Paper detail

Classification of qubit entanglement: SL(2,C) versus SU(2) invariance

The role of SU(2) invariants for the classification of multiparty entanglement is discussed and exemplified for the Kempe invariant I_5 of pure three-qubit states. It is found to being an independent invariant only in presence of both W-type entanglement and threetangle. In this case, constant I_5 admits for a wide range of both threetangle and concurrences. Furthermore, the present analysis indicates that an SL^3 orbit of states with equal tangles but continuously varying I_5 must exist. This means that I_5 provides no information on the entanglement in the system in addition to that contained in the tangles (concurrences and threetangle) themselves. Together with the numerical evidence that I_5 is an entanglement monotone this implies that SU(2) invariance or the monotone property are too weak requirements for the characterization and quantification of entanglement for systems of three qubits, and that SL(2,C) invariance is required. This conclusion can be extended to general multipartite systems (including higher local dimension) because the entanglement classes of three-qubit systems appear as subclasses.

preprint2008arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.