Mutually equibiased bases

In the framework of mutually unbiased bases (MUBs), a measurement in one basis gives no information about the outcomes of measurements in another basis. Here we relax the no-information condition by allowing the $d$ outcomes to be predicted according to a predefined probability distribution $q=({q}_{0},...,{q}_{d\ensuremath{-}1})$. The notion of mutual unbiasedness, however, is preserved by requiring that the extracted information is the same for any preparation and any measurement; regardless of which state from which basis is chosen to prepare the system, the outcomes of measuring the system with respect to the other basis generate the same probability distribution. In light of this, we define the notion of mutually equibiased bases (MEBs) such that within each basis the states are equibiased with respect to the states of the other basis and that the bases are mutually equibiased with respect to each other. For $d=2,3$, we derive a set of $d+1$ MEBs. The mutual equibiasedness imposes nontrivial constraints on the distribution $q$, leading, for $d=3$, to the restriction $1/3\ensuremath{\le}\ensuremath{\mu}\ensuremath{\le}1/2$, where $\ensuremath{\mu}={\ensuremath{\sum}}_{k=0}^{2}{q}_{k}^{2}$. To capture the incompatibility of the measurements in MEBs, we derive an inequality for the probabilities of projective measurements in a qudit system, which yields an associated entropic uncertainty inequality. Finally, we construct a class of positive maps and their associated entanglement witnesses based on MEBs. While an entanglement witness constructed from MUBs is generally finer than one based on MEBs when both use the same number of bases, for certain values of the index $\ensuremath{\mu}$, employing a larger set of MEBs can yield a finer witness. We illustrate this behavior using isotropic states of a $3\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}3$ system. Our results reveal that not all bases in a set of $L$ MEBs can contribute to the entanglement detection. A constraint, dependent on the probability distribution $q$, limits the number of MEBs that can be employed.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Physical review. A/Physical review, A
Published
2025-11-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1103/lg7s-yrzt
Primary Topic
Quantum Information and Cryptography
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mutually equibiased bases

Karl J. Friston
Physical review. A/Physical review, A
Quantum Information and Cryptography
article

Mutually equibiased bases

Karl J. Friston
article en

Abstract

In the framework of mutually unbiased bases (MUBs), a measurement in one basis gives no information about the outcomes of measurements in another basis. Here we relax the no-information condition by allowing the $d$ outcomes to be predicted according to a predefined probability distribution $q=({q}_{0},...,{q}_{d\ensuremath{-}1})$. The notion of mutual unbiasedness, however, is preserved by requiring that the extracted information is the same for any preparation and any measurement; regardless of which state from which basis is chosen to prepare the system, the outcomes of measuring the system with respect to the other basis generate the same probability distribution. In light of this, we define the notion of mutually equibiased bases (MEBs) such that within each basis the states are equibiased with respect to the states of the other basis and that the bases are mutually equibiased with respect to each other. For $d=2,3$, we derive a set of $d+1$ MEBs. The mutual equibiasedness imposes nontrivial constraints on the distribution $q$, leading, for $d=3$, to the restriction $1/3\ensuremath{\le}\ensuremath{\mu}\ensuremath{\le}1/2$, where $\ensuremath{\mu}={\ensuremath{\sum}}_{k=0}^{2}{q}_{k}^{2}$. To capture the incompatibility of the measurements in MEBs, we derive an inequality for the probabilities of projective measurements in a qudit system, which yields an associated entropic uncertainty inequality. Finally, we construct a class of positive maps and their associated entanglement witnesses based on MEBs. While an entanglement witness constructed from MUBs is generally finer than one based on MEBs when both use the same number of bases, for certain values of the index $\ensuremath{\mu}$, employing a larger set of MEBs can yield a finer witness. We illustrate this behavior using isotropic states of a $3\ifmmode\times\else\texttimes\fi{}3$ system. Our results reveal that not all bases in a set of $L$ MEBs can contribute to the entanglement detection. A constraint, dependent on the probability distribution $q$, limits the number of MEBs that can be employed.

Physical review. A/Physical review, AVol. 112(6)
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad (IR)
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Quantum Information and Cryptography
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Mutually equibiased bases — Karl J. Friston · Physical review. A/Physical review, A (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS