A class of generalized positive linear maps on matrix algebras
Xin Li
Department of Mathematics, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China
[email protected]
and
Wei Wu
Department of Mathematics, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200241, China
[email protected]
Abstract.
We construct a class of positive linear maps on matrix algebras. We find conditions when these maps are atomic, decomposable and completely positive. We obtain a large class of atomic positive linear maps. As applications in quantum information theory, we discuss the structural physical approximation and optimality of entanglement witness associated with these maps.
Key words and phrases:
Symmetric group; D-type; Atomic map; Decomposable map; Completely positive; Structural physical approximation; Optimal entanglement witness.
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 46L05; Secondary 15A30
Corresponding author: Wei Wu
The research was supported in part by Shanghai Leading Academic Discipline Project (Project No.
B407), and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11171109).
1. Introduction
Positive linear maps on C∗−algebras, particularly those of finite dimensions, have been becoming more important by their connection with quantum information theory. A linear map on a C∗-algebra is called positive if it sends the cone of positive elements into itself. Little is known about the global structure of positive linear maps, even in the low dimensional matrix algebras.
Let Mn be the C∗-algebra of all n×n matrices over the complex field, and let Pk(Mn) (respectively, Pk(Mn)) be the convex cone of all k-positive (respectively, k-copositive)
linear maps on Mn. One of the basic problems about the structures of the
positive cone P1(Mn) is whether the set P1(Mn) can be decomposed as the algebraic
sum of some simpler classes in P1(Mn) [23].
When n=2, it is well known [24] that
every positive linear map can be written as a sum of a completely positive linear map and a completely copositive linear map, that is, the maps in P1(M2) are decomposable. But this is not the case for higher dimensional matrix algebras. On M3, Choi gave an extremal positive linear map which is indecomposable [2]. Tanahashi and Tomiyama in [23] introduced the concept of atomic positive linear map which has a stronger indecomposability, and they showed that Choi’s map is atomic. There are only a few examples of indecomposable positive linear maps in the literature, much less the atomic ones. Most known examples of indecomposable positive linear maps and atomic positive linear maps can be found in [3, 4, 25, 7, 13, 14] and references therein. In quantum information theory, indecomposable positive linear maps can be used to detect entangled states whose partial transposes are positive and atomic positive linear maps can be used to detect states with the ‘weakest’ entanglement [4]. Positive linear maps also play an important role in the study of operator system theory [19, 16], etc.
In this paper, we give a generalization of linear maps defined in [7]. Let Sn be the symmetric group consisting of all bijections (permutations) from the set {1,2,…,n} onto
itself. For positive real numbers a,c1,c2,…,cn and each σ∈Sn, we define a linear map Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] from Mn to Mn by
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
for each X=(xij)∈Mn. Let ϕ:Mn↦Mn be a linear map. If it has the form
[TABLE]
where D=(dij) is an n×n nonnegative matrix, that is, all dij≥0, then ϕ is called a D-type linear map [12]. In (1.1), if we let
[TABLE]
where In and {Eij}i,j=1n are the identity matrix and the canonical matrix units of Mn, respectively, we can see that Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] has the form in
(1.1) and so it is a D-type linear map. Throughout this paper, if there is no confusion, Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] and Δ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] will often be abbreviated to Θ(n,σ) and Δ(n,σ), respectively.
For each k∈{1,2,…,n}, we define τkn∈Sn by
[TABLE]
for i=1,2,…,n. The linear map Θ(3,τ23)[a;c1,c2,c3] was studied in [13]. In [7], Ha defined the map Θ(n,τn−1n)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] which is a generalization of Θ(3,τ23)[a;c1,c2,c3] and gave a sufficient condition for the map Θ(n,τn−1n)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] being atomic. In [20], Qi and Hou defined the map Θ(n,τkn)[n−1;1,1,…,1] and discussed when Θ(n,τkn) is positive and indecomposable.
In [21], Qi and Hou studied the optimality, decomposability and structural physical approximation of Θ(n,τkn)[n−1;1,1,…,1] for k=n. For each σ∈Sn and c≥0, the positivity of Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] was discussed in [12]. For σ2=idn where idn is the identity of Sn, the decomposability of Θ(n,σ)[n−1;1,1,…,1] was also discussed in [12]. In [8], Ha discussed the optimality of the entanglement witness associated with T∘Θ(n,τkn)[n−1;1,1,…,1] for k=n and 2n (when n (n≥3) is even), where T denotes the transpose map.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we give conditions when the map Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is positive and discuss the equivalence between 2-positivity and completely positivity. In Section 3 we give conditions when Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is atomic and decomposable. We give conditions in Section 4 when the structural physical approximation of Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is separable and the entanglement witness associated with T∘Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is optimal.
Throughout this paper, a matrix A is positive means that A is positive semi-definite and is denoted by A≥0. For every vector in Cn, we consider it as an n×1 matrix, that is, a column vector. If x is a vector or a matrix, then xt and x∗ denote the transpose and conjugate transpose of x, respectively. Let {ei}i=1n and {Eij}i,j=1n denote the canonical orthonormal basis of Cn and the matrix units of Mn, respectively. Let ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ be the usual inner product on Cn and (n,k) denote the greatest common divisor of n and k. For m,n∈N, if m divides n we write m∣n, and if m does not divide n we write m∤n. Let T denote the transpose map on Mn and idn denote the identity of Sn.
The authors are grateful to the referee for careful reading of the manuscript and several helpful comments.
2. Positivity and 2-positivity
In this section, we give conditions when Θ(n,σ) is positive and then discuss the equivalence between 2-positivity and completely positivity.
Lemma 2.1**.**
([7])*
Let a>0. For symmetric function*
[TABLE]
where x1,…,xn are positive real numbers, we have that F(x1,…,xn)≥0 if and only if ∑i=1n(a+xi)−1≤1.
Lemma 2.2**.**
([7])*
For xi≥0, i=1,2,…,n, x≥0 and real number a, we have the following:*
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
A permutation σ∈Sn is called a cycle of length k (k=1,2,…,n) if for k distinct points {i1,i2,…,ik}⊆{1,2,…,n}, we have that σ(ij)=ij+1 (j=1,2,…k−1),
σ(ik)=i1 and σ(i)=i for all i∈{1,2,…,n}\{i1,i2,…,ik}. In the following, denote l(σ) be the length of a cycle σ.
It is well known (for example [6]) that each σ∈Sn has a unique disjoint cycle decomposition σ=σ1σ2⋯σr, where each σi (i=1,2,…,r) is a cycle. In the following, for each σ∈Sn with the unique disjoint cycle decomposition σ=σ1σ2⋯σr, we denote the maximal and the minimal length of σi (i=1,2,…,r) by lmax(σ) and lmin(σ) respectively, that is,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Suppose that k∈{1,2,…,n}. If k∣n, it is not hard to see that τkn (defined in (1.2)) can be decomposed into k disjoint cycles and each cycle has length kn. For k∤n, if (n,k)=r, then r∣n and each i∈{1,2,…,n} can be written as i=u+rv, where 1≤u≤r and 0≤v≤rn−1. Just as in [9], define σ∈Sn by
[TABLE]
It is not hard to see that τrn=σ−1τknσ, that is, τrn and τkn are conjugate in Sn. Hence τrn and τkn have the same number of cycles of each type [6], that is, τkn can be decomposed into r disjoint cycles and each cycle has length rn. So for each k∈{1,2,…,n}, we have that lmin(τkn)=lmax(τkn)=(n,k)n. It is not hard to see that if k=n and 2n (when n (n≥3) is even), then lmin(τkn)=lmax(τkn)≥3. Hence we have the following lemma.
Lemma 2.3**.**
Suppose that k∈{1,2,…,n} . Let τkn be the permutation defined in (1.2). Then we have that lmin(τkn)=lmax(τkn)=(n,k)n and the following:
- (i)
if k=n , then lmin(τkn)=lmax(τkn)=1;
2. (ii)
if k=2n when n is even, then lmin(τkn)=lmax(τkn)=2;
3. (iii)
if k=n and 2n (when n (n≥3) is even), then lmin(τkn)=lmax(τkn)≥3.
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let a,c1,c2…,cn be positive real numbers. For each σ∈Sn, if
[TABLE]
we have the following inequality
[TABLE]
for any positive real numbers α1,α2,…,αn. If σ is a cycle of length n, then the converse is also held.
Proof.
Suppose that a≥max{n−1,n−(c1c2⋯cn)n1}. Let xi=ciαiασ(i) for i∈{1,2,…,n}, then x1x2⋯xn=c1c2⋯cn. For F(x1,…,xn) in Lemma 2.1, we have
[TABLE]
Since a≥n−1, we have that a−m≥0 for m=0,1,…,n−1 and (2.5) is obtained by (2.1) in Lemma 2.2. From (2.2) of Lemma 2.2, we have (2.6). Since a≥n−(c1c2⋯cn)n1, we have (2.7). Hence by Lemma 2.1 we get the desired inequality
[TABLE]
Conversely, suppose that (2.4) holds for any positive real numbers α1,α2,…,αn and σ is a cycle of length n. It is not hard to see that {σ1(1),σ2(1),…,σn(1)}={1,2,…,n}.
First, we show that a≥n−1. For any λ>0, we choose
[TABLE]
where s∈{1,2,…,n}. Note that 1=σn(1). So if i=σs(1) with s∈{1,2,…,n−1}, then for i=2,3,…,n we have that σ(i)=σs+1(1). Hence we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Now from (2.4) we have
[TABLE]
Take λ→+∞, then we have that an−1≤1 by (2.8). So we obtain that a≥n−1.
Next, we show that a≥n−(c1c2⋯cn)n1. Let d=(c1c2⋯cn)n1. For each i∈{1,2,…,n}, if i=σk(1) for some k∈{1,2,…,n}, we let
[TABLE]
where σ0(1)=1.
For i,k∈{1,2,…,n}, if i=σk(1), then from (2.9) we have
[TABLE]
Hence from (2) and (2.4) we have
[TABLE]
So we get a≥n−d=n−(c1c2⋯cn)n1.
From discussions above, we have that a≥max{n−1,n−(c1c2⋯cn)n1}.
∎
Lemma 2.5**.**
([23])*
Let A be a positive invertible operator on a Hilbert space, and ξ0 the unit vector associated with a one dimensional projection P. Then A≥P if and only if ⟨A−1ξ0,ξ0⟩≤1.*
Theorem 2.6**.**
Let a,c1,c2…,cn be positive real numbers. For each σ∈Sn, if a≥max{n−1,n−(c1c2⋯cn)n1}, then Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2…,cn]:Mn↦Mn is positive. Moreover, if σ is a cycle of length n, then the converse is also held.
Proof.
Θ(n,σ) is positive if and only if Θ(n,σ)(P)≥0 for every one dimensional projection P, which means Δ(n,σ)(P)≥P. Let ξ0=(x1,…,xn)t be the unit vector associated with P, that is, P=ξ0ξ0∗. Without loss of generality, we can assume that xi=0 for i=1,…,n. Then the matrix Δ(n,σ)(P) has the form
[TABLE]
Hence A=Δ(n,σ)(P) is invertible and positive. From Lemma 2.5 we can see that Θ(n,σ) is positive if and only if
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.4 and (2), the proof is completed.
∎
Remark 2.7*.*
For Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2…,cn], suppose that c≥0, a=n−c and c1=c2=⋯=cn=c. The map Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is discussed in Proposition 6.2 of [12]. For any σ∈Sn which is not necessarily a cycle of length n, Hou, Li et al. showed that Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is positive if and only if c≤lmax(σ)n. In this case, we can see that there exists σ∈Sn such that the positivity of Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] cannot imply “a≥max{n−1,n−(c1c2⋯cn)n1}”. So for general σ∈Sn, it is interesting to find a necessary and sufficient condition for the positivity of Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn].
Suppose that ϕ:Mn↦Mn is a linear map. For any positive integer k, let Mk(Mn) denote the block matrix algebra of order k over Mn. Equivalently, Mk(Mn) is often written as Mk⊗Mn. Then we can define two linear maps ϕk and ϕk on Mk⊗Mn by
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where aij∈Mn for i,j=1,2,…,k. We say that ϕ is k-positive (or k-copositive) if ϕk (or ϕk) is positive. If ϕk (or ϕk) is positive for all k=1,2,…, then ϕ is said to be completely positive (or completely copositive).
The Choi matrix of a linear map ψ:Mn↦Mn is defined by
[TABLE]
It is well known [1] that ψ is completely positive if and only if Cψ is positive. It is not hard to see that ψ is completely copositive if and only if T∘ψ is completely positive.
Theorem 2.8**.**
Let a,c1,c2,…,cn be positive real numbers. For σ∈Sn, if lmin(σ)≥2, then the following are equivalent:
- (i)
the linear map Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is completely positive;
2. (ii)
the linear map Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is 2-positive;
3. (iii)
a≥n.
Proof.
(\refcp2p1)⇒(\refcp2p2) is clear by definition.
For (\refcp2p2)⇒(\refcp2p3), we assume that Θ(n,σ) is 2-positive. Let ξ=(x1,x2,…,xn,y1,y2,…,yn)t∈C2n with ∥ξ∥=1. Let x=(x1,x2,…,xn)t, y=(y1,y2,…,yn)t∈Cn. Then
[TABLE]
It is clear that P is a projection, and so we have Θ2(n,σ)(P)≥0, that is,
[TABLE]
For Δ2(n,σ)(P), we have
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and Eii∈Mn. Since lmin(σ)≥2, we have that σ(i)=i for each i∈{1,2,…,n}, which means that σ has no fixed point. So for i=1,2,…,n, we can choose real numbers xi, yi such that each Ai is invertible. For example, we can choose xi=αi and yi=α where α=(6n(n+1)(2n+1)+n)−21, that is,
[TABLE]
From the invertibility of each Ai, we see that Δ2(n,σ)(P) is invertible and
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and λi=∣xiyσ(i)−xσ(i)yi∣2.
Note that
[TABLE]
where zi=(xi yi)t∈C2. So we obtain
[TABLE]
By Lemma 2.5, (2.12) and (2.23), we have
[TABLE]
So a≥n, and (\refcp2p3) holds.
Assume that (iii) holds. Since lmin(σ)≥2, it is not hard to see that the eigenfunction of CΘ(n,σ) is
[TABLE]
If a≥n, the eigenvalues of CΘ(n,σ) are nonnegative. So Θ(n,σ) is completely positive and (i) holds.
∎
In Proposition 6.3 of [12], Hou, Li et al. gave similar results as Theorem 2.8 above. For the D-type linear map ΛD discussed there, all row sums and column sums of the nonnegative matrix D associated to ΛD are equal to n. In Theorem 2.8 above, we have not required that.
For σ=τn−1n (n≥2), from Lemma 2.3 we see that τn−1n is a cycle of length n, and so lmin(σ)=n. Hence we obtain Theorem 2.5 of [7] from Theorem 2.8 above. If σ=idn, then we have that lmin(idn)=1. In this case, we have the following result.
Proposition 2.9**.**
For any positive numbers a,c1,…,cn, the following conditions are equivalent:
- (i)
the matrix
[TABLE]
is positive;
2. (ii)
Θ(n,idn)[a;c1,c2,…,cn]* is positive;*
3. (iii)
Θ(n,idn)[a;c1,c2,…,cn]* is completely positive.*
Proof.
Suppose that σ=idn and X∈Mn. By the definition of
Θ(n,σ), we can see that
[TABLE]
where A∗X denotes the Schur product of A and X. Hence, using Theorem 3.7 in [18], we get the equivalence of (i), (ii) and (iii).
∎
For general σ∈Sn with lmin(σ)=1, the situation becomes more complicated. In [20], Qi and Hou defined a linear map Δ(t1,t2,…,tn) in some more general environment. The following result improves Proposition 2.7 in [20].
Corollary 2.10**.**
Let H and K be Hilbert spaces and let {fi}i=1n and {fi′}i=1n be any orthonormal sets of H and K, respectively. Let Fji=fj′fi∗∈B(H,K) be a rank one operator such that for any x∈H we have Fji(x)=⟨x,fi⟩fj′, where ⟨⋅,⋅⟩ denotes the inner product on H. Let Δ(t1,t2,…,tn):B(H)↦B(K) be defined by
[TABLE]
for all X∈B(H). Then the following conditions are equivalent:
- (i)
the matrix
[TABLE]
is positive;
2. (ii)
Δ(t1,t2,…,tn)* is positive;*
3. (iii)
Δ(t1,t2,…,tn)* is completely positive.*
Proof.
Since Δ(t1,t2,…,tn) is a finite rank elementary operator [20], it is not hard to see that if we let ti=a+ci for i=1,2,…,n we can identify it with Θ(n,idn)[a;c1,c2,…,cn]. By Proposition 2.9, we obtain the equivalence of (i), (ii) and (iii).
∎
3. Atomicity and decomposability
In this section we discuss when Θ(n,σ) is atomic and decomposable. Let ϕ:Mn↦Mn be a linear map. In [17], Osaka defined a real linear map ϕ~:Mn(R)↦Mn(R) by
[TABLE]
where (yij)=(yij) for y=(yij)∈Mn. It is not hard to see that if ϕ is k-positive or k-copositive, then so is ϕ~ for k=1,2,…. The following lemma indicates that when k=2 and lmin(σ)≥2 the converse is also true for Θ(n,σ).
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let a,c1,c2,…,cn be positive real numbers. For σ∈Sn with lmin(σ)≥2, if Θ~(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is 2-positive, then a≥n, and so Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is 2-positive.
Proof.
It is clear that Θ(n,σ)(x)=Θ~(n,σ)(x) for x∈Mn(R). Suppose that Θ~(n,σ) is 2-positive. In the proof of Theorem 2.8, for i=1,2,…,n we can choose real numbers xi, yi such that each Ai is invertible. Thus if we apply the proof of Theorem 2.8 to Θ~(n,σ), we can also get that a≥n. So Θ(n,σ) is 2-positive by Theorem 2.8.
∎
Lemma 3.2**.**
Suppose that σ∈Sn (n≥3) and lmin(σ)≥3.
Let ϕ:Mn↦Mn be a positive linear map. Suppose that {ϕ(Eij)}i,j=1n satisfy the following conditions:
- (i)
ϕ(Eii)ej=ej∗ϕ(Eii)=0* for each 1≤i≤n and j∈{1,2,…,n}\{i,σ−1(i)};*
2. (ii)
ϕ(Eij)=−Eij* for 1≤i=j≤n.*
If ϕ=φ+ψ, where φ is a 2-positive linear map and ψ is a 2-copositive linear map, then ϕ~:Mn(R)↦Mn(R) is a 2-positive linear map.
Proof.
First, we show that ψ(Eij) is a diagonal matrix for i=j.
Since φ is 2-positive and ψ is 2-copositive, we have
[TABLE]
Let j∈{1,2,…,n}\{i,σ−1(i)} and 1≤i≤n. By condition (i), we have
[TABLE]
Using the positivity of φ and ψ, we obtain that ej∗φ(Eii)ej=0 and ej∗ψ(Eii)ej=0. Hence φ and ψ also satisfy condition (i).
Note that if \left(\begin{array}[]{cc}x&y\\
\bar{y}&z\\
\end{array}\right)\in M_{2} is positive and x=0 or z=0, then we must have y=0; any principal
submatrix of a positive matrix must be a positive matrix.
So from condition (i), we can see that the nonzero elements in the n×n matrices φ(Eii) and ψ(Eii) can only appear in these positions: (i,i), (i,σ−1(i)), (σ−1(i),i) and (σ−1(i),σ−1(i)).
From (3.5), for i=j we can see that the nonzero elements of the n×n matrix φ(Eij) can only appear in the positions: (i,j), (i,σ−1(j)), (σ−1(i),j) and (σ−1(i),σ−1(j)); the nonzero elements of the n×n matrix ψ(Eij) can only appear in the positions: (j,i), (j,σ−1(i)), (σ−1(j),i) and (σ−1(j),σ−1(i)).
Hence for 1≤i,j≤n we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where all y’s and z’s above are complex numbers.
For i=j, by condition (ii) we have
[TABLE]
If ψ(Eij)=0, then clearly ψ(Eij) is diagonal. Suppose that ψ(Eij)=0. Since {Eij}1≤i,j≤n are linear independent, by comparing indices in (3.7) it can only happen that
- (1)
σ−1(j)=i and σ−1(i)=j;
2. (2)
σ−1(i)=j and σ−1(j)=i;
3. (3)
σ−1(j)=i and σ−1(i)=j;
4. (4)
σ−1(j)=j or σ−1(i)=i.
Suppose that condition (1) holds. From (3.7) it is not hard to see that zσ−1(j),i=−yi,σ−1(j)=0 and zji=zj,σ−1(i)=zσ−1(j),σ−1(i)=0. So from (3.6) we can see that ψ(Eij) is diagonal. Similarly, ψ(Eij) is also diagonal if condition (\refcase2) holds.
Since lmin(σ)≥3, condition (3) and condition (4) cannot happen. If condition (3) holds, then σ(j)=i and σ(i)=j. Thus there exists a cycle of length 2 in the disjoint cycle decomposition of σ. So we have lmin(σ)≤2 which is contradict to our assumption. Similarly, we can see that condition (4) cannot happen. Thus we can see that ψ(Eij) are diagonal matrices for all 1≤i=j≤n. Hence ψ(Eij)t=ψ(Eij) for all 1≤i=j≤n.
Next, we show that ψ~ is 2-positive. Since ψ is positive, ψ(x∗)=ψ(x)∗ for any x∈Mn. From discussions above, we have
[TABLE]
For each (xij)∈Mn(R), from (3.8) and (3.9) we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
So we have
[TABLE]
for any X∈Mn(R).
Now for each \left(\begin{array}[]{cc}X&Y\\
Y^{t}&Z\\
\end{array}\right)\geq 0 in M2(Mn(R)), we have
[TABLE]
where the second equality is followed from (3.10), and the last inequality is followed from the 2-copositivity of ψ~. So ψ~ is 2-positive.
Since ϕ~=φ~+ψ~ and both φ~ and ψ~ are 2-positive, we have that ϕ~ is 2-positive.
∎
Suppose that ϕ:Mn↦Mn is a positive linear map. ϕ is said to be atomic if ϕ can not be decomposed into a sum of a 2-positive map and a 2-copositive map. If ϕ can be decomposed into sums of completely positive maps and completely copositive maps, then ϕ is said to be decomposable, otherwise, ϕ is said to be indecomposable. Let 1k denote the identity map on Mk and T denote the transpose map on Mn, the partial transpose XΓ of a matrix X in Mk⊗Mn is defined by
[TABLE]
It is not hard to see that ϕ is decomposable if and only if Cϕ can be decomposed as sums of positive matrices and matrices whose partial transpose are positive.
Theorem 3.3**.**
Let a,c1,c2,…,cn (n≥3) be positive real numbers. Suppose that σ∈Sn and lmin(σ)≥3. If Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is positive but not completely positive, then Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is atomic. Particularly, if n>a≥max{n−1,n−(c1c2⋯cn)n1}, then Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is atomic.
Proof.
Since lmin(σ)≥3 and Θ(n,σ) is positive but not completely positive, we have that a<n by Theorem 2.8.
Assume that Θ(n,σ)=φ+ψ, where φ is 2-positive and ψ is 2-copositive. For 1≤i,j≤n, we have
[TABLE]
Hence {Θ(n,σ)(Eij)}i,j=1n satisfy conditions in Lemma 3.2, and so Θ~(n,σ) is 2-positive. By Lemma 3.1, we have that a≥n which is a contradiction. Hence Θ(n,σ) is atomic.
Particularly, if n>a≥max{n−1,n−(c1c2⋯cn)n1}, from Theorem 2.6 and Theorem 2.8 we can see that Θ(n,σ) is positive but not completely positive. Thus Θ(n,σ) is atomic.
∎
Remark 3.4*.*
For σ∈Sn, if σ2=idn, then the lengths of cycles in the disjoint cycle decomposition of σ are not greater than 2, that is, lmax(σ)≤2 and lmin(σ)≤2. In Proposition 7.2 of [12], Hou, Li et al. showed that if σ2=idn, then Θ(n,σ)[n−1;1,1,…,1] is decomposable. In Proposition 3.7 below, for σ2=idn we also obtain a class of decomposable maps of the form Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn]. Hence for lmin(σ)≤2, there exist positive linear maps of the form
Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] which are decomposable and hence not atomic.
Since (n,n−1)=1, from Lemma 2.3 we have that lmin(τn−1n)=n. In Theorem 3.3, if we let σ=τn−1n, then we obtain Theorem 3.2 in [7]. For Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] (c≥0), the condition when it is positive and completely positive was discussed in [12]. In the following corollary, we give conditions when it is atomic.
Corollary 3.5**.**
Suppose that σ∈Sn and 0≤c≤lmax(σ)n. If lmin(σ)≥3 and 0<c≤lmax(σ)n, then Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is atomic. If c=0, then Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is completely positive.
Proof.
If 0<c≤lmax(σ)n and lmin(σ)≥3, then by Proposition 6.2 of [12] we have that Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is positive. Since lmin(σ)≥3 and n−c<n, by Theorem 2.8 we can see that Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is positive but not completely positive. Thus by theorem 3.3, Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is atomic.
If c=0, then we can see that Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] takes the form of (2.24). By Corollary 2.10, it is not hard to see that Θ(n,σ)[n;0,0,…,0] is completely positive.
∎
It is clear that Θ(n,τkn)[n−1;1,1,…,1] (n≥3, k∈{1,2,…,n−1}) is the map ‘Φ(k)’ defined in [20] if we restrict Φ(k) to Mn. In [20], Qi and Hou showed that if k=2n, then Φ(k) is indecomposable. Here we give the following result.
Corollary 3.6**.**
For each k∈{1,2,…,n−1} (n≥3), if k=2n when n is even, then Θ(n,τkn)[n−1;1,1,…,1] is atomic.
Proof.
Suppose that k∈{1,2,…,n−1} (n≥3) and k=2n when n is even. By Lemma 2.3, we have that lmin(τkn)≥3.
In Theorem 3.3, if we let a=n−1 and c1=c1=⋯=cn=1, then we can see that Θ(n,τkn)[n−1;1,1,…,1] is atomic.
∎
The following proposition extends Proposition 7.2 in [12].
Proposition 3.7**.**
Suppose that σ∈Sn and σ2=idn. Let F={i:σ(i)=i,i=1,2,…n} and Fc={1,2,…,n}\F. Let a,c1,c2,…,cn be positive real numbers. If a≥n−1, ci≥1 when i∈F and cicσ(i)≥1 when i∈Fc, then Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is decomposable.
Proof.
Let
[TABLE]
Note that P is unitarily equivalent to B⊕0, where B=(bij)∈Mn is a Hermitian matrix satisfying: bii=a−1 or a+ci−1; bij=0 or −1 (when i=j). Since a≥n−1 and ci≥1 when i∈F , we can see that B is a diagonally dominant Hermitian matrix. From the well-known strictly diagonal dominance theorem [10], it is not hard to see that B is positive. Therefore, P is positive.
Since σ2=idn, the lengths of cycles in the disjoint cycle decomposition of σ are not greater than 2. By definition we know that if i∈Fc, then σ(i)∈Fc, i=σ(i) and (i,σ(i)) is a cycle of length 2. So the number k of elements in Fc is even. Then Fc consists of 2k pairs of elements and each pair is of the form (i,σ(i)). For i,σ(i)∈Fc, without loss of generality we assume that i<σ(i), and denote
[TABLE]
For i∈Fc, since cicσ(i)≥1, it is not hard to see that the partial transpose QiΓ of Qi in Mn⊗Mn is positive.
For i,j∈{1,2,…,n}, since σ2=idn, by definition we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
It is not hard to see that the Choi matrix of Θ(n,σ) is
[TABLE]
So the Choi matrix of Θ(n,σ) is the sums of positive matrices and matrices whose partial transposes are positive. From the correspondence between positive linear maps and Choi matrices discussed before, we see that Θ(n,σ) is decomposable.
∎
4. Separability of structural physical approximations and optimality of entanglement witnesses
In this final section, as applications we give conditions to ensure the separability of the structural physical approximation of Θ(n,σ) and the optimality of the entanglement witness associated with T∘Θ(n,σ).
Let ϕ be a nonzero positive linear map of Mn into itself. Since Tr(Cϕ)=Tr(ϕ(In)), we see that Tr(Cϕ)>0. Let W=Tr(Cϕ)1Cϕ. Since W is a Hermitian matrix, there are W+,W−≥0 such that W+W−=0 and W=W+−W−, and similarly for Cϕ if we put Cϕ+=Tr(Cϕ)W+ and Cϕ−=Tr(Cϕ)W−. For 0≤λ≤1, let
[TABLE]
By equation (14) of [5],
[TABLE]
is the maximal λ such that W~(λ)≥0.
In [22], Stormer gave a formula of structural physical approximation for unital linear maps of Mn into itself.
Generally, let ϕ be any nonzero positive linear map of Mn into itself. The structural physical approximation of ϕ (denoted by SPA(ϕ)) is defined as
[TABLE]
Recall that a positive matrix A∈Mm⊗Mn is said to be separable if A=∑i=1kBi⊗Ci for some k∈N, and positive matrices Bi∈Mm and Ci∈Mn for i=1,2,…,k. In the following proposition, if we let c1=c2=⋯=cn=1 and σ=τkn (k=1,2,…,n−1 and k=2n when n is even), we obtain Proposition 4.2 in [21].
Proposition 4.1**.**
Suppose that σ∈Sn and lmin(σ)≥2. For positive real numbers a,c1,c2,…,cn, if a=n−1 and Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is positive, then the structural physical approximation of Θ(n,σ)[a;c1,c2,…,cn] is separable.
Proof.
For σ∈Sn, if lmin(σ)≥2 and a=n−1, it is not hard to see that CΘ(n,σ) is unitarily equivalent to G⊕H, where
[TABLE]
and H∈Mn2−n is a diagonal matrix whose diagonal consists of ci (i=1,2,…,n) and [math]. Since G has only one negative eigenvalue: −1, so is CΘ(n,σ). Thus we have ∥CΘ(n,σ)−∥=1. Since Tr(CΘ(n,σ))=n(n−2)+∑i=1nci, by (4.1) we have
[TABLE]
It is not hard to see that
[TABLE]
Let σij=Eii⊗Eii+Ejj⊗Ejj+Eii⊗Ejj+Ejj⊗Eii−Eij⊗Eij−Eji⊗Eji. To illustrate the separability of σij∈Mn⊗Mn, in this paragraph we let {ei(2):i=1,2,…,n} and {ei(n):i=1,2,…,n} denote the canonical orthonormal basis of C2 and Cn, respectively. Let {Eij(2):i,j=1,2} denote the canonical matrix units of M2.
Let
[TABLE]
Let RΓ be the partial transpose of R in M2⊗M2. It is not hard to see that R and RΓ are positive. From Theorem 2 of [11] we can see that a positive matrix in M2⊗M2 is separable if and only if its partial transpose is positive, hence R is separable.
Let
[TABLE]
where e1(2)∗ and e2(2)∗ denote the conjugate transpose of e1(2) and e2(2), respectively. Note that σij=(Dij⊗Dij)R(Dij∗⊗Dij∗). Since R is separable, we have that σij is separable.
From (4.2) we have
[TABLE]
Hence SPA(CΘ(n,σ)) is separable.
∎
Let ϕ:Mn↦Mn be a positive linear map. If ϕ is not completely positive, then
[TABLE]
is called the entanglement witness associated to ϕ. An entanglement witness is said to be optimal if it detects a maximal set of entanglement [15]. It was shown in [15] that if Wϕ has the spanning property, that is, PWϕ={ζ:⟨Wϕζ,ζ⟩=0,whereζ=ξ⊗η∈Cn⊗Cn} spans the whole space Cn⊗Cn, then Wϕ is an optimal entanglement witness.
For Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] which was discussed in Proposition 6.2 of [12], let c=1 and σ=τkn (k=1,2,…,n). It was shown in [8] that if k=n and 2n (when n (n≥3) is even), then the entanglement witness associated to T∘Θ(n,τkn)[n−1;1,1,…,1] is optimal. Using the method in [8], in the following we give conditions when the entanglement witness associated to T∘Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is optimal.
Theorem 4.2**.**
Suppose that σ∈Sn (n≥3) and lmin(σ)≥3. If
0<c≤lmax(σ)n, then the entanglement witness associated to T∘Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is optimal.
Proof.
Suppose that σ∈Sn and lmin(σ)≥3. Since 0<c≤lmax(σ)n, by Corollary 3.5 we know that Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is positive. Since T is positive, T∘Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c] is also positive.
For i,j∈{1,2,…,n}, since Θ(n,σ)(Eii)=(n−c−1)Eii+cEσ−1(i),σ−1(i) and Θ(n,σ)(Eij)=−Eij (i=j), we have
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
For any n-tuple θ=(θ1,θ2,⋯,θn) of real numbers θj, let
[TABLE]
For each i∈{1,2,…,n}, let
[TABLE]
For ηθ=ξθ⊗ξθ∈S where ξθ=∑j=1neiθjej, we have
[TABLE]
Suppose that l,m∈{1,2,…,n} and
flm=el⊗em∈Vl(n,σ). Since m=l and m=σ−1(l), we have
[TABLE]
Now we will show that if lmin(σ)≥3, the vectors defined in (4.3) and (4.4) span the whole space Cn⊗Cn. For each vector ∑i,j=1nxiyjei⊗ej∈Cn⊗Cn, it can be identified with a matrix ∑i,j=1nxiyjEij∈Mn. So we identify Cn⊗Cn with Mn. In [8], Ha showed that the vectors ξθ⊗ξθ in (4.3)
span all symmetric matrices Eii and Eij+Eji (1≤i=j≤n) in Mn under the identification between Cn⊗Cn and Mn.
For 1≤i,j≤n, if i=j, we have either ei⊗ej∈Vi(n,σ) or ej⊗ei∈Vj(n,σ). If not, by the definition of {Vi(n,σ)}i=1n, we have that i=σ−1(j) and j=σ−1(i), that is, σ(i)=j and σ(j)=i. So there is a cycle of length 2 in the disjoint cycle decomposition of σ which contradicts the assumption lmin(σ)≥3. Thus under the identification between Cn⊗Cn and Mn, either Eij or Eji (1≤i=j≤n) lies in the linear span of vectors in (4.4).
From discussion above, we can see that the vectors in (4.3) and (4.4) span the whole space Cn⊗Cn. Hence WT∘Θ(n,σ) has the spanning property, and so it is optimal.
∎
Suppose that k∈{1,2,…,n−1}, n≥3 and k=2n when n is even. From Lemma 2.3, we have lmin(τkn)≥3. In Theorem 4.2, if we let σ=τkn and c=1, then we obtain Theorem 1 in [8]. In Theorem 4.2, if we let c=0, then Θ(n,σ)[n−c;c,c,…,c]=Θ(n,σ)[n;0,0,…,0]=Δ(n,n,…,n), where Δ(n,n,…,n) is defined in (2.24). For Δ(n,n,…,n), we have the following proposition.
Proposition 4.3**.**
Suppose that n≥2. Then T∘Δ(n,n,…,n) is decomposable and the entanglement witness associated to T∘Δ(n,n,…,n) is optimal.
Proof.
From Corollary 3.5, we have that Δ(n,n,…,n) is completely positive. So T∘Δ(n,n,…,n) is decomposable.
Let WT∘Δn be the entanglement witness associated to T∘Δ(n,n,…,n). For each i∈{1,2,…,n} and n≥2, let
[TABLE]
For n≥2, just as (4.3), let
[TABLE]
where θj (j=1,2,…,n) are arbitrary real numbers. Just
as the proof of Theorem 4.2, it is not hard to check that the vectors in {∪i=1nVi(n)}∪S span the whole space Cn⊗Cn and ⟨WT∘Δnξ,ξ⟩=0 for each ξ∈{∪i=1nVi(n)}∪S. Thus WT∘Δn has the spanning property, and so it is optimal.
∎