–1996
DOI 10.1007/s11128-015-0946-8
Thermal entanglement of a coupled electronic spins

system: interplay between an external magnetic field,
nuclear field and spin–orbit interaction
Roberto J. Guerrero M. · F. Rojas
Received: 4 September 2013 / Accepted: 6 February 2015 / Published online: 27 February 2015
© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015
Abstract We have studied the thermal entanglement as a function of the temperature

for a two-qubits Heisenberg spins system; we have included Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya
interaction (DM), an external magnetic field (EMF) and hyperfine interaction due to
the nuclear field of the surrounding nuclei. A critical value for the EMF was found,
(c)
around Bext,z ∼ 39 mT, which characterizes two regimes of behavior of the thermal
entanglement. Our results show that the DM term acts as a facilitator for the entangle-
ment because it prolongs the nonzero thermal entanglement for larger temperatures.
We found that the concurrence as a function of the temperature has a local maximum,
for values of the magnetic field larger than the critical field. We also show that the
critical temperature Tc follows a polynomial growth as a function of the DM term,
with characteristic behavior Tc ∼ β02 , and the hyperfine field implies a critical temper-
ature as a function of the field variance, σ of the form Tc ∼ σ 2 . We show that in this
system, the entanglement measure by the concurrence and the one-spin polarization
observable exhibit opposite behavior, providing a method to obtain the entanglement
from the measurement of an observable.
Keywords Quantum computation · Quantum entaglement · Entaglement

production · Thermal entaglement · Quantum dots
R. J. Guerrero M. (B)
Centro de Ingeniería y Tecnología, Universidad Autónoma de Baja California,
21500 Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico
e-mail: rjgm76@uabc.edu.mx
F. Rojas
Departamento de Física Teórica, Centro Nanociencias y Nanotecnologia,
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Apartado Postal 361, 22800 Ensenada,
Baja California, Mexico
123
1974 R. J. Guerrero M., F. Rojas
1 Introduction
Entanglement has been extensively studied in recent years because it shows the non-
classical nature of quantum mechanics and plays a fundamental role in quantum com-
putation and information protocols [1–3] such as quantum cryptography [2] and tele-
portation [4].
Considerable attention has been given to entanglement generation in Heisenberg
spins systems, which have been proposed [5] and used [6] for quantum computa-
tion/information purposes. Other systems have been studied in the quantum gate con-
text, for example, nuclear spins [7], cavity quantum electrodynamics (cavity QED)
[8,9] superconductors [10,11] and trapped ions [12,13].
In order to understand the entanglement properties of Heisenberg chains in contact
with a reservoir, the thermal entanglement has been investigated [9,14], with the spin–
orbit [14–20], and Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya (DM) interaction. It has been demonstrated
that the exchange term and DM interaction can be used as a control parameter for the
entanglement of the system [16–20]. Also it has been shown that the entanglement
can be modified by the presence of an external magnetic field [11,13,14,17–26]. The
concurrence, a measurement of entanglement, in those studies shows a strong depen-
dence on the temperature of the system and it was proved that a critical temperature
exist, where the system loses all the ability to generate entangled states [2]. The value
of such a temperature depends on the external magnetic field and DM interaction [15].
Entanglement is the key characteristic that defines a quantum system and has been
the main tool in quantum information and computation studies, and plenty of research
papers have been published related to it. In particular, measuring entanglement of
biparite quantum states is very important and this paper provides a scenario. Some of
the techniques for doing so are entanglement witnesses [27], Bell inequalities [28],
entanglement of formation and distillation [29], negativity [30] and relative entropy
[29].
In a previous work [31], in the context of quantum gates, we found that the measure
of concurrence, C for a system of two coupled electronic spins by exchange, in the
subspace S Z = 0, could be expressed as a function of the spin polarization, σi z , and
satisfy the semicircle relation C 2 + σi2z = 1. Therefore, a relation between the con-
currence and the one-spin polarization became evident. We are interested to see if that
relation holds for nonzero temperatures as well or if not, how to modify it. Reference
[31] established a relationship between concurrence and one-spin polarization which
we believe could be of help to measure the level of entanglement in experiments in the
low-temperature regime. The spin orientation can be determined by using a quantum
point contact (QPC) as presented in [32] where the electric read-out of a spin in a
quantum dot can be detected using spin to charge conversion in the QPC.
In recent years, the study of spin qubits in GaAs has encountered a primary difficulty,
the decoherence caused by the magnetic field of the surrounding nuclei [6,33–43], it
has been proven that considering a net magnetic field (Overhauser field) [6,33,34,43–
45] is not sufficient to describe the effect of nuclei as is shown by the experiments
[6,33,34,43] where a quasi-static statistical description of the nuclear spins have been
used [36,37,41].
123
Thermal entanglement on a coupled electronic spins 1975
We present a systematic study of the interplay of the energetics between the external
magnetic field, Heisenberg interaction and hyperfine field in the characterization of the
thermal entanglement. The work was done adapted to the experimental values found
in [6], and we believe that the results presented here will be of interest to research
groups studying entanglement in the same experimental conditions. We include ana-
lytical expressions, which must be solved numerically over a set of samples, because
of the stochastic nature of the hyperfine field. Additionally, we study the possible
relation between the spin polarization observable and the pure quantum property of
entanglement (through the thermal concurrence).
The results presented are new and, we believe, add some significant knowledge
to the field because the behavior of the thermal entanglement indicates new physical
processes according to our findings. We show that the external magnetic field presents
a critical value where the thermal entanglement changes its behavior. Above this
temperature, the value the concurrence (a measure of entanglement) as function of the
temperature has a maximum as opposed to being monoton decreasing below. It was
also determined that the critical temperature increases as a quadratic polynomial for
large values of the DM amplitude and is quadratic with the hyperfine field. We establish
a relationship between an observable (spin polarization) and a abstract measurement
of entanglement (concurrence) that allow us to extract the degree of entanglement. All
these are new and useful results, which have not been studied previously. We believe
that these results will be useful to understand the thermal entanglement; furthermore,
our work suggests a way to measure it (by the spin polarization observable) possibly
leading to new experiments.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows: In the next section, we present the two
spin qubit model coupled by exchange with DM interaction and nuclear hyperfine field
that we are considering. The quasi-static approximation is described for the nuclear
field. The eigenstates and eigenvalues are obtained explicitly in this section. In Sect. 3,
we present the main quantities that characterize our system: the thermal density matrix:
expressions for concurrence, spin polarization and critical temperature above which
there is no entanglement in the system. Analytical and numerical results are presented
in Sect. 4, separated by two regimes of the external magnetic field. First, we present and
discuss results in the absence of hyperfine field to evaluate the external magnetic field
and the DM effect on the thermal properties. Then we consider how these properties
are modified by the presence of the hyperfine field. Finally, the conclusions are given
in Sect. 5.
2 Model
The full Hamiltonian that includes the exchange coupling between two electronic
spins, Hexc with the DM term, and the nuclear coupling, Hh f is H = Hexc + Hh f , is
given by
Hexc = J S1 · S2 + β · S1 × S2 , (1)
where the J is the exchange constant, the first term, S1 · S2 , is the isotropic exchange
interaction, and the second term is the anisotropic spin–orbit interaction. Here β is
the Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya vector (DM) [46,47], which is first order in spin–orbit
123
coupling. It has been shown that the magnitude of β is of the order of 0.01J for a two-
dimensional structure in GaAs and of the order of 0.1 of J in bulk GaAs structures
[48]. In particular, it has been predicted that DM term would be present in those
crystal structures without inversion symmetry, for instance, zinc-blende and wurtzite
structures [48].
In particular, working in the S Z = 0 subspace in Eq. (1), we can restrict our study
to the z-component of the DM vector, β = β0 k̂ [24]. The electronic spin can inter-
act with the nuclei spin via the hyperfine interaction [6,33–43], where the hyperfine
Hamiltonian is given by
N
Hh f = Ak Ik Sk , (2)
k
and Ik and Sk are spin operators for the nuclei and electron, respectively [49,50], and Ak
is the coupling strength. The full approach to describe the nuclei spin interaction needs
that the values of the operators Ik , Sk and Ak to be known. An alternative description
of the interaction between the nuclei and the electronic spin is by considering the
effect of the surrounding nuclei as an effective magnetic field Bn which is known as
the Overhauser field [6,33,34,43–45]. Its effect is very similar to that of an external
effective magnetic field through a Zeeman interaction:
N
gμ B
A k Ik S = Bn S, (3)
h̄
k
where g is the g-factor of the nuclei and μ B is the nuclear magneton.

If the nuclear field is random with unknown values, then the electronic spin will
evolve randomly and will finish in a statistical set of states [36,37,41], so that averages
have to be computed of the properties of interest. The effective Zeeman Hamiltonian
between an external magnetic field Bext and the nuclear Bn is:

Heff = γe Bext + Bn · S (4)
in the writing of this Hamiltonian it has been accepted that the nuclear field can be
considered as an effective classical field. This approximation is valid if Bn is constant
for small periods of time and it is known as the quasi-static approximation (QSA),
which is valid if there is a big gap between the nuclear and electronic relaxation
times. The electronic spin relaxes in the order of nanoseconds, while the nuclear spin
is considerably longer, up to the order of seconds [33–43], and as such the nuclear
evolution can be ignored for small time scales, and the same is true for the QSA
which is a valid approximation for the time required to perform a single experiment.
During the process of doing many experiments, the nuclear dipole-dipole and exchange
mechanism will change the configuration of the nuclei and so the effective magnetic
field caused by them.
By considering a series of experiments each one separated by a long period of time,
sufficient for the nuclei to reconfigure, then the electrons will be in the presence of a
random nuclear field. The value of each will be assigned randomly and identified by
a statistical distribution. [41]. A Gaussian distribution is assumed and it is given by
123
1 2
P B = 3/2 ex p − B · B 2σ . (5)
2π σ 2
where σ 2 = Bn2 is the variance of the nuclear field and is the parameter that charac-
terizes the hyperfine effect.
To determine the expectation values in the QSA for an observable is necessary to
consider its dependence for a fixed value Bn and then found the dependence of that
property represented by the function F Bn , with the average,

∞
F̄ = F B1,n , B2,n P B1,n , B2,n d B1,n d B2,n . (6)
−∞
where we have considered for our model the two effective nuclear magnetic field B1,n
and B2,n for each spin labeled by 1 and 2, respectively.
By considering the hyperfine interaction in addition to (1), we have the full Hamil-
tonian, H = Hexc + Hh f , where Hexc and Hh f are the exchange and hyperfine Hamil-
tonians, respectively.

H = J S1 · S2 + β0 · (S1 × S2 )z

+ γe Bext + B1,n · S1 + Bext + B2,n · S2 (7)

where
the subscripts to the spin 1 and 2. By using B = Bext
1 and 2 refer + B1,n +
B2,n /2 and dB = B1,n − B2,n /2, then (7) can be written as,

H = J S1 · S2 + β0 · (S1 × S2 )z

+ γe B · S1 + S2 + dB · S1 − S2 (8)
The Hamiltonian (8) can be represented in the computational basis, | ↑, ↑, | ↑, ↓

, | ↓, ↑, | ↓, ↓ and can be written in the matrix form
H = Hexc + Hh f
⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
J ⎜0 −1 2(1 + iβ0 ) 0⎟
= ⎜ ⎝
⎟
4 0 2(1 − iβ0 ) −1 0⎠
0 0 0 1
⎛ ⎞
2Bz Θ ∗ + dΘ ∗ Θ ∗ − dΘ ∗ 0
⎜Θ ∗ + dΘ ∗ −2dBz 0 Θ ∗ − dΘ ∗ ⎟
+ γe ⎜
⎝Θ ∗ − dΘ ∗
⎟ (9)
0 2dBz Θ ∗ + dΘ ∗ ⎠
0 Θ ∗ − dΘ ∗ Θ ∗ + dΘ ∗ −2Bz

the nuclear
and external
interaction Hamiltonian, Hh f , is given by, Hh f = γe B ·
field
S1 + S2 + dB · S1 − S2 and Θ = Bx + i B y and dΘ = dBx + idB y .
In this work, we consider the common approximation of a large external magnetic
field along the z direction so Bext,z Bn , where the common values used in experi-
ments and theoretical works are Bext,z ≈ 100 and Bn ≈ 1 to 5 mT, which implies a
123
large energy gap between Θ, dΘ and Bz , dBz which makes the transition probabilities
| ↑, ↓ | ↑, ↓
between | ↑, ↑ −→ and | ↓, ↓ −→ very small, which allows to
| ↓, ↑ | ↓, ↑
reduce the Hamiltonian to,
⎛J ⎞
− γe B z
4 0 0 0
⎜ 0 − 4 − γe dBz 2 (1 + iβ0 )
J J
0 ⎟
H =⎜
⎝
⎟
⎠ (10)
2 (1 − iβ0 ) − 4 + γe dBz
J J
0 0
0 0 0 J
4 + γe B z

the uniform Zeeman along the z direction will ensure that (10) satisfies H, Sz = 0
[41], and the eigenvalues and eigenvectors of (10) can be calculated and are given by,
J
λ1 = − γe Bz ; |ν1 = | ↑, ↑ (11)
4
1
λ2 = − J + 2 Jeff
4
√ √
J 1 + β0 2γe dBz + Jeff
|ν2 = √ √ √ − | ↑, ↓ + | ↓, ↑ (12)
2 Jeff − 2γe dBz Jeff J 2 (1 − iβ0 )

1
λ3 = − J − 2 Jeff
4
√ √
J 1 + β0 2γe dBz − Jeff
|ν3 = √ √ √ − | ↑, ↓ + | ↓, ↑ (13)
2 Jeff + 2γe dBz Jeff J 2 (1 − iβ0 )
J
λ4 = + γe Bz ; |ν4 = | ↓, ↓ (14)
4
where |ν3 is the basis state and Jeff = J 2 (1 + β02 ) + (2γe dBz )2 , and the relation (13)
shows the base energy and its state vector. The states |ν1 , and |ν4 have concurrence
C = 0 [51], and spin polarization √ σ1z = 1/2,and the states |ν2 , and |ν3 have
concurrence given by C = γe dBz / Jeff and the spin polarization by

σ1z = J 1 + β02 Jeff .
We will use the eigenstates and the eigenenergies to determine the density matrix
ρ and from this, we obtain the basic thermal properties of concurrence C(T ), one-
spin polarization σ1z (T ) and the conditions for the critical temperature Tc for null
entanglement.
3 Basic properties
We are interested in calculating concurrence, C(T ), one-spin polarization, σ1z (T ) and

critical temperature, Tc as a function of the temperature, for the system described in
(10). The thermal properties of a spin system with a Hamiltonian H kept at temperature
123
1 −β Ĥ
T are characterized by the density operator ρ̂ = Ze , where β = 1/kT , and k
is the Boltzmann constant and Z = tr e−β Ĥ
is the partition function. The thermal
entanglement properties of this density matrix can be calculated with the evaluation
of the concurrence using the Wooters formula [51] for mixed ensembles. Explicitly,
the expression for the concurrence is
C = max {0, υ1 − υ2 − υ3 − υ4 } , (15)
where υ’s are positive square roots of the eigenvalues of the matrix ρ ρ̃ in decreasing
order with ρ̃ is defined as
ρ̃ = (σ y ⊗ σ y )ρ ∗ (σ y ⊗ σ y ), (16)
where ∗ denotes complex conjugation in the computational basis and σ y is the y-Pauli
matrix. A concurrence value of C = 0 is for a separable state with no entanglement,
while C = 1 is for a state with maximum entanglement.
By increasing the temperature, T , the probability of being in the ground state will
change due to finite probability induced by T to be in the excited states. This effect
results in a mixed state where the entanglement changes and it will be a function of
the temperature and it is known as thermal entanglement. The symmetry [H, Sz ] = 0
constrains the density matrix to be of the general form [51],
⎛ ⎞
u+
⎜ w z ⎟
ρ=⎜
⎝
⎟
⎠ (17)
z w
u−
where C can be found with (15) and (16) resulting in the compact expression [26],
√
C = 2max 0, |z| − u+u− . (18)
The exact values of the ρ elements are obtained from the spectrum states and
eigenvector of the total H , equations (11) to (14)and from it the expressions for
z, u + , u − .
As we mentioned above, because of an increase in the temperature, the probability
of the system to be in the ground state will change due to the mixing with different
populations, creating a mixed state, that could reach the condition for null entangle-
ment, i.e., the system will lose the ability to generate entangled states. The temperature
√ temperature, Tc , and can be found by solving
at which this occurs is called critical
the secular equation C = 0, |z| = u + u − [26] which in most cases must be solved
numerically.
123
4 Results
In this section, we show the analytical results for the concurrence, one-spin polarization
and critical temperature as a function of the temperature, external magnetic field,
the DM amplitude and the effective nuclear magnetic field (Overhauser field). In the
following subsections, we use QSA for a large number of normal random distributions
for the nuclear spins, to determine the average numerical values of the mentioned
properties.
The thermal density matrix for the system described by (10) in the eigenbasis
(λi , |νi ) is given by the expression
1 −βλi
4
ρ= e |νi νi |, (19)
Z
i=1
in the computational basis the equation (10) has the following matrix form,
⎛ ⎞
ρ1 0 0 0
⎜0 A2 ρ2 + B 2 ρ3 AC ∗ ρ2 + B D ∗ ρ3 0⎟
ρ=⎜
⎝0
⎟ (20)
A∗ Cρ2 + B ∗ Dρ3 C 2 ρ2 + D 2 ρ3 0⎠
0 0 0 ρ4
where the expression for the ρi ’s are given e−βλi and the parameter A, B, C and D
are obtained in terms of the eigenstates amplitudes (11)–(14)
√
1 + β02 2γe dBz + Jeff
A = −√ √ (21)
2(1 − iβ0 ) Jeff + 2γe dBz Jeff
√
1 + β02 2γe dBz − Jeff
B = −√ √ (22)
2(1 − iβ0 ) Jeff − 2γe dBz Jeff

J 1 + β02
C = √ √ (23)
2 Jeff + 2γe dBz Jeff

J 1 + β02
D = √ √ (24)
2 Jeff − 2γe dBz Jeff
and the partition functions are

− 14 Jβ 1 1
Z = 2e cosh(βγe Bz ) + 2e 4 Jβ
cosh β Jeff , (25)
2
and, the block structure of (20) allows to use (18) and identify z, u + , u − for the
concurrence calculation are identified as
123
z = AC ∗ ρ2 + B D ∗ ρ3

1 J (1 + β02 ) 1 1
= √ e 4 β J sinh β Jeff (26)
Z Jeff (1 − iβ0 ) 2
where
1 + β02 1
1 J 1
|z| = √ e 4 β J sinh β Jeff (27)
Z Jeff 2
and
√ 1 −1βJ
u+u− = e 4 (28)
Z
By applying (25), (27) and (28) in (18), we obtained the expression for the concur-
rence
J 1+β02 √
e2
1
Jβ √ sinh 1 β Jeff − 1
Jeff 2
C(T ) = max 0, 1 1 √ , , (29)
e 2 cosh 2 β Jeff + cosh(βγe Bz )
Jβ
due to the stochastic nature of the effective nuclear magnetic field, this a statistical
property. This equation expresses the system capacity to generate entangled states as
a function of the temperature, T , which predicts a critical temperature, Tc , βc = kT1 c .
We found from (29) with the condition C = 0 the transcendental equation,

1
1 + β02 sinh βc Jeff = Jeff ,
1
Jβc
e 2 J (30)
2
by solving this equation, we can find the numerical value of the critical temperature
Tc . We have shown that in a coupled spin systems, the concurrence can be measured
by detecting the one-spin polarization of any of the two electronic spins [31], so here
we are also interested in the calculation of this property. We will measure the first spin
polarization using σ1 = tr (ρ S1z ) and calculate the thermal one-spin polarization,
2γe d Bz 1 Jβ 1 √
1 sinh(βγe Bz ) − √ Jeff e 2 sinh 2 β Jeff
σ1z (T ) = ,
2 cosh(βγe Bz ) + e 21 Jβ cosh 1 β √ Jeff
(31)
2
This will determine the z one-spin polarization of the first spin as a function of the
temperature T .
Equations (29) and (31), and in fact any equation that includes the hyperfine field
must be averaged using equation (6), this makes extremely difficult to obtain analytical
expressions, so it is necessary to present results of a numerical sampling.
The results presented in the rest of the section are divided in two parts:
(i) Thermal properties in the absence of a hyperfine field (Bn = 0, σ = 0), where we
will analyze the effect of the external magnetic field Bext,z and the DM term β0
on the concurrence C, spin polarization σ1z and critical temperature Tc .
123
(ii) Thermal properties in the presence of a hyperfine field σ = 0, where we will

present results of the mentioned properties and how their behavior are modified
for different values of the hyperfine field.
In both cases, we studied the relation between concurrence

C(T ) and one-spin
polarization σ1z (T ) and consider the parametric curve C(T ), σ1z (T ) for each tem-
perature, T in the range studied.
4.1 Thermal properties in absence of hyperfine field
In this section, we exclude the hyperfine field from our calculations of the concurrence,
one-spin polarization and critical temperature, this makes unnecessary to average over
large number of realizations.
We will consider the external magnetic field as nonzero Bext,z = 0 and the hyperfine
field as null (σ = 0 → Bn = 0). Applying these conditions on the relations (29)–(31),
we obtain for the concurrence,
⎧ ⎫
⎪ ⎪
e 2 Jβ sinh 21 β J 1 + β02 − 1
1
⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬
C = max 0, , (32)
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎩ e 2 Jβ cosh 21 β J 1 + β02 + cosh(βγe Bext,z ) ⎪
1
⎭
and the one-spin polarization,
1 sinh(βγe Bext,z )
σ1z = , (33)
2 1
cosh(βγe Bext,z ) + e 2 Jβ cosh 21 β J 1 + β02
Let us consider the relations (32) and (33) at low temperatures

(meaning
β(γe Bext,z − 21 J (1+ 1+β02 )
β 1), it is simple to show that
C = 1/(1 + e ) and
−β(γe Bext,z − 21 J (1+ 1+β02 )
2σ1z = 1/(1 + e ), and by defining R ≡ γe Bext,z −

2 J 1 + 1 + β0 . When R < 0, the exchange and spin–orbit will be the dom-
1 2
inant terms which will allow the ground state and transitions near to it have val-
ues of the entanglement close to 1 and one-spin polarization close to zero. On the
other hand, the regime R > 0 is governed by the Zeeman interaction caused by
the external z-direction magnetic field which by its very nature will try to force
the electronic spins to be aligned in a state with very low concurrence and one-
spin polarization value close to 0.5. In any of these two regimes, we can expand
the relations for C and σ1z using a Taylor series, for R < 0 one obtain the concur-
rence, C = 1 − e−β M + e−2β M + · · · and σ
1z ≈ e
−β M − e−2β M + · · · ) where
M = |R| = |γe Bext,z − 21 J (1 + 1 + β02 )| these expansions show that at low temper-
atures in the R < 0 regime, the concurrence will follow the shown expansion, i.e., the
123
Table 1 The critical values of (c) (c)

(c) β0 Bext,z (mT) γe Bext,z =
the magnetic field, Bext,z where
γ
the relation e Bext,z 1 2
2 J 1 + 1 + β0 (µeV)
= 21 J 1 + 1 + β02 is
satisfied for values of the DM 0.0 39.26 1.0000
amplitude, β0 , from 0 to 1 0.2 39.65 1.0099
0.4 40.77 1.0385
0.6 42.52 1.0831
0.8 44.77 1.1403
1.0 47.39 1.2071
concurrence will be very close to 1. The

same argument can be made for the one-spin
polarization in the γe Bext,z − 21 J (1 + 1 + β02 ) > 0 regime.
2 , shown in [31], we get C 2 +4σ 2 = 1−2e−β M +
Expanding the relation C 2 +4σ1z
1z
4e−2β M + · · · where M = |γe Bext,z − 21 J (1 + 1 + β02 )|. This expansion clearly
shows that for small temperatures (large values of β), the relation C 2 + 4σ1z 2 would
have an approximate value of 1, by contrast for larger temperatures (small values of

β) the relation would not hold; however, a simple analysis of the relations (32) and
(33) would show a rapid decline to zero. A critical value of the external magnetic
(c)
field, Bext,z , can be found by considering the condition M = 0. In Table 1, the values
(c)
of Bext,z for an explicit value of the exchange parameter, J = 1μeV , are shown for
amplitude of the DM term ranging from 0 to 1,
The presence of the external field predicts a low/high regime behavior for the
concurrence and the one-spin polarization. For magnetic fields in the lower regime of
the external magnetic field, i.e., M < 0, and an adequate value of the DM amplitude,
we find, after expanding, that the concurrence and spin polarization are C ≈ 1 −
e−β M + · · · and σ1z ≈ e−β M (1 − e−β M + · · · ). For magnetic fields in the higher
regime of the external magnetic field, i.e., M > 0, we see the inverse results of the
ones discussed. This behavior will be demonstrated in our numerical calculations.
By considering the relation of the concurrence versus temperature, and finding the
values that satisfies, C = 0, from (32), we can find a transcendental equation for the
critical temperature.

1
e 2 Jβc sinh βc J 1 + β02 = 1,
1
(34)
2
for a specific value of β0 and by solving (34), the critical temperature can be deter-
mined. This equation cannot be solved analytically and must be solved numerically.
The rest of the results in this subsection are presented in the two following subsec-
tions.
a) In Sect. 4.1.1, results are presented for the concurrence and on-site polarization,
and other properties as function of the external field. Here we will study the two
regimes separated by the critical value of the external magnetic field found with
(30) and they are in Table 1.
123
(a) (b)
Fig. 1 Concurrence (a) and one-spin polarization (b) as a function of the temperature in the absence of
the hyperfine field (σ = 0), and DM interaction (β0 = 0). Curves for values form 0 to 50 mT en steps of
10 mT external magnetic field, Bext,z
b) In Sect. 4.1.2, we calculate the same quantities including the DM amplitude in the
two regimes of the external magnetic field.
4.1.1 Thermal properties as a function of the external field
Equations (32)–(34) we obtained by excluding the hyperfine field and have two vari-
ables, the DM amplitude and the external magnetic field. We analyze the properties
as function of the external magnetic field.
As we have discussed, the presence of an external field leads to a change of behavior
for the concurrence and for the one-spin polarization before and after the critical value,
(c)
Bext,z . Table 1 shows that for β0 = 0, the critical value is around of 39 mT.
In Fig. 1, we present the curves for the concurrence C (a) and one-spin polarization,
σ1z (b), for β0 = 0 and values of the external magnetic field ranging from 0 mT
(reference curve) to 50 mT as given by the equations (32) and (33), respectively.
Figure 1a shows the predicted behavior of the concurrence around the critical value
(c)
of the external magnetic field, Bext,z ≈ 39 mT. For external fields lower than this
value, Bext,z < 39 mT, the curve, C, has a continuing decreasing behavior, starting
from 1, which can be attributed to a dominant energetic exchange. Meanwhile for
values Bext,z ∼ 39 mT, the concurrence, C, presents a local maximum value at a
temperature T1 , the stronger magnetic fields, at low temperatures, will be Zeeman
dominated (spin aligned). This can be seen as states with lower concurrence due to the
dominant Zeeman effect on the electronic spins. By raising the temperature, one sees
that the concurrence values Cmax will increase, as the population of higher energy states
will compete with the magnetic energy, accessing states with C = 0 with the increase
in these property up to a critical value of the temperature, where the corresponding
thermal state populations will no longer promote this behavior on the spin system and
start losing all entanglement properties again. Figure 1a shows the predicted behavior
change of the concurrence around the critical value of the external magnetic field,
(c)
Bext,z ≈ 39 mT. For external fields lower than this value, Bext,z < 39 mT, the curve,
123
(a) (b)
B ext,z
Fig. 2 Curve a shows the amplitude of the local maximum, Cmax of the concurrence, as a function of
the external magnetic field Bext,z . b The curve presented here shows the position of the local maximum as
a function of the external field, Bext,z
C, has a continuing decreasing behavior, starting from 1, which can be attributed to

a dominant exchange energetic exchange. Meanwhile for values Bext,z ∼ 39 mT, the
concurrence, C, presents a local maximum value at a temperature T1 , the stronger
magnetic fields, at low temperatures, will be Zeeman dominated (spin aligned). This
can be seen as states with lower concurrence, due to the dominant Zeeman effect on
the electronic spins. By raising the temperature, one sees that the concurrence, Cmax
will increase, as the population of higher energy states will compete with the magnetic
energy, accessing states with C = 0 up to a critical value of the temperature, where
the corresponding thermal state populations will no longer promote this behavior and
start losing all entanglement properties. Figure 1b shows that the spin polarization will
Bext,z
have a local maximum, Cmax , for values of the external magnetic field lower than 39
mT at a temperature T2 , in fact it presents a reciprocal behavior of the concurrence
property.
The decreasing behavior for smaller values of the external magnetic field, Bext,z <
39 mT, can be explained by noticing that the dominant term in the Hamiltonian is
the exchange and DM term, but for higher magnetic field, Bext,z > 39, the Zeeman
term is the dominant term in Eq. (6). Meanwhile for large external magnetic fields
Bext,z > 39, at low temperature, the external field polarizes the spin states and evolves
them to a state close to | ↑, ↑ at low temperatures where we observed a drop in the
value of the concurrence.
Bext,z
The local maximum in the concurrence, Cmax , and its position T1 as a function of
the external magnetic field are presented in Fig. 2. Figure 2a shows that the amplitude
Bext,z
of Cmax decreases as the external field Bext,z grows, and Fig. 2b shows the value of
the temperature, T1 , where this maximum is localized. These are expected results, as
competition exists between the initial spin polarization, due to the external field, and
the added energy states presence because of the increasing temperature. So, for higher
external magnetic field, the initial state will be polarized to a state of lower concurrence.
The thermal increase raises the concurrence of the system by allowing transitions to
states of higher concurrence. If a bigger magnetic field is used then the initial state will
123
Fig. 3 Parametric temperature

curves of the concurrence, C(T ),
versus the one-spin polarization,
σ1z (T ), in the temperature range
0 to 580.23 mK
be so polarized that the thermal energy cannot easily promote transitions to entangled
states. After this maximum in the entanglement, the transitions between all the states
start to become evenly distributed due to the thermal population (detailed balance) so
results in a notable decreasing in the entanglement. The value of the temperature, T1 ,
for this maximum, is shown in Fig. 2b.
Figure 3 shows the parametric temperature curves of the concurrence, C(T ), versus
one-spin polarization, σ1z (T ), for values of external magnetic field of 20, 30 40 and
50 mT in the range of the temperatures studied. The figure clearly presents the two
(c) (c)
regimes for the critical value of the external magnetic field Bext,z , Bext,z < Bext,z and
(c)
Bext,z > Bext,z . As anticipated the relation C 2 + 4σ1z
2 = 1 is not valid, but a inverse
class relation between these two properties still exists, and we give a more explicit
relations in the following section.
From the relation (34) and the results of Fig. 1, one can see that the critical tem-
perature, Tc , will not depend on the value of the external magnetic field.
4.1.2 Thermal properties as a function of the DM term
The results presented in this section are also for the two regimes of the external
magnetic field discussed in the previous section. Here we systematically study the
effect of the DM interaction on the thermal entanglement, on-site polarization and
related properties. Figure 4 shows the effect of the DM term, β0 in the concurrence
(c) (c)
for (a) 20 mT (Bext,z < Bext,z ) and (b) 50 mT (Bext,z > Bext,z ).
Figure 4a, b shows that DM term will increase the concurrence for the same temper-
ature regardless of the value of the external magnetic field, up to a critical value where
the entanglement is lost. The DM term then adds a new route for the system to access
different states and so delaying the relaxation effect of the thermal reservoir to loss
entanglement. This behavior can be explained qualitatively, by using the previously
shown expansion for the concurrence and the polarization. We have seen that the con-
(c)
currence under the condition, Bext,z < Bext,z , i.e., R = γe Bext,z − 21 J (1 + 1 + β02 ),
123
(a) (b)
Fig. 4 Concurrence as a function of the temperature is shown, for different values of the DM amplitude,
β0 . a shows such results for small magnetic field Bext,z = 20 mT and b for large field Bext,z = 50 mT
(a) (b)
B
ext,z β0 , as a function
Fig. 5 a The value of the local maximum, Cmax , and b the position of the maximum, kTmax
of the DM term, β0 . The curves are shown by Bext,z = 50 mT
is negative and has a continuing decreasing behavior. If the DM amplitude is increased,

then R will be of smaller value and as concurrence the concurrence will remain non
(c)
cero for larger temperatures, as seen in Fig. 4a. Now if Bext,z > Bext,z , this implies

that R = γe Bext,z − 21 J (1 + 1 + β02 ) has a positive value and the DM amplitude
then the curve of the concurrence has a faster growth at low temperatures, reflecting in
a larger amplitude of the local maximum, as seen in Fig. 4b. Results for the one-spin
polarization as shown in the previous section are entirely reciprocal to the concurrence,
which in this case will decrease as the DM term increases.
Figure 5a shows that the local maximum in the concurrence increases with the DM
β0 β
term, β0 . In fact, its behavior can be fitted with a curve of the form CMax = P0 0 +
β β β β
P2 0 β02 + P4 0 β04 , where the fitting parameters are P0 0 = 0.25632 ± 0.00016, P2 0 =
β0
0.17671 ± 0.00098 and P4 = −0.00785 ± 0.00102, where the dominant term seems
to be the quadratic β02 .
In Fig. 5b, we also show the position of the local maximum as a function of β0 for
an external magnetic field of Bext,z = 50 mT. A numerical fitting shows that the curve
123
Fig. 6 Critical temperature Tc ,

as a function of the DM
amplitude β0 . The curve can be
β
fitted as Tc 0 = A + Bβ02 + Cβ04
β
has the form kTmax 0
= aβ0 + bβ0 β02 + cβ0 β04 where aβ0 = 0.33105 ± 0.00024, bβ0 =
−0.02246 ± 0.00147 and cβ0 = −0.04142 ± 0.00153. This temperature decreases
as the DM increases in contrast to the behavior from the external magnetic field of
previous section
Figure 4a, b, shows that in this situation, the system losses the ability to generate
entangled states at a critical temperature, Tc , which clearly increases as a function
of the DM term. In Fig. 6, we present the critical temperature as a function of β0
β
which follow a quadratic behavior given by Tc 0 = Aβ0 + Bβ0 β02 + Cβ0 β04 with Aβ0 =
0.91024 ± 0.00002, Bβ0 = 0.30213 ± 0.00055 and Cβ0 = −0.06851 ± 0.00216,
the quadratic DM term is again the dominant in the relation. We conclude that the
DM term promotes thermal entanglement in the system by increasing the range of
temperature where the entanglement still appears.
The parametric curves presented in Fig. 7 are the results of calculating the on-
spin polarization as a function of the temperature, σ1z (T ) and plotted against the
concurrence at the same temperature, C(T ), results equivalent to the ones presented
in Fig. 3
In Fig. 7, we explore the effect of the DM amplitude, β0 , in the mapping of these
properties, and the curves are presented for the two regimes of the external magnetic
field (a) 20 mT and (b) 50 mT, where the DM term is given in values of β0 =
0, 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 and 1.
It is evident that the DM term slightly changes the relation between such properties,
(c)
while still keeping the basic structure for small (Bext,z < Bext,z mT) and large (Bext,z
ext >
(c)
Bext,z mT) values of the external magnetic field.
In Fig. 7, we show that the concurrence and one-spin polarization do not have
(c)
a functional relation for the regime (Bext,z < Bext,z mT), but by considering such
relation they can be fitted by inverting the axis. The curves are fitted with polynomial
8 (Bext,z ,β0 ) i
curves of the type σ1z = i=0 ai C , i = 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, and in particular
(20,0.4) (20,0.4)
for β0 = 0.4 the coefficients are a0 = 0.192 ± 2 × 10−4 , a2 = 0.179 ±
(20,0.4) (20,0.4) (20,0.4)
0.0049, a4 = −0.89726 ± 0.01647, a6 = 0.9867 ± 0.02278, a8 =
−0.4605 ± 0.01047.
123
Fig. 7 Parametric curves of the

concurrence versus the on-site
polarization, for different values
of the DM term, β0 . Curves for a
external field of 20 and for 50
mT are shown
ext > B (c)

The curves in Fig. 7 for Bext,z ext,z mT) are functions so that they can be
8 (Bext,z ,β0 ) i
fitted with a curve of the form C = i=0 Ai σ1z , i = 0, 2, 4, 6, 8 and
(50,0.4) (50,0.4)
again for β0 = 0.4 the coefficients are A0 = −1.07065 ± 0.0819, A2 =
(50,0.4) (50,0.4)
8.1129 ± 0.06095, A4 = −16.8974 ± 0.15747, A6 = 14.2801 ±
(50,0.4)
0.1695, A8 = −4.4251 ± 0.06492, shows that a relation between the concur-
rence, C, and the one-spin polarization, σ1z , as a parametric function of the temperature
exists. The curves presented in Fig. 7 show that we are able to find a relation between
the concurrence and one-spin polarization, at least numerically. We believe that under
the right experimental conditions, this can be used to determine the entanglement state
of a bipartite system by measurement of an intuitive property such as spin polarization.
To better qualitatively understand the behavior involved in the thermal effect of the
system, let us consider the probabilities of each element of the eigenbasis (11)–(14).
For a simpler discussion, we are going to consider the energetic scheme without a
hyperfine interaction. The eigenstates under such condition will simplify to
|ν1 = | ↑, ↑ −→ C = 0 (35)

1 + β02
|ν2 = − | ↑, ↓ + | ↓, ↑ −→ C = 1 (36)
J (1 − iβ0 )

1 + β2
0
|ν3 = | ↑, ↓ + | ↓, ↑ −→ C = 1 (37)
J (1 − iβ0 )
|ν4 = | ↓, ↓ −→ C = 0, (38)
where we have included the concurrence of each vector to the right. It is interesting
to note that even when the states (36) and (37) have a maximum concurrence of 1
the symmetrical sum of them must have concurrence of zero. The probability of these
states is given by the Boltzmann factor Pi = e−β Ei /Z .
123
(a) (b)
−β E i
Fig. 8 Probability of states of the eigenbasis given by Pi = e Z and with a DM amplitude of β0 = 0.4.
a The probability and the concurrence for an external field at Bext,z = 50 mT while b for Bext,z = 20 mT
Figure 8 shows the probability for each element of the eigenbasis plus the concur-
rence as a function of the temperature for a DM amplitude of β0 = 0.4. In Fig. 8a,
the probabilities are shown for a magnetic field, Bext,z = 50 mT while in Fig. 8b for
a field Bext,z = 20 mT.
Figure 8a shows that the concurrence displays a local maximum up to 0.2 and 0.28
kT (meV) and only states |ν1 and |ν3 have significant probabilities. Only the state
|ν3 has a concurrence different from zero, so all the contributions to the concurrence
of the system must be due to that contribution. After the maximum of the concurrence,
the probability of the state |ν2 (which is a state with C = 1) becomes different from
zero and the deviation of the concurrence from the probability of state |ν3 becomes
apparent. This indicates that the temperature has generated transitions between the
states |ν1 and |ν3 . For larger temperatures, the mentioned transition becomes more
and more probable, and the concurrence decreases rapidly as the combination of these
states becomes more and more symmetrical.
In contrast, in Fig. 8b, we show the concurrence and the probability for a small
magnetic field Bext,z = 20 mT and the same value for the DM amplitude. The con-
currence here has a maximum value of 1 at low temperatures, around 0 up to 0.2 kT,
and in this interval we see that the main contribution to the probabilities of states is
given by state |ν3 , which we observe that decrease rapidly, while the probabilities of
the other states grow. It is precisely these contributions that will generate the mixture
of all states and produce a state with lower concurrence as the symmetry of the final
states grow.
Next we “turn on” the hyperfine field, in the experimental regime, and analyze its
effect on the properties that we have presented so far.
4.2 Thermal properties and the hyperfine field
The results presented so far show a detailed analysis of the effect of the external
magnetic field and DM interaction, but we have not considered the hyperfine field on
123
(a) (b)
Fig. 9 Thermal concurrence, for β0 = 0.4. Curves are presented for different values of the variance of the
hyperfine field, σ = 0, 2.3, 4.6, 9.2 and 18.4 mT. A reference curve is added for σ = 0 and Bext,z = 0
mT. Two sets of curves are presented a for Bz = 20 mT and b Bext,z = 50 mT
the system. In this section, we include a random magnetic field generated by the nuclei
in the surrounding lattice.
We have demonstrated that the external magnetic field can have a different effect
on the concurrence and on the one-spin polarization for fields over or under the
threshold of around 39 mT. Furthermore, the results have shown that the DM
term will increase the entanglement properties for the system, as well as critical
temperature.
Results for the thermal concurrence are reported in Fig. 9. Here we present curves
for values of the variance of the hyperfine field of, σ = 0, 2.3, 4.6, 9.2 and 18.4 mT.
It has been determined that for lateral quantum dots in GaAs/GaAsAl, the hyperfine
field is around of 2.3 mT ([6,33–43]). In these results, we have fixed the value of the
DM amplitude to β0 = 0.4. Two set of curves for each of the regimes studied of the
external field are presented: Fig. 8a for Bext,z =20 mT and (b) Bext,z = 50 mT. In
addition, we include a reference curve with for σ = 0 and Bext,z = 0 mT.
In Fig. 9a, for an external field of Bext,z = 20 mT, below the threshold of 39
mT, it is observed that the concurrence at temperatures close to zero declines as the
variance of the hyperfine field σ increases, in general the behavior of the curve is to
decrease as the temperature increases up to a critical temperature. The reduction in the
concurrence at low temperatures occurs because the hyperfine field acts as a random
magnetic field with and it has been mentioned previously that a magnetic field lowered
the entanglement properties for the system.
Figure 9b shows numerical results for the concurrence at Bext,z = 50 mT. The
curves present the local maximum expected for a field bigger than 39 mT. Here the
concurrence is close to zero for small values of the variance at very small tempera-
tures, but the hyperfine field promotes entangled state creation at low temperature and
increases as the variance of the hyperfine field grows. Here the Zeeman effect of the
external field is the dominant factor, and the hyperfine field would introduce random
fluctuation in the state of the system; it is this competition and mixing between these
effects that would generate an small amount of entanglement at low temperatures
induced by a smaller effective magnetic field.
123
(a) (b)
Bext,z σ , as a
Fig. 10 a Amplitude of the local maximum in the concurrence, CMax , and its b position, kTmax
function the external magnetic field Bext. The curves presented are for σ = 0, 2.3, 4.6, 9.2 and 18.4 mT
and for β0 = 0.4
Fig. 11 Critical temperature,

Tc , as a function of the variance,
σ . Different curves are presented
for β0 = 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and
0.5
In Fig. 9, we notice that the variance of the hyperfine field changes the amplitude
Bext,z
of the local maximum, and therefore the numerical values of the maximum, CMax ,
and the position kTmaxσ as function of the external field, respectively.
Bext,z
In Fig. 10a, we present the amplitude CMax which decays as a function of the
external field but grows as a function of the variance of the nuclear field. While the
position of this maximum kTmax σ , Fig. 10b, moves to higher temperatures as a function
of the external field and moves to lower temperatures as function of the variance. Due
to these findings, we can associate the random nuclear field plus the external field as
a net external field of lower intensity.
Now by using the relation (30), we can find the value of the critical temperature,
Tc , which is presented in Fig. 11 as a function of the variance, σ . Curves for different
values of the DM amplitude β0 = 0, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 are provided.
The critical temperature, as it is shown, has a polynomial growth with σ of the
σ,β σ,β σ,β σ,β
form, Tc 0 = P0 0 + P2 0 σ 2 + P4 0 σ 4 . Specifically for β0 = 0.3, the fitting
σ,β0 f =0.3 σ,β0 =0.3
values that we found are P0 = 0.93688 ± 2.32951 × 10−5 , P2 =
123
Fig. 12 Parametric curves for

the concurrence versus the
one-spin polarization, for
different values of the variance
of the nuclear field, σ . Curves
for a external field of 20 and for
50 mT are shown
σ,β =0.3
3.6168 × 10−5 ± 376782 × 10−7 and P4 0 = 1.38271 × 10−8 ± 1.01972 × 10−9 .
For the other values of β0 , the fitting parameter has their mayor dominant contribution
σ,β
coming from the constant term P0 0 that we know grows as a parabolic curve ( see
σ,β
Fig. 6). The quadratic term with parameter P2 0 , which is the curvature, has a very
small decreasing behavior ( the curves tend to become flat) when β0 is increasing.
Finally the Fig. 12 shows parametric curves between the concurrence and one-
spin polarization for different values of the variance of the nuclear field, σ . The main
features still appear and for B ∼ 20 mT, there exist access to states with large spin
polarization as σ increases.
The inverse relationship of the concurrence and one-spin polarization presented in
Figs. 3, 7 and 12 can be understood by the following discussion.
Let us consider the four Bell States which are: |ψ ± = 21 | ↑, ↑ ± | ↓, ↓

and |φ ± = 21 | ↑, ↓ ± | ↓, ↑ , which are superposition quantum states with full
entanglement, i.e., concurrence C = 1 and one-spin polarization σi z = 0. Therefore,
it appears that states with perfect nonlocal quantum correlations have null one-spin
polarization.
The computational states in the working subspace of the equation (10) are | ↑, ↓,
| ↓, ↑ and have cero concurrence (C = 0) and one-spin polarization of 21 or − 21 . We
believe that the relation between the concurrence and the one-spin polarization can be
attributed to the specific energetic approximations of our model (made in Sect. 2) and
to the spin properties of the Bell states (somewhat similar to the |ν2 , equation (10),
and |ν3 , equation (11) of the eigenbase), i.e., by working in the 2 × 2 subsystem of
Eq. 10 we are assuring that we are working with states of the form α| ↑↓, ± β| ↓, ↑,
that have the inverse relation between concurrence and one-spin polarization ([31]).
By including the thermal ensemble, we are mixing the 2 × 2 subsystem to the upper
energy sates, with null concurrence, to complete 4 × 4 Hamiltonian (Eq. 10), this as a
function of the temperature will produce an uniform mixture, according to the regime,
of all 4 eigenstates and a situation where the concurrence and spin polarization will be
very close to cero, for a small magnetic field (where the states of the 2 × 2 dominates)
123
and concurrence close to cero and spin-polarization close to 21 for large magnetic field
where the state with full polarization dominates.
It appears that is possible to connect a local property, such as the one-spin polar-
ization, which provides information of the mixture of one of the subsystems, with a
nonlocal property such as the entanglement.
5 Conclusions
We have presented analytical and numerical results for the thermal concurrence,
one-spin polrization, critical temperatures in a coupled spin systems that in includes
exchange, DM interaction and hyperfine field in the quasi-static approximation. We
studied the relation between the concurrence and plarization, for the range of temper-
atures from 0 mK to 117 mK, showing a consistent behavior for the two regimes and
fitting function were obtained.
It was demonstrated that the concurrence has a dependency on the external magnetic
field; specially it was shown that exists a critical value for the external field where the
concurrence and magnetization change theirs. The concurrence versus temperature
is steadily decreasing for small fields, but exhibits a maximum for large ones. The
critical value of the external field was found numerically to be around 39 mT from the
numerical results 1 presented.
The amplitude of the local maximum, for large external fields, was found to decrease
in polynomial form as function of the external field. The local maximum would occur
at larger temperatures as the external field grows. It was also found that the concurrence
would rise with the magnetic field, for the range of values of the external field.
The analytical expression shows that the critical temperature would not have a
dependence on the external field for the range of values used here. The DM term
was found to increase the properties of system entanglement and that the critical
β
temperature would increases following a polynomial curve, Tc 0 = Aβ0 + Bβ0 β02 +
Cβ0 β04 , with the DM amplitude β0 with the quadratic term dominant. These results
point to the DM term as an facilitator of the entanglement properties of the system so
we believe that for experimental use it would be convenient to use systems with large
value of β0 if the entanglement resource is required.
For low external fields, Bext,z < 39 mT, the hyperfine interaction would cause
the entanglement properties to decrease at low temperatures. For big external fields,
Bext,z > 39 mT, it would cause them to increase. The dependence of the critical
temperature is quadratic with the variance of the effective magnetic field σ .
Acknowledgments We would like to thanks DGAPA-UNAM for support with the Project IN112012 and
R.G. thanks CONACYT and CICESE for financial aid with a PhD scholarship.
References
1. Bennett, C.H.: Quantum cryptography using any two nonorthogonal states. Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 3121
(1992)
2. Bennett, C.H., et al.: Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein–Podolsky–
Rosen channels. Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895 (1993)
123
3. Nielsen, M.A., Chuang, I.L.: Quantum Computation and Quantum Information. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge (2000)
4. Ekert, A.K.: Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem. Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991)
5. Loss, D., DiVicenzo, D.P.: Quantum computation with quantum dots. Phys. Rev. A 57, 120 (1998)
6. Peta, J.R., et al.: Double quantum dot as a quantum bit. Science 309, 2180 (2005)
7. Kane, B.E.: A silicon-based nuclear spin quantum computer. Nature 393, 133 (1998)
8. Imamoglu, A.: Quantum information processing using quantum dot spins and cavity QED. Phys. Rev.
Lett. 83, 4204 (1999)
9. Zheng, S.B., Guo, G.C.: Efficient scheme for two-atom entanglement and quantum information process-
ing in cavity QED. Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 2392 (2000)
10. Wang, X.: Entanglement in the quantum Heisenberg XY model. Phys. Rev. A 64, 012313 (2001)
11. Arnesen, M.C., et al.: Natural thermal and magnetic entanglement in the 1D Heisenberg model. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 87, 017901 (2001)
12. Yi, X.X., et al.: Entanglement induced in spin-1/2 particles by a spin chain near its critical points. Phys.
Rev. A 74, 054102 (2006)
13. Porras, D., Cirac, J.I.: Effective quantum spin systems with trapped ions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 207901
(2004)
14. Wang, F., et al.: Anisotropy and magnetic field effects on entanglement of a two-spin (1/2, 1) mixed-spin
Heisenberg XY chain. Commun. Theor. Phys. 50, 341 (2008)
15. Wang, X.: Effects of anisotropy on thermal entanglement. Phys. Lett. A 281, 101 (2001)
16. Zhang, G.: Thermal entanglement and teleportation in a two-qubit Heisenberg chain with
Dzyaloshinski–Moriya anisotropic antisymmetric interaction. Phys. Rev. A 75, 034304 (2007)
17. Ma, X.S.: Thermal entanglement of a two-qutrit XX spin chain with Dzialoshinski–Moriya interaction.
Opt. Commun. 281, 484 (2008)
18. Kheirandish, F., et al.: Effect of spin–orbit interaction on entanglement of two-qubit Heisenberg XYZ
systems in an inhomogeneous magnetic field. Phys. Rev. A 77, 042309 (2009)
19. Akyüz, C., et al.: Thermal entanglement of a two-qutrit Ising system with Dzialoshinski–Moriya
interaction. Opt. Commun. 281, 5271 (2008)
20. li, D.: Thermal entanglement in the anisotropic Heisenberg XXZ model with the Dzyaloshinskii–
Moriya interaction. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 20, 325229 (2008)
21. Gunlycke, D., et al.: Thermal concurrence mixing in a one-dimensional Ising model. Phys. Rev. A 64,
042302 (2001)
22. Kamta, G.L., Starace, A.F.: Anisotropy and magnetic field effects on the entanglement of a two qubit
Heisenberg XY chain. Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 107901 (2002)
23. Zhou, L., et al.: Enhanced thermal entanglement in an anisotropic Heisenberg XYZ chain. Phys. Rev.
A 68, 024301 (2003)
24. Sun, Y., et al.: Thermal entanglement in the two-qubit Heisenberg XY model under a nonuniform
external magnetic field. Phys. Rev. A 68, 044301 (2003)
25. Asoudeh, M., Karimipour, V.: Thermal entanglement of spins in the Heisenberg model at low temper-
atures. Phys. Rev. A 70, 052307 (2004)
26. Asoudeh, M., Karimipour, V.: Thermal entanglement of spins in an inhomogeneous magnetic field.
Phys. Rev. A 71, 022308 (2005)
27. Chruscinskim, D., Pytel, J.: Constructing optimal entanglement witnesses. II. Witnessing entanglement
in 4N×4N systems. Phys. Rev. A 82, 052310 (2010)
28. Bennet, A., et al.: Experimental semi-device-independent certification of entangled measurements.
Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 080405 (2014)
29. Vedral, V., Plenio, M.B.: Entanglement measures and purification procedures. Phys. Rev. A 57, 1619
(1998)
30. Zyczkowski, K., Horodecki, P.: Volume of the set of separable states. Phys. Rev. A 58, 883 (1998)
31. Guerrero, R.J., Rojas, F.: Effect of the Dzyaloshinski–Moriya term in the quantum (SWAP)a gate
produced with exchange coupling. Phys. Rev. A 77, 012331 (2007)
32. Elzerman, J.M., et al.: Single-shot read-out of an individual electron spin in a quantum dot. Nature
430, 431 (2006)
33. Merkulov, I.A., et al.: Electron spin relaxation by nuclei in semiconductor quantum dots. Phys. Rev.
B 65, 205309 (2002)
34. Khaetskii, A.V., et al.: Electron spin decoherence in quantum dots due to interaction with nuclei. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 88, 186802 (2002)
123
35. Khaetskii, A.V., et al.: Electron spin evolution induced by interaction with nuclei in a quantum dot.
Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 195329 (2003)
36. Coish, W.A., Loss, D.: Hyperfine interaction in a quantum dot: non-Markovian electron spin dynamics.
Phys. Rev. B 70, 195340 (2004)
37. Johnson, A.C., et al.: Triplet-singlet spin relaxation via nuclei in a double quantum dot. Nature 435,
925 (2005)
38. Coish, W.A., Loss, D.: Singlet-triplet decoherence due to nuclear spins in a double quantum dot. Phys.
Rev. B 72, 125337 (2005)
39. Klauser, D., et al.: Nuclear spin state narrowing via gate-controlled Rabi oscillations in a double
quantum dot. Phys. Rev. B 73, 205302 (2006)
40. Chuntia, S., et al.: Detection and measurement of the Dzyaloshinskii–Moriya interaction in double
quantum dot system. Phys. Rev. B 73, 241304 (2006)
41. Taylor, J.M., et al.: Relaxation, dephasing, and quantum control of electron spins in double quantum
dots. Phys. Rev. B 76, 035315 (2007)
42. Golovach, V.N., et al.: Spin relaxation at the singlet-triplet crossing in a quantum dot. Phys. Rev. B 77,
045328 (2008)
43. Petta, J.R., et al.: Dynamic nuclear polarization with single electron spins. Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 067601
(2008)
44. Erlingsson, S.I., et al.: Radiatively limited dephasing in InAs quantum dots. Phys. Rev. B 70, 033301
(2005)
45. Erlingsson, S.I., Nazarov, Y.V.: Evolution of localized electron spin in a nuclear spin environment.
Phys. Rev. B 70, 205327 (2004)
46. Dzyaloshinskii, I.: A thermodynamics theory of “weak” ferromagnetirm of antiferromagnetics;
anisotropic superexchange interaction and weak ferromagnetism. J. Chem. Solids 4, 241 (1958)
47. Moriya, T.: Anisotropic exchange interaction of localized conduction-band electrons in semiconduc-
tors. Phys. Rev. 120, 91 (1960)
48. Kavokin, K.V.: Anisotropic exchange of localized conduction-band electrons in semiconductor. Phys.
Rev. B 64, 075305 (2001)
49. Abragam, A.: The Principles of Nuclear Megnetism. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1961)
50. Abragam, A., Bleaney, B.: Entanglement of Formation of an Arbitrary State of Two Qubits. Dover,
New York (1986)
51. Wootters, W.K.: Entanglement of formation of an arbitrary state of two qubits. Phys. Rev. Lett. 80,
2245 (1998)
123

QINP

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

QINP

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Quantum Inf Process (2015) 14:1973–1996

Thermal entanglement of a coupled electronic spins

Roberto J. Guerrero M. · F. Rojas

Abstract We have studied the thermal entanglement as a function of the temperature

Keywords Quantum computation · Quantum entaglement · Entaglement

where g is the g-factor of the nuclei and μ B is the nuclear magneton.

The Hamiltonian (8) can be represented in the computational basis, | ↑, ↑, | ↑, ↓

We are interested in calculating concurrence, C(T ), one-spin polarization, σ1z (T ) and

C = max {0, υ1 − υ2 − υ3 − υ4 } , (15)

and the partition functions are

(ii) Thermal properties in the presence of a hyperfine field σ = 0, where we will

In both cases, we studied the relation between concurrence

4.1 Thermal properties in absence of hyperfine field

and the one-spin polarization,

Let us consider the relations (32) and (33) at low temperatures

Table 1 The critical values of (c) (c)

concurrence will be very close to 1. The

have an approximate value of 1, by contrast for larger temperatures (small values of

4.1.1 Thermal properties as a function of the external field

C, has a continuing decreasing behavior, starting from 1, which can be attributed to

Fig. 3 Parametric temperature

4.1.2 Thermal properties as a function of the DM term

is negative and has a continuing decreasing behavior. If the DM amplitude is increased,

Fig. 6 Critical temperature Tc ,

Fig. 7 Parametric curves of the

ext > B (c)

4.2 Thermal properties and the hyperfine field

Fig. 11 Critical temperature,

Fig. 12 Parametric curves for

You might also like

(ii) Thermal properties in the presence of a hyperfine field σ = 0, where we will