# QUANTUM ENTANGLEMENTS AND ENTANGLED MUTUAL ENTROPY

## 1. Introduction

Recently, the specifically quantum correlations, called in quantum physics entanglements, are used to study quantum information processes, in particular, quantum computation, quantum teleportation, quantum cryptography . There have been mathematical studeis of the entanglements in , in which the entangled state is defined by a state not written as a form $`_k\lambda _k\rho _k\sigma _k`$ with any states $`\rho _k`$ and $`\sigma _k.`$ However it is obvious that there exist several correlated states written as separable forms above. Such correlated, or entangled states have been also discussed in several contexts in quantum probability such as quantum measurement and filtering , quantum compound state and lifting . In this paper, we study the mathematical structure of quantum entangled states to provide a finer classification of quantum sates, and we discuss the informational degree of entanglement and entangled quantum mutual entropy.

We show that the entangled states can be treated as generalized compound states, the nonseparable states of quantum compound systems which are not represetable by convex combinations of the product states. The compound states, called o-entangled, are defined by orthogonal decompositions of their marginal states. This is a particular case of so called separable state of a compound system, the convex combination of the product states which we call c-entangled. The o-entangled compound states are most informative among c-entangled states in the sense that the maximum of mutual entropy over all c-entanglements to the quantum system $`𝒜`$ is achieved on the extreme o-entangled states as the von Neumann entropy $`S\left(\varrho \right)`$ of a given normal state $`\varrho `$ on $`𝒜`$ . Thus the maximum of mutual entropy over all classical couplings, described by c-entanglements of (quantum) probe systems $``$ to the system $`𝒜`$, is bounded by $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{rank}𝒜`$, the logarithm of the rank of the von Neumann algebra $`𝒜`$, defined as the dimensionality of the maximal Abelian subalgebra $`𝒜^{}𝒜`$. Due to $`dim𝒜\left(\mathrm{rank}𝒜\right)^2`$, it is achieved on the normal tracial $`\rho =\left(\mathrm{rank}𝒜\right)^1I`$ only in the case of finite dimensional $`𝒜`$.

More general than o-entangled states, the d-entangled states, are defined as c-entangled states by orthogonal decomposition of only one marginal state on the probe algebra $``$. They can give bigger mutual entropy for a quantum noisy channel than the o-entangled state which gains the same information as d-entangled extreme states in the case of a deterministic channel.

We prove that the truly (strongest) entangled states are most informative in the sense that the maximum of mutual entropy over all entanglements to the quantum system $`𝒜`$ is achieved on the quasi-compound state, given by an extreme entanglement of the probe system $`=𝒜`$ with coinciding marginals, called standard for a given $`\varrho `$. The standard entangled state is o-entangled only in the case of Abelian $`𝒜`$ or pure marginal state $`\varrho `$. The gained information for such extreme q-compound state defines another type of entropy, the quasi-entropy $`\stackrel{~}{S}\left(\varrho \right)`$ which is bigger than the von Neumann entropy $`S\left(\varrho \right)`$ in the case of non-Abelian $`𝒜`$ (and mixed $`\varrho `$.) The maximum of mutual entropy over all quantum couplings, described by true quantum entanglements of probe systems $``$ to the system $`𝒜`$ is bounded by $`\mathrm{ln}dim𝒜`$, the logarithm of the dimensionality of the von Neumann algebra $`𝒜`$, which is achieved on a normal tracial $`\rho `$ in the case of finite dimensional $`𝒜`$. Thus the q-entropy $`\stackrel{~}{S}\left(\varrho \right)`$, which can be called the dimensional entropy, is the true quantum entropy, in contrast to the von Neumann entropy $`S\left(\varrho \right)`$, which is semi-classical entropy as it can be achieved as a supremum over all couplings with the classical probe systems $``$. These entropies coincide in the classical case of Abelian $`𝒜`$ when $`\mathrm{rank}𝒜=dim𝒜`$. In the case of non-Abelian finite-dimensional $`𝒜`$ the q-capacity $`C_q=\mathrm{ln}dim𝒜`$ is achieved as the supremum of mutual entropy over all q-encodings (correspondences), described by entanglements. It is strictly bigger then the classical capacity $`C=\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{rank}𝒜`$ of the identity channel, which is achieved as the supremum over usual encodings, described by the classical-quantum correspondences $`𝒜^{}𝒜`$.

In this short paper we consider the case of a simple algebra $`𝒜=\left(\right)`$ for which some results are rather obvious and given without proofs. The proofs are given in the complete paper  for a more general case of decomposable algebra $`𝒜`$ to include the classical discrete systems as a particular quantum case, and will be published elsewhere.

## 2. Compound States and Entanglements

Let $``$ denote the (separable) Hilbert space of a quantum system, and $`𝒜=\left(\right)`$ be the algebra of all linear bounded operators on $``$. A bounded linear functional $`\varrho :𝒜𝐂`$ is called a state on $`𝒜`$ if it is positive (i.e., $`\varrho \left(A\right)0`$ for any positive operator $`A`$ in $`𝒜`$) and normalized $`\varrho (I)=1`$ for the identity operator $`I`$ in $`𝒜`$ . A normal state can be expressed as

(1) 
$$\varrho \left(A\right)=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\kappa ^{}A\kappa =\mathrm{tr}A\rho ,\text{ }A𝒜\text{.}$$

In (2.1), $`𝒢`$ is another separable Hilbert space, $`\kappa `$ is a linear Hilbert-Schmidt operator from $`𝒢`$ to $``$ and $`\kappa ^{}`$ is the adjoint operator of $`\kappa `$ from $``$ to $`𝒢`$. This $`\kappa `$ is called the amplitude operator, and it is called just the amplitude if $`𝒢`$ is one dimensional space $``$ , corresponding to the pure state $`\varrho \left(A\right)=\kappa ^{}A\kappa `$ for a $`\kappa `$ with $`\kappa ^{}\kappa =\kappa ^2=1,`$ in which case $`\kappa ^{}`$ is the adjoint functional from $``$ to $``$. Moreover the density operator $`\rho `$ in (2.1) is $`\kappa \kappa ^{}`$ uniquely defined as a positive trace class operator $`\mathrm{P}_𝒜𝒜`$ . Thus the predual space $`𝒜_{}`$ can be identified with the Banach space $`𝒯\left(\right)`$ of all trace class operators in $``$ (the density operators $`\mathrm{P}_𝒜𝒜_{}`$, $`\mathrm{P}_{}_{}`$ of the states $`\varrho `$, $`\varsigma `$ on different algebras $`𝒜`$, $``$ will be usually denoted by different letters $`\rho ,\sigma `$ corresponding to their Greek variations $`\varrho `$, $`\varsigma `$.)

In general, $`𝒢`$ is not one dimensional, the dimensionality $`dim𝒢`$ must be not less than $`\mathrm{rank}\rho `$, the dimensionality of the range $`\mathrm{ran}\rho `$ of the density operator $`\rho .`$ We shall equip it with an isometric involution $`J=J^{}`$, $`J^2=I`$, having the properties of complex conjugation on $`𝒢`$,

$$J\lambda _j\zeta _j=\overline{\lambda _j}J\zeta _j,\lambda _j𝐂,\zeta _j𝒢$$

with respect to which $`J\sigma =\sigma J`$ for the positive and so self-adjoint operator $`\sigma =\kappa ^{}\kappa =\sigma ^{}`$ on $`𝒢`$. The latter can also be expressed as the symmetricity property $`\stackrel{~}{\varsigma }=\varsigma `$ of the state $`\varsigma \left(B\right)=`$ $`\mathrm{tr}B\sigma `$ given by the real and so symmetric density operator $`\overline{\sigma }=\sigma =\stackrel{~}{\sigma }`$ on $`𝒢`$ with respect to the complex conjugation $`\overline{B}=JBJ`$ and the tilda operation ($`𝒢`$-transponation) $`\stackrel{~}{B}=JB^{}J`$ on the algebra $`=\left(𝒢\right)`$.

For example, $`𝒢`$ can be realized as a subspace of $`l^2(𝐍)`$ of complex sequences $`𝐍n\zeta \left(n\right)`$, with $`_n\left|\zeta \left(n\right)\right|^2<+\mathrm{}`$ in the diagonal representation $`\sigma =\left[\mu \left(n\right)\delta _n^m\right]`$. The involution $`J`$ can be identified with the complex conjugation $`C\zeta \left(n\right)=\overline{\zeta }\left(n\right)`$, i.e.,

$$C:\zeta =\underset{n}{}|n\zeta \left(n\right)C\zeta =\underset{n}{}|n\overline{\zeta }\left(n\right)$$

in the standard basis $`\left\{|n\right\}𝒢`$ of $`l^2(𝐍)`$. In this case $`\kappa =\kappa _nn|`$ is given by orthogonal eigen-amplitudes $`\kappa _n`$, $`\kappa _m^{}\kappa _n=0`$, $`mn`$, normalized to the eigen-values $`\lambda \left(n\right)=\kappa _n^{}\kappa _n=\mu \left(n\right)`$ of the density operator $`\rho `$ such that $`\rho =\kappa _n\kappa _n^{}`$ is a Schatten decomposition, i.e. the spectral decomposition of $`\rho `$ into one-dimensional orthogonal projectors. In any other basis the operator $`J`$ is defined then by $`J=U^{}CU`$, where $`U`$ is the corresponding unitary transformation. One can also identify $`𝒢`$ with $``$ by $`U\kappa _n=\lambda \left(n\right)^{1/2}|n`$ such that the operator $`\rho `$ is real and symmetric, $`J\rho J=\rho =J\rho ^{}J`$ in $`𝒢=`$ with respect to the involution $`J`$ defined in $``$ by $`J\kappa _n=\kappa _n`$. Here $`U`$ is an isometric operator $`l^2\left(\right)`$ diagonalizing the operator $`\rho `$: $`U\rho U^{}=|n\lambda \left(n\right)n|`$. The amplitude operator $`\kappa =\rho ^{1/2}`$ corresponding to $`=𝒜`$, $`\sigma =\rho `$ is called standard.

Given the amplitude operator $`\kappa `$, one can define not only the states $`\varrho `$ $`\left(\rho =\kappa \kappa ^{}\right)`$and $`\varsigma `$ $`\left(\sigma =\kappa ^{}\kappa \right)`$on the algebras $`𝒜=\left(\right)`$ and $`=\left(𝒢\right)`$ but also a pure entanglement state $`\varpi `$ on the algebra $`𝒜`$ of all bounded operators on the tensor product Hilbert space $`𝒢`$ by

$$\varpi \left(BA\right)=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\stackrel{~}{B}\kappa ^{}A\kappa =\mathrm{tr}_{}A\kappa \stackrel{~}{B}\kappa ^{}.$$

Indeed, thus defined $`\varpi `$ is uniquely extended by linearity to a normal state on the algebra $`𝒜`$ generated by all linear combinations $`C=\lambda _jB_jA_j`$ due to $`\varpi \left(II\right)=\mathrm{tr}\kappa ^{}\kappa =1`$ and

$`\varpi \left(C^{}C\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,k}{}}\overline{\lambda }_i\lambda _k\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\stackrel{~}{B}_k\stackrel{~}{B}_i^{}\kappa ^{}A_i^{}A_k\kappa `$   
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i,k}{}}\overline{\lambda }_i\lambda _k\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\stackrel{~}{B}_i^{}\kappa ^{}A_i^{}A_k\kappa \stackrel{~}{B}_k=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\chi ^{}\chi 0,`$   
where $`\chi =_jA_j\kappa \stackrel{~}{B}_j`$. This state is pure on $`\left(𝒢\right)`$ as it is given by an amplitude $`\vartheta 𝒢`$ defined as

$$\left(\zeta \eta \right)^{}\vartheta =\eta ^{}\kappa J\zeta ,\zeta 𝒢,\eta ,$$

and it has the states $`\varrho `$ and $`\varsigma `$ as the marginals of $`\varpi `$:

(2) 
$$\varpi \left(IA\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}A\rho ,\varpi \left(BI\right)=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢B\sigma .$$

As follows from the next theorem for the case $`=`$ , any pure state

$$\varpi \left(BA\right)=\vartheta ^{}\left(BA\right)\vartheta ,B,A𝒜$$

given on $`\left(𝒢\right)`$ by an amplitude $`\vartheta 𝒢`$ with $`\vartheta ^{}\vartheta =1`$, can be achieved by a unique entanglement of its marginal states $`\varsigma `$ and $`\varrho `$.

Theorem 2.1. Let $`\varpi :𝒜`$ be a compound state

(3) 
$$\varpi \left(BA\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}\upsilon ^{}\left(BA\right)\upsilon ,$$

defined by an amplitude operator $`\upsilon :𝒢`$ on a separable Hilbert space $``$ into the tensor product Hilbert space $`𝒢`$ with $`\mathrm{tr}\upsilon ^{}\upsilon =1`$. Then this state can be achieved as an entanglement

(4) 
$$\varpi \left(BA\right)=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\stackrel{~}{B}\kappa ^{}\left(IA\right)\kappa =\mathrm{tr}_{}\left(IA\right)\kappa \stackrel{~}{B}\kappa ^{}$$

of the states (2) with $`\sigma =\kappa ^{}\kappa `$ and $`\rho =\mathrm{tr}_{}\kappa \kappa ^{}`$, where $`\kappa `$ is an amplitude operator $`𝒢`$. The entangling operator $`\kappa `$ is uniquely defined by $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }U=\upsilon `$ up to a unitary transformation $`U`$ of the minimal domain $`=\mathrm{dom}\upsilon `$. 

Note that the entangled state (4) is written as

(5) 
$$\varpi \left(BA\right)=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\stackrel{~}{B}\pi \left(A\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}A\pi _{}\left(\stackrel{~}{B}\right),$$

where $`\pi \left(A\right)=\kappa ^{}\left(IA\right)\kappa `$, bounded by $`A\sigma _{}`$ for any $`A\left(\right)`$, is in the predual space $`_{}`$ of all trace-class operators in $`𝒢`$, and $`\pi _{}\left(B\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}\kappa B\kappa ^{}`$, bounded by $`B\rho 𝒜_{}`$ , is in $`𝒜_{}𝒜`$. The map $`\pi `$ is the Steinspring form  of the general completely positive map $`𝒜_{}`$, written in the eigen-basis $`\left\{|k\right\}`$ of the density operator $`\upsilon ^{}\upsilon `$ as

(6) 
$$\pi \left(A\right)=\underset{m,n}{}|m\kappa _m^{}\left(IA\right)\kappa _nn|,A𝒜$$

while the dual operation $`\pi _{}`$ is the Kraus form  of the general completely positive map $`\mathrm{A}𝒜_{}`$, given in this basis as

(7) 
$$\pi _{}\left(B\right)=\underset{n,m}{}n\left|B\right|m\mathrm{tr}_{}\kappa _n\kappa _m^{}=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\stackrel{~}{B}\omega .$$

It corresponds to the general form

(8) 
$$\omega =\underset{m,n}{}|nm|\mathrm{tr}_{}\kappa _n\kappa _m^{}$$

of the density operator $`\omega =\upsilon \upsilon ^{}`$ for the entangled state $`\varpi \left(BA\right)=\mathrm{tr}\left(BA\right)\omega `$ in this basis, characterized by the weak orthogonality property

(9) 
$$\mathrm{tr}_{}\psi \left(m\right)^{}\psi \left(n\right)=\mu \left(n\right)\delta _n^m$$

in terms of the amplitude operators $`\psi \left(n\right)=\left(In|\right)\stackrel{~}{\kappa }=\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_n`$.

Definition 2.1. The dual map $`\pi _{}:𝒜_{}`$ to a completely positive map $`\pi :𝒜_{}`$, normalized as $`\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\pi \left(I\right)=1`$, is called the quantum entanglement of the state $`\varsigma =\pi \left(I\right)`$ on $``$ to the state $`\varrho =\pi _{}\left(I\right)`$ on $`𝒜`$. The entanglement by

(10) 
$$\pi _{}^{}\left(A\right)=\rho ^{1/2}A\rho ^{1/2}=\pi ^{}\left(A\right)$$

of the state $`\varsigma =\varrho `$ on the algebra $`=𝒜`$ is called standard for the system $`(𝒜,\varrho )`$. 

The standard entanglement defines the standard compound state

$$\varpi _0\left(BA\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}\stackrel{~}{B}\rho ^{1/2}A\rho ^{1/2}=\mathrm{tr}_{}A\rho ^{1/2}\stackrel{~}{B}\rho ^{1/2}$$

on the algebra $`𝒜𝒜`$, which is pure, given by the amplitude $`\vartheta _0`$ associated with $`\varpi _0`$ is $`\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_0`$, where $`\kappa _0=\rho ^{1/2}`$.

Example 2.1. In quantum physics the entangled states are usually obtained by a unitary transformation $`U`$ of an initial disentangled state, described by the density operator $`\sigma _0\rho _0\tau _0`$ on the tensor product Hilbert space $`𝒢𝒦`$ , that is,

$$\varpi \left(BA\right)=\mathrm{tr}U^{}\left(BAI\right)U\left(\sigma _0\rho _0\tau _0\right).$$

In the simple case, when $`𝒦=`$, $`\tau _0=1`$, the joint amplitude operator $`\upsilon `$ is defined on the tensor product $`=𝒢_0`$ with $`_0=\mathrm{ran}\rho _0`$ as $`\upsilon =U_1\left(\sigma _0\rho _0\right)^{1/2}`$. The entangling operator $`\kappa `$, describing the entangled state $`\varpi `$, is constructed as it was done in the proof of Theorem 2.1 by transponation of the operator $`\upsilon U^{}`$, where $`U`$ is arbitrary isometric operator $`𝒢_0`$. The dynamical procedure of such entanglement in terms of the completely positive map $`\pi _{}:𝒜_{}`$ is the subject of Belavkin quantum filtering theory . The quantum filtering dilation theorem  proves that any entanglement $`\pi `$ can be obtained the unitary entanglement as the result of quantum filtering by tracing out some degrees of freedom of a quantum environment, described by the density operator $`\tau _0`$ on the Hilbert space $`𝒦`$, even in the continuous time case. 

## 3. C- and D-Entanglements and Encodings

The compound states play the role of joint input-output probability measures in classical information channels, and can be pure in quantum case even if the marginal states are mixed. The pure compound states achieved by an entanglement of mixed input and output states exhibit new, non-classical type of correlations which are responsible for the EPR type paradoxes in the interpretation of quantum theory. The mixed compound states on $`𝒜`$ which are given as the convex combinations

$$\varpi =\underset{n}{}\varsigma _n\varrho _n\mu \left(n\right),\mu \left(n\right)0,\underset{n}{}\mu \left(n\right)=1$$

of tensor products of pure or mixed normalized states $`\varrho _n𝒜_{}`$, $`\varsigma _n_{}`$ as in classical case, do not exhibit such paradoxical behavior, and are usually considered as the proper candidates for the input-output states in the communication channels. Such separable compound states are achieved by c-entanglements, the convex combinations of the primitive entanglements $`B\mathrm{tr}_𝒢B\omega _n`$, given by the density operators $`\omega _n=\sigma _n\rho _n`$ of the product states $`\varpi _n=\varsigma _n\varrho _n`$:

(11) 
$$\pi _{}\left(B\right)=\underset{n}{}\rho _n\mathrm{tr}_𝒢B\sigma _n\mu \left(n\right),$$

A compound state of this sort was introduced by Ohya  in order to define the quantum mutual entropy expressing the amount of information transmitted from an input quantum system to an output quantum system through a quantum channel, using a Schatten decomposition $`\sigma =_n\sigma _n\mu \left(n\right)`$, $`\sigma _n=|nn|`$ of the input density operator $`\sigma `$. It corresponds to a particular, diagonal type

(12) 
$$\pi \left(A\right)=\underset{n}{}|n\kappa _n^{}\left(IA\right)\kappa _nn|$$

of the entangling map (6) in an eigen-basis $`\left\{|n\right\}𝒢`$ of the density operator $`\sigma `$, and is discussed in this section.

Let us consider a finite or infinite input system indexed by the natural numbers $`n𝐍`$. The associated space $`𝒢l^2\left(𝐍\right)`$ is the Hilbert space of the input system described by a quantum projection-valued measure $`n|nn|`$ on $``$, given an orthogonal partition of unity $`I=|nn|`$ $``$ of the finite or infinite dimensional input Hilbert space $`𝒢`$. Each input pure state, identified with the one-dimensional density operator $`|nn|`$ corresponding to the elementary symbol $`n`$, defines the elementary output state $`\varrho _n`$ on $`𝒜`$. If the elementary states $`\varrho _n`$ are pure, they are described by output amplitudes $`\eta _n`$ satisfying $`\eta _n^{}\eta _n=1=\mathrm{tr}\rho _n`$, where $`\rho _n=`$ $`\eta _n\eta _n^{}`$ are the corresponding output one-dimensional density operators. If these amplitudes are non-orthogonal $`\eta _m^{}\eta _n\delta _n^m`$, they cannot be identified with the input amplitudes $`|n`$.

The elementary joint input-output states are given by the density operators $`|nn|\rho _n`$ in $`𝒢`$. Their mixtures

(13) 
$$\omega =\underset{n}{}\mu \left(n\right)|nn|\rho _n,$$

define the compound states on $`𝒜`$, given by the quantum correspondences $`n|nn|`$ with the probabilities $`\mu \left(n\right)`$. Here we note that the quantum correspondence is described by a classical-quantum channel, and the general d-compound state for a quantum-quantum channel in quantum communication can be obtained in this way due to the orthogonality of the decomposition (13), corresponding to the orthogonality of the Schatten decomposition $`\sigma =_n|n\mu \left(n\right)n|`$ for $`\sigma =\mathrm{tr}_{}\omega `$.

The comparison of the general compound state (8) with (13) suggests that the quantum correspondences are described as the diagonal entanglements

(14) 
$$\pi _{}\left(B\right)=\underset{n}{}\mu \left(n\right)n|B|n\rho _n,$$

They are dual to the orthogonal decompositions (12):

$$\pi \left(A\right)=\underset{n}{}\mu \left(n\right)|n\eta _n^{}A\eta _nn|=\underset{n}{}|n\eta \left(n\right)^{}A\eta \left(n\right)n|,$$

where $`\eta \left(n\right)=\mu \left(n\right)^{1/2}\eta _n`$. These are the entanglements with the stronger orthogonality

(15) 
$$\psi \left(m\right)\psi \left(n\right)^{}=\mu \left(n\right)\delta _n^m,$$

for the amplitude operators $`\psi \left(n\right):`$ of the decomposition of the amplitude operator $`\upsilon =_n|n\psi \left(n\right)`$ in comparison with the orthogonality (9). The orthogonality (15) can be achieved in the following manner: Take in (6) $`\kappa _n=|n\eta \left(n\right)`$ with $`m|n=\delta _n^m`$ so that

$$\kappa _m^{}\left(IA\right)\kappa _n=\mu \left(n\right)\eta _n^{}A\eta _n\delta _n^m$$

for any $`A𝒜`$. Then the strong orthogonality condition (15) is fulfilled by the amplitude operators $`\psi \left(n\right)=\eta \left(n\right)n|=\stackrel{~}{\kappa }_n`$, and

$$\kappa ^{}\kappa =\underset{n}{}\mu \left(n\right)|nn|=\sigma ,\kappa \kappa ^{}=\underset{n}{}\eta \left(n\right)\eta \left(n\right)^{}=\rho .$$

It corresponds to the amplitude operator for the compound state (13) of the form

(16) 
$$\upsilon =\underset{n}{}|n\psi \left(n\right)U,$$

where $`U`$ is arbitrary unitary operator from $``$ onto $`𝒢`$ , i.e. $`\upsilon `$ is unitary equivalent to the diagonal amplitude operator

$$\kappa =\underset{n}{}|nn|\eta \left(n\right)$$

on $`=𝒢`$ into $`𝒢`$. Thus, we have proved the following theorem in the case of pure output states $`\rho _n=\eta _n\eta _n^{}`$.

Theorem 3.1. Let $`\pi `$ be the operator (13), defining a d-compound state of the form

(17) 
$$\varpi \left(BA\right)=\underset{n}{}n|B|n\mathrm{tr}__n\psi _n^{}A\psi _n\mu \left(n\right)$$

Then it corresponds to the entanglement by the orthogonal decomposition (12) mapping the algebra $`𝒜`$ into a diagonal subalgebra of $``$. 

Note that (2.9) defines the general form of a positive map on $`𝒜`$ with values in the simultaneously diagonal trace-class operators in $`\mathrm{A}`$.

Definition 3.1. The completely positive convex combination (11) is called c-entanglement, and is called d-entanglement, or quantum encoding if it has the diagonal form (14) on $``$. The d-entanglement is called o-entanglement and compound state is called o-compound if all density operators $`\rho _n`$ are orthogonal: $`\rho _m\rho _n=\rho _n\rho _m`$ for all $`m`$ and $`n`$. 

Note that due to the commutativity of the operators $`BI`$ with $`IA`$ on $`𝒢`$, one can treat the correspondences as the nondemolition measurements  in $``$ with respect to $`𝒜`$. So, the compound state is the state prepared for such measurements on the input $`𝒢`$. It coincides with the mixture of the states, corresponding to those after the measurement without reading the sent message. The set of all d-entanglements corresponding to a given Schatten decomposition of the input state $`\sigma `$ on $``$ is obviously convex with the extreme points given by the pure output states $`\rho _n`$ on $`𝒜`$, corresponding to a not necessarily orthogonal decompositions $`\rho =_n\rho \left(n\right)`$ into one-dimensional density operators $`\rho \left(n\right)=\mu \left(n\right)\rho _n.`$

The Schatten decompositions $`\rho =_n\lambda \left(n\right)\rho _n`$ correspond to the extreme d-entanglements, $`\rho _n=\eta _n\eta _n^{}`$, $`\mu \left(n\right)=\lambda \left(n\right)`$, characterized by orthogonality $`\rho _m\rho _n=0`$, $`mn`$ . They form a convex set of d-entanglements with mixed commuting $`\rho _n`$ for each Schatten decomposition of $`\rho `$. The orthogonal d-entanglements were used in  to construct a particular type of Accardi’s transitional expectations  and to define the entropy in a quantum dynamical system via such transitional expectations.

The established structure of the general q-compound states suggests also the general form

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(B,\varrho _0)=\mathrm{tr}__1X^{}\left(B\rho _0\right)X=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\left(\stackrel{~}{B}I\right)Y\left(I\rho _0\right)Y^{}$$

of transitional expectations $`\mathrm{\Phi }_{}:\times 𝒜_{}^{}𝒜_{}`$, describing the entanglements $`\pi _{}=\mathrm{\Phi }_{}\left(\varrho _0\right)`$ of the states $`\varsigma =\pi \left(I\right)`$ to $`\varrho =\pi _{}\left(I\right)`$ for each initial state $`\varrho _0𝒜_{}^{}`$ with the density operator $`\rho _0𝒜^{}\left(_0\right)`$ by $`\pi _{}\left(B\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}\kappa \left(BI\right)\kappa ^{}`$, where $`\kappa =X^{}\left(I\rho _0\right)^{1/2}`$. It is given by an entangling transition operator $`X:𝒢_0`$, which is defined by a transitional amplitude operator $`Y:_0𝒢`$ up to a unitary operator $`U`$ in $``$ as

$$\left(\zeta \eta _0\right)^{}X\left(U\xi \eta \right)=\left(\eta _0J\xi \right)^{}Y^{}\left(J\zeta \eta \right)\text{.}$$

The dual map $`\mathrm{\Phi }:𝒜_{}𝒜^{}`$ is obviously normal and completely positive,

(18) 
$$\mathrm{\Phi }\left(A\right)=X\left(IA\right)X^{}_{}𝒜^{},A𝒜,$$

with $`\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\mathrm{\Phi }\left(I\right)=I^{}`$, and is called filtering map with the output states

$$\varsigma =\mathrm{tr}__0\mathrm{\Phi }\left(I\right)\left(I\rho _0\right)$$

in the theory of CP flows  over $`𝒜=𝒜^{}`$. The operators $`Y`$ normalized as $`\mathrm{tr}_{}Y^{}Y=I^{}`$ describe $`𝒜`$-valued q-compound states

$$\mathrm{E}\left(BA\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}Y^{}\left(BA\right)Y=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢\left(\stackrel{~}{B}I\right)\mathrm{\Phi }\left(A\right),$$

defined as the normal completely positive maps $`𝒜𝒜^{}`$ with $`\mathrm{E}\left(II\right)=I^{}`$ .

If the $`𝒜`$-valued compound state has the diagonal form given by the orthogonal decomposition

(19) 
$$\mathrm{\Phi }\left(A\right)=\underset{n}{}|n\mathrm{tr}_{}\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right)^{}A\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right)n|,$$

corresponding to $`Y`$ $`=_n|n\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right)`$, where $`\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right):_0`$, it is achieved by the d-transitional expectations

$$\mathrm{\Phi }_{}(B,\varrho _0)=\underset{n}{}n|B|n\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right)\left(\rho _0I\right)\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right)^{}.$$

The d-transitional expectations correspond to the instruments  of the dynamical theory of quantum measurements. The elementary filters

$$\mathrm{\Theta }_n\left(A\right)=\frac{1}{\mu \left(n\right)}\mathrm{tr}_{}\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\left(n\right)A\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right),\mu \left(n\right)=\mathrm{tr}\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right)\left(\rho _0I\right)\mathrm{\Psi }^{}\left(n\right)$$

define posterior states $`\varrho _n=\varrho _0\mathrm{\Theta }_n`$ on $`𝒜`$ for quantum nondemolition measurements in $``$, which are called indirect if the corresponding density operators $`\rho _n`$ are non-orthogonal. They describe the posterior states with orthogonal

$$\rho _n=\mathrm{\Psi }_n\left(\rho _0I\right)\mathrm{\Psi }_n^{},\mathrm{\Psi }_n=\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right)/\mu \left(n\right)^{1/2}$$

for all $`\rho _0`$ iff $`\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right)^{}\mathrm{\Psi }\left(n\right)=\delta _n^mM\left(n\right)`$.

## 4. Quantum Entropy via Entanglements

As it was shown in the previous section, the diagonal entanglements describe the classical-quantum encodings $`\varkappa :𝒜_{}`$, i.e. correspondences of classical symbols to quantum, in general not orthogonal and pure, states. As we have seen in contrast to the classical case, not every entanglement can be achieved in this way. The general entangled states $`\varpi `$ are described by the density operators $`\omega =\upsilon \upsilon ^{}`$ of the form (8) which are not necessarily block-diagonal in the eigen-representation of the density operator $`\sigma `$, and they cannot be achieved even by a more general c-entanglement (11). Such nonseparable entangled states are called in  the quasicompound (q-compound) states, so we can call also the quantum nonseparable correspondences the quasi-encodings (q-encodings) in contrast to the d-correspondences, described by the diagonal entanglements.

As we shall prove in this section, the most informative for a quantum system $`(𝒜,\varrho )`$ is the standard entanglement $`\pi _{}^{}=\pi _0`$ of the probe system $`(^{},\varsigma _0)=(𝒜,\varrho )`$, described in (10). The other extreme cases of the self-dual input entanglements

$$\pi _{}\left(A\right)=\underset{n}{}\rho \left(n\right)^{1/2}A\rho \left(n\right)^{1/2}=\pi \left(A\right),$$

are the pure c-entanglements, given by the decompositions $`\rho =\rho \left(n\right)`$ into pure states $`\rho \left(n\right)=\eta _n\eta _n^{}\mu \left(n\right)`$. We shall see that these c-entanglements, corresponding to the separable states

(20) 
$$\omega =\underset{n}{}\eta _n\eta _n^{}\eta _n\eta _n^{}\mu \left(n\right),$$

are in general less informative then the pure d-entanglements, given in an orthonormal basis $`\left\{\eta _n^{}\right\}`$ by

$$\pi ^{}\left(A\right)=\underset{n}{}\eta _n^{}\eta _n^{}A\eta _n\eta _n^{}\mu \left(n\right)\pi _{}^{}\left(A\right).$$

Now, let us consider the entangled mutual entropy and quantum entropies of states by means of the above three types of compound states. To define the quantum mutual entropy, we need the relative entropy  of the compound state $`\varpi `$ with respect to a reference state $`\phi `$ on the algebra $`𝒜`$. It is defined by the density operators $`\omega ,\varphi 𝒜`$ of these states as

(21) 
$$S(\varpi ,\phi )=\mathrm{tr}\omega \left(\mathrm{ln}\omega \mathrm{ln}\varphi \right).$$

It has a positive value $`S(\varpi ,\phi )[0,\mathrm{}]`$ if the states are equally normalized, say (as usually) $`\mathrm{tr}\omega =1=\mathrm{tr}\varphi `$, and it can be finite only if the state $`\varpi `$ is absolutely continuous with respect to the reference state $`\phi `$, i.e. iff $`\varpi \left(E\right)=0`$ for the maximal null-orthoprojector $`E\varphi =0`$.

The mutual entropy $`I_\omega (𝒜,)`$ of a compound state $`\varpi `$ achieved by an entanglement $`\pi _{}:`$ $`𝒜_{}`$ with the marginals

$$\varsigma \left(B\right)=\varpi \left(BI\right)=\mathrm{tr}_𝒢B\sigma ,\varrho \left(A\right)=\varpi \left(IA\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}A\rho $$

is defined as the relative entropy (21) with respect to the product state $`\phi =\varsigma \varrho `$:

(22) 
$$I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)=\mathrm{tr}\omega \left(\mathrm{ln}\omega \mathrm{ln}\left(\sigma I\right)\mathrm{ln}\left(I\rho \right)\right).$$

Here the operator $`\omega `$ is uniquely defined by the entanglement $`\pi _{}`$ as its density in (7), or the $`𝒢`$-transposed to the operator $`\stackrel{~}{\omega }`$ in

$$\pi \left(A\right)=\kappa ^{}\left(IA\right)\kappa =\mathrm{tr}_{}A\stackrel{~}{\omega }.$$

This quantity describes an information gain in a quantum system $`(𝒜,\varrho )`$ via an entanglement $`\pi _{}`$ of another system $`(,\varsigma ).`$ It is naturally treated as a measure of the strength of an entanglement, having zero value only for completely disentangled states, corresponding to $`\varpi =\varsigma \varrho `$.

The following proposition follows from the monotonicity property 

(23) 
$$\varpi =\mathrm{K}_{}\varpi _0,\phi =\mathrm{K}_{}\phi _0S(\varpi ,\phi )S(\varpi _0,\phi _0).$$

of the general relative entropy on a von Neuman algebra $``$ with respect to the predual $`\mathrm{K}_{}`$ to any normal completely positive unital map $`\mathrm{K}:^{}`$.

Proposition 4.1. Let $`\pi _{}^{}:^{}𝒜_{}`$ be an entanglement $`\pi _{}^{}`$ of a state $`\varsigma _0=\pi ^{}\left(I\right)`$ on a discrete decomposable algebra $`^{}\left(𝒢_0\right)`$ to the state $`\varrho =\pi _{}^{}\left(I\right)`$ on $`𝒜`$, and $`\pi _{}=\pi _{}^{}\mathrm{K}`$ be an entanglement defined as the composition with a normal completely positive unital map $`\mathrm{K}:^{}`$. Then $`I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)I_{𝒜,^{}}\left(\varpi _0\right)`$ , where $`\varpi ,\varpi _0`$ are the compound states achieved by $`\pi _{}^{}`$ , $`\pi _{}`$ respectively. In particular, for any c-entanglement $`\pi _{}`$ to $`(𝒜,\varsigma )`$ there exists a not less informative d-entanglement $`\pi _{}^{}=\varkappa `$ with an Abelian $`^{}`$, and the standard entanglement $`\pi _0\left(A\right)=\rho ^{1/2}A\rho ^{1/2}`$ of $`\varsigma _0=\varrho `$ on $`^{}=𝒜`$ is the maximal one in this sense. 

Note that any extreme d-entanglement

$$\pi _{}^{}\left(B\right)=\underset{n}{}n|B|n\rho _n^{}\mu \left(n\right),B^{},$$

with $`\rho =_n\rho _n^{}\mu \left(n\right)`$ decomposed into pure normalized states $`\rho _n^{}=\eta _n\eta _n^{}`$, is maximal among all c-entanglements in the sense $`I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi _0\right)I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)`$. This is because $`\mathrm{tr}\rho _n^{}\mathrm{ln}\rho _n^{}=0`$, and therefore the information gain

$$I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)=\underset{n}{}\mu \left(n\right)\mathrm{tr}\rho _n\left(\mathrm{ln}\rho _n\mathrm{ln}\rho \right).$$

with a fixed $`\pi _{}\left(I\right)=\rho `$ achieves its supremum $`\mathrm{tr}_{}\rho \mathrm{ln}\rho `$ at any such extreme d-entanglement $`\pi _{}^{}`$. Thus the supremum of the information gain (22) over all c-entanglements to the system $`(𝒜,\varrho )`$ is the von Neumann entropy

(24) 
$$S_𝒜\left(\varrho \right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}\rho \mathrm{ln}\rho .$$

It is achieved on any extreme $`\pi _{}^{}`$, for example given by the maximal Abelian subalgebra $`^{}𝒜`$, with the measure $`\mu =\lambda `$, corresponding to a Schatten decomposition $`\rho =_n\eta _n^{}\eta _n^{}\lambda \left(n\right)`$, $`\eta _m^{}\eta _n^{}=\delta _n^m`$. The maximal value $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{rank}𝒜`$ of the von Neumann entropy is defined by the dimensionality $`\mathrm{rank}𝒜=dim^{}`$ of the maximal Abelian subalgebra of the decomposable algebra $`𝒜`$, i.e. by $`dim`$.

Definition 4.1. The maximal mutual entropy

(25) 
$$\stackrel{~}{S}_𝒜\left(\varrho \right)=\underset{\pi _{}\left(I\right)=\rho }{sup}I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)=I_{𝒜,^{}}\left(\varpi _0\right),$$

achieved on $`^{}=𝒜`$ by the standard q-entanglement $`\pi _{}^{}\left(A\right)=\rho ^{1/2}A\rho ^{1/2}`$ for a fixed state $`\varrho \left(A\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{}A\rho `$ , is called q-entropy of the state $`\varrho `$. The differences

$$\stackrel{~}{S}_{|𝒜}\left(\varpi \right)=\stackrel{~}{S}_{}\left(\varsigma \right)I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)$$

$$S_{|𝒜}\left(\varpi \right)=S_{}\left(\varsigma \right)I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)$$

are respectively called the q-conditional entropy on $``$ with respect to $`𝒜`$ and the degree of disentanglement for the compound state $`\varpi `$. 

Obviously, $`\stackrel{~}{S}_{|𝒜}\left(\varpi \right)`$ is positive in contrast to the disentanglement $`S_{|𝒜}\left(\varpi \right)`$, having the positive maximal value $`S_{|𝒜}\left(\varpi \right)=S_{}\left(\varsigma \right)`$ in the case $`\varpi =\varsigma \varrho `$ of complete disentanglement, but which can achieve also a negative value

(26) 
$$\underset{\pi _{}\left(I\right)=\rho }{inf}D_{|𝒜}\left(\varpi \right)=S_𝒜\left(\varsigma \right)\stackrel{~}{S}_𝒜\left(\varrho \right)=\mathrm{tr}\rho \mathrm{ln}\rho $$

for the entangled states as the following theorem states. Obviously $`S_𝒜\left(\varrho \right)=\stackrel{~}{S}_𝒜\left(\varrho \right)`$ if the algebra $`𝒜`$ is completely decomposable, i.e. Abelian, and the maximal value $`\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{rank}𝒜`$ of $`S_𝒜\left(\varrho \right)`$ can be written as $`\mathrm{ln}dim𝒜`$ in this case. The disentanglement $`S_{|𝒜}\left(\varpi \right)`$ is always positive in this case, as well as in the case of Abelian $``$ when $`S_{|𝒜}\left(\varpi \right)=\stackrel{~}{S}_{|𝒜}\left(\varpi \right)`$.

Theorem 4.2. The q-entropy for the simple algebra $`𝒜=\left(\right)`$ is given by the formula

(27) 
$$\stackrel{~}{S}_𝒜\left(\varrho \right)=2\mathrm{t}\mathrm{r}_{}\rho \mathrm{ln}\rho =2S_𝒜\left(\rho \right),$$

It is positive, $`\stackrel{~}{S}_𝒜\left(\varrho \right)[0,\mathrm{}]`$, and if $`𝒜`$ is finite dimensional, it is bounded, with the maximal value $`\stackrel{~}{S}_𝒜\left(\varrho ^{}\right)=\mathrm{ln}dim𝒜`$ which is achieved on the tracial $`\rho ^{}=\left(dim\right)^1I`$, where $`dim𝒜=\left(dim\right)^2`$ . 

## 5. Quantum Channel and its Q-Capacity

Let $`_0`$ be a Hilbert space describing a quantum input system and $``$ describe its output Hilbert space. A quantum channel is an affine operation sending each input state defined on $`_0`$ to an output state defined on $``$ such that the mixtures of states are preserved. A deterministic quantum channel is given by a linear isometry $`Y:_0`$ with $`Y^{}Y=I^{}`$ ($`I^{}`$ is the identify operator in $`_0`$) such that each input state vector $`\eta _0`$, $`\eta =1`$ is transmitted into an output state vector $`Y\eta `$, $`Y\eta =1`$. The orthogonal mixtures $`\rho _0=_n\mu \left(n\right)\rho _n^{}`$ of the pure input states $`\rho _n^{}=\eta _n^{}\eta _n^{}`$ are sent into the orthogonal mixtures $`\rho =_n\mu \left(n\right)\rho _n`$ of the corresponding pure states $`\rho _n=Y\rho _n^{}Y^{}`$.

A noisy quantum channel sends pure input states $`\varrho _0`$ into mixed ones $`\varrho =\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}\left(\varrho _0\right)`$ given by the dual $`\mathrm{\Lambda }^{}`$ to a normal completely positive unital map $`\mathrm{\Lambda }:𝒜𝒜_0`$,

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(A\right)=\mathrm{tr}__1Y^{}AY,A𝒜$$

where $`Y`$ is a linear operator from $`_0_+`$ to $``$ with $`\mathrm{tr}__+Y^{}Y=I^{}`$, and $`_+`$ is a separable Hilbert space of quantum noise in the channel. Each input mixed state $`\varrho _0`$ on $`𝒜^{}\left(_0\right)`$ is transmitted into an output state $`\varrho =\varrho _0\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ given by the density operator

$$\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}\left(\rho _0\right)=Y\left(\rho _0I^+\right)Y^{}𝒜_{}$$

for each density operator $`\rho _0𝒜_{}^{}`$, where $`I^+`$ is the identity operator in $`_+`$. Without loss of generality we can assume that the input algebra $`𝒜^{}`$ is the smallest decomposable algebra, generated by the range $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(𝒜\right)`$ of the given map $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$.

The input entanglements $`\varkappa :𝒜_{}^{}`$ described as normal CP maps with $`\varkappa \left(I\right)=\varrho _0`$, define the quantum correspondences (q-encodings) of probe systems $`(,\varsigma )`$, $`\varsigma =\varkappa ^{}\left(I\right)`$, to $`(𝒜^{},\varrho _0)`$. As it was proven in the previous section, the most informative is the standard entanglement $`\varkappa =\pi _{}^{}`$, at least in the case of the trivial channel $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{I}`$. This extreme input q-entanglement

$$\pi ^{}\left(A^{}\right)=\rho _0^{1/2}A^{}\rho _0^{1/2}=\pi _{}^{}\left(A^{}\right),A^{}𝒜^{},$$

corresponding to the choice $`(,\varsigma )=(𝒜^{},\varrho _0)`$, defines the following density operator

(28) 
$$\omega =\left(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)_{}\left(\omega _q^{}\right),\omega _q^{}=\vartheta _0\vartheta _0^{}$$

of the input-output compound state $`\varpi _q^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ on $`𝒜^{}𝒜`$. It is given by the amplitude $`\vartheta _0_0^2`$ defined as $`\stackrel{~}{\vartheta }_0=\rho _0^{1/2}`$. The other extreme cases of the self-dual input entanglements, the pure c-entanglements corresponding to (20), can be less informative then the d-entanglements, given by the decompositions $`\rho _0=\rho _0\left(n\right)`$ into pure states $`\rho _0\left(n\right)=\eta _n\eta _n^{}\mu \left(n\right)`$. They define the density operators

(29) 
$$\omega =\left(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)_{}\left(\omega _d^{}\right),\omega _d^{}=\underset{n}{}\eta _n^{}\eta _n^{}\eta _n\eta _n^{}\mu _0\left(n\right),$$

of the $`𝒜^{}𝒜`$-compound state $`\varpi _d^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, which are known as the Ohya compound states $`\varpi _o^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$  in the case

$$\rho _0\left(n\right)=\eta _n^{}\eta _n^{}\lambda _0\left(n\right),\eta _m^{}\eta _n^{}=\delta _n^m,$$

of orthogonality of the density operators $`\rho _0\left(n\right)`$ normalized to the eigen-values $`\lambda _0\left(n\right)`$ of $`\rho _0`$. They are described by the input-output density operators

(30) 
$$\omega =\left(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)_{}\left(\omega _o^{}\right),\omega _o^{}=\underset{n}{}\eta _n^{}\eta _n^{}\eta _n^{}\eta _n^{}\lambda _0\left(n\right),$$

coinciding with (28) in the case of Abelian $`𝒜^{}`$. These input-output compound states $`\varpi `$ are achieved by compositions $`\lambda =\pi ^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }`$, describing the entanglements $`\lambda ^{}`$ of the extreme probe system $`(^{},\varsigma _0)=(𝒜^{},\varrho _0)`$ to the output $`(𝒜,\varrho )`$ of the channel.

If $`\mathrm{K}:^{}`$ is a normal completely positive unital map

$$\mathrm{K}\left(B\right)=\mathrm{tr}_{_{}}X^{}BX,B,$$

where $`X`$ is a bounded operator $`_{}𝒢_0𝒢`$ with $`\mathrm{tr}_{_{}}X^{}X=I^{}`$, the compositions $`\varkappa =\pi _{}^{}\mathrm{K}`$, $`\pi _{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}\varkappa `$ are the entanglements of the probe system $`(,\varsigma )`$ to the channel input $`(𝒜^{},\varrho _0)`$ and to the output $`(𝒜,\varrho )`$ via this channel. The state $`\varsigma =\varsigma _0\mathrm{K}`$ is given by

$$\mathrm{K}_{}\left(\sigma _0\right)=X\left(I^{}\sigma _0\right)X^{}_{}$$

for each density operator $`\sigma _0_{}^{}`$, where $`I^{}`$ is the identity operator in $`_{}`$. The resulting entanglement $`\pi _{}=\lambda _{}\mathrm{K}`$ defines the compound state $`\varpi =\varpi _0\left(\mathrm{K}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)`$ on $`𝒜`$ with

$$\varpi _0\left(B^{}A^{}\right)=\mathrm{tr}\stackrel{~}{B}^{}\pi ^{}\left(A^{}\right)=\mathrm{tr}\upsilon _0^{}\left(B^{}A^{}\right)\upsilon _0.$$

on $`^{}𝒜^{}`$. Here $`\upsilon _0:_0𝒢_0_0`$ is the amplitude operator, uniquely defined by the input compound state $`\varpi _0_{}^{}𝒜_{}^{}`$ up to a unitary operator $`U^{}`$ on $`_0`$, and the effect of the input entanglement $`\varkappa `$ and the output channel $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ can be written in terms of the amplitude operator of the state $`\varpi `$ as

$$\upsilon =\left(XY\right)\left(I^{}\upsilon _0I^+\right)U$$

up to a unitary operator $`U`$ in $`=_{}_0_+`$. Thus the density operator $`\omega =\upsilon \upsilon ^{}`$ of the input-output compound state $`\varpi `$ is given by $`\varpi _0\left(\mathrm{K}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)`$ with the density

(31) 
$$\left(\mathrm{K}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)_{}\left(\omega _0\right)=\left(XY\right)\omega _0\left(XY\right)^{},$$

where $`\omega _0=\upsilon _0\upsilon _0^{}`$.

Let $`𝒦_q`$ be the convex set of normal completely positive maps $`\varkappa :𝒜_{}^{}`$ normalized as $`\mathrm{tr}\varkappa \left(I\right)=1`$, and $`𝒦_q^{}`$ be the convex subset $`\{\varkappa 𝒦_q:\varkappa \left(I\right)=\varrho _0\}`$. Each $`\varkappa 𝒦_q^{}`$ can be decomposed as $`\pi _{}^{}\mathrm{K}`$, where $`\pi _{}^{}=\pi ^{}`$ is the standard entanglement on $`(𝒜^{},\varrho _0)`$, and $`\mathrm{K}`$ is a normal unital CP map $`𝒜^{}`$. Further let $`𝒦_c`$ be the convex set of the maps $`\varkappa `$, dual to the input maps of the form (11), described by the combinations

(32) 
$$\varkappa \left(B\right)=\underset{n}{}\varsigma \left(B\right)\rho _0\left(n\right).$$

of the primitive maps $`\varkappa _n:B\varsigma _n\left(B\right)\rho _0\left(n\right)`$, and $`𝒦_d`$ be the subset of the diagonal decompositions

(33) 
$$\varkappa \left(B\right)=\underset{n}{}n|B|n\rho _0\left(n\right).$$

As in the first case $`𝒦_c^{}`$ and $`𝒦_d^{}`$ denote the convex subsets corresponding to a fixed $`\varkappa \left(I\right)=\varrho _0`$, and each $`\varkappa 𝒦_c^{}`$ can be represented as $`\pi _{}^{}\mathrm{K}`$, where $`\pi _{}^{}`$ is a d-entanglement, which can be always be made pure by a proper choice of the CP map $`\mathrm{K}:𝒜^{}`$. Furthermore let $`𝒦_o`$ ($`𝒦_o^{}`$) be the subset of all decompositions (32) with orthogonal $`\rho _0\left(n\right)`$ (and fixed $`_n\rho _0\left(n\right)=\rho _0`$):

$$\rho _0\left(m\right)\rho _0\left(n\right)=0,mn.$$

Each $`\varkappa 𝒦_o^{}`$ can be also represented as $`\pi _{}^{}\mathrm{K}`$, where $`\pi _{}^{}`$ is a diagonal pure o-entanglement $`𝒜^{}`$.

Now, let us maximize the entangled mutual entropy for a given quantum channel $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ and a fixed input state $`\varrho _0`$ by means of the above four types of compound states. The mutual entropy (22) was defined in the previous section by the density operators of the compound state $`\varpi `$ on $`𝒜`$, and the product-state $`\phi =\varsigma \varrho `$ of the marginals $`\varsigma ,\varrho `$ for $`\varpi `$. In each case

$$\varpi =\varpi _0\left(\mathrm{K}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right),\phi =\phi _0\left(\mathrm{K}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right),$$

where $`\mathrm{K}`$ is a CP map $`^{}`$ , $`\varpi _0`$ is one of the corresponding extreme compound states $`\varpi _q^{}`$, $`\varpi _c^{}=\varpi _d^{}`$, $`\varpi _o^{}`$ on $`𝒜^{}𝒜^{}`$, and $`\phi _0=\varrho _0\varrho _0`$. The density operator $`\omega =\left(\mathrm{K}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)_{}\left(\omega _0\right)`$ is written in (31), and $`\varphi =\sigma \rho `$ can be written as

$$\varphi =\varkappa _{}\left(I\right)\lambda _{}\left(I\right),$$

where $`\lambda _{}=\mathrm{\Lambda }_{}\pi _{}^{}`$.

Proposition 5.1. The entangled mutual entropies achieve the following maximal values

(34) 
$$\underset{\varkappa 𝒦_q^{}}{sup}I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)=I_q(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda }):=I_{𝒜,𝒜^{}}\left(\varpi _q^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right),$$

$$I_c(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\underset{\varkappa 𝒦_c^{}}{sup}I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)=\underset{\varpi _d^{}}{sup}I_{𝒜,𝒜^{}}\left(\varpi _d^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=I_d(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda }),$$

(35) 
$$\underset{\varkappa 𝒦_o^{}}{sup}I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)=I_o(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda }):=\underset{\varpi _o^{}}{sup}I_{𝒜,𝒜^{}}\left(\varpi _o^{}\mathrm{\Lambda }\right),$$

where $`\varpi _{}^{}`$ are the corresponding extremal input entangled states on $`𝒜^{}𝒜^{}`$ with marginals $`\varrho _0`$. They are ordered as

(36) 
$$I_q(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })I_c(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })=I_d(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })I_o(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda }).$$

We shall denote the maximal informations $`I_c(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })=I_d(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$ simply as $`I(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })`$.

Definition 5.1. The supremums

$$C_q\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=\underset{\varkappa 𝒦_q}{sup}I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)=\underset{\varrho _0}{sup}I_q(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda }),$$

(37) 
$$\underset{\varkappa 𝒦_c}{sup}I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)=C\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right):=\underset{\varrho _0}{sup}I(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda }),$$

$$C_o\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=\underset{\varkappa 𝒦_o}{sup}I_{𝒜,}\left(\varpi \right)=\underset{\varrho _0}{sup}I_o(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda }),$$

are called the q-, c- or d-, and o-capacities respectively for the quantum channel defined by a normal unital CP map $`\mathrm{\Lambda }:𝒜𝒜^{}`$. 

Obviously the capacities (37) satisfy the inequalities

$$C_o\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)C\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)C_q\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right).$$

Theorem 5.2. Let $`\mathrm{\Lambda }\left(A\right)=Y^{}AY`$ be a unital CP map $`𝒜𝒜^{}`$ describing a quantum deterministic channel. Then

$$I(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })=I_o(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })=S\left(\varrho _0\right),I_q(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })=\stackrel{~}{S}\left(\varrho _0\right),$$

and thus in this case

$$C\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=C_o\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=\mathrm{ln}\mathrm{rank}𝒜^{},C_q\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)=\mathrm{ln}dim𝒜^{}$$

In the general case d-entanglements can be more informative than o-entanglements as it can be shown on an example of a quantum noisy channel for which

$$I(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda })>I_o(\varrho _0,\mathrm{\Lambda }),C\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right)>C_o\left(\mathrm{\Lambda }\right).$$

The last equalities of the above theorem will be related to the work on entropy by Voiculescu .