Abstract
Coherence is the most fundamental quantum feature of the nonclassical systems. The understanding of coherence within the resource theory has been attracting increasing interest among which the quantification of coherence is an essential ingredient. A satisfactory measure should meet certain standard criteria. It seems that the most crucial criterion should be the strong monotonicity, that is, average coherence doesn’t increase under the (sub-selective) incoherent operations. Recently, the Tsallis relative α entropy has been tried to quantify the coherence. But it was shown to violate the strong monotonicity, even though it can unambiguously distinguish the coherent and the incoherent states with the monotonicity. Here we establish a family of coherence quantifiers which are closely related to the Tsallis relative α entropy. It proves that this family of quantifiers satisfy all the standard criteria and particularly cover several typical coherence measures.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Coherence, the most fundamental quantum feature of a nonclassical system, stems from quantum superposition principle which reveals the wave particle duality of matter. It has been shown that coherence plays the key roles in the physical dynamics in biology1,2,3,4,5,6,7, transport theory8,9, and thermodynamics10,11,12,13,14. In particular, some typical approaches such as phase space distributions and higher order correlation functions have been developed in quantum optics to reveal quantum coherence even as an irrigorous quantification15,16,17. Quite recently, quantum coherence has been attracting increasing interest in various aspects18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33 including the quantification of coherence18,19,20,21,22,23, the operational resource theory24,25,26,27,28, the distribution29, the different understandings34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41 and so on.
Quantification of coherence is the most essential ingredient not only in the quantum theory but also in the practical application. Various quantities have been proposed to serve as a coherence quantifier, however the available candidates are still quite limited. Up to now, only two alternatives, i.e., the coherence measures based on l 1 norm and the relative entropy, have turned out to be a satisfactory coherence measure18. In contrast, the usual l p (p ≠ 1) norm can not directly induce a good measure19. In addition, the coherence quantifier based on the Fidelity is easily shown to satisfy the monotonicity that the coherence of the post-incoherent-operation state doesn’t increase, but it violates the strong monotonicity that average coherence doesn’t increase under the sub-selective incoherent operations18,42. Similarly, the coherence based on the trace norm is valid in many cases19,42 but looks invalid in general43. However, we know that the strong monotonicity is much more important than the monotonicity not only because the sub-selection of the measurement outcomes required by the strong monotonicity can be well controlled in experiment as is stated in refs18,19, but also because the realizable sub-selection would lead to the real increment of the coherence from the point of resource theory of view if the strong monotonicity was violated. In this sense, the quantitative characterization of coherence still needs to be paid more attention.
Recently, ref.22 has also proposed a coherence quantifier in terms of the Tsallis relative α entropy which lays the foundation to the non-extensive thermo-statistics and plays the same role as the standard logarithmic entropy does in the information theory44,45. However, it is unfortunate that the Tsallis relative α entropy isn’t an ideal coherence measure either because ref.22 showed that it only satisfies the monotonicity and a variational monotonicity rather than the strong monotonicity. Is it possible to bridge the Tsallis relative α entropy with the strong monotonicity by some particular and elaborate design? In this paper, we build such a bridge between the Tsallis relative α entropy with the strong monotonicity, hence present a family of good coherence quantifiers. By considering the special case in this family, one can find that the l 2 norm can be validly employed to quantify the coherence. The remaining of this paper is organized as follows. We first introduce the coherence measure and the Tsallis relative α entropy. Then we present the family of coherence quantifier and mainly prove them to be strongly monotonic, and then we study the maximal coherence, several particular coherence measures and give a concrete application. Finally, we finish the paper by the conclusion and some discussions.
Result
The coherence and the Tsallis relative α entropy
The resource theory includes three ingredients: the free states, the resource states and the free operations24,46. For coherence, the free states are referred to as the incoherent states which are defined in a given fixed basis {|i〉} by the states with the density matrices in the diagonal form, i.e., \(\delta ={\sum }_{i}{\delta }_{i}|i\rangle \langle i|\) with \({\sum }_{i}{\delta }_{i}=1\) for the positive δ i . All the states without the above diagonal form are the coherent states, i.e., the resource states. The quantum operations described by the Kraus operators {K n } with \({K}_{n}^{\dagger }{K}_{n}={\bf{I}}\) are called as the incoherent operations and serve as the free operations for coherence, if \({K}_{n}\delta {K}_{n}^{\dagger }\in {\mathcal I} \) for any incoherent δ. In this sense, the standard criteria of a good coherence quantifier C(ρ) for the state ρ can be rigorously rewritten as18 (i) (Null) C(δ) = 0 for \(\delta \in {\mathcal I} \); (ii) (Strong monotonicity) for any state ρ and incoherent operations {K n }, \(C(\rho ){\rm{\ge }}{\sum }_{n}\,{p}_{n}C({\rho }_{n})\) with \({p}_{n}={\rm{Tr}}{K}_{n}\rho {K}_{n}^{\dagger }\) and \({\rho }_{n}={K}_{n}\rho {K}_{n}^{\dagger }/{p}_{n}\); (iii) (Convexity) For any ensemble {q i , σ i }, \(C({\sum }_{i}{q}_{i}{\sigma }_{i})\le {\sum }_{i}{q}_{i}C({\sigma }_{i})\).
In addition, ref.18 also introduces the monotonicity (in contrast to the strong monotonicity) that requires \(C(\rho )\ge C({\sum }_{n}{p}_{n}{\rho }_{n})\). This actually can be automatically implied by (ii) and (iii). As mentioned in ref.18, the monotonicity is not laid in an important position compared with the strong monotonicity, because the measurement outcomes of {K n } can be well controlled (sub-selected) in practical experiments. In fact, the fundamental spirit of both the monotonicity and the strong monotonicity (or the resource theory) is to restrict that the coherence (resource) shouldn’t be increased under the incoherent (free) operations, which is parallel with the resource theory of entanglement, namely, the average entanglement is not increased under the local operations and classical communication (LOCC). However, if for a quantum state ρ, there exists one incoherent operation {K n } such that \(C({\sum }_{n}{p}_{n}{\rho }_{n}) < C(\rho )\) but \({\sum }_{n}\,{p}_{n}C({\rho }_{n}) > C(\rho )\) where n denotes the measurement outcome with the probability \({p}_{n}={\rm{Tr}}{K}_{n}\rho {K}_{n}^{\dagger }\), and the corresponding post-measurement state is \({\rho }_{n}={K}_{n}\rho {K}_{n}^{\dagger }\), this means that if we erase the information of the measurement outcomes, the coherence of the post-measurement state ρ′ is less than the coherence of the pre-measurement state, but if we keep the measurement information, the average coherence is increased. However, in the practical experiment, it is not necessary for us to erase any information. This means that the incoherent operation {K n } can increase the coherence, which violates the fundamental spirit of a resource theory. It is why we emphasize the strong monotonicity.
With the above criteria, any measure of distinguishability such as the (pseudo-) distance norm could induce a potential candidate for a coherence quantifier. But it has been shown that some candidates only satisfy the monotonicity rather than the strong monotonicity, so they are not ideal and could be only used in the limited cases. ref.22 found that the coherence based on the Tsallis relative α entropy is also such a coherence quantifier without the strong monotonicity.
The Tsallis relative α entropy is a special case of the quantum f-divergences22,47. For two density matrices ρ and σ, it is defined as
for α ∈ (0, 2]. It is shown that for α → 1, \({D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\) will reduce to the relative entropy \(S(\rho \parallel \sigma )=Tr\rho \,{\mathrm{log}}_{2}\,\rho -\rho \,{\mathrm{log}}_{2}\,\sigma \). The Tsallis relative α entropy \({D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\) inherits many important properties of the quantum f-divergences, for example, (Positivity) \({D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\ge 0\) with equality if and only if ρ = σ, (Isometry) \({D}_{\alpha }(U\rho {U}^{\dagger }\parallel U\sigma {U}^{\dagger })={D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\) for any unitary operations, (Contractibility) \({D}_{\alpha }(\$(\rho )\parallel \$(\sigma ))\le {D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\) under any trace-preserving and completely positive (TPCP) map \(\$\) and (Joint convexity) \({D}_{\alpha }({\sum }_{n}\,{p}_{n}{\rho }_{n}\parallel {\sum }_{n}\,{p}_{n}{\sigma }_{n})\le {\sum }_{n}\,{p}_{n}{D}_{\alpha }({\rho }_{n}\parallel {\sigma }_{n})\) for the density matrices ρ n and σ n and the corresponding probability distribution p n .
Based on the Tsallis relative α entropy \({D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\), the coherence in the fixed reference basis {|i〉} can be characterized by22
However, it is shown that \({\tilde{C}}_{\alpha }(\rho )\) satisfies all the criteria for a good coherence measure but the strong monotonicity. Since \({D}_{\alpha \to 1}(\rho \parallel \sigma )\) reduces to the relative entropy \(S(\rho \parallel \sigma )\) which has induced the good coherence measure, throughout the paper we are mainly interested in \(\alpha \in \mathrm{(0},\mathrm{1)}\cup \mathrm{(1},\mathrm{2]}\).
In addition, the Tsallis relative α entropy \({D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\) can also be reformulated by a very useful function as
with
Accordingly, the coherence \({\tilde{C}}_{\alpha }(\rho )\) can also be rewritten as
which, based on Eq. (2), leads to the conclusion
Based on Eq. (6) and the properties of \({D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\) mentioned above, one can have the following observations for the function f α (ρ, σ)22,47.
Observations: f α (ρ, σ) satisfies the following properties:
-
(I)
f α (ρ, σ) ≥ 1 for α ∈ (1, 2] and f α (ρ, σ) ≤ 1 for α ∈ (0, 1) with equality if and only if ρ = σ;
-
(II)
For a unitary operation U, f α (UρU †, UσU †) = f α (ρ, σ);
-
(III)
For any TPCP map $, f α (ρ, σ) doesn’t decrease for α ∈ (0, 1), and doesn’t increased for α ∈ (1, 2], namely,
$${{\rm{sgn}}}_{1}(\alpha ){f}_{\alpha }(\$[\rho ],\$[\sigma ])\le {{\rm{sgn}}}_{1}(\alpha ){f}_{\alpha }(\rho ,\sigma ),$$(7)where the function is defined by \({{\rm{sgn}}}_{1}(\alpha )=\{\begin{array}{cc}-\mathrm{1,} & \alpha \in \mathrm{(0,1)}\\ \mathrm{1,} & \alpha \in \mathrm{(1,2]}\end{array}\);
-
(IV)
The function sgn1(α)f α (ρ, σ) is jointly convex;
-
(V)
For a state δ, \({f}_{\alpha }(\rho \otimes \delta ,\sigma \otimes \delta )={f}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\), which can be easily found from the function itself.
The coherence measures based on the Tsallis relative α entropy
To proceed, we would like to present a very important lemma for the function f α (ρ, σ), which is the key to show our main result.
Lemma 1
Suppose both ρ and σ simultaneously undergo a TPCP map \(\$\,:=\{{M}_{n}:\sum _{n}\,{M}_{n}^{\dagger }{M}_{n}={{\mathbb{I}}}_{S}\}\) which transforms the states ρ and σ into the ensemble {p n , ρ n } and {q n , σ n }, respectively, then we have
The proof is given in the Methods.
Based on Lemma 1 and the preliminaries given in the previous section, we can present our main theorem as follows.
Theorem 1
The coherence of a quantum state ρ can be measured by
where α ∈ (0, 2], {|j〉} is the reference basis and \({f}_{\alpha }(\rho ,\delta )=(\alpha -1){D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )+1\) with \({D}_{\alpha }(\rho \parallel \sigma )\) representing the Tsallis relative α entropy.
Proof
. At first, one can note that the function x α is a monotonically increasing function on x, so Eq. (10) obviously holds for positive x due to Eq. (6).
Null
Since the original Tsallis entropy defined by Eq. (2) can unambiguously distinguish a coherent state from the incoherent one. Eq. (2) implies that \({\sum }_{j}\,\langle j|{\rho }^{\alpha }{|j\rangle }^{\mathrm{1/}\alpha }=1\) is sufficient and necessary condition for incoherent states. Thus the zero C α (ρ) is also a sufficient and necessary condition for incoherent state ρ.
Convexity
From ref.48, one can learn that the function g(A) = Tr(XA p X †)s is convex in positive matrix A for p ∈ [1, 2] and \(s\ge \frac{1}{p}\), and concave in A for p ∈ (0, 1] and \(1\le s\le \frac{1}{p}\). Now let’s assume A = ρ, \(X=|j\rangle \langle j|\) and p = α and \(s=\frac{1}{\alpha }\), thus one has
which implies \({g}_{\alpha }^{j}(\rho )\) is convex in density matrix ρ for α ∈ [1, 2] and \(s=\frac{1}{\alpha }\), and concave in ρ for α ∈ (0, 1] and \(s=\frac{1}{\alpha }\). Here the subscript α and the superscript j in \({g}_{\alpha }^{j}\) specifies the particular choice. So it is easy to find that \(\frac{1}{\alpha -1}{\sum }_{j}\,{g}_{\alpha }^{j}(\rho )\) is convex for α ∈ (0, 2]. Considering Eq. (10), one can easily show C α (ρ) is convex in ρ.
Strong monotonicity
Now let {M n } denote the incoherent operation, so the ensemble after the incoherent operation on the state ρ can be given by {p n ,ρ n } with \({p}_{n}={\rm{Tr}}{M}_{n}\rho {M}_{n}^{\dagger }\) and \({\rho }_{n}={M}_{n}\rho {M}_{n}^{\dagger }/{p}_{n}\). Thus the average coherence \({\bar{C}}_{\alpha }\) is
Let δ o denote the optimal incoherent state such that
i.e.,
Considering the incoherent operation {M n }, we have \({\sigma }_{n}^{o}={M}_{n}{\delta }^{o}{M}_{n}^{\dagger }/{q}_{n}\in {\mathcal I} \) with \({q}_{n}={\rm{Tr}}{M}_{n}{\delta }^{o}{M}_{n}^{\dagger }\). Therefore, one can immediately find that
where we use the function x 1/α is monotonically increasing on x. According to Eqs (12) and (15), we obtain
In addition, the Hölder inequality49 implies that for α ∈ (0, 1),
and the inequality sign is reverse for α ∈ (1, 2], so Eq. (16) becomes
which is due to Lemma 1. Eq. (18) shows the strong monotonicity of C α . ■
Maximal coherence and several typical quantifiers
Next, we will show that the maximal coherence can be achieved by the maximally coherent states. At first, we assume α ∈ (0, 1). Based on the eigen-decomposition of a d-dimensional state \(\rho :\rho ={\sum }_{k}{\lambda }_{k}|{\psi }_{k}\rangle \langle {\psi }_{k}|\) with λ k and \(|{\psi }_{k}\rangle \) representing the eigenvalue and eigenvectors, we have
One can easily find that the lower bound Eq. (19) can be attained by the maximally coherent states \({\rho }_{m}=|{\rm{\Psi }}\rangle \langle {\rm{\Psi }}|\) with \(|{\rm{\Psi }}\rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{d}}\,{\sum }_{j}\,{e}^{i{\varphi }_{j}}|j\rangle \). Correspondingly, the coherence is given by \({C}_{0 < \alpha < 1}({\rho }_{m})=\frac{1}{1-\alpha }(1-{d}^{\frac{\alpha -1}{\alpha }})\). Similarly, for α ∈ (1, 2], the function x 1/α is concave, which leads to that Eq. (19) with the inverse inequality sign holds. The inequality can also saturate for ρ m . The corresponding coherence can be found to have the same form as C 0<α<1(ρ m ). In other words,
C α (ρ) actually defines a family of coherence measures related to the Tsallis relative α entropy. This family includes several typical coherence measures. As mentioned above, the most prominent coherence measure belonging to this family is the coherence in terms of relative entropy, i.e., C 1(ρ) = S(ρ).
One can also find that
with ||·||2 denoting l 2 norm. So the l 2 norm has been revived for coherence measure by considering the square root of the density matrices. This is much like the quantification of quantum correlation proposed in ref.50. In addition, C 1/2(ρ) can also be rewritten as
which is just the coherence measure based on the skew information51,52,53.
Finally, one can also see that
which is a simple function of the density matrix.
Applications
As applications, we would like to compare our coherence measure with other analytic coherence measures, that is, the measure based on l 1 norm, the relative entropy and the skew information. Let’s consider a decoherence process where a bipartite maximally entangled state \(|\psi \rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|++\rangle +|--\rangle )\) with \(|\pm \rangle =\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}(|0\rangle \pm |1\rangle )\) undergoes a composite amplitude damping channel54 \({\rm{\$}}\otimes {\rm{\$}}\) where $ = {M i } and \({M}_{1}=(\begin{array}{cc}1 & 0\\ 0 & \sqrt{1-\gamma }\end{array})\), \({M}_{2}=(\begin{array}{cc}0 & \sqrt{\gamma }\\ 0 & 0\end{array})\) with γ denoting the damping rate. Thus the final state under this amplitude damping channel can be given by
Thus one can easily find that the coherence based on the l 1 norm can be given by \({C}_{{l}_{1}}(\rho (\gamma ))={\sum }_{i\ne j}\,|{\rho }_{ij}|=1-\gamma \), and the coherence based on our Tsallis relative α entropy can be given by \({C}_{\alpha }(\rho (\gamma ))=\frac{1}{\alpha -1}({\sum }_{i=1}^{4}\,\langle i|\rho {(\gamma )}^{\alpha }{|i\rangle }^{\mathrm{1/}\alpha }-1)\). In particular, it is shown that C α (ρ(γ)) for α → 1 corresponds to the coherence based on the relative entropy defined by R(ρ(γ)) = S(I \(\circ \) ρ(γ)) − S(ρ(γ)) with \(\circ \) meaning the Hadamard product of matrices and C 1/2(ρ(γ)) corresponds to the skew information53. In order to explicitly show the difference between the various coherence measures, we plot the coherence of the state ρ(γ) for \({C}_{{l}_{1}}\) and C α (ρ(γ)) for various α in Fig. 1.
Conclusion
We establish a family of coherence measures that are closely related to the Tsallis relative α entropy. We prove that these coherence measures satisfy all the required criteria for a satisfactory coherence measure especially including the strong monotonicity. We also show this family of coherence measures includes several typical coherence measures such as the coherences measure based on von Neumann entropy, skew information and so on. Additionally, we show how to validate the l 2 norm as a coherence measure. In addition, one can find that our current coherence measure can be easily related to the original Tsallis relative α entropy in Theorem 1, thus our current coherence measure has many potential applications or connections in both thermo-statistics and the information theory, since the Tsallis relative α entropy lays the foundation to the non-extensive thermo-statistics and have important applications in the information theory44,45. This could require the further investigation. Finally, we would like to emphasize that the convexity and the strong monotonicity could be two key points which couldn’t easily be compatible with each other to some extent. Fortunately, ref.48 provides the important knowledge to harmonize both points in this paper. This work builds the bridge between the Tsallis relative α entropy and the strong monotonicity and provides the important alternative quantifiers for the coherence quantification. This could shed new light on the strong monotonicity of other candidates for coherence measure.
Methods
Proof of Lemma 1
Any TPCP map can be realized by a unitary operation on a composite system followed by a local projective measurement54. Suppose system S is of our interest and A is an auxiliary system. For a TPCP map \(\$\,:=\{{M}_{n}:{\sum }_{n}{M}_{n}^{\dagger }{M}_{n}={{\mathbb{I}}}_{S}\}\), one can always find a unitary operation U SA and a group of projectors \({\{{{\rm{\Pi }}}_{n}^{A}=|n\rangle }_{A}\langle n|\}\) such that
Using Properties (I) and (II), we have
holds for any two states ρ S and σ S . Let \({\rho }_{Sf}={\$}_{SA}[{U}_{SA}({\rho }_{S}\otimes {{\rm{\Pi }}}_{0}^{A}){U}_{SA}^{\dagger }]\) and \({\sigma }_{Sf}={\$}_{SA}[{U}_{SA}({\sigma }_{S}\otimes {{\rm{\Pi }}}_{0}^{A}){U}_{SA}^{\dagger }]\) which describe the states \({U}_{SA}({\rho }_{S}\otimes {{\rm{\Pi }}}_{0}^{A}){U}_{SA}^{\dagger }\) and \({U}_{SA}({\sigma }_{S}\otimes {{\rm{\Pi }}}_{0}^{A}){U}_{SA}^{\dagger }\) undergo an arbitrary TPCP map $ SA performed on the composite system S plus A. Based on Property (III), one can easily find
Suppose the TPCP map \({\$}_{SA}:=\{{{\mathbb{I}}}_{S}\otimes {{\rm{\Pi }}}_{n}^{A}\}\), according to Eq. (25), one can replace ρ Sf and σ Sf in Eq. (27), respectively, by
and
Therefore, we get
which completes the proof ■.
References
Engel, G. S. et al. Evidence for wavelike energy transfer through quantum coherence in photosynthetic systems. Nature (London) 446, 782 (2007).
Plenio, M. B. & Huelga, S. F. Dephasing-assisted transport: quantum networks and biomolecules. New J. Phys. 10, 113019 (2008).
Collini, E. et al. Coherently wired light-harvesting in photosynthetic marine algae at ambient temperature. Nature (London) 463, 644 (2010).
Lloyd, S. Quantum coherence in biological systems. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 302, 012037 (2011).
Li, C. M. et al. Witnessing quantum coherence: from solid-state to biological systems. Sci. Rep. 2, 855 (2012).
Huelga, S. F. & Plenio, M. B. Vibrations, quanta and biology. Contemp. Phys. 54, 181 (2013).
Rybak, L. et al. Generating molecular rovibrational coherence by two-photon femtosecond photoassociation of thermally hot atoms. Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 273001 (2011).
Rebentrost, P., Mohseni, M. & Aspuru-Guzik, A. Role of quantum coherence and environmental fluctuations in chromophoric energy transport. J. Phys. Chem. B 113, 9942 (2009).
Witt, B. & Mintert, F. Stationary quantum coherence and transport in disordered networks. New J. Phys. 15, 093020 (2013).
Åberg, J. Catalytic coherence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 150402 (2014).
Narasimhachar, V. & Gour, G. Low-temperature thermodynamics with quantum coherence. Nat. Comm. 6, 7689 (2015).
Ćwikliński, P. et al. Limitations on the evolution of quantum coherences: towards fully quantum second laws of thermodynamics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 210403 (2015).
Lostaglio, M., Jennings, D. & Rudolph, T. Description of quantum coherence in thermodynamic processes requires constraints beyond free energy. Nat. Commun. 6, 6383 (2015).
Lostaglio, M. et al. Quantum coherence, time-translation symmetry, and thermodynamics. Phys. Rev. X 5, 021001 (2015).
Glauber, R. J. Coherent and incoherent states of the radiation field. Phys. Rev. 131, 2766 (1963).
Sudarshan, E. C. G. Equivalence of semiclassical and quantum mechanical descriptions of statistical light beams. Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 277 (1963).
Scully, M. O. & Zubairy, M. S. In Quantum optics Ch. 4, 115–141 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1997).
Baumgratz, T., Cramer, M. & Plenio, M. B. Quantifying coherence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 140401 (2014).
Rana, S., Parashar, P. & Lewenstein, M. Trace-distance measure of coherence. Phys. Rev. A 93, 012110 (2016).
Girolami, D. Observable measure of quantum coherence in finite dimensional systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 170401 (2014).
Napoli, C. et al. Robustness of coherence: an operational and observable measure of quantum coherence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 150502 (2016).
Rastegin, A. E. Quantum-coherence quantifiers based on the Tsallis relative α entropies. Phys. Rev. A 93, 032136 (2016).
Piani, M. et al. Robustness of asymmetry and coherence of quantum states. Phys. Rev. A 93, 042107 (2016).
Winter, A. & Yang, D. Operational resource theory of coherence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 120404 (2016).
Du, S., Bai, Z. & Guo, Y. Conditions for coherence transformations under incoherent operations. Phys. Rev. A 91, 052120 (2015).
Chitambar, E. et al. Assisted distillation of quantum coherence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 070402 (2016).
Chitambar, E. & Hsieh, M.-H. Relating the resource theories of entanglement and quantum coherence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 020402 (2016).
Chitambar, E. & Gour, G. Critical examination of incoherent operations and a physically consistent resource theory of quantum coherence. Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 030401 (2016).
Radhakrishnan, C. et al. Distribution of quantum coherence in multipartite systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 150504 (2016).
Marvian, I. & Spekkens, R. W. Modes of asymmetry: the application of harmonic analysis to symmetric quantum dynamics and quantum reference frames. Phys. Rev. A 90, 062110 (2014).
Marvian, I., Spekkens, R. W. & Zanardi, P. Quantum speed limits, coherence, and asymmetry. Phys. Rev. A 93, 052331 (2016).
Yao, Y. et al. Quantum coherence in multipartite systems. Phys. Rev. A 92, 022112 (2015).
Singh, U., Zhang, L. & Pati, A. K. Average coherence and its typicality for random pure states. Phys. Rev. A 93, 032125 (2016).
Yu, C. S. & Song, H. S. Bipartite concurrence and localized coherence. Phys. Rev. A 80, 022324 (2009).
Streltsov, A. et al. Measuring quantum coherence with entanglement. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 020403 (2015).
Ma, J. et al. Converting coherence to quantum correlations. Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 160407 (2016).
Tan, K. C. et al. Unified view of quantum correlations and quantum coherence. Phys. Rev. A 94, 022329 (2016).
Streltsov, A., Adesso, G. & Plenio, M. B. Quantum coherence as a resource. arXiv:1609.02439 [quant-ph].
Streltsov, A. et al. Maximal coherence and the resource theory of purity. arXiv:1612.07570 [quant-ph].
Hu, M. L. et al. Quantum coherence and quantum correlations. arXiv:1703.01852v2 [quant-ph].
Ma, T. et al. Accessible coherence and coherence distribution. Phys. Rev. A 95, 042328 (2017).
Shao, L. H. et al. Fidelity and trace-norm distances for quantifying coherence. Phys. Rev. A 91, 042120 (2015).
Yu, X. D. et al. Alternative framework for quantifying coherence. Phys. Rev. A 94, 060302 (2016).
Borland, L., Plastino, A. R. & Tsallis, C. Information gain within nonextensive thermostatistics. J. Math. Phys. 39, 6490 (1998).
Tsallis, C. et al. In Nonextensive Statistical Mechanics and Its Applications, edited by Abe, S. & Okamoto, Y. (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 2001).
Brandão, F. G. S. L. & Gour, G. Reversible framework for quantum resource theories. Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 070503 (2015).
Hiai, F. et al. Quantum f-divergences and error correction. Rev. Math. Phys. 23, 691 (2011).
Carlen, E. A. & Lieb, E. H. A Minkowski type trace inequality and strong subadditivity of quantum entropy II: convexity and concavity. Lett. Math. Phys. 83, 107 (2008).
Kuang, J. C. In Applied inequalities (Shandong Science and Technology Press, Jinan, China, 2012).
Chang, L. N. & Luo, S. L. Remedying the local ancilla problem with geometric discord. Phys. Rev. A 87, 062303 (2013).
Wigner, E. P. & Yanase, M. M. Information contents of distributions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 49, 910 (1963).
Lieb, E. H. Convex trace functions and the Wigner-Yanase-Dyson conjecture. Adv. Math. 11, 267 (1973).
Yu, C. S. Quantum coherence via skew information and its polygamy. Phys. Rev. A 95, 042337 (2017).
Nielsen, M. A. & Chuang, I. L. Quantum computation an quantum information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 2000).
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China, under Grant Nos 11775040 and 11375036, and the Xinghai Scholar Cultivation Plan.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
Yu raises the question. Both Zhao and Yu analyze the question, provide the proof, write and review the paper.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing Interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Zhao, H., Yu, Cs. Coherence measure in terms of the Tsallis relative α entropy. Sci Rep 8, 299 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18692-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-017-18692-1
- Springer Nature Limited
This article is cited by
-
Coherence as entropy increment for Tsallis and Rényi entropies
Quantum Information Processing (2023)
-
Quantumness of Pure-State Ensembles via Coherence of Gram Matrix Based on Generalized α-z-Relative Rényi Entropy
International Journal of Theoretical Physics (2022)
-
Measure of genuine coherence based of quasi-relative entropy
Quantum Information Processing (2022)
-
Quantifying the Quantumness of an Ensemble of Quantum States
International Journal of Theoretical Physics (2022)
-
Quantifying dynamical total coherence in a resource non-increasing framework
Quantum Information Processing (2022)