2012
DOI: 10.1142/s0219749912500566
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On the Impossibility to Extend Triples of Mutually Unbiased Product Bases in Dimension Six

Abstract: An analytic proof is given which shows that it is impossible to extend any triple of mutually unbiased (MU) product bases in dimension six by a single MU vector. Furthermore, the 16 states obtained by removing two orthogonal states from any MU product triple cannot figure in a (hypothetical) complete set of seven MU bases. These results follow from exploiting the structure of MU product bases in a novel fashion, and they are among the strongest ones obtained for MU bases in dimension six without recourse to co… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
33
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 28 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
(49 reference statements)
0
33
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In a recent paper, it has been analytically proven that given any triplet of MU product bases in dimension six it is not possible to find even a single vector MU to the triplet [25].…”
Section: Complex Hadamard Matrices and Mutually Unbiased Basesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a recent paper, it has been analytically proven that given any triplet of MU product bases in dimension six it is not possible to find even a single vector MU to the triplet [25].…”
Section: Complex Hadamard Matrices and Mutually Unbiased Basesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It can be immediately seen that any other basis obtained introducing the fourth one of the space would not be mutually unbiased with the others, since it is missing a different basis in . The set (5) consists of 18 product states and cannot be extended by any other vector in , even if entangled states are considered23; moreover if a complete MUB set in d = 6 existed, then only one among the seven bases therein could be composed of product states, while all others must be entangled24.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…for j = 1, 2, 3, 4 in (12). We shall use these facts in the following arguments of solving (13)- (16).…”
Section: ⊓ ⊔mentioning
confidence: 99%