Laser Phys. Lett. 3, No. 12, 599–604 (2006) / DOI 10.1002/lapl.

200610057 599

Abstract: In this paper a novel analytical method is applied to

the problem of investigating the fidelity and linear entropy of a
three-level system in the presence of a photonic band gap. Using
this analytic solution, we conclusively calculate the fidelity and
linear entropy, related particularly to the entanglement phenom-
ena. We demonstrate how fluctuations in the fidelity and linear 1.00
entropy are effected by the presence of the photonic-band-gap. 0.75 10
The outcomes are illustrated with numerical simulations applied 0.50
to GaAs. It is found that the time evolution of the lower bound of 0.25
8

the linear entropy systematically captures the corresponding col- 0

0 6 _
n
lapse and revival features. Our work also sheds light on quantum
1 4
information storage and processing with multi-level atoms.
ω/ω T 2
2

The fidelity as a function of the mode-frequency ω/ωT and the

mean-photon number

c 2006 by Astro Ltd.

Published exclusively by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA

Quantum information of a three-level atom in

one-dimensional photonic bandgaps
M. Abdel-Aty 1,∗ and F. Saif 2
1
Department of Mathematics, College of Science, University of Bahrain, P.O. Box 32038, Bahrain
2
Department of Physics, University of Arizona, 1118 East 4th Street, P.O. Box 210081, Tucson, Arizona 85721, USA

Received: 25 July 2006, Revised: 8 August 2006, Accepted: 12 August 2006

Published online: 30 August 2006

Key words: three-level atom; photonic bandgaps; quantum entanglement; fidelity; linear entropy; quantum information

PACS: 42.50.Gy, 42.70.Qs, 03.67.-a, 03.65.Fd

1. Introduction interference dark line effect [13], phase control of spon-

Entropy, entanglement, fidelity and capacity constitute
major milestones in quantum information [1–6]. In quan-
tum optics, optical lattice or photonic crystals serve as a
rich framework for the study of these characteristics [7].
One of the most interesting properties of a photonic crys-
tal is the existence of a photonic band gap [8]. Photonic
crystals are usually viewed as an optical analog of semi-
conductors that modify the properties of light similar to
a microscopic atomic lattice that creates a semiconduc-
tor band-gap for electrons [9,10]. The matter-wave inter-
action in photonic band gap materials has been found to
exhibit many interesting new phenomena such as matter-
wave bound states [11], spectral splitting [12], quantum
∗
Corresponding author: e-mail: mabdelaty@sci.uob.bh
taneous emission [14], transparency near band edge [15],
and single-atom switching [16].
In a parallel development, considerable work is de-
voted to study the properties of entanglement [17,18].
In spite of its conceptual simplicity as “non-factorizable
states”, the detection of entangled states is one of the fun-
damental problem in quantum information science. From a
theoretical point of view one can try to answer the question
whether a given entirely known state is entangled or not,
but despite a lot of progress in the last years, no general so-
lution of this problem is known. In experiments, one aims
at detecting entanglement without knowing the state com-
pletely. Bell inequalities [20] and entanglement witnesses
[21] are the main tools to tackle this task. Also, quantum

c 2006 by Astro Ltd.
Published exclusively by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA
600 M. Abdel-Aty and F. Saif: Quantum information of a three-level atom

imaging is one of the most intriguing effects exhibiting the For the frequency range ωT < ω < ωL the wavevector
typical nonlocal behavior of entangled states (see [22]). normal to the interface is purely imaginary and this shows
Interestingly, the fidelity of the teleported state, which is up as a gap region where electromagnetic waves cannot
related to the entanglement, is strongly effected at the crit- propagate. It is easy to write λij in the following form
ical point [23]. These pioneering results raise the question
2 2
of the universality of these behaviors. Actually, the lack 30 (ω/ωT ) − (ωL /ωT )
of exact solutions especially in higher dimensions implies λij = 2 (µij E) , (5)
20 + 1 (ω/ωT ) − η 2
a numerical treatment which often restrict the study to a
small number of degrees of freedom. where
In this paper we particularly describe the situation, in 2
which the entangled states are obtained from the interac- 20 (ωL /ωT ) + 1
η2 = . (6)
tion of a multi-level atom with a cavity field. We perform 20 + 1
the standard scheme where the unknown state is described
by a density operator. Our notion of distinguishability will Next we derive the equation of motion for the probability
be based on information–theoretic considerations and will amplitudes.
rest on the concept of fidelity and linear entropy.

3. Exact solution
2. The model
At any time the atom-field wavevector |Ψ (t)
can be writ-
We consider a three-level atom, in Λ configuration, in- ten as
teracting with a single-mode of the electromagnetic field. ∞


We express the Hamiltonian governing the interaction of a |Ψ (t)
= Ab (n, t)|n, b
+ (7)
cavity mode with the atom as [24] n=0

Ĥ = Ĥ0 + Ĥint , (1) 

+Aa (n, t)|n + m1 , a
+ Ac (n, t)|n + m1 , c
.
where Ĥ0 describes the Hamiltonian in the absence of We denote by Ai (n, t) the probability amplitude for the
atom-field interaction and Ĥint describes the atom-field atom to be in the level i. The lower index n indicates
interaction. In an appropriate rotating frame, we write the dependence of the corresponding quantities on the
3

photon number. In general, the dynamics of Ai (n, t) the
Ĥ0 = ωj |j
AA j| + Ω↠â , (2) probability amplitude of the atomic level is given by the
j=1 Schrödinger equation [26],
3
Ĥint = ∆1 |a
AA a|+∆2 |c
AA c|+λba âm1|b
AA a|+ ∂Aj (n, t)

i = Hjk Ak (n, t) , (8)
∂t
+λ∗cb â†m2|c
AA b|+λ∗ba â†m1|a
AA b|+λcb âm2|b
AA c| . k=1

The operator |i
AA i| describes the atomic population of where Hjk = ξj |Ĥint |ξk
, (|ξ1,2,3
= |n, b
, |n + m1 , a
,
level |i
A with energy ωi , (i = a, b, c) and the operator |n + m2 , c
). These equations are exact for any three-
|i
AA j|, (i = j) describes the transition from level |i
A level system. For our model, H12 = v1 , H13 = v2∗ ,
to level |j
A . In Eq. (2) m1 photons affect the transition H22 = ∆1 , H33 = ∆2 , H31 = v2 , H21 = v1∗ , and the
|a
↔ |b
while m2 photons affect the transition |c
↔ |b
.
Also, the dissipation of the cavity field is neglected.  = 0. Also, v1 = λba (n + m1 )!/n!, and
rest of Hij
v2 = λbc (n + m2 )!/n!. In order to consider the most
The atom-field couplings λij are given by λij = general case, we solve Eq. (8), by assuming a new variable
Y µij E, where E is the quantized electric field and µij is G(n, t) as
the matrix dipole moment coupling between the state |i

and |j
. The Y factor accounts for local field effects which G(n, t) = Ab (n, t) + xAa (n, t) + yAc (n, t) , (9)
can be traced in the operator reaction field theory in quan-
tum optics and is given by [25] which means that
3s (ω) dG(n, t)
Y = , (3) i = (H11 + xH21 + yH31 ) × (10)
2s (ω) + 1 dt

where s (ω) is frequency dependent dielectric constant of H12 + xH22 + yH32
× A1 (n, t) + A2 (n, t) +
the slab-cavity and it may be modelled by H11 + xH21 + yH31
2 2 
(ω) − (ωL ) H13 + xH23 + yH33
s (ω) = 0 2 2 . (4) + A3 (n, t) .
(ω) − (ωT ) H11 + xH21 + yH31

c 2006 by Astro Ltd.

Published exclusively by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA
Laser Phys. Lett. 3, No. 12 (2006) / www.lphys.org 601

x2 − x1
Let us emphasize that in addition to the general form of A33 (n, t) = ,
Eq. (10), the present method is suitable for any initial con- D
ditions. It is instructive to examine the formation of a gen- and
eral solution of the three-level systems. Therefore, we use
D = x1 y2 + x2 y3 + x3 y1 − x1 y3 − x2 y1 − x3 y2 .
Eq. (10) and seek G(n, t) such that
We have thus completely determined the exact solution
dG(n, t)
i = zG(n, t) , (11) of a three-level system in the presence of photonic crystal.
dt The important point to note here is that, using the above
This hold if analytic approach, any three-level Hamiltonian is likewise
exactly solvable, with precisely similar eigenvectors and
H12 + xH22 + yH32
x= , (12) eigenvalues that are obtained directly using Eqs. (4) and
H11 + xH21 + yH31 (6). In [27] an analytic approach is proposed for three-level
H13 + xH23 + yH33 systems, based on the Riccati nonlinear differential equa-
y= , tion. However, the solution obtained is valid only in certain
H11 + xH21 + yH31
situations. On the other hand, our analytic approach re-
z = H11 + xH21 + yH31 . moved the restriction that considered in the previous work
and this solution is valid for any three-level system. We
After some algebra this leads to a cubic equation may mention here that a potential of high-frequency time-
which has three eigenvalues xi (yi ), which determine the domain detector by applying it to the reconstruction of the
zi . There are also three corresponding eigenfunctions density matrix elements of various field states by means of
Gj (n, t) = Gj (0) exp(−izj t) , quantum tomography has been presented in [28].

where
Gj (t) = Mj1 Ab (n, t)+Mj2 Aa (n, t)+Mj3 Ac (n, t) , (13)
4. Fidelity

Mji = k̂êx + x̂êy + ŷêz , In order to characterize the mixed quantum states [29,30],
minimizing the distance of the density ρ to the set of co-
where êx , êy , and êz are mutually orthogonal unit vectors, herent states is related to the search for the maximal fi-
given by êx = (1, 0, 0), êy = (0, 1, 0), and êz = (0, 0, 1), delity (the Hilbert–Schmidt fidelity T r(ρσ) or the Bures-
where the astrict means that the row vector becomes col- Uhlmann fidelity). Armin Uhlmann [31] expressed the in-
umn vector and k̂ = (1, 1, 1)T , x̂ = (x1 , x2 , x3 )T , and trinsic expression of the fidelity in the following form
ŷ = (y1 , y2 , y3 )T .  √ √ 1 2
Now, we express the unperturbed state amplitude f (ρ, σ) = T r ρσ ρ 2 , (16)
Ab (n, t), Aa (n, t) and Ac (n, t) in terms of the dressed
state amplitude Gj Using the above equations, we can where 0 ≤ f (ρ, σ) ≤ 1 and f (ρ, σ) = 1 if and only if ρ =
write σ. On the same footing, the Monge distance introduced
3
in [32] may be applied to describe to what extent a given

mixed state is close to the manifold of coherent states. If
−1
Ai (n, t) = Mij Gj (n, t) = (14)
the input state is a pure state ρinp = |ψ(0)
ψ(0)|, the
j=1
channel fidelity is given as a quantum overlap between the
3

input and the output state. In this case the channel fidelity
−1
= Mij Gj (0) exp(−izj t) . is
j=1
f (ρ, σ) = Ψ |ρinp |Ψ
. (17)
3


Aj (n, t) = Ajm (n, t)e−izm t , (15) where |Ψ
is the final state of the system. This quantity
measures how close the teleported state is to the input
m=1
state. Let us assume that the initial state of the atom-field
where is given by
x2 y3 − y2 x3 x3 y1 − y3 x1 ρinp = |Ψ (0)
Ψ (0)| , (18)
A11 (n, t) = , A12 (n, t) = ,
D D
where
x1 y2 − y1 x2 y2 − y3
A13 (n, t) = , A21 (n, t) = , ∞


D D
|Ψ (0)
= (γ1 |n, b
+ γ2 |n, a
+ γ3 |n, c
) . (19)
y3 − y1 y 1 − y2 n=0
A22 (n, t) = , A13 (n, t) = ,
D D Using Eqs. (7), (17), and (18), we obtain
x2 − x3 x3 − x1
A31 (n, t) = , A32 (n, t) = − , f (ρ, σ) = (20)
D D

c 2006 by Astro Ltd.

Published exclusively by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA
602 M. Abdel-Aty and F. Saif: Quantum information of a three-level atom

(a) (a)

1.00 1.00
0.75 25 0.75 25
0.50 0.50
20 20
0.25 0.25
0 15 0 15
0 _ 0 _
10
n 10
n
10 10

λt 20 5 λt 20 5

30 0 30 0
(b) (b)

1.00 1.00
0.75 10 0.75 15
0.50 0.50
8
0.25 0.25
10
0 6 0
0
_ 0
_
n n
1 4 1
5

ω/ω T 2 2
ω/ω T 2

3 3

Figure 1 (online color at www.lphys.org) (a) The fidelity as a
function of the scaled time and the mean-photon number. (b) The
fidelity as a function of the mode-frequency ω/ωT and the mean-
photon number. Calculations assume that, ω0 /ωT = 1, ωL =
36.29 meV, ωT = 33.25 meV, and n̄ = 10
Figure 2 (online color at www.lphys.org) (a) Linear entropy as a
function of the scaled time and the mean-photon number. (b) Lin-
ear entropy as a function of the mode-frequency and the mean-
photon number

∞
 2

η = 1.085, ω/ωT = 2, ω0 /ωT = 1, ωL = 36.29 meV,
= γ1 Ab (n, t) + γ2 Aa (n, t) + γ3 Ac (n, t) .
∗ ∗ ∗
n=0
For applications in real systems, we consider the dipole
emitters with frequencies in the reststrahl band of GaAs.
We will consider the commonly used state as initial condi-
tion for the cavity field: the coherent state, which may be
applicable in different situations. As might be expected,
the behavior of the three-level system changes dramati-
cally depending on the initial field state. Throughout this
section the quantity to be examined is the fidelity f (ρ, σ).
Fig. 1a, explains the oscillatory behavior of the fi-
delity f (ρ, σ) as a function of the scaled time λ1 t and
the mean photon number n. We consider a specific sys-
tem in which the cavity is taken as GaAs with 0 = 10.89,
ωT = 33.25 meV. It is seen that, after the time goes on,
we see that the maximum value of the concurrence de-
creases with small amplitude of the oscillations. As the
mean photon number increased, the number of oscillations
decreased. From Fig. 1a, larger mean-photon number re-
sults in decreased revival amplitude due to the larger num-
ber of frequencies in the sum, which causes the rephasing
to be less complete. However, a signature of the revivals
persists as a return to the bare Rabi frequency even at
mean-photon number high enough that the behavior looks
random and the revival amplitude is essentially washed
out.
In what follows, we will lay special emphasis on the
case of different values of the mean photon number pa-

c 2006 by Astro Ltd.

Published exclusively by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA
Laser Phys. Lett. 3, No. 12 (2006) / www.lphys.org 603

rameter for a coherent state. It is important to note that with definition of the quantum entropy, the linear entropy
the fidelity for the three-level atom is also similar to the of entanglement can be defined as [34]
collapse-revival phenomenon of Rabi oscillation. Our par-
ticular observation is the fidelity vanishing near the band
edges, which corresponds to ω = 2ωT . Near the band
edges the wave vector parallel to the interface reaches its
maximum value, and this corresponds to the first two rel-
atively small peaks around the point η = 2. In the gap
region or the reststrahl region of the GaAs system no elec-
tromagnetic fields can propagate and coupling is therefore
suppressed. This is a common feature of bandgap systems
which makes them special when one considers the inter-
action of dipole emitters with the field modes. The extra
peaks around the point 2 are attributed to local field ef-
fects and can be understood from looking at Eq. (5), where
λij has a pole at η = ω/ωT . One has to bear in mind
that the above calculation did not take into explicit ac-
count the spatial dependence of the coupling parameters.
Therefore, a more careful calculation would have to take
into account the nonstationary property of the present sys-
tem. The above model calculations suggest that physical
parameters such as mode frequency, mode-atom coupling
and cavity dielectric have important effects on the fidelity.
Curiously, with fixing the photonic crystals parameters
and atomic parameters we could actually choose to reduce
the scaled time and see the effect on the fidelity, this is seen
in figure 1b. It is natural to ask if there is any connection
between the fidelity exchange that we observe in this sec-
tion and a linear entropy exchange process. Although we
cannot rule out this possibility, we believe that the connec-
tion is unlikely. In our case, because the entropy exchange
is periodic and the system is small, there is no reason to
believe a priori that the energy that is exchanged is unre-
coverable for pure work. Nevertheless, if one examines the
linear entropy with the same parameters as in the fidelity
and the entropy change of each subsystem, there is some
overall correlation with the initial state of the field. In the
next section we will focus on a well-established measure
of entanglement which is the linear entropy.
5. Linear entropy
The main purpose of this section is to shed some light of
the relation between the linear entropy and entanglement.
Physically allowed degree of entanglement and mixture
were investigated by Munro et al. in terms of normalized
linear entropy [33]. The procedure is based on a formalism
which parallels strictly the one proposed by von Neumann
for implementing ideal measurement processes. Using the
matrix elements which represent the state of the field, we
are able to determine under which conditions we may at-
tain a reasonable purification of the field, namely, depart-
ing from a mixed state. The coherence loss of the field by
means of linear entropy, is a convenient way to study the
coherence properties of the density operator. By analogy

Sa (t) = 1 − T ra ρ̂2a (t) . (21)
where ρ̂a is the reduced density matrix of the subsystem a.
Eq. (21) has been used in the literature as an entropy-like
quantity, and sometimes referred to as the linear entropy.
For a pure state density matrix, Sa (t) vanishes as
T ra {ρ̂2a (t)} = 1. But for an entangled state, ρ̂a does not
have the form of a pure state density matrix. Thus, any
non-zero Sa (t) provides signature of entanglement present
in the state. Note further that the linear entropy is closely
related to the entanglement measure in terms of Schmidt
number [35]. Clearly for any non-zero scaled time the lin-
ear entropy becomes non-zero and positive implying en-
tanglement (see Fig. 2a). As shown in Fig. 1b, the mode
frequency parameter has the same effect on the linear en-
tropy (see Fig. 2b).
6. Conclusions
In our work we have presented a general treatment de-
scribing interaction of a three-level atom in Λ configura-
tion interacting with a photonic crystal. The present study
explains quantum fidelity and linear entropy in a straight-
forward manner. These results can easily be extended to
multi-level atoms.
References
[1] R. Jozsa and S. Presnell, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A 459, 3061
(2003).
[2] V.N. Gorbachev and A.I. Trubilko, Laser Phys. Lett. 3, 59
(2005).
[3] C.H. Bennett and P.W. Shor, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 44,
2724, (1998).
[4] G. Brida, M. Genovese, and M. Gramegna, Laser Phys. Lett.
3, 115 (2005).
[5] S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. A 55, 1613 (1997).
[6] P. Hausladen, R. Jozsa, B. Schumacher, M. Westmoreland,
and W. Wooters, Phys. Rev. A 54, 1869 (1996).
[7] In the language of Lindau a periodically varying dielectric
constant defines a “crystal”.
[8] S. Yamada, Y. Watanabe, Y. Katayama, and J.B. Cole, J.
Appl. Phys. 93, 1859 (2003); S. Yamada, Y. Watanabe, Y.
Katayama, X.Y. Yan, and J.B. Cole, J. Appl. Phys. 92, 1181
(2002).
[9] A. Kamli and M. Babiker, Phys. Rev A 62, 043804 (2000).
[10] J.D. Joannoupoulos, R.B. Meade, and J.N. Winn, Photonic
Crystals: Molding the Flow of Light (Princeton University
Press, Princeton N.J., 1995); S. John, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58,
2486 (1987); E. Yablonovitch, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 2059
(1987).
[11] S. John and J. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 64, 2418 (1990).
[12] S. John and T. Quang, Phys. Rev. A 50, 1764 (1994).
[13] S.-Y. Zhu, H. Chen, and H. Huang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 205
(1997).

c 2006 by Astro Ltd.
Published exclusively by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA
604
[14] E. Paspalakis and P.L. Knight, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 293
(1998).
[15] E. Paspalakis, N.J. Kylstra, and P.L. Knight, Phys. Rev. A
60, R33 (1999).
[16] M. Florescu and S. John, Phys. Rev. A 64, 033801 (2001).
[17] G. Vidal, J.I. Latorre, E. Rico, and A. Kitaev, Phys. Rev.
Lett. 90, 227902 (2003); T.J. Osborne and M.A. Nielsen,
Phys. Rev. A 66, 032110 (2002); A. Osterloh, L. Amico, G.
Falci, and R. Fazio, Nature 416, 608 (2002); I. Bose and E.
Chattopadhyay, Phys. Rev. A 66, 062320 (2002).
[18] M. Abdel-Aty, Laser Phys. Lett. 1, 104 (2004); A.-S.F.
Obada, M. Abdel-Aty, and M.S. Abdalla, Laser Phys. Lett.
2, 208 (2005).
[19] M. Abdel-Aty, Laser Phys. 11, 871 (2001); S. Nakamura, S.
Furuichi, and M. Abdel-Aty, Laser Phys. 12, 1349 (2002).
[20] A. Peres, Found. Phys. 29, 589 (1999).
[21] M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Phys. Lett.
A 223, 1 (1996); B.M. Terhal, Phys. Lett. A 271, 319 (2000);
M. Lewenstein, B. Kraus, J.I. Cirac, and P. Horodecki, Phys.
Rev. A 62, 052310 (2000).
[22] M. D’Angelo and Y.H. Shih, Laser Phys. Lett. 2, 567 (2005).
[23] N. Metwally, M. Abdel-Aty, and A.-S.F. Obada, Opt. Com-
mun. 250, 148 (2005).

c 2006 by Astro Ltd.
Published exclusively by WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA
M. Abdel-Aty and F. Saif: Quantum information of a three-level atom
[24] M. Ikram and F. Saif, Phys. Rev. A 66, 014304 (2002); H.-I.
Yoo and J.H. Eberly, Phys. Rep. 118, 239 (1985).
[25] S.S. Hassan, H.A. Batarfi, and R.K. Bullough, J. Opt. B 2,
R35 (2000).
[26] J.H. Mc-Guire, K.K. Shakov, and K.Y. Rakhimov, J. Phys.
B 36, 3145 (2003).
[27] S. Bougouffa and A. Kamli, J. Opt. B 6, S60 (2004).
[28] A. Zavatta, S. Viciani, and M. Bellini, Laser Phys. Lett. 3, 3
(2005).
[29] V.V. Dodonov, J. Opt. B 4, R1 (2002).
[30] P. Marian, T.A. Marian, and H. Scutaru, Phys. Rev. A 68,
062309 (2003).
[31] A. Uhlmann, Rep. Math. Phys. 9, 273 (1976); A. Uhlmann,
Rep. Math. Phys. 24, 229 (1986); R. Jozsa, J. Mod. Opt. 41,
2315 (1994).
[32] K. Zyczkowski and W. Slomczynski, J. Phys. A 34, 6689
(2001).
[33] W.J. Munro, D.F.V. James, A.G. White, and P.G. Kwiat,
Phys. Rev. A 64, 030302 (2001).
[34] W.H. Zurek, S. Habib, and J.P. Paz, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1187
(1993); A.K. Pattanayak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 4526 (1999).
[35] C.K. Law, I.A. Walmsley, and J.H. Eberly, Phys. Rev. Lett.
84, 5304 (2000); K.W. Chan, C.K. Law, and J.H. Eberly,
Phys. Rev. A 68, 022110 (2003).