Influence of entanglement swapping on quantum small-world networks entanglement percolation in noisy scenario

Abstract

Abstract: Entanglement percolation of quantum small-world networks in mixed state is investigated by means of generating function and entanglement swapping method. Based on theoretical calculation and numerical simulation, the relationship between normalized average component size and path length in small-world networks is analyzed. Results show that the small world network has a larger average component size under the shorter paths in small-world network. It is further demonstrated that quantum small-world networks have larger aggregation and shorter average paths. It is found that the average component size increases with the increase of fidelity, and increasing the average degree of small-world networks can reduce the fidelity required for information delivery. The fidelity of maximum entangled states can be improved by entanglement swapping of mixed states, which shows that entanglement swapping can optimize the entanglement percolation in quantum small-world networks.

Key words: quantum small-world network, entanglement percolation, entanglement swapping, fidelity, average component size

CLC Number:

MAO Jun, MA Lei. Influence of entanglement swapping on quantum small-world networks entanglement percolation in noisy scenario[J]. Chinese Journal of Quantum Electronics.

References

[1] Komar P, Kessler E M, Bishof M, et al. A quantum network of clocks[J]. Nature Physics, 2014, 10(8): 582-587. [2] Pfaff W, Hensen B J, Bernien H, et al. Unconditional quantum teleportation between distant solid-state quantum bits[J]. Science, 2014, 345(6196): 532-535. [3] Wilde M M. Quantum Information Theory[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013. [4] Devoret M H, Schoelkopf R J. Superconducting circuits for quantum information: An outlook[J]. Science, 2013, 339(6124): 1169-1174. [5] Giuseppe V, Davide B, Daniele D, et al. Experimental satellite quantum communications[J]. Physical Review Letters, 2015, 115(4): 040502. [6] Ma X S, Herbst T, Scheidl T, et al. Quantum teleportation over 143 kilometres using active feed-forward[J]. Nature, 2012, 489(7415): 269-273. [7] Lapeyre Jr G J, Wehr J, Lewenstein M. Enhancement of entanglement percolation in quantum networks via lattice transformations[J]. Physical Review A, 2009, 79(4): 042324. [8] Broadfoot S, Dorner U, Jaksch D. Entanglement percolation with bipartite mixed states[J]. Europhysics Letters, 2009, 88(5): 50002. [9] Cuquet M, Calsamiglia J. Entanglement percolation in quantum complex networks[J]. Physical Review Letters, 2009, 103(24): 240503. [10] Zhang Wanhang, Ma Lei. Influence of entanglement swapping on quantum random networks robustness[J]. Chinese Journal of Quantum Electronics(量子电子学报), 2015, 32(6): 700-705(in Chinese). [11] Wang Yuhan, Ma Lei. Entanglement percolation of quantum scale-free network under random attacks and targeted failures[J].Chinese Journal of Quantum Electronics(量子电子学报）, 2017, 34(5): 596-602(in Chinese). [12] Zhou Lei, Wu Liang, Zhu Shiqun, et al. Entanglement percolation in small-world quantum networks[J]. Acta Sinica Quantum Optica (量子光学学报), 2012, 18(2): 136-142(in Chinese). [13] Veldhorst M, Hwang J C C, Yang C H, et al. An addressable quantum dot qubit with fault-tolerant control-fidelity[J]. Nature Nanotechnology, 2014, 9(12): 981-985. [14] Shao L H, Xi Z, Fan H, et al. Fidelity and trace-norm distances for quantifying coherence[J]. Physical Review A, 2015, 91(4): 042120. [15] Rajarshi P, Somshubhro B, Sibasish G, et al. Entanglement sharing through noisy qubit channels: One-shot optimal singlet fraction[J]. Physical Review A, 2014, 90(5): 052304. [16] Serrano M Á, Boguná M. Percolation and epidemic thresholds in clustered networks[J]. Physical Review Letters, 2006, 97(8): 088701. [17] Liu Xueming, Pan Linqiang, Stanley H E, et al. Controllability of giant connected components in a directed network[J]. Physical Review E, 2017, 95(4): 042318. [18] Cuquet M, Calsamiglia J. Limited-path-length entanglement percolation in quantum complex networks[J]. Physical Review A, 2011, 83(3): 032319. [19] Titze M, Bahrdt J, Wustefeld G, et al. Symplectic tracking through straight three dimensional fields by a method of generating functions[J]. Physical Review Special Topics-Accelerators and Beams, 2016, 19(1): 014001. [20] Langer N, Pedroni A, Jäncke L. The problem of thresholding in small-world network analysis[J]. PloS one, 2013, 8(1): e53199. [21 Li Wenlin, Li Chong, Song Heshan, et al. Quantum synchronization and quantum state sharing in an irregular complex network [J]. Physical Review E, 2017, 95(2): 022204. [22] Su X, Tian C, Deng X, et al. Quantum entanglement swapping between two multipartite entangled states[J]. Physical Review Letters, 2016, 117(24): 240503. [23] Song W, Yang M, Cao Z L. Purifying entanglement of noisy two-qubit states via entanglement swapping[J]. Physical Review A, 2014, 89(1): 014303. [24] Sun Xinmei, Zha Xinwei, Li Ning. Scheme of quantum private comparison via Bell states and Bell Entanglement swapping[J]. Chinese Journal of Quantum Electronics(量子电子学报), 2013, 30(5): 579-585(in Chinese). [25] Zanardi P, Quan H T, Wang X, et al. Mixed-state fidelity and quantum criticality at finite temperature[J]. Physical Review A, 2007, 75(3): 032109. [26] Xu Huacheng, Nie min, Yang Guang. An optimal exchange rate for quantum signaling quantum entanglement swapping based on fedelity[J]. Chinese Journal of Quantum Electronics(量子电子学报), 2015, 32(2): 170-177(in Chinese).