Abstract
Abstract
The Choi–Jamiołkowski isomorphism is an essential component in every quantum information theorist’s toolkit: it allows to identify linear maps between two quantum systems with linear operators on the composite system. Here, we analyse this widely used gadget from a new perspective. Namely, we explicitly distinguish between its kinematical and dynamical properties, that is, we study the isomorphism on two different levels: Jordan algebras and the different
C
∗
-algebras they arise from, which are distinguished by their order of composition. A number of important and novel insights stem from our analysis. We find that Choi’s theorem, which asserts that Choi’s version of the isomorphism (Choi 1975 Lin. Alg. Appl.
10 285) further maps the positive cone of completely positive linear maps (such as quantum channels) to the cone of positive linear operators (such as quantum states) on the composite system, crucially depends on the dynamical structure in
C
∗
-algebras. We explain in detail how this dependence gives rise to the mismatch between the basis-dependence of Choi’s version of the isomorphism, and the basis-independent version by Jamiołkowski (1972 Rep. Math. Phys.
3 275). We then overcome this subtle but pervasive issue in a number of ways: first, we prove a version of Choi’s theorem for Jamiołkowski’s isomorphism, second, we define a basis-independent variant of Choi’s isomorphism and, third, by making explicit the dynamical distinction between Jordan and
C
∗
-algebras, we combine the different variants of the isomorphism into a unified description, that subsumes their individual features. We also embed and interpret our results in the graphical calculus of categorical quantum mechanics.
Funder
Foundational Questions Institute
Centre of Excellence for Quantum Computation and Communication Technology, Australian Research Council
Reference69 articles.
1. A categorical semantics of quantum protocols;Abramsky,2004
2. On orientation and dynamics in operator algebras. Part I;Alfsen;Commun. Math. Phys.,1998
3. Orientation in operator algebras;Alfsen;Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA,1998
4. Quantum common causes and quantum causal models;Allen;Phys. Rev. X,2017
5. Physics, topology, logic and computation: a Rosetta stone;Baez;Lecture Notes Phys.,2011