one of the key technologies for quantum information and computation is purification / distillation of quantum states @xcite .
particular pure states , such as entangled states , often play significant roles there , but it is not easy to find such `` clean '' states in nature .
it is therefore required to prepare them out of mixed states ; otherwise , we can not carry out any interesting ideas of quantum information and computation .    a new purification mechanism has recently been proposed @xcite .
it is shown that repeated measurements on a system , say a , result in a purification of another system , say b , in interaction with a @xcite .
that is , the state of b is driven to a pure state irrespectively of its ( generally mixed ) initial state , if certain conditions are satisfied .
remarkably , if appropriate adjustment of the relevant parameters is possible , the maximal yield , which is prescribed by the initial mixed state of b and its target pure state , can be attained , while keeping the maximal fidelity , by a finite number of measurements on a ( an  optimal purification " ) .
this constitutes a remarkable contrast to the standard purification protocol @xcite , in which it is generally difficult to realize both a non - vanishing yield and the maximal fidelity at the same time .
since an entangled state is one of the pure states of two quantum systems , say a and b , one can think of a possibility of extracting the entangled state between a and b by repeatedly performing measurements on x which interacts with both a and b. this possibility has already been pointed out @xcite and explored to show that one of the bell states can be extracted when this mechanism is applied to a three - qubit system , where qubits a and b always interact with the other qubit x on which one and the same measurement is repeatedly performed .
notice that in this case the two systems a and b are not spatially separated , because they are supposed to locally interact with x. on the other hand , it is often required , e.g. , in the ideas of quantum teleportation and communication @xcite , to establish an entanglement between two quantum systems that are located at or at least can be sent , without loosing the entanglement , to distant places . in this respect , it would be worth remembering that interesting ideas of generating an entanglement between two cavities @xcite and of transferring an entanglement between two modes in a cavity to that between other two modes in different cavities @xcite have been proposed . in the former a two - level atom
is sent to interact successively with the two cavities resulting in the generation of an entanglement between the two , and in the latter the entanglement is shown to be transferred by a two - level atom which passes through the two cavities and interacts with the relevant cavity modes . in this paper , this kind of successive interaction with two quantum systems is incorporated within the framework of the new purification mechanism @xcite to show that an entanglement can be established between the states of the two systems spatially separated ( or that can be separated ) .
notice that the entangled state is distilled from an arbitrary initial state that is in general mixed , while in the generation of entanglement in ref .
@xcite the initial state should be prepared in an appropriate pure state and in the transfer of entanglement in ref .
@xcite the state is assumed to be initially entangled .
after a brief review of the new purification mechanism in sec .
[ sec : rev ] , a scheme of successive interaction is introduced in a three - qubit system , a+b+x , in which system x is assumed to interact first with system a and then with b , in sec .
[ sec : qqx ] .
system x is prepared in an initial pure state and is measured after it has interacted with a and b. then only those events in which system x is found in the initial state are kept .
this process will be repeated many times .
it is shown that an optimal entanglement purification is actually realizable for a particular choice of interaction and by properly adjusting interaction times and strengths between a and x and b and x. in sec .  [
sec : ccx ] , another example of an entanglement purification is examined in a physical system where a two - level atom x is injected successively to the two cavities a and b `` back and forth , '' interacts with their cavity modes under the rotating - wave approximation and the state of x is repeatedly measured in a prescribed way .
it is explicitly shown that , under certain conditions , a particular entangled state between the lowest two modes of each cavity is extracted , irrespectively of the initial cavity states .
finally we summarize the results obtained and give future perspectives in sec .
[ sec : sum ] .
let the total system consist of two parts , system a and system b , and the dynamics be described by the total hamiltonian @xmath0 where @xmath1 stands for the interaction between the two ( sub)systems .
we initially prepare the system in a product state @xmath2 at @xmath3 . notice that system b can be in an _ arbitrary mixed
_ state @xmath4 .
we perform measurements on a at regular intervals @xmath5 to confirm that it is still in the state @xmath6 @xcite , while the total system a+b during the time @xmath5 evolves unitarily in terms of the total hamiltonian @xmath7 .
since the measurement is performed only on system a , the action of such a ( projective , for simplicity ) measurement can be conveniently described by the following projection operator @xmath8 thus the state of system a is set back to @xmath6 every after @xmath5 , while that of b just evolves dynamically on the basis of the total hamiltonian @xmath7 .
we repeat the same measurement , represented by ( [ eq : calo ] ) , @xmath9 times and collect only those events in which system a has been found in the state @xmath6 consecutively @xmath9 times ; other events are discarded .
the state of system b is then described by the density matrix @xmath10 where @xmath11 is an operator acting on b and @xmath12\nonumber\\ & = { \mathop{\mathrm{tr}}\nolimits}_\text{b}\bigl[\bigl(v_\phi(\tau)\bigr)^n\rho_\text{b}(0 )    \bigl(v_\phi^\dagger(\tau)\bigr)^n\bigr ] \label{eq : ptaun}\end{aligned}\ ] ] is the probability for these events to occur ( yield ) .
this normalization factor appearing in ( [ eq : rhobn ] ) reflects the fact that only the right outcomes are collected in this process .    in order to examine the asymptotic state of system b for large @xmath9 ,
consider , assuming its existence , the spectral decomposition of the operator @xmath13 , which is not hermitian , @xmath14 .
we therefore need to set up both the right- and left - eigenvalue problems @xmath15 the eigenvalue @xmath16 is complex valued in general , but its absolute value is bounded @xcite @xmath17 this reflects the unitarity of the time evolution operator @xmath18 .
these eigenvectors are assumed to form a complete orthonormal set in the following sense @xmath19 ( we normalize @xmath20 as @xmath21 , while the norm of @xmath22 has been fixed by the above relations and is not necessarily unity . )
the operator @xmath13 itself is now expanded in terms of these eigenvectors @xmath23 it is now easy to see that the @xmath9th power of this operator is expressed as @xmath24 and therefore it is dominated by a single term for large @xmath9 @xmath25 provided the largest ( in magnitude ) eigenvalue @xmath26 is _ discrete , nondegenerate and unique_. if these conditions are satisfied , the density operator of system b is driven to a pure state @xmath27 with the probability @xmath28 the pure state @xmath29 , which is nothing but the right - eigenvector of the operator @xmath13 belonging to the largest ( in magnitude ) eigenvalue @xmath26 , is thus distilled in system b. this is the purification scheme proposed in @xcite .
a few comments are in order .
first , the final pure state @xmath29 toward which system b is to be driven is dependent on the choice of the state @xmath6 on which system a is projected every after measurement , on the measurement interval @xmath5 and the hamiltonian @xmath7 , but does not depend on the initial state of system b at all . in this sense , the purification is accomplished irrespectively of the initial ( mixed ) state @xmath4 .
second , as is clear in the above exposition , what is crucial in this purification scheme is the repetition of one and the same measurement ( more appropriately , spectral decomposition ) and the measurement interval @xmath5 need not be very small @xcite .
it instead remains an adjustable parameter .
third , if we can make other eigenvalues than @xmath26 much smaller in magnitude @xmath30 by adjusting parameters , we will need fewer steps ( i.e. , smaller @xmath9 ) to purify system b.    it is now evident that the purification can be made _ optimal _ , if the conditions ( [ eq : quick ] ) and @xmath31 are satisfied .
this condition ( [ eq : noloss ] ) assures that we can repeat as many measurements as we wish without running the risk of losing the yield @xmath32 in order to make the fidelity to the target state @xmath29 , @xmath33 , \label{eq : f}\ ] ] higher .
actually , the yield @xmath32 decays like @xmath34 and the condition ( [ eq : noloss ] ) can bring us with the non - vanishing yield @xmath35 even in the @xmath36 limit .
therefore the condition ( [ eq : noloss ] ) makes the two ( sometimes not compatible ) demands , i.e. , _ higher fidelity and non - vanishing yield _ , achievable , with fewer steps when the condition ( [ eq : quick ] ) is met . in this sense ,
the purification is considered to be optimal
.    it would be desirable if an optimal purification can be realized by an appropriate choice of the state @xmath6 and/or tuning of the measurement interval @xmath5 and parameters in a given hamiltonian .
a few simple systems have already been examined @xcite to show how such optimal purifications are made possible .
since an entangled state of system a+b is one of the pure states , there is a possibility that we apply the purification mechanism described above to distill the initial ( generally mixed ) state of a+b to a desired entangled state .
this possibility has already been pointed out and it has been explicitly demonstrated that one of the bell states @xmath37 of the two qubit systems a+b can actually be extracted if we repeatedly measure one and the same state of another qubit system x , the interactions of which are symmetrical with respect to  a and b , resulting with the maximal yield @xcite .
one of the limitations of this model is that the entanglement can be established only when the two systems a and b locally interact with the same system x at the same time and therefore it does not seem to allow to establish an entanglement between two systems that are spatially separated .
a new scheme is certainly needed .    when the two systems a and b are spatially separated , their local interactions with the other system x can not take place simultaneously .
this means that the interactions are considered to become effective one by one , i.e. , system x first interacts with , say system a and then with b @xcite .
this kind of process can be conveniently described by a time - dependent total hamiltonian . in this section , a total system composed of three qubits ( or three spin @xmath38 systems ) , a , b , and x ,
is considered .
the two qubits a and b interact with the other qubit x successively , the state of x , initially prepared in a particular state , say in up state , is measured after the interactions with a and b , and only those events in which the state of x is found in up state will be retained and other events are just discarded .
the process will be repeated many times and we are interested in the resulting state of a+b .
assume that the three - qubit system a+b+x is described by a time - dependent total hamiltonian @xmath39 .
qubit x , which is initially prepared in up state @xmath40 , is first brought to interaction with qubit a for time interval @xmath41 .
the hamiltonian in this period is    @xmath42    next , after a free time evolution under the free hamiltonian @xmath43 for time duration @xmath44 , qubit x interacts with another qubit b , which has no direct interaction with a , for @xmath45 .
the hamiltonian for this period reads @xmath46    after another free time evolution for @xmath47 , the state of x is measured and only those cases in which qubit x is found in its initial up state @xmath40 shall be retained .
the whole process , i.e. , @xmath48 shall be repeated many times and we are interested in the final state of a+b .
see fig .  1 .    , is brought to interaction with qubits a and b successively and then its state is measured .
if it is found in @xmath40 , the whole process is repeated again ; other events are discarded.,scaledwidth=48.0% ]    in order to describe the above process explicitly and to show the possibility of entanglement distillation by this process , we consider the following free and interaction hamiltonians    @xmath49    where @xmath50 s are pauli matrices acting on the hilbert space of system a and so on , and @xmath51 and @xmath52 are real ( assumed , for definiteness , to be positive ) coupling constants .
the free hamiltonians for a , b , and x are assumed to be the same for simplicity and are characterized solely by the common energy gap @xmath53 .
it is clear that the relevant evolution operator for the whole process ( [ eq : wp ] ) is given by @xmath54 it is an elementary task to evaluate this operator , since each factor on the right - hand side is easily evaluated in terms of the eigenstates of the hamiltonian in the exponent . indeed
, we have    @xmath55 , \label{eq : rf}\end{gathered}\ ] ]    and similarly @xmath56\\    { } + \langle{\downarrow}_\text{x}|    \{-i\sin\varphi_\text{b}\sin2\theta_\text{b }    |{\uparrow}_\text{b}\rangle\langle{\downarrow}_\text{b}|-i\sin    ( g_\text{b}t_\text{b } )    |{\downarrow}_\text{b}\rangle\langle{\uparrow}_\text{b}|\ }    \bigr ] , \label{eq : lf}\end{gathered}\ ] ]    where the angles @xmath57 and @xmath58 are defined as    [ eq : angles ] @xmath59    let us introduce a parity operator @xmath60 whose eigenvalues @xmath61 and @xmath62 single out two subspaces of the product hilbert space @xmath63 invariant under the action of the operator @xmath64 . the two states @xmath65 and @xmath66 generate the even parity subspace and the following @xmath67 matrix @xmath68 with its elements    @xmath69\\ \mathcal{m}_{22 } = { } & \cos ( g_\text{a}t_\text{a})\cos ( g_\text{b}t_\text{b } ) \label{eq : m22}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    allows to completely characterize the action of @xmath64 in this subspace as follows @xmath70 = e^{-i\omega(t_\text{a}+\tau_\text{a}+t_\text{b}+\tau_\text{b})}{\mathcal{m } } \left[\begin{matrix }        |{\uparrow}_\text{a}{\uparrow}_\text{b}\rangle\\ \noalign{\smallskip }        |{\downarrow}_\text{a}{\downarrow}_\text{b}\rangle        \end{matrix}\right ] .
\label{eq : p+}\ ] ] we proceed in the same way for the odd parity subspace spanned by the states @xmath71 and @xmath72 . to this end
we define the @xmath67 matrix @xmath73 with its elements    @xmath74    so that the action of @xmath64 is represented as @xmath75 = e^{-i\omega(t_\text{a}+t_\text{b}+2\tau_\text{b})}\mathcal{n } \left[\begin{matrix }        |{\uparrow}_\text{a}{\downarrow}_\text{b}\rangle\\ \noalign{\smallskip }        |{\downarrow}_\text{a}{\uparrow}_\text{b}\rangle        \end{matrix}\right ] .
\label{eq : p-}\ ] ]    in order to show explicitly that the process ( [ eq : wp ] ) with the particular choice of interaction ( [ eq : hab ] ) admits an entanglement distillation for qubit - system a+b , it turns out to be enough to consider a much simpler case .
let us treat systems a and b symmetrically , except for the ordering of their interactions with system x. we choose the same parameters for a and b , i.e. , @xmath76 , @xmath77 and @xmath78 ( @xmath79 and @xmath80 ) .
for the parity - odd states , the matrix @xmath73 now is simplified to be    @xmath81    it is easy to find the condition under which an entangled state of the form @xmath82 is a real parameter , is an eigenstate of this matrix @xmath73 ( and therefore , of the operator @xmath64 ) .
a straightforward calculation shows that if the parameters @xmath83 , @xmath84 and @xmath5 are so chosen that the following relation @xmath85 is satisfied , the state @xmath86 with @xmath87 is indeed an eigenstate of @xmath64 belonging to the eigenvalue @xmath88 .
[ there is another possibility of optimal distillation of the above entangled state ( [ eq : psi ] ) , but with a different @xmath89 , i.e. , @xmath90 .
this case is realized under the condition ( [ eq : opt1 ] ) with the replacement @xmath91 ; the corresponding eigenvalue is also given by the shifted one , i.e. , @xmath92 . ]    notice that we are not allowed to set @xmath93 because it would result in a degenerate ( in magnitude ) eigenvalue .
observe that we have essentially two conditions ( [ eq : opt1 ] ) , while we have three independent combination of parameters @xmath94 , @xmath95 and @xmath96 .
we , therefore , have a possibility of an optimal distillation of the entangled state @xmath86 , if the magnitudes of the other eigenvalues of @xmath64 are made smaller than unity .
the remaining eigenvalue of @xmath73 under the conditions in ( [ eq : opt1 ] ) reads @xmath97\\ = e^{-i\omega(t+\tau ) } [ -\cos^2(gt)+\sin^2(gt ) ] , \label{eq : ev'}\end{gathered}\ ] ] and its absolute value can not be made unity when @xmath98 .
on the other hand , matrix @xmath68 is expressed as @xmath99 and the absolute values of the eigenvalues of this matrix can not reach unity if @xmath100 and @xmath98 .
this means that , under these conditions on @xmath94 , @xmath95 and @xmath96 satisfying the relation ( [ eq : opt1 ] ) , an optimal purification ( i.e. , distillation ) of the entangled state @xmath101 is possible .
it is in fact easily shown that the left - eigenstate of @xmath64 belonging to the eigenvalue @xmath88 is expressed as @xmath102 and therefore the yield @xmath32 approaches asymptotically , as @xmath9 becomes large , a finite value @xmath103\\   { } \times\rho_\text{ab}(0 )   \bigl[|{\uparrow}_\text{a}{\downarrow}_\text{b}\rangle+e^{i\chi}|{\downarrow}_\text{a}{\uparrow}_\text{b}\rangle\bigr ] .
\label{eq : yield}\end{gathered}\ ] ] this is nothing but the probability of finding the target entangled state @xmath104 in the initial state @xmath105 .
in the previous section , the possibility of realizing an entanglement distillation is demonstrated for the three - qubit system a+b+x .
the particular form of interaction ( [ eq : hab ] ) is shown to be suitable for this purpose following the procedure ( [ eq : wp ] ) . in this section ,
another application of the purification mechanism @xcite is explored in a system composed of a two - level system ( e.g. , an atom ) interacting with two single - mode cavities .
the two cavities may be located at spatially distant places ( or may be near and separated later ) and we aim at extracting an entanglement between the two - cavity states by repeatedly bringing the two - level atom into interaction with them and then selecting a particular state of the atom by measurements .    the ideas of generating @xcite and of transferring @xcite entanglement in two - cavity system have already been proposed and studied in the context of the cavity quantum electrodynamics ( cqed ) @xcite , spectacularly developed over the last two decades both in the microwave @xcite and optical @xcite domains .
entanglement is generated from a properly prepared pure state in the former @xcite and an initially prepared entanglement in one cavity is transformed into another entanglement between the two cavities in the latter @xcite , via successive interactions with a two - level atom .
the atom plays the role of a `` mediator '' or `` transformer '' of entanglement . a similar , but more complicated role is sought for the atom in the present scheme ,
because its interactions with the cavities and the measurements of its state are expected to enable us to extract an entangled state , that is to produce an entanglement distillation , _ irrespectively of the initial states of the two cavities_.    for simplicity , suppose that the two cavities , a and b , are identical and their interaction with a two - level atom x is well described by the jaynes  cummings hamiltonian @xcite .
let @xmath106 and @xmath107 indicate the annihilation operators of the modes of the two cavities a and b , respectively . the free and interaction hamiltonians are    @xmath108    a state where the atom x is in up(down ) state and the modes @xmath106 and @xmath107 are in the @xmath109th and @xmath110th levels , respectively , is denoted as @xmath111 ( @xmath112 ) .
since our purpose is to extract a pure state not in product form but entangled , it turns out that simple processes like ( [ eq : wp ] ) for the three - qubit system would not work . indeed ,
because of the choice of the jaynes  cummings ( rotating - wave ) interactions ( [ eq : hab ] ) , the number operator @xmath113 commutes with any of @xmath43 , @xmath114 , and @xmath115 , and therefore any state of the two - cavity system of the form @xmath116 , which is a product state , is easily seen to be an eigenstate of the time evolution operator constructed analogously to ( [ eq : v ] ) .
( if the down state of x is measured , product states @xmath117 are found to be eigenstates of the relevant time evolution operator . )
thus a process different from ( [ eq : wp ] ) would be necessary for our purpose .
the above consideration would suggest that , with interaction given by ( [ eq : hab ] ) , it would be better to select after measurement a state of x different from the initial state . however ,
at the same time , we need a procedure that can be repeated many times within the present framework of the purification mechanism . thus we choose a procedure that can be described schematically as @xmath118\\ & \quad\to\text{free evolution for $ \tau_\text{a}$}\nonumber\\ & \quad\to\text{interaction between x and b for $ t_\text{b}$}\nonumber\\ & \quad\to\text{free evolution for $ \tau_\text{b}$}\nonumber\\ & \quad\to\text{projection to\ } |{\uparrow}\rangle\nonumber\\ & \quad\to\text{free evolution for $ \tau_\text{b}$}\nonumber\\ & \quad\to\text{interaction between x and b for $ t_\text{b}$}\nonumber\\ & \quad\to\text{free evolution for $ \tau_\text{a}$}\nonumber\\ & \quad\to\text{interaction between x and a for $ t_\text{a}$}\nonumber\\ & \quad\to\text{projection to\ } |{\downarrow}\rangle .
\label{eq : wp2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] see also fig .
[ fig:2 ] .
, is brought to interaction with cavity modes @xmath106 and @xmath107 in the two cavities a and b successively , and its state is measured after the interactions .
atoms that are found in state @xmath119 will be sent back to the cavities in the reversed order .
the state of atom x is again measured , and if it is found in @xmath120 , the whole process is repeated ; other events are discarded.,scaledwidth=48.0% ]    this is clearly a generalization of the purification process , `` projection '' @xmath121 `` time evolution '' @xmath121 `` projection . '' indeed , in the above scheme ,  time evolution " is not meant in the usual sense , that is described by a total hamiltonian .
it is instead interrupted by another projection . however , the condition under which the purification mechanism does work is essentially the same as in the ordinary cases and all what we have to do here is to investigate the relevant evolution operator corresponding to the above process ( [ eq : wp2 ] )
. it would be important to notice that the above choice of the initial and projected states for system x is not arbitrary .
in fact if it were prepared in the up state , the procedure analogous to that described before does not work .
the vacuum state of the two cavities , which is a product state , would indeed turn out to be an eigenstate .
the relevant evolution for the above process ( [ eq : wp2 ] ) is represented by products of the time - evolution and projection operators and each of them is easily evaluated .
the only non - trivial operators are    @xmath122    and @xmath123\\         { } -i\sin\varphi_\text{b}^{(m+1)}|{\downarrow},m+1\rangle\langle{\uparrow},m|         + e^{i\omega t_\text{b}}\cos\varphi_\text{b}^{(m ) }         |{\downarrow},m\rangle\langle{\downarrow},m|         \bigr ) , \label{eq : utb}\end{gathered}\ ] ]    where angles @xmath124 and @xmath125 are defined as @xmath126 it is an elementary task to evaluate in this case the relevant evolution operator @xmath127 , analogously to , @xmath128 and its explicit expression reads @xmath129 , \label{eq : vcexp}\end{aligned}\ ] ]    where @xmath130 .
it is manifest from ( [ eq : vcexp ] ) that in the product hilbert space of the two cavities there are sectors of @xmath127 within which the action of @xmath127 is closed .
these invariant sectors are characterized by the number @xmath131 .
we have @xmath132 states @xmath133 for the ( @xmath131)th sector .
notice that the singlet state ( vacuum state ) @xmath134 ( @xmath135 ) belongs to zero - eigenvalue of @xmath127 and we need not consider it , for @xmath136 .
this is closely related to the choice of the initial state of x and is the reason why we must prepare x in the down state @xmath120 .
let us turn our attention first to the doublet subspace ( @xmath137 ) .
the action of @xmath127 on this subspace is easily read from ( [ eq : vcexp ] ) as    @xmath138    observe that the determinant of this matrix always vanishes , which means that one of the eigenvalues is zero and the other is given by the trace of the matrix @xmath139 .
therefore we have a possibility of obtaining the largest ( in magnitude ) eigenvalue by adjusting the parameter @xmath140 so that @xmath141 ( the possibility @xmath142 would result , not in an entanglement distillation , but in a product - state purification . ) in such a case , the above eigenvalue equation is simplified to @xmath143\\ & { } \times\left (   \begin{matrix }   \cos\varphi_\text{b}^{(1)}&\pm\sin\varphi_\text{b}^{(1)}\\ \noalign{\smallskip }   \mp\sin\varphi_\text{b}^{(1)}&\cos\varphi_\text{b}^{(1 ) }   \end{matrix }   \right )   \left (   \begin{matrix }   |1,0\rangle\\   \noalign{\medskip }   |0,1\rangle   \end{matrix }   \right ) , \label{eq : dblt2}\end{aligned}\ ] ] from which it is clear that the entangled state @xmath144 can be extracted with the maximal probability by this setup . notice that it still remains the freedom to adjust the value of @xmath145 .
the remaining task is to check whether there are other eigenstates of @xmath127 belonging to eigenvalues with unit magnitude , under the condition ( [ eq : ccond ] ) .
consider the invariant sector characterized by @xmath146 that is composed of @xmath147 states @xmath148 .
the action of @xmath127 on this sector is represented by the following matrix [ see ( [ eq : vcexp ] ) ]    @xmath149    where matrix elements @xmath150 can be read from ( [ eq : vcexp ] ) as @xmath151 it is important to notice that the condition ( [ eq : ccond ] ) implies that the element @xmath152 vanishes , irrespectively of @xmath153 and thus the sector further splits into two subsectors @xmath154 and @xmath155 .
furthermore , it is easily seen that the entangled state in the latter subspace of the form @xmath156 has the eigenvalue @xmath157 , while , as shown in the appendix , no eigenstate in the former subspace @xmath154 belongs to a unit ( in magnitude ) eigenvalue ( if @xmath158 is smaller than 9 ) .
we have seen that there are , for any @xmath158-sector , many entangled states @xmath156 ( @xmath159 ) ( that increase , in general , in higher @xmath158-sectors ) extracted with the optimal probabilities by the process ( [ eq : wp2 ] ) . repeated interactions of the two - level atom x in the cavities a and b and the prescribed measurements ( projections ) certainly bring us with a statistical ( classical ) mixture of these entangled states . the situation would not be considered completely satisfactory , since we would not be able to distill a single entangled state by the process ( [ eq : wp2 ] ) .
there is , however , a way out of this difficulty .
we may prepare such an initial ( mixed ) state of a+b that contains only those sectors with relatively small @xmath158s .
such a preparation of the initial state would effectively eliminate the possibility of obtaining other states than @xmath160 after performing the process ( [ eq : wp2 ] ) .
for example , we may consider the following preparation procedure , which is nothing but a purification process applied to cavity b. we send a two - level atom prepared in down state @xmath120 to cavity b. after its interaction , which is again assumed to be of the form ( [ eq : hab ] ) , with b , the atom is measured and only those events in which it is found in the state @xmath120 are retained .
this process is to be repeated many times and the resulting state of a+b , which will be used as the initial state for the following entanglement distillation process ( [ eq : wp2 ] ) , would be dominated by the state @xmath161 , since the vacuum state of system b is the unique eigenstate of the relevant evolution operator @xmath162 belonging to eigenvalue unity if no fine tunings are made on the parameters . after having prepared the state @xmath105 , we repeat the process ( [ eq : wp2 ] ) under the condition ( [ eq : ccond ] )
. we would finally end up with the single entangled state @xmath163 , because our initial state @xmath105 satisfies @xmath164 for @xmath165 , where @xmath166 is the left - eigenstate corresponding to @xmath160 .    concluding this section we wish to give typical values of relevant parameters under the aspect of the possibility of implementing our proposal in laboratory .
we concentrate on the estimation of the total duration @xmath167 of the experiment . to this end
, we choose to be in the context of microwave cqed where both the geometrical arrangement of the experimental set up and the intensity of the atom - field coupling regime , seem more favorable to our proposal .
let us first note that the typical atom - field coupling constant @xmath83 ( @xmath51 or @xmath52 ) can be chosen in such a way that @xmath168@xmath169 @xcite .
moreover the lifetime of a rydberg atom is @xmath170 @xcite .
as for the quality factor @xmath171 of the cavities currently used in laboratory , we quote typical values of the order of @xmath172@xmath173 @xcite corresponding to a cavity damping time @xmath174@xmath175 . considering that in our case @xmath176 , the total duration @xmath167 of the experiment may be estimated and turns out to be compatible with the entanglement distillation proposed in this section .
in this paper , the idea of extracting entangled states among systems located at spatially separated places , irrespectively of their initial states , has been proposed and applied to simple systems to show the potentiality of a novel measurement - based purification scheme @xcite .
the establishment of entanglement distillation relies on the successive interactions between the systems under consideration and the so - called  mediator " quantum system . in the first example
, it is demonstrated that the entanglement between the two qubit states is possible via their interactions with another qubit , which plays the role of the entanglement mediator , with the maximal yield ( optimal distillation ) . in the case of distillation of cavity - mode entanglement , however , a modification of the original simple scheme , that is , `` interaction @xmath121 measurement @xmath121 interaction @xmath177 , '' is required and the modified procedure ( [ eq : wp2 ] ) turns out to result in the entangled state @xmath163 , after an appropriate preparation of the initial state .
we stress that there would also be a possibility of obtaining an entangled state not only in the lowest sector @xmath178 but also in the higher @xmath158 sector , provided an appropriate initial state be prepared
.    it would be worth stressing that in spite of such a modification required in the second example , the underlying notion is still the same : the action of a measurement ( represented by a projection operator , for simplicity ) causes an essential and critical dynamical change , not only in the system measured , but also in the others interacting with the former . since the notion is so general , one can devise various applications of this scheme in many different situations .
the examples explored in this paper are just two of them and further applications will be reported elsewhere .    finally we add some comments on the practical setup of our proposal . in both schemes reported in the previous sections ,
the entanglement mediator is an atom appropriately prepared before entering in interaction with the two subsystems to be entangled and subjected to a conditional measurement of its internal state at the end of the two successive coupling processes .
we wish to stress that to realize in practice the required `` many crosses '' scheme one may synchronize the injection of the @xmath179th atom of the sequence into the process with the successful outcome of the internal state measurement of the @xmath180th one .
this kind of experimental setup might be preferable to the conceptually simpler one based on the idea of using always the same atom reversing its direction of motion at exit to re - inject it into the process .
thus the representations in figs .  1 and 2 , as far as the aspect under scrutiny is concerned ,
have been reported only for the sake of simplicity .
the authors ( h.n . , m.u . , and k.y .
) acknowledge useful and helpful discussions with prof .
is grateful for the warm hospitality at universit di palermo .
this work is partly supported by a grant for the 21st century coe program ( physics of self - organization systems ) at waseda university and a grant - in - aid for priority areas research ( b ) ( no .
13135221 ) , both from the ministry of education , culture , sports , science and technology , japan , by a grant - in - aid for scientific research ( c ) ( no .
14540280 ) from the japan society for the promotion of science , by a waseda university grant for special research projects ( no .  2002a-567 ) and by the bilateral italian - japanese project 15c1 on `` quantum information and computation '' of the italian ministry for foreign affairs .
is investigated with particular attention on its eigenstates belonging to the eigenvalues with unit magnitudes . since this matrix is real and symmetric , its eigenvalues are all real , and the eigenvalues of relevance in the framework of our procedure here are @xmath184 .    for the first possibility @xmath61
, let us consider the determinant @xmath185 ( @xmath186 ) defined by @xmath187 it is easy to see that the particular form of @xmath185 and the definitions of @xmath188 and @xmath189 in ( [ a : cjdj ] ) lead to a recursion relation @xmath190 for @xmath191 .
this is further reduced to @xmath192 if we set @xmath193 , then @xmath194 is found to be positive semi - definite and to satisfy @xmath195 this relation is easily solved to yield the explicit form of @xmath196 with      since each term in ( [ a : pk ] ) has the same sign to each other , vanishing of @xmath198 , which is nothing but the condition for the matrix ( [ a : matrix ] ) to possess eigenstates that belong to eigenvalue unity , is equivalent to that of each term .
this means that there are @xmath158 conditions for three parameters @xmath199 , @xmath200 and @xmath158 and it seems impossible to have a vanishing @xmath198 in general , unless most of the conditions are simultaneously satisfied .
if we choose a particular value for @xmath199 , say @xmath201 as in ( [ eq : ccond ] ) , however , all @xmath198 with @xmath202 vanish because each term in ( [ a : pk ] ) contains either @xmath203 or @xmath204 , each of which vanishes .
on the other hand , the matrix ( [ a : matrix ] ) is shown to have no eigenstate belonging to the eigenvalue @xmath62 .
consider the following determinant @xmath205 where @xmath188 and @xmath189 are again given in ( [ a : cjdj ] ) .
since @xmath206 and therefore @xmath207 and @xmath208 , let us assume that all @xmath209 s are positive definite for @xmath210 up to @xmath211 .
then it follows that @xmath212\\ > { } & c_ij_{i-1}-d_i^2j_{i-2}\nonumber\displaybreak[0]\\ = { } & \sin^2\varphi_\text{a}^{(i)}\cos^2\varphi_\text{b}^{(k - i+1)}\nonumber\\   & { } \times   \bigl (   j_{i-1}-\cos^2\varphi_\text{a}^{(i-1)}\sin^2\varphi_\text{b}^{(k - i+1)}j_{i-2 }   \bigr)\nonumber\\ & { } + \cos^2\varphi_\text{a}^{(i)}\sin^2\varphi_\text{b}^{(k - i)}j_{i-1}. \label{a : irr}\end{aligned}\ ] ] this relation recursively yields inequalities @xmath213 the last factor on the right most hand is shown to be positive definite @xmath214 which means that the quantity on the left - hand side in ( [ a : irr1 ] ) is positive definite .
we conclude that @xmath215 is positive definite and therefore @xmath216 does not vanish , which completes the proof .
99 c.  h. bennett , g. brassard , s. popescu , b. schumacher , j.  a. smolin , and w.  k. wootters , phys .
lett .  * 76 * , 722 ( 1996 ) ; * 78 * , 2031(e ) ( 1997 ) ; c.  h. bennett , d.  p. divincenzo , j.  a. smolin , and w.  k. wootters , phys
.  rev .
a * 54 * , 3824 ( 1996 ) ; j.  i. cirac , a.  k. ekert , and c. macchiavello , phys .
* 82 * , 4344 ( 1999 ) . for reviews ,
see _ the physics of quantum information _ , edited by d. bouwmeester , a. ekert , and a. zeilinger ( springer - verlag , heidelberg , 2000 ) ; a. galindo and m.  a. martn - delgado , rev .
* 74 * , 347 ( 2002 ) , and references therein .
h. nakazato , t. takazawa , and k.
yuasa , phys .
lett.*90 * , 060401 ( 2003 ) ; k.
yuasa , h. nakazato , and t. takazawa , j. phys .
jpn .  * 72 * suppl .
c , 34 ( 2003 ) . in this respect
, the present scheme seems to be closely related to the so - called quantum zeno effect , though the mechanism is quite different , as has been pointed out in ref .  @xcite . as for the quantum zeno effect , see , for example , b. misra and e.  c.  g. sudarshan , j. math .
phys . * 18 * , 756 ( 1977 ) ; k. kraus , found .
phys . * 11 * , 547 ( 1981 ) ; h. nakazato , m. namiki , and s. pascazio , int . j. mod
b * 10 * , 247 ( 1996 ) ; d. home and m.  a.  b. whitaker , ann .
* 258 * , 237 ( 1997 ) ; p. facchi and s. pascazio , in _ progress in optics _ , edited by e. wolf ( elsevier , amsterdam , 2001 ) , vol .
42 , p.  147 .
k. yuasa , h. nakazato , and m. unoki , j. mod . opt . * 51 * , 1005 ( 2004 ) ; h. nakazato , m. unoki , and k. yuasa , phys .
a * 70 * , 012303 ( 2004 ) .
wu , d. lidar , and s. schneider , e - print quant - ph/0402209 . for reviews
, see c.  h. bennett and d.  p. divincenzo , nature ( london ) * 404 * , 247 ( 2000 ) ; m.  a. nielsen and i.  l. chuang , _ quantum computation and quantum information _ ( cambridge university press , cambridge , 2000 ) , and references therein .
p. meystre , in _ progress in optics _ , edited by e. wolf ( elsevier science , new york , 1992 ) , vol .
30 , p. 261 ; j.  a. bergou and m. hillery , phys .
a * 55 * , 4585 ( 1997 ) ; a. messina , eur .
j. d * 18 * , 379 ( 2002 ) ; d.  e. browne and m.  b. plenio , phys .
a * 67 * , 012325 ( 2003 ) .
a. napoli , a. messina , and g. compagno , fortschr .
* 51 * , 81 ( 2003 ) .
h. mabuchi and a. doherty , science * 298 * , 1372 ( 2002 ) .
e. hagley , x. matre , g. nogues , c. wunderlich , m. brune , j.  m. raimond , and s. haroche , phys .
* 79 * , 1 ( 1997 ) ; m. weidinger , b.  t.  h. varcoe , r. heerlein , and h. walther , _ ibid .
_ * 82 * , 3795 ( 1999 ) ; a. rauschenbeutel , g. nogues , s. osnaghi , p. bertet , m. brune , j.  m. raimond , and s. haroche , _ ibid . _ * 83 * , 5166 ( 1999 ) ; j.  m. raimond , m. brune , and s. haroche , rev .
phys . * 73 * , 565 ( 2001 ) .
r.  j. thompson , g. rempe , and h.  j. kimble , phys .
lett . * 68 * , 1132 ( 1992 ) ; c.  j. hood , t.  w. lynn , a.  c. doherty , a.  s. parkins , and h.  j. kimble , science * 287 * , 1447 ( 2000 ) .
e.  t. jaynes and f.  w. cummings , proc .
ieee * 51 * , 89 ( 1963 ) ; see also m.  o. scully and h. walther , phys .
rev .  a * 39 * , 5229 ( 1989 ) .
h. walther , in _ quantum communication , computing , and measurement 3 _ , edited by p. tombesi and o. hirota ( kluwer academic / plenum publishers , new york , 2001 ) , p. 463 .
s. haroche , in _ fundamental systems in quantum optics _ , edited by j. dalibard , j .-
raimond , and j. zinn - justin ( north - holland , amsterdam , 1992 ) .