WorksPhysics and Astronomy
Correlated Catalysis Removes the Strong Converse for Entanglement Distillation
Abstract
Entanglement distillation converts noisy shared quantum states into maximally entangled pairs using local operations and classical communication. The distillable entanglement determines the maximum asymptotic rate at which this process can be performed reliably. For several classes of quantum states, distillation above this rate obeys a strong converse: the fidelity with the target state vanishes asymptotically. Here we show that correlated catalysis removes the strong converse for every distillable bipartite state. Specifically, at any target rate , the optimal asymptotic fidelity is given by . Thus, although catalysis does not increase the maximum reliable distillation rate, it allows nonvanishing fidelity at every finite rate. Remarkably, this advantage persists even when the catalyst is returned exactly at every finite blocklength and the correlations between the output and catalyst vanish asymptotically. We further characterize the catalyst size required to sustain nonvanishing fidelity above the reliable distillation rate.
Introduction
Quantum entanglement [1] is a fundamental type of correlation between quantum particles, enabling communication protocols that surpass classical limits. As a uniquely quantum phenomenon, entanglement acts as a vital resource for tasks such as quantum teleportation [2], superdense coding [3], and quantum key distribution [4, 5]. These applications motivate the development of methods for preparing high-quality entangled states.
Entanglement is often studied in the context of resource theory. In this setting, two parties, say Alice and Bob, can perform only local quantum channels, and communicate through a classical channel. These operations are called local operations and classical communication (LOCC) [6].
Entanglement distillation enables the extraction of nearly maximally entangled states from noisy entangled input using local operations and classical communication [7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13]. For a finite number of input copies, both deterministic protocols based on quantum error correction [8, 13] and probabilistic protocols based on postselection [7, 9] have been studied. In the asymptotic regime, the central objective is to determine the optimal rate at which maximally entangled pairs can be extracted as the number of input copies tends to infinity [8, 14, 15].
In the asymptotic regime, a distillation protocol transforms copies of a bipartite state into an output state approximating maximally entangled qubit pairs. The distillation rate is the number of target pairs per input copy, . The distillable entanglement is the supremum of rates achievable such that the fidelity between the output state and maximally entangled states tends to unity [16]:
where the supremum is taken over rates for which there exists a sequence of LOCC channels , and denotes the density operator of a maximally entangled qubit pair. Operationally, quantifies the asymptotic number of Bell pairs that can be extracted per input copy with vanishing error [17].
The definition of distillable entanglement rules out asymptotically perfect distillation at rates , but does not determine how the fidelity behaves in this regime. A stronger requirement is the strong converse property: for every rate , the fidelity of the output with the target state must tend to zero as , irrespective of the sequence of LOCC protocols employed [18]. Thus, when the strong converse holds, allowing a fixed nonzero error does not increase the asymptotically achievable distillation rate.
It is known that the strong converse holds for bipartite pure states [19] and for maximally correlated states [20]. More generally, the Rains relative entropy provides a strong-converse upper bound on the distillation rate: whenever the rate exceeds this bound, the fidelity vanishes exponentially with the number of input copies [21, 22]. Whether the strong converse holds for unassisted distillation from arbitrary bipartite states remains open. In this paper, we investigate whether the strong converse also holds for entanglement distillation protocols assisted by a catalyst.
Entanglement catalysis provides another way to extend the possibilities of quantum state manipulation under LOCC [23, 24, 25, 26, 27]. In its original formulation [23], Alice and Bob have access to an auxiliary entangled state , called a catalyst, which assists a transformation while being returned unchanged and uncorrelated with the output. A catalytic transformation therefore takes the form
Remarkably, such a transformation may be possible even when cannot be converted into by LOCC alone. This framework was subsequently extended to correlated catalysis [28, 29, 30], in which the catalyst is returned exactly in its marginal state but may become correlated with the output system [31, 32, 33]. The final state is such that
instead of . Allowing such residual correlations can enlarge the set of achievable state transformations [31].
Entangled states with positive partial transpose remain undistillable under correlated catalytic local operations and classical communication, while retaining a positive entanglement cost [33]. Thus, correlated catalysis does not make entanglement theory asymptotically reversible.
In this work, we show that correlated catalysis removes the strong converse for every distillable bipartite state, even when the correlations between the output and the catalyst vanish asymptotically. More precisely, at any rate , the optimal asymptotic fidelity equals , whereas fidelity approaching unity is achievable for . These limits remain achievable under any prescribed positive sequence of upper bounds on the output–catalyst mutual information tending to zero.
We also determine the catalytic resources needed to sustain non-vanishing fidelity above the reliable distillation rate. At rates where non-catalytic distillation obeys an exponential strong converse, the catalyst’s max-relative entropy of entanglement must grow at least linearly with the input blocklength . Requiring the output–catalyst mutual information to satisfy , for any prescribed positive sequence , strengthens this lower bound to , and hence imposes the same lower bound on the logarithm of each local catalyst dimension. Conversely, for every distillable source, every , and every fixed , we construct correlated catalytic protocols achieving fidelity at least with . Thus, whenever the exponential-converse assumption holds, the optimal catalyst dimension satisfies . In particular, this conclusion applies to pure and maximally correlated source states at every rate above their distillable entanglement.
Definitions and problem statement
Let
be a maximally entangled state with local dimensions . The -fold tensor product of a maximally entangled qubit pair is therefore .
As discussed in the introduction, catalysis can enable transformations that are otherwise impossible under LOCC alone. Here, we study entanglement distillation assisted by a bipartite catalyst. We define a distillation protocol with catalyst as follows [31, 32]:
Definition 1. Correlated catalytic distillation protocol
Fix a bipartite source state and a target of Bell pairs. A correlated catalytic distillation protocol is a deterministic LOCC channel that takes copies of the state and a bipartite catalyst and outputs
We quantify the performance of a catalytic distillation protocol by the overlap of its output marginal with the target maximally entangled state:
The correlations between the output and the catalyst can be quantified by the quantum mutual information [34]
where denotes the von Neumann entropy [27]. Additionally, we can bound the trace distance to uncorrelated catalysis by the quantum Pinsker inequality with quantum mutual information [35],
In particular, implies . Moreover, vanishing mutual information implies that the joint state approaches the product of its marginals in trace distance.
Throughout this work, we consider finite-dimensional catalysts with unrestricted dimension and entanglement, and investigate protocols in which the residual correlations between the system and catalyst can be made arbitrarily small while preserving the exact catalyst marginal.
Suppose that we have copies of a state and want to produce copies of using correlated catalytic entanglement distillation. The maximum achievable fidelity with a target state is:
where the supremum is taken over all finite-dimensional catalysts and deterministic LOCC channels satisfying and . See Eq. (5) for the definition of . We use when no restriction on the output–catalyst correlations is imposed.
For a fixed distillation rate , let . The reliable catalytic distillation rate is defined as
This quantity coincides with the correlated-catalytic distillable entanglement defined in [33], since vanishing trace-distance error and fidelity tending to one are equivalent for the pure target state. The corresponding strong-converse threshold is
The strong converse holds if every rate exceeding the reliable distillation rate necessarily leads to vanishing global fidelity in the limit . In other words, for an input state , the strong converse holds iff . In this paper we show that strong converse does not hold for catalytic entanglement distillation protocols.
Throughout this work, all logarithms are base two unless stated otherwise. We use standard asymptotic notation: for nonnegative sequences and , we write if there exists a constant such that for all sufficiently large . We write if there exists a constant such that for all sufficiently large . Finally, we write if there exist constants such that for all sufficiently large .
Throughout this work, fidelity refers to the squared fidelity; for a pure target , it is given by .
Main results
We first show that exact catalysis with vanishing correlations removes the strong converse for every distillable source state. At any rate , the optimal asymptotic fidelity is , even when output–catalyst correlations vanish asymptotically.
Theorem 2. Let be a finite-dimensional bipartite state with . For every prescribed positive sequence and every ,
Consequently,
The proof is given in § 1.3. In particular, if we obtain
Note that the result was previously established for distillable states in Ref. [32].
The construction used in the proof of Theorem 2 achieves the optimal asymptotic fidelity at rates , but requires a large catalyst memory.
In the following, we derive lower bounds on the catalyst resources needed to maintain a fixed positive fidelity at rates where non-catalytic distillation obeys an exponential decay of fidelity.
Let
denote the optimal fidelity without a catalyst. For a bipartite catalyst state , define its max-relative entropy of entanglement [36]
The Rains relative entropy , defined as [37]
provides an exponential converse-bound for non-catalytic distillation of any finite-dimensional bipartite state [21, 22], i.e. every rate satisfying leads to exponential decay of . In Eq. (19), denotes partial transposition on Bob’s subsystem [38, 39] and is the quantum relative entropy, with value when .
For pure and maximally correlated states, [20], so for these states every rate above distillable entanglement leads to exponential decay of fidelity with target state . Our catalyst-resource lower bounds require an exponential fidelity bound at a threshold strictly below the target rate. We formulate this assumption below.
Definition 3 (Exponential Converse Bound). Let be a finite-dimensional bipartite state. We say that non-catalytic distillation from satisfies an exponential-converse bound with parameters , , and if
for every integer and every integer . The parameters are independent of and $L.
We next derive lower bounds on the catalyst entanglement required to maintain nonvanishing fidelity at rates where non-catalytic distillation obeys an exponential converse bound. The following theorem applies at every target rate , since its exponential-converse assumption is satisfied by choosing a threshold rate such that .
Theorem 4 (Necessary catalyst entanglement). Let be a finite-dimensional bipartite state satisfying the exponential-converse bound of Definition 3 with parameters , , and . Consider a deterministic catalytic LOCC protocol with as input, as catalyst such
that it achieves the rate and the fidelity of this protocol with a target Bell state is greater than a constant .
Then, for all sufficiently large and with no restriction on catalyst correlation, the catalyst’s max-relative entropy of entanglement satisfies
Furthermore, if the correlations of the joint output state are restricted by
then
The proof is given in § 1.4.
We next translate the lower bounds on into lower bounds on the local catalyst dimensions. Let
denote the smaller local catalyst dimension. We show the following corollary:
Corollary 5 (Necessary catalyst dimension). Under the assumptions of Theorem 4 and without a correlation constraint, the following lower bound on the catalyst dimension holds:
for all sufficiently large .
Moreover, if we also assume the correlation constraint , we obtain
Equivalently, there exists a constant such that
for all sufficiently large $n.
Proof. The max-relative entropy of entanglement satisfies the standard dimension bound [36, 40]
Consequently,
Combining this inequality with Theorem 4 gives
for protocols without a constraint on output–catalyst correlations. Under the additional correlation assumptions, Theorem 4 also yields
which proves the remaining claims. □
Although the above corollary provides a lower bound on the dimension of the catalyst, it does not provide a protocol that uses such a catalyst. The following theorem constructs a protocol which reaches the scaling specified by the lower bound on catalyst dimensions (26) of Corollary 5.
Theorem 6 (Achievable catalyst dimension). Let be a finite-dimensional bipartite state with . Fix , , and let be any prescribed sequence with .
Then, for all sufficiently large , there exists a deterministic correlated catalytic LOCC protocol with input and target , where , such that
Moreover, both local catalyst dimensions satisfy
The proof is given in Section VI.
Now, let be the minimum value of over all deterministic correlated catalytic LOCC protocols with input , target , fidelity at least , and output–catalyst mutual information at most . Using above results we show the following corollary.
Corollary 7 (Optimal order of catalyst dimension). Under the assumptions of Theorem 6, suppose additionally that the exponential-converse hypothesis of Theorem 4 holds for some threshold strictly below . Assume that the output–catalyst mutual information is at most . Then
Proof. Corollary 5 gives
The matching upper bound follows from Theorem 6. □
The constants in these bounds may depend on , , , and the fixed exponential-converse parameters, but not on or . The strict inequality provides the fixed positive gap required for our construction. Thus, under the assumptions of Corollary 7, the optimal catalyst dimension satisfies for every fixed fidelity requirement strictly below the optimal asymptotic fidelity. This does not determine the optimal dimension scaling when the fidelity itself converges to .
Operationally, this corresponds to an optimal local catalyst memory cost of qubits: every admissible protocol requires qubits on each side, and our construction achieves the matching upper bound on both sides. This counts the memory needed to represent the catalyst, not the number of Bell pairs it contains.
Proof of Theorem 2
In this section, we detail the proof of theorem 2. Within the proof, we will use several lemmas whose full statements and proofs can be found in Section VII.
To begin, assume that we have a state such that . First, we find an upper bound on .
Let a catalytic protocol take as input and produce an -pair output of fidelity . Lemmas 9 and 10 give, for ,
Hence
For this yields
The bound is independent of catalyst dimension, catalyst entanglement, and output–catalyst correlation.
We now construct a protocol that asymptotically attains this upper bound. The protocol consists of two stages. First, correlated catalytic amplification produces a mixture of copies of the source state and a separable state. Second, ordinary LOCC distillation with a rate is applied to obtain Bell pairs. In the following paragraph we describe the first stage.
Fix a rate with and a requested rate . For all sufficiently large set
Since and , there are LOCC distillation channels on source copies producing Bell pairs with fidelity tending to one, after discarding any excess output pairs.
Let be a separable bipartite state on the same Hilbert space as . Choose an integer such that
Such a finite exists because along the multiples of . By Proposition 12, there exists a correlated catalytic LOCC protocol with input and output marginal
satisfying
Now we proceed to the second stage. We apply the ordinary -copy distillation channel only to the system output. Let us denote it by . This does not change the catalyst marginal and cannot increase . Additionally, we have
Since , ordinary distillation achieves
Moreover, since is separable and is LOCC, the state is separable. Thus, by Lemma 8,
Consequently, the achieved fidelity satisfies
where we used Eq. (39).
For , this construction therefore gives
Since this holds for every fixed , letting yields
For , ordinary unassisted distillation already achieves fidelity tending to one. At , the same catalytic construction gives an asymptotic fidelity of at least for every fixed . Letting therefore yields a lower bound of one. Combining all three cases, we obtain
For every , the limiting fidelity is one; for every , it is . Hence the reliable rate is . For every finite , the limiting fidelity is positive because . Therefore the nonvanishing-fidelity threshold is infinite, proving (13).
Proof of Theorem 4
In this section, we detail the proof of theorem 4. Let denote the fidelity of the catalytic protocol with the target state . By assumption, we have . Since , for all sufficiently large , we have and . Lemma 13 and Eq. (20) therefore give
Taking logarithms proves Eq. (21).
We now repeat the protocol times, each time using a fresh input block and the same catalyst. Since the catalyst marginal is returned exactly after each use, the resulting process is a catalytic LOCC protocol with input , target Bell pairs, and catalyst . Since
our exponential-converse assumption implies
Now, we impose the additional constraints that the correlations within the joint output state are restricted by
Then, by applying Lemma 14, we obtain
Set
Since , eventually . Moreover,
Consequently,
where we used the fact that exponential decay dominates polynomial growth. Thus, for all sufficiently large ,
Substituting into Eq. (54) gives
Taking logarithms yields
For sufficiently large , and . Consequently,
The threshold in and the constants in this bound depend only on the fixed parameters and the prescribed sequences and , not on the protocol or catalyst. Thus, the bound holds uniformly over all admissible protocols. Eq. (23) follows.
Proof of Theorem 6
In this section, we detail the proof of theorem 6. As in the proof of Theorem 2, the protocol consists of two stages. First, correlated catalysis transforms copies of into a mixture of , with , and a separable state. Second, ordinary LOCC distillation is applied to this output to produce approximate Bell pairs. To reduce the catalyst memory cost, the first stage uses a truncated binomial distribution instead of the fixed-weight distribution used in Proposition 12.
Choose fixed constants such that
For all sufficiently large , set
Then
Since and , there exist deterministic LOCC distillation channels such that
We now construct the first stage of the protocol. Let be a separable state on the same bipartite Hilbert space as , and define
The additional copies of can be prepared freely by LOCC.
For an integer , to be chosen below, set
Let be the probability distribution on given by
where is the Hamming weight of the binary string , i.e., the number of entries equal to one. Define
where
Thus, is the probability of sampling the string . Consider the permutation-invariant state
The transformation is deterministic LOCC. Indeed, Alice samples according to and communicates it to Bob. Every string in the support of requires copies of . The parties discard the unused copies of , replace them with copies of , and perform matching local permutations to prepare the corresponding tensor product.
Let denote the -block marginal of , with (it is a scalar, see the comment in Lemma 11) on the trivial system. By Lemma 11, the state
enables a correlated catalytic conversion of one fresh block into an output with marginal . The complete catalyst marginal is returned exactly, and the output–catalyst mutual information at this stage equals
To bound this quantity, define
Let and , so that . Denote by the classical-to-quantum channel that prepares conditional on the classical string . It maps the distribution to and to . Indeed,
Data processing therefore gives
Furthermore, since every one-block marginal of equals ,
Consequently,
Choose a fixed such that, for all sufficiently large ,
For , Hoeffding’s inequality yields [41]
Whenever , we also have
Combining these inequalities with Eq. (78) gives
The condition means that the admissible configurations carry at least half of the probability under the original distribution . Since , it is sufficient to take
As is fixed, this condition is automatically satisfied for sufficiently large . It imposes no additional assumption on the source state. Note that is a normalization factor, not the success probability of the catalytic protocol: the protocol samples directly from , whose support contains only admissible configurations.
For all sufficiently large , we have . We may then choose
Here denotes the natural logarithm. This choice ensures
and .
By permutation invariance,
Since conditioning on removes only an upper tail,
Thus .
Finally, apply (recall that is ordinary distillation protocol) only to the released output block. This preserves the catalyst marginal and cannot increase the output–catalyst mutual information. The final state therefore satisfies
Because is separable,
Hence
which implies
In particular, for all sufficiently large . No comparison between and is required.
It remains to bound the catalyst dimensions. Let be the local dimensions of . Each catalyst block contains copies of the source Hilbert space, and the classical clock has values. Including the clock, the local dimensions can be chosen to satisfy
Since and , both quantities are , as claimed.
AUXILIARY LEMMAS AND PROPOSITIONS
Lemma 8 (Separable target overlap [22]). For every separable state with local dimension ,
Lemma 9 (Distillable entanglement of a finite catalytic output). Assume that . Suppose a finite-block exact-return catalytic LOCC protocol maps to an output marginal . Then
Proof. Fix and initial catalyst and assume instead that . Consequently, there exists such that . Run independent copies of the finite protocol on , using independent copies of its finite catalyst. The system output is exactly and the complete catalyst marginal is exactly . Apply an ordinary distillation protocol only to . Such protocol does not change the catalyst marginal. Since there exist protocol which distill copies of state as . Thus, we constructed a protocol which consumes copies of a state and distills copies of . The rate of this protocol is in the limit . This contradicts the catalytic rate-invariance theorem (Theorem 2 of Ref. [32]). Therefore, (95) holds.
Lemma 10 (Bell-product overlap lower-bounds ). Let be a state on qubit pairs and let
Set
Then
Proof. Let . Apply the isotropic twirl , which is LOCC and preserves . Since distillable entanglement cannot increase under LOCC, it is enough to lower-bound the distillable entanglement of
Decompose each local -dimensional space into two subsystems of dimensions and such that:
The maximally entangled state factors as .
Alice and Bob measure their -dimensional subsystems in the computational basis. They keep the -dimensional subsystems exactly when their outcomes agree and forget the common outcome. The ideal component always passes and leaves . The identity operator has matching outcomes, so the unnormalized retained state is
Its success probability and unnormalized Bell overlap are
The normalized successful state is isotropic with local dimension , with Bell fidelity
@references 久久精品 Its local marginals are maximally mixed, and therefore its coherent information is
where denotes the binary entropy. Here, and denote Alice’s and Bob’s retained subsystems, respectively, each of dimension . The hashing inequality states that the positive part of coherent information is an achievable one-way distillation rate [15]. Applying the filter independently to many copies and hashing the successful outputs gives
The final inequality is valid even when the expression is negative, because .
We now estimate the last expression. First, , see Eq. (103). Second,
Plugging it into Eq. (102), we obtain that . Since also ,
where the second inequality uses the fact that . Recalling (97) completes the proof of (98).
The following construction is a variant of the catalysts introduced in [29, 42].
Lemma 11 (Batch catalyst and entropy identity). Let be an arbitrary bipartite state, and suppose that a deterministic LOCC channel transforms exactly into a permutation-invariant -block state . Denote by its -block marginal and set (it is a scalar, since all the subsystems are traced out).
Define a catalyst of blocks and a classical clock by
Then, there is an exact catalytic conversion of one fresh block to an output with marginal . Moreover,
where is quantum relative entropy.
Proof. We construct the LOCC protocol that implements the claimed transformation. Apply the following channel. For clock value , regard one block of the part as the output, place the fresh into the bank, and increment the clock. The catalyst marginal in the new clock branch is
which is precisely the term of (112) corresponding to . Correlations between the released block and the retained blocks are kept; only the marginal of the retained blocks is .
For clock value , the bank and fresh input contain . Apply the assumed exact channel to obtain , release one block, retain the remaining blocks, and reset the clock to zero. The retained marginal is , again the required next catalyst branch. Since the clock is uniformly distributed and shifted cyclically, the complete catalyst marginal returns exactly. Every released block has marginal by permutation invariance.
It remains to compute the correlation. Put . Orthogonality of the classical clock labels and standard properties of von Neumann entropy give:
The second expression is indexed by the final clock value; at clock zero its conditional joint state is , and at clock it is with one block designated as . Since the catalyst returns exactly and ,
where the sums telescope. Finally, all one-block marginals of are , so
Dividing by and comparing with Eq. (117) proves (113).
Proposition 12
Proposition 12 (Decoupled source-state amplifier). Let be a finite-dimensional bipartite state and let be a separable state on the same Hilbert space. Let be positive integers satisfying , , and . There exists a deterministic correlated catalytic LOCC protocol with input and output marginal
The catalyst is returned exactly, , and the residual correlations satisfy
Proof. Set
Since is separable, the additional copies of can be prepared freely by LOCC. Define
and the permutation-invariant state
where . The state contains exactly copies of and copies of . Every tensor product term in Eq. (123) contains exactly copies of and copies of .
Alice chooses a binary string of weight uniformly at random and communicates it to Bob. Both parties then perform matching local permutations to arrange the copies of and into the corresponding tensor product term in Eq. (123). Consequently, is a deterministic LOCC transformation.
Since is permutation invariant, every one-block marginal is identical. The probability that a given block contains equals . Therefore,
By Lemma 11, the transformation yields a correlated catalytic conversion of into an output with marginal . Since the additional copies of can be prepared freely, this gives the claimed protocol with input and proves Eq. (119).
By Lemma 11, the residual correlation is
Let , and let denote the uniform probability distribution over binary strings of length and weight . Let be the distribution of independent Bernoulli random variables. Consider the classical-to-quantum channel that prepares conditioned on a classical string . By construction,
The data-processing inequality for quantum relative entropy therefore gives
Finally, define
Since is a mode of the binomial distribution, and the distribution has possible outcomes,
Consequently, by Eq. (127),
which proves Eq. (120).
Auxiliary-state bound
Lemma 13 (Auxiliary-state bound). Let be a deterministic LOCC channel acting on , where is a finite-dimensional bipartite auxiliary state. Write
Then
No return condition on the auxiliary state is required.
Proof. Fix . By the definition of (see Eq. (17)), there exists a normalized separable state such that [36]
Tensoring with and applying the positive map gives
Consequently,
Indeed, preparing the separable state , applying , and discarding defines a non-catalytic LOCC protocol. Taking and using proves the claim. □
Lemma 14 (Repeated-use bound). Under the assumptions of Lemma 13, suppose additionally that
Then, for every integer ,
Proof. Apply the same protocol times, using fresh input blocks and the same catalyst, without acting again on previous outputs. Let denote the entire output block of use , including both parties’ systems, and let denote the final joint state of all output blocks. Each use produces the same output marginal, so . Note that the total output might be correlated and in general .
Before each use, the catalyst marginal is , and the fresh input is independent of the catalyst and all previous outputs. The reduced input to each use is therefore . Consequently, immediately after each use, the joint marginal of the new output and the catalyst is
up to relabeling as . In particular,
Here refers to the state immediately after use . Since subsequent uses do not act on , its final marginal also satisfies .
Fix . Starting immediately after use , all future outputs are obtained by processing the catalyst together with fresh independent input blocks. Including these fixed input states in the channel definition, the remaining protocol followed by discarding the final catalyst is a quantum channel
Thus
Data processing gives
where each mutual information is evaluated on the corresponding joint state.
Using and the entropy chain identity, we obtain (recall that is quantum relative entropy.)
In the last step we used Eq. (142). Quantum Pinsker’s inequality therefore implies [35]
Eq. (131) gives . Since , the trace-distance bound yields
Using the fact that we obtain:
The complete repeated-use process is a deterministic LOCC protocol acting on , with the catalyst supplied only once. Since is locally unitarily equivalent to , the auxiliary-state bound gives
Combining Eqs. (147), (146) and (144), we obtain:
Conclusions
In this work, we have shown that correlated catalysis removes the strong converse for entanglement distillation from every finite-dimensional distillable bipartite state. At any target rate , the optimal asymptotic fidelity is , even under an arbitrarily small positive bound on the output–catalyst mutual information tending to zero. The catalyst is returned exactly for every input blocklength. Consequently, catalysis preserves the reliable distillation rate while allowing nonvanishing fidelity at every finite rate.
An analogous catalytic enhancement occurs in coherence manipulation under time-translation covariant operations [43]. Under suitable conditions on the coherent modes, correlated catalysts can increase the reliable distillation rate from zero to infinity [43]. Our result identifies a different effect for entanglement: for every distillable source, the reliable rate remains , while the strong-converse threshold becomes infinite, even with asymptotically vanishing output–catalyst mutual information.
The construction used in the proof of Theorem 2 establishes the optimal asymptotic fidelity, but requires a larger catalyst memory. This motivates our second construction, which reduces memory cost while retaining any fixed fidelity requirement at rates . For every distillable source, it requires only qubits of local catalyst memory while ensuring that the fidelity with the target state satisfies and that . Whenever noncatalytic distillation obeys an exponential strong converse at a threshold below , a matching lower bound holds uniformly over all admissible protocols. Under this assumption, the optimal local memory cost for such fixed fidelity requirements is therefore .
The fixed fidelity requirement can be chosen arbitrarily close to , but the constants in the memory bound and the required input blocklength may depend on this choice. Thus, although the construction of Theorem 2 establishes the optimal fidelity limit, our matching memory bounds do not determine the optimal memory cost when . Characterizing the joint dependence of this cost on the fidelity gap and the allowed output–catalyst correlations remains an open question.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by the National Science Centre Poland (Grant No. 2022/46/E/ST2/00115 and 2024/55/B/ST2/01590).
ChatGPT 6 Astra was used during the preparation of this manuscript. The authors checked and verified all the results.
References
References
- [1]R. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, M. Horodecki, and K. Horodecki, Quantum entanglement, Rev. Mod. Phys. 81, 865 (2009).DOI
- [2]C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, C. Crépeau, R. Jozsa, A. Peres, and W. K. Wootters, Teleporting an unknown quantum state via dual classical and Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 1895 (1993).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10053414
- [3]C. H. Bennett and S. J. Wiesner, Communication via one- and two-particle operators on Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 69, 2881 (1992).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10046665
- [4]C. H. Bennett and G. Brassard, Quantum cryptography: Public key distribution and coin tossing, in Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Computers, Systems and Signal Processing (Bangalore, India, 1984) pp. 175–179.
- [5]A. K. Ekert, Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s theorem, Phys. Rev. Lett. 67, 661 (1991).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10044956
- [6]E. Chitambar, D. Leung, L. Mančinska, M. Ozols, and A. Winter, Everything you always wanted to know about LOCC (but were afraid to ask), Communications in Mathematical Physics 328, 387 (2014).
- [7]C. H. Bennett, G. Brassard, S. Popescu, B. Schumacher, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Purification of noisy entanglement and faithful teleportation via noisy channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 722 (1996).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10061534
- [8]C. H. Bennett, D. P. DiVincenzo, J. A. Smolin, and W. K. Wootters, Mixed-state entanglement and quantum error correction, Phys. Rev. A 54, 3824 (1996).DOI
- [9]D. Deutsch, A. Ekert, R. Jozsa, C. Macchiavello, S. Popescu, and A. Sanpera, Quantum privacy amplification and the security of quantum cryptography over noisy channels, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 2818 (1996).DOI
- [10]J. Dehaene, M. Van den Nest, B. De Moor, and F. Verstraete, Local permutations of products of Bell states and entanglement distillation, Phys. Rev. A 67, 022310 (2003).DOI
- [11]M. Horodecki and P. Horodecki, Reduction criterion of separability and limits for a class of distillation protocols, Phys. Rev. A 59, 4206 (1999).
- [12]W. Dür and H. J. Briegel, Entanglement purification and quantum error correction, Reports on Progress in Physics 70, 1381 (2007).
- [13]R. Matsumoto, Conversion of a general quantum stabilizer code to an entanglement distillation protocol, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 36, 8113 (2003).
- [14]C. H. Bennett, H. J. Bernstein, S. Popescu, and B. Schumacher, Concentrating partial entanglement by local operations, Phys. Rev. A 53, 2046 (1996).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9913106
- [15]I. Devetak and A. Winter, Distillation of secret key and entanglement from quantum states, Proceedings of the Royal Society A 461, 207 (2005).
- [16]E. M. Rains, Rigorous treatment of distillable entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 60, 173 (1999).DOI
- [17]M. B. Plenio and S. Virmani, An introduction to entanglement measures, Quantum Information and Computation 7, 1 (2007).arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0504163
- [18]L. Lami and B. Regula, No second law of entanglement manipulation after all, Nature Physics 19, 184 (2023).DOI
- [19]M. Hayashi, M. Koashi, K. Matsumoto, F. Morikoshi, and A. Winter, Error exponents for entanglement concentration, Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General 36, 527 (2003).DOI
- [20]K. Fang, X. Wang, M. Tomamichel, and R. Duan, Non-asymptotic entanglement distillation, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 65, 6454 (2019).
- [21]M. Tomamichel, M. M. Wilde, and A. Winter, Strong converse rates for quantum communication, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 63, 715 (2017).
- [22]S. Khatri and M. M. Wilde, Principles of quantum communication theory: A modern approach (2024).
- [23]D. Jonathan and M. B. Plenio, Entanglement-assisted local manipulation of pure quantum states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 3566 (1999).DOI
- [24]C. Datta, T. V. Kondra, M. Miller, and A. Streltsov, Catalysis of entanglement and other quantum resources, Reports on Progress in Physics 86, 116002 (2023).DOI
- [25]P. Lipka-Bartosik, H. Wilming, and N. H. Y. Ng, Catalysis in quantum information theory, Rev. Mod. Phys. 96, 025005 (2024).
- [26]J. Eisert and M. Wilkens, Catalysis of entanglement manipulation for mixed states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 437 (2000).pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10991302
- [27]M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information: 10th Anniversary Edition (Cambridge University Press, 2010).
- [28]H. Wilming, R. Gallego, and J. Eisert, Axiomatic characterization of the quantum relative entropy and free energy, Entropy 19, 241 (2017).arxiv.org/abs/1702.08473
- [29]N. Shiraishi and T. Sagawa, Quantum thermodynamics of correlated-catalytic state conversion at small scale, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 150502 (2021).DOI
- [30]H. Wilmington, Entropy and reversible catalysis, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 260402 (2021).
- [31]T. V. Kondra, C. Datta, and A. Streltsov, Catalytic transformations of pure entangled states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 150503 (2021).DOI
- [32]R. Ganardi, T. V. Kondra, and A. Streltsov, Catalytic and asymptotic equivalence for quantum entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 250201 (2024).DOI
- [33]L. Lami, B. Regula, and A. Streltsov, No-go theorem for entanglement distillation using catalysis, Phys. Rev. A 109, L050401 (2024).DOI
- [34]M. M. Wilde, Quantum Information Theory (Cambridge University Press, 2013).
- [35]F. Hiai, M. Ohya, and M. Tsukada, Sufficiency, KMS condition and relative entropy in von Neumann algebras, Pacific Journal of Mathematics 96, 99 (1981).
- [36]N. Datta, Min- and max-relative entropies and a new entanglement monotone, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 55, 2816 (2009).DOI
- [37]E. Rains, A semidefinite program for distillable entanglement, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 47, 2921 (2001).DOI
- [38]M. Horodecki, P. Horodecki, and R. Horodecki, Separability of mixed states: necessary and sufficient conditions, Physics Letters A 223, 1 (1996).DOI
- [39]A. Peres, Separability criterion for density matrices, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 1413 (1996).DOI
- [40]N. Datta, Max-relative entropy of entanglement, alias log robustness, International Journal of Quantum Information 07, 475 (2009).arxiv.org/abs/0807.2536
- [41]W. Hoeffding, Probability inequalities for sums of bounded random variables, Journal of the American Statistical Association 58, 13 (1963).
- [42]R. Duan, Y. Feng, X. L. Li, and M. Ying, Multiple-copy entanglement transformation and entanglement catalysis, Phys. Rev. A 71, 042319 (2005).DOI
- [43]N. Shiraishi and R. Takagi, Arbitrary amplification of quantum coherence in asymptotic and catalytic transformation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 180202 (2024).DOI