Laser Physics

PAPER You may also like

- Entropic uncertainty and quantum
The entropic uncertainty preservation in non- correlations dynamics in a system of two
qutrits exposed to local noisy channels
Markovian environment via classical driving fields Atta Ur Rahman, M Y Abd-Rabbou, S M
Zangi et al.

- Classical-driving-assisted coherence
To cite this article: H Hajihoseinlou and B Ahansaz 2024 Laser Phys. 34 075202 dynamics and its conservation
De-Ying Gao, , Qiang Gao et al.

- Entanglement dynamics of an open

moving-biparticle system driven by
classical-field
View the article online for updates and enhancements. Qilin Wang, Rongfang Liu, Hong-Mei Zou
et al.

This content was downloaded from IP address 131.251.254.197 on 03/07/2024 at 16:16

 Astro Ltd Laser Physics

Laser Phys. 34 (2024) 075202 (7pp) https://doi.org/10.1088/1555-6611/ad4eb8

The entropic uncertainty preservation

in non-Markovian environment via
classical driving fields
H Hajihoseinlou1 and B Ahansaz2,∗
1
Department of Physics, Urmia University of Technology, Urmia, Iran
2
Physics Department, Azarbaijan Shahid Madani University, Tabriz, Iran

E-mail: bahramahansaz@gmail.com

Received 21 January 2024

Accepted for publication 13 May 2024
Published 6 June 2024

Abstract
Uncertainty relations in terms of entropies were initially proposed to deal with conceptual
shortcomings in the original formulation of the uncertainty principle and, hence, play an
important role in quantum foundations. In quantum information theory, the preferred
mathematical quantity to express the entropic uncertainty relation is the Shannon’s entropy. In
this work, we investigate the effect of a classical driving field on entropic uncertainty lower
bound (EULB). In this regard, we consider a particle as the quantum memory correlated with a
measured particle, where during the interaction with the environment, the quantum memory is
driven by the external classical field. Our result reveals that in the presence of the classical
driving fields, the EULB is reduced and consequently, the measurement accuracy is increased.
Keywords: entropic uncertainty, open quantum system, classical driving field

1. Introduction Based on Robertson and Schrödinger the idea can be univer-

sally improved for any arbitrary pairs of incompatible observ-
One of the most outstanding features of quantum mechanics, ables Q̂ and R̂ to a form as [3, 4]
which distinguishes it from classical theory, is the uncertainty
principle. This concept, also known as Heisenberg’s uncer- 1 h i
∆Q̂∆R̂ ⩾ | < ψ| Q̂, R̂ |ψ > |, (2)
tainty principle, fundamentally asserts a limit to the accur- 2
acy and precision with which the values for certain pairs of
q
incompatible quantum measurements can be predicted [1]. 2
where ∆Ô = < ψ|Ô2 |ψ > −< ψ|Ô|ψ > , (Ô ∈ {Q̂, R̂})
For instance, position, denoted as x̂, and momentum, denoted
as p̂, cannot be simultaneously predicted from initial condi- and [Q̂.R̂] = Q̂R̂ − R̂Q̂.
tions with high precision. There are a variety of formulations If the system is prepared in the eigenstates of the two
according to which the principle can be expressed. However, observables, the given results are trivial. In terms of quantum
the most important form is the Heisenberg uncertainty relation, information theory, the uncertainty principle is formulated
formulated by Kennard [2], by Shannon entropy, which was first suggested by Kraus,
Maassen and Uffink as [5, 6]
h̄
∆x̂∆p̂ ⩾ . (1)    
2 1
H Q̂ + H R̂ ⩾ log2 , (3)
c

where H(Ô) = −Σo po log2 po is the Shannon entropy and

c = max{i,j} |⟨qi |rj ⟩|2 quantifies the complementarity between
∗
Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed. the observables Q̂ and R̂ with the eigenstates |qi ⟩ and |rj ⟩,

1 © 2024 Astro Ltd

Laser Phys. 34 (2024) 075202 H Hajihoseinlou and B Ahansaz

respectively. The entropic uncertainty formulation for the state outcomes, it is significant to clarify how the entropic uncer-
with ρ is as tainty lower bound (EULB) can be controlled using exist-
ing strategies to protect the entanglement from environmental
    1 noise. Numerous efforts have been made to achieve this pur-
H Q̂ + H R̂ ⩾ log2 + S (ρ) , (4)
c pose, such as employing the quantum Zeno effect [22, 23], util-
izing weak measurement and quantum measurement reversal
where S(ρ) = −tr(ρlog2 ρ) denotes the Von Neumann entropy. protocols [24, 25], and adding auxiliary subsystems into the
It is obvious that equation (3) is a reduced form of equation (4) reservoir [26–28], among others. However, it can be demon-
for every pure state ρ. Now, we consider circumstances in strated how the implementation of a classical driving field
which there is an additional quantum system, referred to as can suppress the negative influences of the loss of quantum
quantum memory B, correlated with the measured quantum entanglement [29–32]. The effects of the environment on the
system A. Berta et al proved that the boundary of uncertainty EULB in the presence of weak measurement and measurement
for B, which has access to the quantum memory, regarding reversal have been studied in [33]. Also, the effects of aux-
the results of measurements Q̂ and R̂ on the system A, is given iliary qubits when added into the quantum memory’s reser-
by [7] voir on the EULB have been investigated in [34]. In this work,
    we consider the influence of the classical driving field on the
1 EULB in the presence of decoherence. It is demonstrated how
S Q̂|B + S R̂|B ⩾ log2 + S (A|B) , (5)
c this external field can reduce the EULB within the Berta rela-
tion. Additionally, it is shown how an increase in entanglement
where S(A|B) = S(ρAB ) − S(ρB ) is the conditional Von leads to a decrease in uncertainty, and vice versa.
Neumann entropy which quantifies the amount of entangle-
ment between the particle and the memory. Also, S(Ô|B) =
S(ρÔB ) − S(ρB ), (Ô ∈ {Q̂, R̂}) shows the conditional Von 2. Dynamics of a two-level open system driven by
Neumann entropies of the post measurement states the external classical field

X In this section, we study the dynamics of a two-level atom

ρÔB = (|oi ⟩⟨oi | ⊗ I) ρAB (|oi ⟩⟨oi | ⊗ I) , (6) as our open system, which is coupled to a structured reser-
i
voir at zero temperature and is driven by a classical field with
frequency ω L . We assume that the excited state of the atom
where |oi ⟩’s are the eigenstates of the observable Ô and I is |e⟩ decays into the ground state |g⟩ with transition frequency
the identity operator. It can be concluded that the uncertainty ω 0 . The Hamiltonian describing the whole system, under the
lower bound in equation (5) is reduced for the negative con- dipole and rotating wave approximations, is written as (we
ditional entropy S(A|B). Consequently, system B can predict assume h̄ = 1)
the outcomes of system A with high accuracy. Subsequently,
Pati et al [8] derived a new uncertainty relation that tightens ω0 X X  
H = σz + ωk a†k ak + gk ak σ+ + a†k σ−
the lower bound in equation (5) by incorporating an additional 2
k k
term dependent on quantum discord and the classical correla- −iωL t iωL t


+Ω e σ+ + e σ− , (8)
tion of the joint state. Adabi et al further improved the tighter
uncertainty bounds for the quantum-memory-assisted entropic where, σz = |e⟩⟨e| − |g⟩⟨g| is the population inversion oper-
uncertainty relation by showing that [9] ator and the operators σ+ = |e⟩⟨g| and σ− = |g⟩⟨e| are the
    1 raising and lowering operators. Additionally, ak and a†k are
S Q̂|B + S R̂|B ⩾ log2 + S (A|B) + max {0.δ} , (7) the annihilation and creation operator of the kth field mode
c
of the reservoir having the frequencies ω k and gk and Ω
represent the coupling strength of the interactions of the
with δ = I(A; B) − I(I(Q̂; B) + I(R̂; B)), in which I(Ô; B) =
atom with the reservoir and classical driving field, respect-
S(ρb ) − Σi pi S(ρB i ) is known as Holevo quantity. The
ively. In the newly dressed-state basis {|+⟩ = √12 (|g⟩ +
quantum memory-assisted entropic uncertainty relation has
been widely applied to various appealing aspects in the field |e⟩), |−⟩ = √12 (|g⟩ − |e⟩)} and by considering two rotating
of quantum information science [10–12], including entangle- reference frames through two unitary transformations U1 =
ment witnessing [13–15], quantum cryptography [16, 17], and exp(−iωL σz t/2) and U2 = exp(−iω0 Ξ+ t/2), the Hamiltonian
quantum key distribution [18–20]. of the system can be transformed into an effective Hamiltonian
In the realistic quantum world, no quantum system is isol- in the rotating-wave approximation [35]
ated and is inevitably susceptible to its ambient surroundings, X X  
ω′
which induces the phenomena of decoherence and dissipation Heff = Ξz + ωk a†k ak + gk′ ak Ξ+ + a†k Ξ− , (9)
[21]. Owing to this fact, the quantum entanglement between 2
k k
two particles is also affected by the interaction between the
system and its environment, leading to degradation. Given where, Ξz = |+⟩⟨+| − |−⟩⟨−| and Ξ+ = Ξ†− = |+⟩⟨−|
the importance of the entanglement between particles A and (Ξ− = |−⟩⟨+|) represents the new population inversion oper-
B in Berta’s uncertainty relation for predicting measurement ator and lowering (raising) operator. In equation (9), we have

2
Laser Phys. 34 (2024) 075202 H Hajihoseinlou and B Ahansaz

ω ′ = 2Ω + ω0 and gk′ = gk /2. It is worth noting that during In principle, the above set of coupled differential
the derivation of the effective Hamiltonian (9), we have neg- equations (12) can be solved analytically using, for instance,
lected the non-conservation energy terms by using the usual the Laplace transformation method. Therefore, the exact solu-
rotating-wave approximation [36, 37]. tions of the probability amplitudes C+ (t) can be obtained
Assuming that the environment is initially prepared in the as [21]
vacuum state, the initial state of the whole system in the newly ′
dressed states can be written as C+ (t) = G(t)C+ (0) = e−[λ−i(ω −ωc )]t/2
 
λ − i(ω ′ − ωc )
|ψ (0)⟩ = C− (0) |−⟩S |0⟩E + C+ (0) |+⟩S |0⟩E , (10) × cosh(Dt/2)+ sinh(Dt/2) C+ (0),
D
(16)
where |0⟩E denotes the vacuum state of the reservoir. After
time t > 0, the initial state (10) evolves into the following state p
with D = λ2 − 2Rλ − (ω ′ − ωc )2 − 2i(ω ′ − ωc )λ. In the
|ψ (t)⟩ = C− (t) |−⟩S |0⟩E + C+ (t) |+⟩S |0⟩E dressed-state basis {|+⟩, |−⟩}, the reduced density matrix of
X the system at time t reads,
+ Ck (t) |−⟩S |1k ⟩E , (11)  
k |C+ (0)|2 |G(t)|2 C∗0 (0)C+ (0)G(t)
ρ(t) =  ,
where |1k ⟩E is the state of the reservoir with only one excita- ∗ ∗
C0 (0)C+ (0)G (t) 1 − |C+ (0)| |G(t)|
2 2
tion in the kth mode. Solving the Schrödinger equation enables (17)
us to obtain the time evolution of the probability amplitudes
which are governed by a series of differential equations, and writing the dynamics of the above two-level system in the
X ′
operator-sum representation gives,
−ωk )t
Ċ+ (t) = −i gk′ Ck (t) ei(ω ,
k X
2
′ ρ (t) = Λ (ρ (0)) = Ki (t) ρ (0) K†i (t) , (18)
Ċk (t) = −i gk′ C+ (t) e−i(ω −ωk )t
. (12) i =1

If we assume that Ck (0) = 0, so a closed equation for C+ (t) is where the corresponding Kraus operators Ki (t) can be easily
derived as follows obtained as
ˆ t  
dC+ (t) G(t) 0
= − f (t − t ′ ) C+ (t ′ ) dt ′ , (13) K1 (t) =  ,
dt 0
0 1
in which the kernel f(t − t ′ ) is the correlation function defined  
0 0
in terms of continuous limits of the environment frequency as
K2 (t) =  p , (19)
ˆ 1 − |G(t)|2 0
′ ′
f (t − t ) = dωJ (ω) ei(ω −ω)(t−t ) ,
′
(14)
P2
with i =1 K†i (t)Ki (t) = I. At the end, we find the Kraus oper-
where J(ω) is the spectral density of the reservoir and here we ators (19) in the old basis {|e⟩, |g⟩} as follows
assume that it has the Lorentzian spectral density of the form  
G(t) + 1 G(t) − 1
1
f1 (t) =  ,
1 λR K
J (ω) = , (15) 2
2π (ω − ωc )2 + λ2 G(t) − 1 G(t) + 1
p  
−1 −1
where the parameter λ indicates the spectral width, R the coup- f2 (t) = 1 − |G(t)| 2
 .
K (20)
ling strength and ω c is the center frequency of the reservoir. It 2
1 1
is worth noting that the dynamics of open quantum systems
are critically dependent on the types of environments to which
the system is coupled. Markovian environments are character- 3. Protection process of entropic uncertainty
ized by a noise signal that has no self-correlation over any time relation
interval, i.e. they are memoryless; thus, the coupling between
systems and these environments typically results in a quantum To examine the influence of the classical driving field on the
irreversible process. However, non-Markovian environments EULB in the presence of decoherence, we suppose that the
can feed back part of the information they have absorbed dur- maximal correlated state
ing the interaction into the systems due to memory effects. 1
According to [21], in the weak coupling regime (λ > 2R), the |ϕ ⟩AB = √ (|e, e⟩ + |g, g⟩) , (21)
2
evolutionary process exhibits Markovian behavior, while in
the strong coupling regime (λ < 2R), non-Markovian dynam- which is initially shared between the particles of Alice and Bob
ics occur, accompanied by an oscillatory reversible decay. and then let the Bob’s particle couples with a environment as

3
Laser Phys. 34 (2024) 075202 H Hajihoseinlou and B Ahansaz

   
1−η 1−η 1+η 1+η
S(ρσ̂x B ) = − log2 − log2
2 4 2 4
1 |G(t)|2 |G(t)|2 1 − |G(t)|2
S(ρσ̂z B ) = − log2 −
2 2 2 2
1 − |G(t)|2
× log2 , (24)
2
p
where η = 1 − |G(t)|2 + |G(t)|4 . So, the left-hand side
(LHS) of equation (7) is obtained as

1 1−η 1−η 1+η 1+η

UL = − log2 ( )− log2 ( )
Figure 1. Schematic representation of the setup where Alice 2 2 4 2 4
performs measurement on her particle and quantum memory |G(t)|2 |G(t)|2 1 − |G(t)|2 1 − |G(t)|2
interacts with the environment. During the interaction with the − log2 − log2
2 2 2 2
environment, quantum memory is driven by a classical driving field.  
|G(t)|2
− Sbin , (25)
2
an open quantum system, as depicted in figure 1. During the
interaction with the environment, the system is independently where Sbin (x) = −x log2 x − (1 − x) log2 (1 − x). And the right-
driven by a classical driving field. Subsequently, Alice per- hand side (RHS) of equation (7) is given by
forms her measurement on the quantum state of the prepared
 
particle and declares her choice of measurement to Bob. Then, 1 − |G (t) |2
Bob tracks to minimize his uncertainty regarding the outcome UR = 1 + Sbin
2
of Alice’s measurement.  
|G (t) |2
If only the quantum memory B interacts with the envir- − Sbin + max{0, δ}, (26)
onment, the dynamics of the bipartite quantum state can be 2
obtained by using the Kraus operators (20), as follows
with the following δ
2 
X   †    
ρAB (t) = I ⊗ Kei (t) |φ⟩⟨φ| I ⊗ Kei (t) , (22) 1 1−η 1−η 1+η 1+η
δ=− − log2 − log2
i =1 2 2 4 2 4
|G (t) |2 |G (t) |2 1 − |G (t) |2 1 − |G (t) |2
where the explicit forms of the matrix elements of density − log2 − log2
operator ρAB (t) in the standard computational basis set {|1⟩ ≡ 2 2 2 2
   
|e, e⟩, |2⟩ ≡ |e, g⟩, |3⟩ ≡ |g, e⟩, |4⟩ ≡ |g, g⟩}, become 1 − |G (t) | 2
|G (t) | 2
− Sbin − Sbin . (27)
2 2
(1,1) 1 + Re{G(t)}
(4,4)
ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) = , Herein, we aim to introduce an efficient entanglement wit-
4
(1,4) (4,1) |G(t)|2 + Re{G(t)} ness measure based on the uncertainty relations by employing
ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) = , the Adabi inequality (7). As we know, S(A|B) < 0 is typically
4
(1,2) (2,1) ∗ (4,3) (3,4) ∗ considered an indicator of entanglement. Therefore, we recon-
ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) figure equation (7) as follows:
|G(t)| − iIm{G(t)} − 1
2
= ,     1
4 S Q̂|B + S R̂|B − max {0.δ} ⩾ log2 + S (A|B) . (28)
(2,3) (3,2) |G(t)|2 − Re{G(t)} c
ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) = ,
4
1 − Re{G(t)} Based on the above equation, if the inequality S(Q̂|B) +
(2,2) (3,3)
ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) = , S(R̂|B) − max{0.δ} < log2 1c is true, then the inequality
4
(3,1) (1,3) ∗ (2,4) (4,2) ∗
S(A|B) < 0 must also hold, indicating the existence of entan-
ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) = ρAB (t) glement between the particles of Alice and Bob. It should be
iIm{G(t)} emphasized that although negative conditional Von Neumann
= , (23) entropy, S(A|B), is a signature of entanglement, the converse
4
is not necessarily true [38]. This means that not all entangled
(m,n)
in which the above matrix elements are derived by ρAB (t) = states necessarily exhibit negative conditional Von Neumann
⟨m|ρAB (t)|n⟩ (m, n = 1, 2, 3, 4). entropy.
Alice and Bob reach an agreement on measuring two In addition, we use concurrence as another measure of
observables σˆx and σ̂z . So, the von Neumann entropy of the entanglement to quantify the degree of entanglement between
post measurement states are given by the particles of Alice and Bob [39]. The analytical form for

4
Laser Phys. 34 (2024) 075202 H Hajihoseinlou and B Ahansaz

the concurrence of a given bipartite quantum state can be

expressed as follows:
n p p p p o
C (ρ) = max 0, λ1 − λ2 − λ3 − λ4 , (29)

in which λi ’s are the eigenvalues,

p√ √ in decreasing order, of the
Hermitian matrix R = ρρ̃ ρ with ρ̃ = (σyA ⊗ σyB )ρ∗ (σyA ⊗
σyB ). Here ρ∗ means the complex conjugation of ρ and σ y is
the Pauli matrix. Therefore, the following analytical form for
the concurrence of the given bipartite quantum state (22) is
obtained as

C (ρAB (t)) = 2|G (t) |. (30)

The entanglement witness of the bipartite quantum state (22)

in the Markovian regime with λ = 1.5R, is depicted in
figure 2(a). Here, we choose the two complementary observ-
ables σ̂x and σ̂z as the measurements operators, which leads to
the maximal complementarity between them; that is, c = 1/2
and thus log2 (1/c) = 1. It is evident that increasing the power
of the classical field (Ω) leads to an increase in the regions
where entanglement is witnessed. This means that, for this
case, the entanglement regions witnessed by them are approx-
imately [0, 1.2], [0, 5.7] and [0, 31.6] for Ω = 0, 2R, 5R respect-
ively. Moreover, the amount of entanglement, as quantified
by concurrence in the Markovian regime with λ = 1.5R is
depicted in figure 2(c). As expected, environmental effects will
degrade the entanglement. However, as shown in figure 2(c),
increasing the power of the classical field (Ω) reduces the rate
of entanglement degradation, thereby preserving the entangle-
ment for longer periods.
Figure 2(e) illustrates the evolution of the EULB over time
in the Markovian regime with λ = 1.5R. It is evident that the
bound of the EULB increases over time due to environmental
effects. Nevertheless, the rapid escalation of uncertainty over Figure 2. Dynamics of (a), (b) entanglement witness, (c), (d)
time can be mitigated by enhancing the strength of the clas- concurrence and (e), (f) EULB of the two complementary
sical field. A comparison of figures 2(a), (c) and (e) reveals observables σ̂x and σ̂z as a function of dimensionless quantity Rt in
that not only is it feasible to maintain the quantum correla- the (a), (c), (e) Markovian regime λ = 1.5R and (b), (d), (f)
tions between two parts of a quantum system by employing non-Markovian regime λ = 0.2R for driving field strengths of
Ω = 0, 2R, 5R. Here, the maximally entangled state (21) is prepared
the classical field, but it is also possible to curb the swift rise of between Alice and Bob and the used parameters are ω0 = 1R and
the EULB using the same field. This main event is predictable, ωc = 1R.
because as mentioned earlier, the uncertainty in the presence
of the memory particle has the opposite relationship with the
quantum correlation. inferred that an increase in entanglement leads to a decrease
In addition, the entanglement witness, concurrence, EULB in uncertainty. Furthermore, it is noteworthy that in the non-
over time in the non-Markovian regime with λ = 0.2R are Markovian regime, the fluctuating behavior of entanglement
depicted in figures 2(b),(d) and (f), respectively. Similar to and quantum uncertainty is caused by the return of informa-
the previous discussion in the Markovian regime, it is obvi- tion from the environment to the system, which occurs at cer-
ous that the entanglement regions are increased by growing the tain time intervals.
power of the classical field (Ω). And according to figure 2(d), For a better understanding of the EULB behavior in both the
we observe that the environmental effects reduce entangle- Markovian and non-Markovian regimes, we present the EULB
ment; however, this degradation is mitigated by applying a as a function of the driving field strength and time in figure 3.
classical field. Also, the evolution of the EULB in the non- This figure indicates that the EULB in the Markovian regime
Markovian regime increases over time but is reduced by is more resistant to changes in the classical driving field than
increasing the strength of the classical field. Thus, it can be in the non-Markovian regime.

5
Laser Phys. 34 (2024) 075202
Figure 3. Three dimensional plots of EULB of the two
complementary observables σ̂x and σ̂z as a function of
dimensionless quantity Rt and driving field strength Ω in the (a)
Markovian regime λ = 1.5R and (b) non-Markovian regime
λ = 0.2R. Here, the maximally entangled state (21) is prepared
between Alice and Bob and the used parameters are ω0 = 1R and
ωc = 1R.
4. Conclusions
To summarize, we have investigated the lower bound of
entropic uncertainty in the presence of an external classical
driving field. We have demonstrated how this field can reduce
the EULB within the Berta relation. Our findings indicate
that the EULB and entanglement exhibit inverse behaviors.
Generally, it has been observed that the external classical
field preserves quantum correlations and diminishes the lower
6
H Hajihoseinlou and B Ahansaz
bound of the uncertainty relations in both Markovian and non-
Markovian regimes.
References
[1] Heisenberg W 1927 The actual content of quantum theoretical
kinematics and mechanics Z. Phys. 43 172
[2] Kennard E H 1927 Zur quantenmechanik einfacher
bewegungstypen Z. Phys. 44 326
[3] Robertson H P 1929 The uncertainty principle Phys. Rev.
34 163
[4] Schrödinger E 1930 About Heisenberg uncertainty relation
Proc. Prussian Acad. Sciences, Phys. Math., XIX 296
[5] Kraus K 1987 Complementary observables and uncertainty
relations Phys. Rev. D 35 3070
[6] Maassen H and Uffink J B M 1988 Generalized entropic
uncertainty relations Phys. Rev. Lett. 60 1103
[7] Berta M, Christandl M, Colbeck R, Renes J M and Renner R
2010 The uncertainty principle in the presence of quantum
memory Nat. Phys. 6 659
[8] Pati A K, Wilde M M, Usha Devi A R, Rajagopal A K and
Sudha S 2012 Quantum discord and classical correlation
can tighten the uncertainty principle in the presence of
quantum memory Phys. Rev. A 86 042105
[9] Adabi F, Salimi S and Haseli S 2016 Tightening the entropic
uncertainty bound in the presence of quantum memory
Phys. Rev. A 93 062123
[10] Chen M N, Wang D and Ye L 2019 Characterization of
dynamical measurement’s uncertainty in a two-qubit system
coupled with bosonic reservoirs Phys. Lett. A 383 977
[11] Ming F, Wang D and Ye L 2019 Dynamical measurementas
uncertainty in the curved space-time Ann. Phys.
531 1900014
[12] Wang D, Shi W N, Hoehn R D, Ming F, Sun W Y, Kais S and
Ye L 2018 Effects of hawking radiation on the entropic
uncertainty in a schwarzschild space-time Ann. Phys.
530 1800080
[13] Prevedel R, Hamel D R, Colbeck R, Fisher K and Resch K J
2011 Experimental investigation of the uncertainty principle
in the presence of quantum memory and its application to
witnessing entanglement Nat. Phys. 7 757
[14] Li C-F, Xu J-S, Xu X-Y, Li K and Guo G-C 2011
Experimental investigation of the entanglement-assisted
entropic uncertainty principle Nat. Phys. 7 752
[15] Shi J, Ding Z, Wu T, He J, Yu L, Sun W, Wang D and Ye L
2017 Entanglement witness via quantum-memory-assisted
entropic uncertainty relation Laser Phys. Lett. 14 125208
[16] Tomamichel M, Lim C C W, Gisin N and Renner R 2012 Tight
finite-key analysis for quantum cryptography Nat. Commun.
3 634
[17] Ng N H Y, Berta M and Wehner S 2012 Min-entropy
uncertainty relation for finite-size cryptography Phys. Rev.
A 86 042315
[18] Ekert A K 1991 Quantum cryptography based on Bell’s
theorem Phys. Rev. Lett. 67 661
[19] Renes J M and Boileau J C 2009 Conjectured strong
complementary information tradeoff Phys. Rev. Lett.
103 020402
[20] Haseli S, Dolatkhah H, Rangani Jahromi H, Salimi S and
Khorashad A S 2020 The lower bound of quantum
memory-assisted entropic uncertainty and secret rate for
two topological qubits under environments Opt. Commun.
461 125287
[21] Breuer H P and Petruccione F 2002 The Theory of Open
Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press)
Laser Phys. 34 (2024) 075202
[22] Facchi P, Lidar D A and Pascazio S 2004 Unification of
dynamical decoupling and the quantum zeno effect Phys.
Rev. A 69 032314
[23] Maniscalco S, Francica F, Zaffino R L, Gullo N L
and Plastina F 2008 Protecting entanglement
via the quantum Zeno effect Phys. Rev. Lett.
100 090503
[24] Basit A, Badshah F, Ali H and Ge G-Q 2017
Protecting quantum coherence and discord from
decoherence of depolarizing noise via weak
measurement and measurement reversal Europhys.
Lett. 118 30002
[25] Huang Z and Situ H 2017 Optimal protection of quantum
coherence in noisy environment Int. J. Theor. Phys.
56 503
[26] An N B 2013 Protecting entanglement of atoms stored in a
common nonperfect cavity without measurements Phys.
Lett. A 337 2520
[27] Behzadi N, Ahansaz B and Faizi E 2017 Quantum coherence
and entanglement preservation in Markovian and
non-Markovian dynamics via additional qubits Eur. Phys. J.
D 71 280
[28] Man Z X, Xia Y J and Lo Franco R 2015 Cavity-based
architecture to preserve quantum coherence and
entanglement Sci. Rep. 5 13843
[29] Zhang Y J, Han W, Xia Y J and Fan H 2017
Classical-driving-assisted entanglement dynamics control
Ann. Phys. 379 187
[30] Liao Q H, Zhang Q, Xu J, Yan Q R, Liu Y and Chen A 2016
Control and transfer of entanglement between two atoms
H Hajihoseinlou and B Ahansaz
driven by classical fields under dressed-state representation
Commun. Theor. Phys. 65 684
[31] Zhang J S, Xu J B and Lin Q 2009 Controlling entanglement
sudden death in cavity QED by classical driving fields Eur.
Phys. J. D 51 283
[32] Nourmandipour A, Vafafard A, Mortezapour A and Franzosi R
2021 Entanglement protection of classically driven qubits in
a lossy cavity Sci. Rep. 11 16259
[33] Haseli S, Dolatkhah H, Salimi S and Khorashad A S 2019
Controlling the entropic uncertainty lower bound in
two-qubit systems under decoherence Laser Phys. Lett.
16 045207
[34] Haseli S and Ahmadi F 2019 Holevo bound of entropic
uncertainty relation under Unruh channel in the context of
open quantum systems Eur. Phys. J. D 73 65
[35] Zhang Y J, Han W, Xia Y J, Cao J P and Fan H 2015
Classical-driving-assisted quantum speed-up Phys. Rev. A
91 032112
[36] Xiao X, Fang M F and Li Y L 2010 Non-Markovian dynamics
of two qubits driven by classical fields: population trapping
and entanglement preservation J. Phys. B: At. Mol. Opt.
Phys. 43 185505
[37] Huang Z and Situ H 2017 Non-Markovian dynamics of
quantum coherence of two-level system driven by classical
field Quantum Inf. Process. 16 1–17
[38] Vempati M, Ganguly N, Chakrabarty I and Pati A K 2021
Witnessing negative conditional entropy Phys. Rev. A
104 012417
[39] Wootters W K 1998 Entanglement of formation of an arbitrary
state of two qubits Phys. Rev. Lett. 80 2245