quantum coherence ( qch ) plays an important role in today s physics , more specifically in physics of low temperature starting from the laws of thermodynamics @xcite and most recently in the emerging area of quantum information theory .
it has been useful in understanding the underlying process of efficient energy transfer in complex biological systems @xcite . in
the recent past researchers have attempted to devolop a framework to formalize the theory of qch within the realms of quantum information theory and quantum resource theories @xcite . in this framework qch
is quantified in terms of the functions of coherence monotones .
some of these better known measures are based on @xmath0 norm , relative entropy @xcite , skew information @xcite and there are many others @xcite .
several works were done in this context to extend the measures of coherence for multipartite systems@xcite . in another work
, researchers studied the creation of qch using unitary operations with limited thermodynamic resources and eventually they found explicitly the unitary transformation that creates the maximal coherence @xcite .
other works were done where people found the average relative entropy of coherence of pure quantum states sampled randomly from the uniform haar measure and showed that it to be typical @xcite .
it was shown that in the asymptotic limit , the minimum amount of noise that is required to fully decohere a quantum system , is equal to the relative entropy of coherence .
this is quantified by the cost of erasing qch @xcite . in another work
it was demonstrated that measurements in a coherent basis are needed to make use of coherence , and that such measurements must be generated by coherent unitary interactions with an environment @xcite .
recently some authors derive complementarity relations between coherence measures on mutually unbiased bases using various coherence measures @xcite . in a similar kind of work the robustness of coherence was suitably defined and was proven a full monotone in the context of the recently introduced resource theories of qch @xcite .
another group of authors showed that all measures of coherence are frozen for an initial state in a strictly incoherent channel if and only if the relative entropy of coherence is frozen for the state @xcite .
further work show the study the relation between qch and quantum discord , a kind of quantum correlation which appears even in non entangled states @xcite . a new framework for measuring qch in finite dimensional systems
was introduced and a theoretical measure satisfying the reliability criteria was established in the context of quantum resource theories @xcite . + the impossibility to clone quantum states is regarded as one of the most fundamental restriction that comes from nature @xcite .
the  no cloning theorem " states that there exists no quantum mechanical process , which can take two distinct non - orthogonal quantum states @xmath1 , @xmath2 into states @xmath3 , @xmath4 respectively . even though we can not copy an unknown quantum state perfectly but quantum mechanics never rules out the possibility of cloning it approximately @xcite .
it also allows probabilistic cloning as one can always clone an arbitrary quantum state perfectly with some non - zero probability of succsess @xcite . in the year 1996 , buzek et al .
went beyond the idea of perfect cloning and introduced the concept of approximate cloning .
in this process , they have also introduced the state independent quantum copying machine by keeping the fidelity of cloning independent of the input state parameters .
this machine is also popularly known as universal quantum cloning machine ( uqcm ) @xcite . later in another work by gisin and massar
this cloner was shown to be optimal @xcite .
other than this state independent quantum cloning machine ( qcm ) , there are also state dependent qcms @xcite .
state dependent quantum cloning machine can be both dynamic and static depending on the choice of machine parameters @xcite . in this context
it was shown that how the fidelity of quantum cloning machine is related with the amount of correlation generated in the process of cloning @xcite .
+ quantum entanglement @xcite in general quantum correlation is considered as a useful resource as it plays a significant role in computational and communication processes like quantum key generation @xcite , secret sharing @xcite , teleportation @xcite , superdense coding @xcite , entanglement swapping @xcite , remote entanglement distribution @xcite and in many more tasks @xcite .
the more  pure " is entanglement , more  valuable " is the given two - particle state at least from the point of view of information processing tasks .
therefore it becomes important to extract pure entanglement from mixed entangled state .
researchers had done a lot of work in past years on these extraction processes @xcite .
this comes at the cost of reduction of number of entangled states .
it is interesting to see that in quantum information processing scenario , there exists tasks which are completely opposite to this from the operational point of view .
this comes under the umbrella of  broadcasting of inseparability " @xcite .
when there is an exigency in increasing the number of available entangled pairs rather than the purity of it , it becomes important to broadcast the amount of entanglement from a given pair to different pairs .
one possible way to achieve this is by applying local and non local cloing . in general
cloning in this context includes both state dependent and state independent cloning @xcite . in a recent work we have shown that it is impossible to optimally broadcast quantum correlation across different laboratories @xcite .
but if we consider non optimal broadcasting it is indeed possible to broadcast quantum correlation between separated parties @xcite .
other than application of cloning there are different ways to broadcast quantum correlation .
quite recently , many authors showed by using sophisticated methods that correlations in a single bipartite state can be locally or uni locally broadcast if and only if the states are classical ( i.e. having classical correlation ) or classical - quantum respectively @xcite .
+ in this work our basic objective is to broadcast qch present in a pair of qubits to other pairs . keeping in mind the usefulness of qch in resource theories it is also important to broadcast it to more pair of qubits .
here we have considered the @xmath0 norm as a measure of coherence . given a state @xmath5 , with its matrix elements as @xmath6 the amount of coherence present in the state @xmath5 in the basis @xmath7
is given by the quantity @xmath8 , where @xmath9 .
it is interesting note that coherence is a basis dependent quantity as the representation of coherence will be different in different basis .
more precisely since all these measures are functions of off diagonal elements of a given density matrix representation .
the value of the coherence in the eigen basis where there are no off diagonal elements , will be zero .
it is intuitive that for all other basis the physical findings followed by implications will be similar .
so , without any loss of generality here we have computed the coherence in the computational basis @xmath10 . +
let us begin with a situation where we have two distant parties @xmath11 and @xmath12 and they share a two qubit mixed state @xmath13 which can be canonically expressed as , @xmath14 = \left\{\overrightarrow{x},\:\overrightarrow{y},\ : t_{3\times 3}\right\},\:\:\ : \label{eq : mix}\end{aligned}\ ] ] where @xmath15 and @xmath16 are bloch vectors with @xmath17 and @xmath18 . here , @xmath19
s ( @xmath20 = @xmath21 ) are elements of the correlation matrix ( @xmath22_{3 \times 3}$ ] ) , whereas @xmath23 are the pauli matrices and @xmath24 is the identity matrix .
+    @xmath25{local}\includegraphics[height=4.5cm , width=4cm]{nonlocal } \end{array}\ ] ]    we start with two qubit state @xmath13 and then apply universal symmetric optimal buzek hillery cloner both locally and non locally ( @xmath26 ) as a cloning transformation . in short , broadcasting will be possible if we are able to produce more coherent pairs out of initial coherent pair . in principle , broadcasting is both optimal and non optimal and depends upon the choice of cloning machine .
+ we separately investigate both _
optimal _ and _ non optimal broadcasting_. in principle , in order to broadcast the amount of coherence between the desired pairs @xmath27 and @xmath28 ( see fig 1 ) , we need to maximize the amount of coherence between the non - local output pairs , regardless of the states between @xmath29 and @xmath30 .
however , for optimal broadcasting of coherence across parties , we need to minimize the amount of coherence within parties , i.e , in the states @xmath29 and @xmath30.this is because the total amount of coherence ( @xmath31 ) produced after cloning operation is equal to the sum of the coherence within parties ( @xmath32 ) and the coherence across the parties ( @xmath33 ) , i.e @xmath34 . to maximize @xmath33 , we must have @xmath35 .
in other words , for optimal broadcasting we should have no coherence between the qubits @xmath29 and @xmath30 . +
* definition : optimal broadcasting ( local / nonlocal ) * [ def : broad_local ] we start with two parties a and b sharing a coherent input state @xmath13 , with qubits 1 and 2 on a s side and b s side respectively . a coherent input state @xmath13 is said to be broadcast optimally after the application of local cloning operation @xmath36 , on the qubits 1 and 2 respectively , if for some values of the input state parameters , the non - local output states , given by @xmath37=tr_{23}\left[u_1\otimes u_2\left(\rho_{12}\right)\right],{}\nonumber\\ & & \tilde{\rho}_{23 } = tr_{14}\left[\tilde{\rho}_{1234}\right]=tr_{14}\left[u_1\otimes u_2 \left(\rho_{12}\right ) \right],\end{aligned}\ ] ] of a and b are coherent i.e @xmath38 , while the local output states , given by @xmath39= tr_{24}\left[u_1\otimes u_2\left(\rho_{12}\right)\right],{}\nonumber\\ & & \tilde{\rho}_{24 } = tr_{13}\left[\tilde{\rho}_{1234}\right]= tr_{13}\left[u_1\otimes u_2\left(\rho_{12}\right)\right ] , \end{aligned}\ ] ] of a and b are incoherent i.e @xmath40 .
+ [ def : broad_nonlocal]similarly , a coherent input state @xmath13 is said to be broadcast optimally after the application of non local cloning operation @xmath41 together on qubits 1 and 2 , if for some values of the input state parameters , the non - local output states , given by @xmath42=tr_{34}\left[u_{12}\left(\rho_{12}\right)\right ] , { } \nonumber\\ & & \tilde{\rho}_{34 } = tr_{12}\left[\tilde{\rho}_{1234}\right]=tr_{12}\left[u_{12 } \left(\rho_{12}\right ) \right],\end{aligned}\ ] ] of a and b are coherent i.e @xmath43 , while the local output states , given by @xmath39= tr_{24}\left[u_{12}\left(\rho_{12}\right)\right],{}\nonumber\\ & & \tilde{\rho}_{24 } = tr_{13}\left[\tilde{\rho}_{1234}\right]= tr_{13}\left[u_{12}\left(\rho_{12}\right)\right],\end{aligned}\ ] ] of a and b are incoherent i.e @xmath40 .    here , in this work , we show that it is impossible to broadcast coherence optimally in both the cases of local and non local cloning .
we show this for the computational basis @xmath10 starting with most general mixed state ( given in eq .  ) as a resource with the help of the following theorems .
+    [ theo : local_broad_no_optimal ] _ given a two qubit general mixed state @xmath13 ( given by eq .  ) and b - h local cloning transformations ( @xmath44 ( see appendix b ) ) , it is impossible to optimally broadcast the coherence within @xmath13 into two lesser coherent states : [ ( a ) ] @xmath45 = @xmath46 $ ] , [ ( b ) ] @xmath47 = @xmath48 $ ] ( here we have @xmath49 ) in the computational basis @xmath10 . _    here
, we consider the input state as the most general two qubit mixed state @xmath13 ( given by eq .  ) .
the b - h local cloning transformation @xmath50 is applied to clone qubits ( @xmath51 and @xmath52 ) of @xmath13 .
we have local output states as , @xmath53 , where @xmath54 and the non local output states @xmath55 . here
, @xmath56 with @xmath57 and @xmath58 being the cloning machine parameters and @xmath59 represent the bloch vector and @xmath60 represents the correlation matrix of the input state . the coherence calculated by using @xmath0 norm of the local output states in the computational basis @xmath10
are given by , @xmath61 on a s side and @xmath62 on b s side .
each of these quantities are positive as the norm @xmath63 are positive quantities lying between @xmath64 and @xmath65 .
this is true for all values of @xmath58 lying between @xmath66 . since the coherence of local output states are non vanishing
, it is clear enough that it is impossible to optimally brodcast quantum coherence .
+ now for @xmath67 , the above b - h local cloner @xmath44 reduces to state independent b - h optimal local cloner .
subsequently , the coherence of local output states changes to , @xmath68 and @xmath69 .
[ theo : nonlocal_broad ] _ given a two qubit general mixed state @xmath13 ( given by eq .  ) and b - h non - local cloning transformations ( @xmath70(see appendix b ) ) , it is impossible to optimally broadcast the coherence within @xmath13 into two lesser coherent states : [ ( a ) ] @xmath71 = @xmath72 $ ] , [ ( b ) ] @xmath73 = @xmath74 $ ] .
( here we have @xmath75 ) in the computational basis @xmath10 .
_    similar to the previous proof , here also we start with most general version of the two qubit mixed state @xmath13 ( given by eq .  ) .
when b - h non - local cloning transformation @xmath76 is applied non locally to clone qubits ( @xmath51 and @xmath52 ) of @xmath13 , then , we have local output states as , @xmath77 , where @xmath78 and the non local output states @xmath79 . here
, @xmath80 with @xmath57 and @xmath58 being the cloning machine parameters and @xmath59 represent the bloch vector and @xmath60 represents the correlation matrix of the input state . the coherence calculated by using @xmath0 norm measure in the computational basis @xmath81 .
hence , for the local output states , we have , @xmath82 on a s side and @xmath83 on b s side .
each of these quantities are positive as the norm @xmath63 are positive quantities lying between @xmath64 and @xmath65 .
this is true for all values of @xmath58 lying between @xmath84 .
similarly here also we see that it is impossible to broadcast quantum coherence optimally as we have non vanishing quantum coherence for local output states . + now for @xmath85 , the above b - h non - local cloning machine @xmath70 reduces to state independent b - h optimal non - local cloner .
subsequently , the coherence of local output states changes to , @xmath86 and @xmath87 .
+    at this point it is interesting to note that though it is impossible to broadcast optimally qch between the desired qubits .
however , it does not rule out the entire possibility of broadcasting .
if we relax the condition @xmath40 , then we show that subsequently it will be possible to broadcast qch .
we show this for the most general two qubit mixed state as a resource . + * definition : non optimal broadcasting ( local / non local ) * a coherent state @xmath13 is said to be broadcast non optimally after the application of local cloning operation @xmath36 , on the qubits 1 and 2 respectively or by non local cloning operation @xmath41 together on qubits 1 and 2 , if for some values of the input state parameters , the coherence of non - local output states are greater than coherence of local output states , i.e , @xmath88 and @xmath89 in the local cloning case ; and , @xmath90 and @xmath91 in the non - local cloning case .
+ under this relaxation , the quantum coherence of the cloned state @xmath92 can either increase , or remain same or even decrease from the initial resource state @xmath13 , which implies the following three scenarios after broadcasting :    * @xmath93 $ ] , @xmath94 $ ] @xmath95 @xmath96 * @xmath93 $ ] , @xmath94 $ ] @xmath97 @xmath96 * @xmath93 $ ] , @xmath94$]@xmath98 @xmath96    interestingly , in this work we show that it is indeed impossible to increase the quantum coherence by local and non local cloning operation though in general it is possible to increase the quantum coherence by local operations .
we present this result in form of two following theorems , where we have considered general local and non local cloning transformations .
[ theo : local_broad ] _ given a two qubit general mixed state @xmath13 ( given by eq .  ) and b - h local cloning transformations ( @xmath44 ) , we can always create two states @xmath45 and @xmath99 , such that : ( a ) @xmath100 ( b ) @xmath101 in the computational basis @xmath10 .
_    we start with most general representation of two qubit mixed state @xmath13 ( given by eq .  ) .
when buzek hillary local cloning transformation @xmath50 is applied to @xmath13 , we get the non local output states as @xmath102 . here
, @xmath56 with @xmath57 and @xmath58 being the cloning machine parameters and @xmath59 represent the bloch vector and @xmath60 represents the correlation matrix of the input state . using @xmath0-norm as measure of coherence we find out the coherence in the computational basis @xmath10 , @xmath103 $ ] and @xmath104 $ ] .
where , @xmath105 if we can show that the conditions @xmath106 , @xmath107 and @xmath108 hold true , then we can always conclude that @xmath109 @xmath98 @xmath110 .
+ at first , if we observe the terms @xmath111 and @xmath112 carefully , we find that @xmath112 @xmath97 @xmath113 @xmath95 @xmath111 because @xmath114 + now , we need to compare @xmath115 and @xmath116.if we observe the terms in @xmath115 and @xmath116 , and ignoring the constant @xmath117 , they can be thought of as distance between two points in a cartesian plane .
let us denote the distance between two points a and b in a 2-dimensional space ( like xy cartesian plane ) by @xmath118.let us consider @xmath119 and as @xmath120 , so , we have , @xmath121 .
now , assume 4 points in cartesian plane , namely , @xmath122 , @xmath123,@xmath124 and @xmath125 without @xmath126 as the origin .
now , as @xmath120 , hence , it is always true that @xmath127 ; that is , @xmath128 .
so , d always lies on @xmath129 , inside @xmath130 .
@xmath131{triangle }   \end{array}\ ] ]    now , from the figure 2 , we have , @xmath132 and @xmath133 .
now , we have proved @xmath134 in the appendix a by plane geometry .
hence , we have,@xmath135 similarly , we can show @xmath136 hence , we have proved that @xmath137    [ theo : non_local_broad ] _ given a two qubit general mixed state @xmath13 and b - h non local cloning transformations ( @xmath70 ) , we can always create two states @xmath71 and @xmath73 , such that : ( a ) @xmath138 ( b ) @xmath139 in the computational basis @xmath10 , where @xmath140 , is the machine parameter . _    first of all we apply buzek hillary non - local cloning transformation @xmath76 to the 2- qubit general mixed quantum states @xmath13 ( eq .  ) .
the non local output states obtained as aresult of this are given by , @xmath79 . here , @xmath80 with @xmath57 and @xmath58 being the cloning machine parameters , @xmath59 represent the bloch vector and @xmath60 represents the correlation matrix of the input state .
the qch present in these states are calculated in the computational basis @xmath10 by using the @xmath0 norm are given by , @xmath141 and @xmath142 where , @xmath143\end{aligned}\ ] ] now , we know , @xmath144 and @xmath145 .
so , clearly , @xmath146 and @xmath147 .
hence , we have created two weaker ( in terms of coherence ) correlations from input correlation after non - local cloning .
in this section , we consider the standard examples of two qubit mixed state as a resource state . these include werner like states ( wls ) and bell diagonal states ( bds ) .
we apply the standard bh cloner both locally and non locally , to find the range where at least non optimal broadcasting is possible , in terms of input state parameters . in both the examples ,
we have chosen computational basis @xmath10 for measuring coherence via @xmath0-norm . + * _   example : a. werner like states ( wls ) : _ * + as our first example , we consider werner - like states ( wls ) , which can be formally expressed in terms of bloch vectors as , @xmath148 , where @xmath149 is the bloch vector and the correlation matrix is given by , @xmath150 with the condition @xmath151 and @xmath152 . +   + the local output states obtained after applying general local cloning operation ( @xmath44 ) on both the qubits @xmath65 and @xmath153 are given by , @xmath154 , where @xmath155 is the bloch vector of the state @xmath156 , @xmath157 $ ] and @xmath158 , where @xmath57 and @xmath58 being the machine state parameter ( see appendix b ) . also , we have the non - local output states as , @xmath159 , where @xmath155 is bloch vector
, @xmath160 is the correlation matrix of the state @xmath156 .
+ now , coherence for the local output state is independent of @xmath161 and @xmath162 and it is given by , @xmath163 .
on the other hand , coherence of non - local output state depends on @xmath161 , @xmath162 , @xmath58 and it is given by , @xmath164 .
for non optimal broadcasting of coherence , our region of interest is the one where the condition @xmath165 or @xmath166 is satisfied .
this condition eventually reduces to @xmath167 for general local cloning case . +
in order to obtain the state independent local cloner , we substitute the value of @xmath58 as @xmath168 .
the corresponding values of coherence of the local output states , if we perform state independent cloning , are given by , @xmath169 and the coherence of non - local output state is given by , @xmath170 .
subsequently , the condition under which non optimal broadcasting would be possible reduces to @xmath171 . +    .broadcasting ranges for local state independent cloning in case of werner like states . [ cols="<,<",options="header " , ]     in table [ tab : bell_sidnl_table ] , we have shown some of the trends in broadcasting ranges obtained in terms of @xmath172 , @xmath173 and @xmath174 after state independent non - local cloning transformations .
we fix the values of @xmath172 and @xmath174 and substitute their respective values in the expression @xmath175 >
1.$ ] here , from @xmath176 onwards , discontinuities in the intervals corresponding to the ranges of @xmath173-parameter are observed , which imply the presence of a no - broadcast zone in between .
+     or @xmath177 ) after normalised in a scale of 0 to 1.,title="fig:",width=283,height=245 ] +    in figure [ fig : bell_sidnl ] , the region of broadcasting is superimposed on the tetrahedral - region hosting all bell - diagonal states in @xmath178-coordinate system , with axes @xmath172 , @xmath173 and
@xmath174.the light light regions represent the no - broadcast zones , while the regions on the dark blue - magenta spectrum , occupying a significant fraction of the tetrahedron s volume , highlight the regions where we can broadcast coherence . in the bluish - magenta region , the change in hue signifies how the values of the non - local coherence , @xmath179 or @xmath177 , changes with respect to the values of the @xmath178-parameters . as the value of @xmath179 or @xmath177 increases , the hue changes from blue to magenta .
for instance , the concentrated presence of magenta - pink hue , especially in the regions along the tetrahedron s edge and in the regions surrounding the corners , suggests that non - local coherence is much higher in those regions , compared to the other regions in the broadcasting zone . also , we find that there is a light purple cavity - like zone sandwiched in between the bluish - magenta regions , which points to a no - broadcast zone .
this cavity - like zone accounts for discontinuities int the intervals corresponding to ranges of @xmath173-paramter in table [ tab : bell_sidnl_table ] .
moreover , we observe in the figure that in terms of coverage of the tetrahedron s volume , the zone of broadcasting in the non - local cloning scenario is significantly larger when compared to that of the local cloning scenario ( figure [ fig : bell_sidl ] ) , thereby suggesting that non - local state independent cloning performs much better when it comes to broadcasting of coherence in the bell - diagonal states .
+ _ acknowledgements : _
authors acknowledge mr .
tushant jha and mr .
sourav chatterjee for their suggestions .
99    m.horodecki , j. openheim , http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2013/130626/ncomms3059/full/ncomms3059.html[nat .
commun * 4 * 2059 ( 2013 ) ] ; c. a. rodriguez - rosario _ et .
al _ , https://arxiv.org/abs/1308.1245[arxiv : 1308.1245 ] ; m. lostaglio _ et .
al _ , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevx.5.021001[phys .
x * 5 * , 0210001 ( 2015 ) ] ; l. a. correa _ et .
al _ http://www.nature.com/articles/srep03949[scientific reports * 4 , 3949 * ( 2014 ) ] ; p.
skrzypczyk , a. j. short , and s. popescu , http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140627/ncomms5185/abs/ncomms5185.html[nature communications * 5 , 4185 * ( 2014 ) ] ; m. lostaglio , d. jennings , and t. rudolph , http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2015/150310/ncomms7383/full/ncomms7383.html?wt.ec_id=ncomms-20150311[nat . commun .
* 6 , 6383 * ( 2015 ) ] ; m. lostaglio , k. korzekwa , d. jennings , and t. rudolph , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevx.5.021001[phys .
x * 5 * , 021001 ( 2015 ) ] ; k. korzekwa , m. lostaglio , j. oppenheim , and d. jennings , http://iopscience.iop.org / article/10.1088/1367 - 2630/18/2/023045/meta[new j. phys .
18 , 023045 ( 2016 ) ] ; p. kammerlander and j. anders , http://www.nature.com/articles/srep22174[scientific reports * 6 , 22174 * ( 2016 ) ] ; g. vacanti , c. elouard , and a. auffeves , ( 2015 ) , https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.01974[arxiv:1503.01974 ] ; a. l. malvezzi , g. karpat , b.  akmak , f. f. fanchini , t. debarba , and r. o. vianna , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevb.93.184428[phys . rev .
b 93 , 184428 ( 2016 ) ] ; s. bhattacharya , s. banerjee , and a.k .
pati , ( 2016 ) , https://arxiv.org/abs/1601.04742[arxiv:1601.04742 ] ; y. yang and g. chiribella , ( 2015 ) , http://arxiv.org/abs/1502.00259v2[arxiv:1502.00259v2 ] .
s. llyod , http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1742-6596/302/1/012037/meta[j phys : conf .
* 302 * , 012037 ( 2011 ) ] ; s. huelga , m. plenio , http://www.tandfonline.com / doi / abs/10.1080/00405000.2013.829687[contemp . phys .
, * 54 * , 181 ( 2013 ) ] ; f. levi , f. mintert , http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1367-2630/16/3/033007/meta[new . j. phys , * 16 * , 033007 ( 2014 ) ] ; c.m .
li , n. lambert , y.n .
chen , g.y .
chen , and f. nori , http://www.nature.com/articles/srep00885[sci .
* 2 , 885 * ( 2012 ) ] ; v. singh poonia , d. saha , and s. ganguly , ( 2014 ) , https://arxiv.org/abs/1408.1327[arxiv:1408.1327 ] .
e. chitambar , a. streltsov , s. rana , m. n. bera , g. adesso , and m. lewenstein , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.116.070402[phys .
lett . * 116 * , 070402 ( 2016 ) ] ; a. winter and d. yang , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.116.120404[phys .
lett . * 116 * , 120404 ( 2016 ) ] ; i. marvian and r.w .
spekkens , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.90.062110[phys .
rev . a * 90 * , 062110,(2014 )
] ; j. aberg , ( 2006 ) , https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0612146[arxiv:quant-ph/0612146v1 ] ; g. gour , i. marvian , and r.w .
spekkens , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.80.012307[phys .
a * 80 * , 012307 ( 2009 ) ] ; j. chen , j. cui , and h. fan , ( 2015 ) , https://arxiv.org/abs/1509.03576[arxiv:1509.03576v1 ] ; j. chen , n. johnston , c .- k .
li , and s. plosker , ( 2016 ) , https://arxiv.org/abs/1601.06269[arxiv:1601.06269 ] ; s. cheng and m.j.w .
hall , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.92.042101[phys .
a * 92 * , 042101 ( 2015 ) ] ; p. deb , http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2915444[quantum information processing , * 15(4 ) * 1629 - 1638(2016 ) ] ; s. du , z. bai , and y. guo , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.91.052120[phys .
rev . a * 91 * , 052120 ( 2015 ) ] ; m. n. bera , t. qureshi , m. a. siddiqui , and a. k. pati , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.92.012118[phys . rev .
a * 92 * , 012118 ( 2015 ) ] ; x. liu , z. tian , j. wang , and j. jing , http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s0003491615004340[annals of physics , * 366 * 102 - 112 ( 2016 ) ] ; k. von prillwitz , l. rudnicki , and f. mintert , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.92.052114[phys .
a * 92 * , 052114 ( 2015 ) ] ; m. hillery , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.012111[phys .
a * 93 * , 012111 ( 2016 ) ] ; k. bu , u. singh , and j. wu , ( 2015 ) , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.042326 [ phys . rev . a 93 , 042326 ( 2016)];. j. m. matera , d. egloff , n. killoran , and m. b. plenio , ( 2015 ) , http://arxiv.org/abs/1512.07486[arxiv:1512.07486v1 ] ; y.r .
zhang , l .- h .
shao , y. li , and h. fan , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.012334[phys .
a * 93 * , 012334 ( 2016 ) ] ; u. singh , m. n. bera , h. s. dhar , and a. k. pati , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.91.052115[phys . rev .
a * 91 * , 052115 ( 2015 ) ] .
t. baumgratz .
al _ , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.113.140401[phys .
* 113 * , 140401 ( 2014 ) ] .
davide girolami , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.113.170401[phys .
113 , 170401 ( 2014 ) ] .
x. yuan , h. zhou , z. cao , and x. ma , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.92.022124[phys .
a * 92 * , 022124 ( 2015 ) ] ; d. p. pires , l. c. cleri , and d. o. soares - pinto , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.91.042330[phys .
rev . a * 91 * , 042330 ( 2015 ) ] ; b. yadin and v. vedral , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.022122[phys . rev .
a * 93 * , 022122 ( 2016 ) ] ; s. rana , p. parashar , and m. lewenstein , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.012110[phys .
a * 93 * , 012110 ( 2016 ) ] ; m. allegra , p. giorda , and s. lloyd , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.042312[phys . rev .
a * 93 * , 042312 ( 2016)];r .
chandrashekar , p. manikandan , j. segar , and t. byrnes , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.116.150504[phys .
lett . * 116 * , 150504 ( 2016 ) ] ; e. chitambar and g. gour , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.117.030401[phys .
117 , 030401 ( 2016 ) ] ; m. piani , m. cianciaruso , t. r. bromley , c. napoli , n. johnston , and g. adesso , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.042107[phys . rev . a 93 , 042107 ( 2016 ) ] .
x. hu , a. milne , b. zhang , and h. fan , http://www.nature.com/articles/srep19365[scientific reports 6 , 19365 ( 2016 ) ] ; e. chitambar and m .- h .
hsieh , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.117.020402[phys .
117 , 020402 ( 2016 ) ] ; a. streltsov , s. rana , m. nath bera , and m. lewenstein,(2015 ) , http://arxiv.org/abs/1509.07456[arxiv:1509.07456v2 ] ; t. r. bromley , m. cianciaruso , and g. adesso , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.114.210401[phys .
lett . * 114 * , 210401 ( 2015 ) ] ; a. streltsov , u. singh , h. s. dhar , m. n. bera , and g. adesso , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.115.020403[phys .
lett . * 115 * , 020403 ( 2015 ) ] ; y. yao , x. xiao , l. ge , and c. p. sun , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.92.022112[phys .
a * 92 * , 022112 ( 2015 ) ] .
avijit misra , uttam singh , samyadeb bhattacharya , arun kumar pati , https://arxiv.org/abs/1602.08437v2[arxiv:1602.08437v2 ] .
uttam singh , l. zhang , and a. k. pati , ( 2015 ) , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.032125[phys .
a 93 , 032125 , ( 2016 ) ] .
uttam singh , manabendra nath bera , avijit misra , arun kumar pati , http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.08186[arxiv:1506.08186v1 ] .
b. yadin , j. ma , d. girolami , m. gu , and v. vedral , ( 2015 ) , https://arxiv.org/abs/1512.02085[arxiv:1512.02085v1 ] .
carmine napoli , thomas r. bromley , marco cianciaruso , marco piani , nathaniel johnston , gerardo adesso , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.116.150502[phys .
116 , 150502 ( 2016 ) ] .
debasis mondal , tanumoy pramanik , arun kumar pati , http://arxiv.org/abs/1508.03770[arxiv:1508.03770v2 ] .
xiao - dong yu , da - jian zhang , c. l. liu , d. m. tong , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.060303[phys .
a 93 , 060303(r ) , ( 2016 ) ] .
jiajun ma , benjamin yadin , davide girolami , vlatko vedral , mile gu , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.116.160407[phys .
lett . 116 , 160407 ( 2016 ) ] .    w. k. wootters and w. h. zurek , http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v299/n5886/abs/299802a0.html[nature * 299 * , 802 ( 1982 ) ] .
v. buzek and m. hillery , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.54.1844[phys . rev .
a * 54 * , 1844 ( 1996 ) ] .
d. bruss , p.d .
divincenzo , a. ekert , c. a. fuchs , c. macchiavello and j. a. smolin , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.57.2368[phys .
a * 57 * , 2368 ( 1998 ) ] .
v. buzek and m. hillery , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.81.5003[phys .
lett . * 81 * , 5003 ( 1998 ) ] .
a. chefles and s. m. barnett , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.60.136[phys .
a * 60 * , 136 ( 1999 ) ] ; h. fan , k.matsumoto and m.wadati , http://journals.aps.org/pra/abstract/10.1103/physreva.64.064301[phys
a * 64 * , 064301 ( 2001 ) ] ; j. fiurasek , s. iblisdir , s. massar , and n. j. cerf , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.65.040302[phys .
a * 65 * , 040302 ( 2002 ) ] ; h. p.yuen , phys . lett .
a * 113 * , 405 ( 1986 ) ; k. azuma , j. shimamura , m. koashi and n. imoto , phys . rev .
a * 72 * , 032335 ( 2005 ) ; s. adhikari , n. ganguly , i. chakrabarty and b. s. choudhury , http://iopscience.iop.org / article/10.1088/1751 - 8113/41/41/415302/meta [ j. phys . a * 41 * , 415302 ( 2008 ) ] ; s adhikari , ak pati , i chakrabarty , bs choudhury , http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11128-007-0053-6[quantum information processing * 6 * ( 4 ) , 197 - 219 ] .
n. gisin and s. massar , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.79.2153[phys .
lett . * 79 * , 2153 ( 1997 ) ] .
n. j. cerf , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.84.4497[phys .
84 * , 4497 ( 2000 ) ] .
n. j. cerf , http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09500340008244036[j .
mod . opt . * 47 * , 187 ( 2000 ) ] .
v. scarani , s. iblisdir , n.gisin and a. acin , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/revmodphys.77.1225[rev .
phys . * 77 * , 1225 ( 2005 ) ] , and references therein .
l. m. duan and g. c. guo , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.80.4999[phys .
lett . * 80 * , 4999 ( 1998 ) ] ; l.hardy and d. d. song , http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s037596019900448x[phys .
a * 259 * , 331 ( 1999 ) ] .
n. gisin , doi:10.1016/s0375 - 9601(98)00170 - 4[phys .
a * 242 * , 1 ( 1998 ) ] .
s. adhikari , i. chakrabarty and b. s. choudhary , http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/0305-4470/39/26/011/meta[j .
a * 39 * , 8439 ( 2006 ) ] .
m. k. shukla , i. chakrabarty , s .
chatterjee , http://arxiv.org / pdf/1511.05796.pdf[arxiv : 1511.05796 ] .
sk sazim , i. chakrabarty , a. datta and a. k. pati , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.91.062311[phys .
rev a * 91 * , 062311 ( 2015 ) ] .
a. einstein , b. podolsky and n. rosen , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrev.47.777[phys .
, 47 777 ( 1935 ) ] .
a. ekert , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.67.661[phys .
67 * , 661 ( 1991 ) ] .    c. h. bennett and g. brassard , http://researcher.watson.ibm.com/researcher/files/us-bennetc/bb84highest.pdf[proceedings of ieee international conference on computers , system and signal processing , bangalore , india , pp.175 - 179 ( 1984 ) ] ; p. w. shor and j. preskill , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.85.441[phys .
lett . * 85 * , 441 ( 2000 ) ] .
m. hillery , v. buzek and a. berthiaume , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.59.1829[phys .
a * 59 * , 1829 ( 1999 ) ] ; s. k. sazim , i. chakrabarty , c. vanarasa and k. srinathan , http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11128-015-1109-7[quant . inf .
process * 14 * 4651 ( 2015 ) ] ; s. adhikari , i. chakrabarty and p. agrawal , http://arxiv.org/abs/1012.5570[quant .
inf . comp .
* 12 * , 0253 ( 2012 ) ] ; m.ray , s. chatterjee and i. chakrabarty , http://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjd/e2016-60683-x[eur .
j. d * 70 * : 114 ( 2016 ) ] .    c. h. bennett , g. brassard , c. crepeau , r. jozsa , a. peres and w. k. wootters , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.70.1895[phys .
lett . * 70 * , 1895 ( 1993 ) ] ; r. horodecki , m. horodecki and p. horodecki , http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0375960196006391[phys .
a * 222 * , 21 ( 1996 ) ] .
c.h.bennett and s.j.weisner , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.69.2881[phys.rev.lett . * 69 * , 2881 ( 1992 ) ] ; r. nepal , r. prabhu , a. sen de and u. sen , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.87.032336[phys .
a * 87 * , 032336 ( 2013 ) ] .
r. horodecki , p. horodecki , m. horodecki and k. horodecki , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/revmodphys.81.865[rev .
phys . * 81 * , 865 ( 2009 ) ] , and references therein .
s. bose , v. vedral and p. l. knight , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.57.822[phys .
a * 57 * , 822 ( 1998 ) ] ; m. zukowski , a. zeilinger , m. a. horne and a. k. ekert , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.71.4287[phys . rev . lett . * 71 * , 4287 ( 1993 ) ] .
sk sazim and i. chakrabarty , http://link.springer.com/article/10.1140/epjd/e2013-30746-9[eur .
j. d * 67 * , 174 ( 2013 ) ] .
d. deutsch , a. ekert , r. jozsa , c. macchiavello , s. popescu and a. sanpera , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.77.2818[phys .
. lett . * 77 * , 2818 ( 1996 ) ] ; l. goldenberg and l.vaidman , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.75.1239 [ phys .
lett . * 75 * , 1239 ( 1995 ) ] ; a. cabello , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.61.052312[phys .
a * 61 * , 052312 ( 2000 ) ] ; c. li , h - s song and l. zhou , http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1464-4266/5/2/306/pdf[journal of optics b : quantum semiclass . opt . * 5 * , 155 ( 2003 ) ] ; a. orieux , g. ferranti , a. darrigo , r. lo franco , g. benenti , e. paladino , g. falci , f. sciarrino and p. mataloni , http://www.nature.com/articles/srep08575[scientific reports 5 , 8575 ( 2015 ) ] ; a. darrigo , r. lo franco , g. benenti , e. paladino and g. falci , link:10.1016/j.aop.2014.07.021[ann . phys . * 350 * , 211224 ( 2014 ) ] .    c. h. bennett , h. j. bernstein , s. popescu and b. schumacher , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.53.2046[phys .
a * 53 * , 2046 ( 1996 ) ] .
v. buzek , v. vedral , m. b. plenio , p. l. knight and m. hillery , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.55.3327[phys . rev .
a * 55 * , 3327 ( 1997 ) ] .
s. bandyopadhyay and g. kar , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.60.3296 [ phys .
a * 60 * , 3296 ( 1999 ) ] .
i. chakrabarty , http://arxiv.org/abs/0803.3393[int .
inf , * 7 * ( 02 ) , 559 - 565 ] . s. adhikari and b. s. choudhury , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.74.032323[phys
a * 74 * , 032323 ( 2006 ) ] ; i. chakrabarty and b. s. choudhary http://arxiv.org/abs/0804.2568[arxiv:0804.2568 ] . s. chatterjee , s. sazim , i. chakrabarty , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.93.042309[phys . rev .
a * 93 * , 042309 ( 2016 ) ] .
a. kheirollahi .
et.al , https://arxiv.org/abs/1604.04995[arxiv : 1604.04995 ] .
h. barnum , c. m. caves , c. a. fuchs , r. jozsa and b. schumacher , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.76.2818[phys .
lett . * 76 * , 2818 ( 1996 ) ] .
m. piani , p. horodecki and r. horodecki , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.100.090502[phys .
. lett . * 100 * , 090502 ( 2008 ) ] .
h. barnum , j. barrett , m. leifer and a. wilce , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physrevlett.99.240501[phys .
99 * , 240501 ( 2007 ) ] .
s. luo , http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11005-010-0389-1[lett .
phys . * 92 * , 143 ( 2010 ) ] .
s. luo , n. li and x. cao , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.79.054305[phys . rev . a * 79 * , 054305 ( 2009 ) ] .
i. ghiu , http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/physreva.67.012323[phys .
a * 67 * , 012323 ( 2003 ) ] .
@xmath131{proof }   \end{array}\ ] ]    _ let m be a point in the interior of @xmath180 then , @xmath181 , @xmath182 and @xmath183 .
_    as shown in figure 5 , @xmath184 is extended to point e outside @xmath130 intersecting @xmath185 at @xmath186 . by applying triangle inequality on @xmath187 and @xmath188 , we get @xmath189 + @xmath190 @xmath98 @xmath191 and , @xmath192 + @xmath193 @xmath98 @xmath194 respectively .
+ also , as @xmath195 lies on @xmath196 , we have , @xmath184 + @xmath192 = @xmath197 + now , adding these two inequalities , we have ,    @xmath189 + @xmath190 + @xmath193 + @xmath192 @xmath98 @xmath191 + @xmath194 + @xmath198 @xmath189 + @xmath199 + @xmath200 + @xmath192 @xmath98 @xmath201 + @xmath202 + @xmath194 + @xmath198 @xmath189 + @xmath185 + @xmath192 @xmath98 @xmath184 + @xmath192 + @xmath194 +    cancelling out @xmath192 , we finally get,@xmath203 + @xmath185 @xmath98 @xmath184 + @xmath204 similarly , the other two inequalities can be proved .
the cloning of arbitrary quantum states is forbidden by no - cloning theorem .
however , there still exists the possibility of cloning arbitrary quantum states approximately with certain fidelity , or , imperfection. quantum cloning transformations are ( cptp ) completely positive trace preserving map between two quantum systems , supported by an ancilla state . in this section , at first , we briefly describe the buzek - hillery ( b - h ) qcm .
+ the b - h cloning machine ( @xmath205 ) is a @xmath206-dimensional quantum copying transformation acting on a state @xmath207 ( @xmath208 = 1 , ... , @xmath206 ) , which is to be copied onto a blank state @xmath209 .
initially , the copy is prepared in state @xmath210 which subsequently gets transformed into another set of state vectors @xmath211 and @xmath212 as a result of application of the cloning machine . here
@xmath213 , @xmath111 and @xmath214 represent the input , blank and machine qubits respectively . in this case
, these transformed state vectors belong to the orthonormal basis set in the @xmath206-dimensional space .
the transformation scheme @xmath205 is given by , @xmath215 where @xmath20 = @xmath216 , and the coefficients @xmath217 and @xmath218 are real .
an optimal state independent version of the b - h cloner can be obtained from eq . by imposing the unitarity and normalization conditions which give rise to the following set of constraints , + @xmath219 , + @xmath220 and @xmath221 here , @xmath222 where @xmath223 is the number of qubits in a given quantum register . in this transformation ,
the fidelity of the output copies does nt depend on the input state because the shrinking or scaling property is independent of the input states .
+ now , by substituting @xmath217 = @xmath218 = 1 , the unitarity constraints on the b - h cloning transformation in eq .   give rise to the following set of conditions : @xmath224 where @xmath9 and @xmath225 for @xmath226 ; and the output states are no longer necessarily orthonormal .
+ let us assume that , @xmath227 where again @xmath9 for @xmath228 ; @xmath57 and @xmath58 are the machine parameters .      the optimal cloning machine described above with @xmath229 becomes a local cloning machine ( @xmath230 ) .
by substituting the values of the coefficients @xmath217=@xmath231 and @xmath218=@xmath232 in eq .  , we obtain the optimal state independent cloning machine which can be used for local copying purposes.in this case , the value of @xmath58 is @xmath168 .
+      similarly , the optimal cloning machine described above becomes a non local cloning machine ( @xmath233 ) for @xmath234 .
then the corresponding values of the coefficients @xmath217 and @xmath218 in eq.10 become @xmath235 and @xmath236 respectively.now , by substituting the values of the coefficients @xmath217=@xmath235 and @xmath218=@xmath236 in eq .
, we obtain the optimal state independent non local cloning machine.in this case , the value of @xmath58 is @xmath237 .