A general framework for complete positivity
Open accessAbstract
Complete positivity of quantum dynamics is often viewed as a litmus test for physicality, yet it is well known that correlated initial states need not give rise to completely positive evolutions. This observation spurred numerous investigations over the past two decades attempting to identify necessary and sufficient conditions for complete positivity. Here we describe a complete and consistent mathematical framework for the discussion and analysis of complete positivity for correlated initial states of open quantum systems. This formalism is built upon a few simple axioms and is sufficiently general to contain all prior methodologies going back to Pechakas, PRL (1994). The key observation is that initial system-bath states with the same reduced state on the system must evolve under all admissible unitary operators to system-bath states with the same reduced state on the system, in order to ensure that the induced dynamical maps on the system are well-defined. Once this consistency condition is imposed, related concepts like the assignment map and the dynamical maps are uniquely defined. In general, the dynamical maps may not be applied to arbitrary system states, but only to those in an appropriately defined physical domain. We show that the constrained nature of the problem gives rise to not one but three inequivalent types of complete positivity. Using this framework we elucidate the limitations of recent attempts to provide conditions for complete positivity using quantum discord and the quantum data-processing inequality. The problem remains open, and may require fresh perspectives and new mathematical tools. The formalism presented herein may be one step in that direction.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the pure dephasing model, entanglement can increase only when the evolution is non-Markovian (γ(t)<0).
“so entanglement can increase only for non-Markovian evolution γ (t) < 0.”
From Quantum non-Markovianity: characterization, quantification and detection (2014) · cites this paper as [244]
The Introduction (p. 1) and Summary (p. 14) discuss complete positivity and initial system–bath correlations, not entanglement growth in a pure dephasing model. Searches for pure dephasing, γ(t), and a negative dephasing rate found no passage addressing the claimed condition for entanglement to increase. (LLM, conf=0.75)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 9
- [18]R. Goodman and N. R. Wallach, Symmetry, Representations, and Invariants (Springer, New York, 2009).
- [21]D. Salgado and J. L. Sanchez-Gomez, (2002), arXiv:quantph/0211164.
- [24]M.-D. Choi, Linear Algebr. Appl. 10 , 285 (1975). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0024-3795(7590075-0) · DOI
- [23]J. de Pillis, Pacific J. Math. 23 , 129 (1967). http://dx.doi.org/10.2140/pjm.1967.23.129 · DOI
- [25]W. F. Stinespring, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 6 , 211 (1955). http://www.jstor.org/stable/2032342
- [27]W. Arveson, Acta Math. 123 , 141 (1969). http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02392388 · DOI
- [26]A. Jenˇ cov´ a, J. Math. Phys. 53 , 012201 (2012). http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3676294 · DOI
- [29]K. Kraus, Ann. Physics 64 , 311 (1971). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0003-4916(7190108-4) · DOI
- [34]C. A. Rodr´ ıguez, The Theory of Non-Markovian Open Quantum Systems , Ph.D. thesis, The University of Texas at Austin (2008).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Quantum non-Markovianity: characterization, quantification and detection
Rivas, Á., Huelga, S. F., & Plenio, M. B. (2014) · Reports on Progress in Physics · doi:10.1088/0034-4885/77/9/094001 · Cited by 1,035 · see citing works
- Authors
- Dominy, J. M., Shabani, A., & Lidar, D. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Southern California (US)
- Google (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Lidar, Daniel A.
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2013
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 465-494
- ISSN
- 1570-0755 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1312.0908
- OpenAlex
- W1863769126
- Cited by
- 84
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 40 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8
- FWCI
- 6.87
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Quantum Information Processing (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Funders
- National Science Foundation (PHY- 969969, PHY-803304)
- Army Research Office (W911NF‐11‐1‐0268)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum Mechanics and Applications
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Advanced Thermodynamics and Statistical Mechanics
- Keywords
- complete positivity, open quantum systems, dynamical maps, physical domain, quantum discord, reduced state, necessary and sufficient conditions
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
