Skip to main content
Log in

Distinguished three-qubit ‘magicity’ via automorphisms of the split Cayley hexagon

  • Published:
Quantum Information Processing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Disregarding the identity, the remaining 63 elements of the generalized three-qubit Pauli group are found to contain 12096 distinct copies of Mermin’s magic pentagram. Remarkably, 12096 is also the number of automorphisms of the smallest split Cayley hexagon. We give a few solid arguments showing that this may not be a mere coincidence. These arguments are mainly tied to the structure of certain types of geometric hyperplanes of the hexagon. It is further demonstrated that also an \((18_{2}, 12_{3})\)-type of magic configurations, recently proposed by Waegell and Aravind (J Phys A Math Theor 45:405301, 2012), seems to be intricately linked with automorphisms of the hexagon. Finally, the entanglement properties exhibited by edges of both pentagrams and these particular Waegell–Aravind configurations are addressed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. It is obvious that the product of the three operators located on a line of the \(10_3\)-configuration is not equal to \(\pm I\).

    Fig. 1
    figure 1

    A magic pentagram of type 1

References

  1. Liang, Y.C., Spekkens, R.W., Wiseman, H.M.: Specker’s parable of the overprotective seer: a road to contextuality, nonlocality and complementarity. Phys. Rep. 506, 1–39 (2011)

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  2. Greenberger, D.M., Horne, M.A., Zeilinger, A.: Going beyond Bell’s theorem, in Bell’s theorem. In: Kafatos, M. (ed.) Quantum Theory and Conceptions of the Universe. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp. 73–76 (1989)

  3. Kochen, S., Specker, E.P.: The problem of hidden variables in quantum mechanics. J. Math. Mech. 17, 59–87 (1967)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  4. Bengtsson, I.: Gleason, Kochen–Specker, and a competition that never was. Preprint 1210.0436 [quant-ph] (2012)

  5. Mermin, N.D.: Hidden variables and the two theorems of John Bell. Rev. Mod. Phys. 65, 803–815 (1993)

    Article  MathSciNet  ADS  Google Scholar 

  6. Planat, M.: On small proofs of the Bell–Kochen–Specker theorem for two, three and four qubits. Eur. Phys. J. Plus 127, 86 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Arkhipov, A.: Extending and characterizing quantum magic games. Preprint 1209.3819 [quant-ph] (2012)

  8. Ruuge, A.R., van Oystaeyen, F.: Saturated Kochen–Specker type configuration of $120$ projective lines in eight-dimensional space and its group of symmetry. J. Math. Phys. 46, 052109 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  9. Saniga, M., Planat, M., Pracna, P., Lévay P.: ‘Magic’ configurations of three-qubit observables and geometric hyperplanes of the smallest split Cayley hexagon. SIGMA 8, 083 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Polster, B., Schroth, A.E., van Maldeghem, H.: Generalized flatland. Math. Intell. 23, 33–47 (2001)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Schroth, A.E.: How to draw a hexagon. Discret. Math. 199, 161–171 (1999)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Waegell, M., Aravind, P.K.: Proofs of the Kochen–Specker theorem based on a system of three qubits. J. Phys. A Math. Theor. 45, 405301 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gropp, H.: Configurations and their realization. Discret. Math. 174, 137–151 (1997)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Bekius, F.: The Shannon capacity of a graph. Bachelor thesis (Amsterdam, available at http://www.science.uva.nl/onderwijs/thesis/centraal/files/f1876615413.pdf) (2011)

  15. Saniga, M., Planat, M.: Multiple qubits as symplectic polar spaces of order two. Adv. Stud. Theor. Phys. 1, 1–4 (2007)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Planat, M.: Pauli graphs when the Hilbert space dimension contains a square: why the Dedekind psi function? J. Phys. A Math. Theor. 44, 045301 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Coolsaet, K.: The smallest split Cayley hexagon has two symplectic embeddings. Finite Fields Appl. 16, 380–384 (2010)

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. Lévay, P., Saniga, M., Vrana, P.: Three-qubit operators, the split Cayley hexagon of order two, and black holes. Phys. Rev. D 78, 124022 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Ronan, M.A.: Embeddings and hyperplanes of discrete geometries. Eur. J. Comb. 8, 179–185 (1987)

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Frohard, D., Johnson, P.M.: Geometric hyperplanes in generalized hexagons of order (2,2). Commun. Algebra 22, 773–797 (1994)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Saniga, M., Lévay, P.: Mermin’s pentagram as an ovoid of $PG(3,2)$. Europhys. Lett. EPL 97, 50006 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Coffman, V., Kundu, J., Wootters, W.K.: Distributed entanglement. Phys. Rev. 61, 052306 (2000)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Holweck, F., Luque, J.G., Thibon, J.Y.: Geometric descriptions of entangled states by auxiliary varieties. J. Math. Phys. 53, 102203 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Lawrence, J.: Entanglement patterns in mutually unbiased basis sets. Phys. Rev. A 84, 022338 (2011)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was partially supported by the VEGA grant agency projects 2/0098/10 and 2/0003/13. We thank Dr. P. Vrana for enlightening correspondence concerning a skew symplectic embedding of the split Cayley hexagon and Dr. P. Pracna for providing us with the electronic versions of the figures.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michel Planat.

Appendix

Appendix

We shall show here why no edge of either a pentagram or a WA-configuration can feature a \(W\)-type of entanglement. In fact, we have the more general following statement:

Assume that \(u_1\) and \(u_2\) are two commuting operators of the generalized three-qubit Pauli group and let \(v\) be a common eigenvector, then \(v\) is either non-entangled, partially entangled or exhibits entanglement of a GHZ-type.

The proof can be carried out in two steps:

Operators involving the identity at least once

Let \(u=U_1U_2U_3\) be an element of the generalized Pauli group where \(U_i\in \{I, X, Y,Z\}\) and not all the three entries are simultaneously equal to the identity. There are \(36\) elements with at least one of the \(U_i\) being equal to \(I\). Assume \(U_1=I\) and denote by \(E_u ^\lambda \) the eigenspace of the operator \(u\) for the eigenvalue \(\lambda \). Then the space of three qubits decomposes as \(E_u^1\oplus E_u^{-1}\) and bases of the eigenspaces are given by :

\(E_u^1\)

\(E_u^{-1}\)

\(|000\rangle +|0U_2(|0\rangle )U_3(|0\rangle )\rangle \)

\(|000\rangle -|0U_2(|0\rangle )U_3(|0\rangle )\rangle \)

\(|100\rangle +|1U_2(|0\rangle )U_3(|0\rangle )\rangle \)

\(|100\rangle -|1U_2(0\rangle )U_3(|0\rangle )\rangle \)

\(|01U_3(|1\rangle )\rangle +|0U_2(|1\rangle )1\rangle \)

\(|01U_3(|1\rangle )\rangle -|0U_2(|1\rangle )1\rangle \)

\(|11U_3(|1\rangle )\rangle +|1U_2(|1\rangle )1\rangle \)

\(|11U_3(|1\rangle )\rangle -|1U_2(|1\rangle )1\rangle \)

An eigenvector \(v\) can therefore be written as

$$\begin{aligned} v&= (\alpha |0\rangle +\beta |1\rangle )\otimes (|00\rangle \pm |U_2(|0\rangle )U_3(|0\rangle )\rangle )+(\gamma |0\rangle \\&+\delta |1\rangle )\otimes (|1U_3(|1\rangle )\rangle \pm |U_2(|1\rangle )1\rangle ) \end{aligned}$$

with \(\alpha ,\beta , \gamma , \delta \in \mathbb C \). Such a vector is either non entangled, partially entangled or of GHZ-type. The same reasoning works if we consider \(u=U_1IU_3\) or \(u=U_1U_2I\).

Operators which do not involve the identity

There are \(27\) operators \(u_i=U^i _1U^i _2U^i _3\) such that \(U^i_j\in \{X,Y,Z\}\). Let \(u_1=U_1 ^1 U_2^1U_3^1\) and \(u_2=U_1^2U_2^2 U_3^2\) two such operators which commute. Because of the commuting assumption we necessarily have a \(j\in \{1,2,3\}\) such that \(U_j^1=U_j^2\). Without loss of generality let us assume that \(j=1\) and let \(v\) be a common eigenvector of \(u_1\) and \(u_2\). The vector \(v\) is also an eigenvector for \(u=u_1u_2\). But by composition \(u=u_1u_2=(U_1^1\times U_1^2)\otimes (U_2^1\times U_2^2)\otimes (U_3^1\times U_3^2)\), and \(U_1^1\times U_1 ^2=I\) by hypothesis (the notation \(\times \) stands for the usual product of matrices). Therefore \(u=u_1u_2=U_2^3U_3^3\) where \(U_2^3= U_2^1\times U_2^2\) and \(U_3^3=U_3^1\times U_3^2\). In other words \(u=u_1u_2\) is a Pauli operator of the three qubits system involving once the identity. By the previous step of our argument its eigenvector \(v\) is either non-entangled, partially entangled or of GHZ-type.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Planat, M., Saniga, M. & Holweck, F. Distinguished three-qubit ‘magicity’ via automorphisms of the split Cayley hexagon. Quantum Inf Process 12, 2535–2549 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-013-0547-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11128-013-0547-3

Keywords

Navigation