text:
# Inverse scattering approach to coupled higher order nonlinear Schrödinger equation and 𝑁-soliton solutions

## 1 Introduction

Optical soliton since it’s discovery occupies a distinguished position in the nonlinear optics research and it is regarded as the next generation carrier in an all-optical communication system. Because of their remarkable stability solitons are capable of propagating long distance without attenuation . Theoretical study of optical soliton began as early as in seventies with the landmark discovery by Hasegawa and Tappert . They had shown that the nonlinear Schrödinger equation(NLSE) studied by Zakharov and Shabat  (but with space and time interchanged) is the appropriate equation for describing the propagation of pico-second optical pulses in optical fibers. Later on Mollenauer etal.  successfully demonstrated the transmission of pico-second optical solitons through a monomode fiber. Recently Kodama and Hasegawa  proposed a modified NLS model, known as the higher order nonlinear Schrödinger equation (HNLSE), which is suitable for the propagation of femto-second optical pulse. Untill now only two integrable HNLS equations  which has soliton solutions are known. The dynamics of HNLSE not only takes care of dispersion loss but also takes care of the propagation loss as the optical soliton propagate along the fiber. This is due to the fact that the stimulated Raman scattering effect, which compensates the propagation loss, already exists in the spectrum of the HNLS equation. As a consequence a short pulse can propagate as a soliton for a long distance without distortion. Therefore the importance of the study of HNLS system and to find their soliton solution is unquestionable. The soliton solution may be obtained by several methods like Hirota’s bilinear method , Lie group theory  and inverse scattering method (IST) . The IST is the most elegant and one of the most widely used technique, which eventually proves the complete integrability of the system.

It has been known that a good number of soliton equations in nonlinear optics have multifield generalizations. The coupled nonlinear Schrödinger equation proposed by Manakov , is one such example. It describes a system with two interacting optical fields with different states of polarizations. It has an important application in communication systems using optical solitons. Such systems have many other important applications in all optical computations , in photorefractive crystals . Recently the existence of multicomponent solitons has been discovered experimentally also . Interestingly the HNLS equation also has it’s multifield generalization and they have been studied in different physical contexts . The coupled HNLS (CHNLS) equations are particularly important for describing the dynamics of ultrashort optical pulse in a system involving two or more interacting optical fields. Recently a CHNLS equation, which incorporates the effect of third order dispersion, kerr nonlinearity and stimulated Raman scattering was proposed by Nakkeeran et. al., . The equation considered in  is given by

$$E_{k_z}+\frac{i}{2}[E_{k_{\tau \tau }}+(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}E_j^{}E_j)E_k]+ϵE_{k_{\tau \tau \tau }}+ϵ6(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}E_j^{}E_j)E_{k_\tau }+ϵ3(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}(|E_j|^2)_\tau E_k)=0$$
(1)
for $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}n`$. It describes the evolution of a complex vector field $`E`$ with $`n`$ components, where $`n`$ is a finite integer. The suffices $`z`$ and $`\tau `$ denote the normalised space and time derivatives respectively. $`E_k`$ and $`E_k^{}`$ respectively represent the amplitude of the $`k`$th component of a slowly varying field and it’s complex conjugate. $`ϵ`$ is an independent parameter. They have also shown the integrability of (1) through the existence of Lax pair and obtained the one soliton solution (1SS) of (1) through Bac̈klund transformation. Existence of Lax pair although indicates the integrability of the system but a conclusive sense of integrability is achieved if the system possess an infinite number of conserved charges . It is important to note that the equation (1) is the multifield generalization of the Sasa-Satsuma equation . Interestingly for Sasa-Satsuma (scalar) equation two different 1SS were reported in . One is the convensional $`sech`$ solution having a single peak and the other is a complex combination of $`sech`$ function having two peaks. In view of the connection between the Sasa-Satsuma equation and it’s multifield generalization it is expected that the latter equation should also admit both type of soliton solutions. It should be mentioned that the 1SS with $`sech`$ envelope function has been obtained in . However, it remained to show that (1) admit a more general class of solutions. The existence of the higher order solitons, which are important to study the soliton interactions also remained unexplored. A possible reason for this may be the difficulty involved in solving the linear problem associated with the system. It is important to note that for a completly integrable system it is necessary that the system possess $`N`$-soliton solution.

Our objective in this paper is to obtain the whole hierarchy of the conserved charges in a systemetic way to establish integrability of (1) conclusively. We complete the investigation of higher order soliton solutions for (1) by deriving the exact $`N`$-soliton solutions for the system. We invoke the inverse scattering method for an ($`2n+1\times 2n+1`$) dimensional eigenvalue problem and obtain the $`N`$-soliton solution by solving the set of ($`2n+1`$) Gelfand-Levitan-Marchenko (GLM) equations. Subsequently we discuss some important characteristics of the 1SS.

The paper is organized in the following sequence. In section 2 we use a set of variable transformations to cast the CHNLS equation into a form, suitable for the inverse scattering transform. Subsequently we study the linear problem associated with the modified system. In section 3 we show the existence of infinite number of conserved quantities by solving a set of coupled Riccati equations. The IST scheme and the properties of the scattering data are studied and the generalized GLM equations are derived in the section 4. The exact $`N`$-soliton solution is obtained in section 5. In Section 6 two class of solutions of the CHNLS equation are discussed. Section 7 is the concluding one.

## 2 Eigenvalue problem

In order to investigate (1) we use the following change of variables and a Galelian transformation,

$`q_k(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`E_k(z,\tau )e^{\frac{i}{6ϵ}(\tau \frac{z}{18ϵ})},`$ (2)
$`t`$ $`=`$ $`z,`$ (3)
$`x`$ $`=`$ $`\tau {\displaystyle \frac{z}{12ϵ}}`$ (4)
Thus we get a set of complex modified K-dV equations (CMKDV)

$$q_{kt}+ϵq_{kxxx}+6ϵ(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}q_j^{}q_j)q_{k}^{}{}_{x}{}^{}+3ϵ(\underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}(|q_j|^2)_xq_k)=0$$
(5)
We use $`x`$ and $`t`$ in (5) and in the subsequent expressions to denote the derivatives with respect to $`x`$ and $`t`$ respectively. The associated spectral problem of (5) may be represented by a pair of linear eigenvalue equations.

$$_x\mathrm{\Psi }=L(x,t,\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi }$$
(6)
$$_t\mathrm{\Psi }=M(x,t,\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi }$$
(7)
where $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$ is the ($`2n+1`$) dimensional auxiliary field and $`\lambda `$ is the time independent spectral parameter. The pair of matrices ($`L,M`$) is called the Lax pair. The explicit form of the Lax pair has been given in . With slight modifications (see eq. 11 in ) we express the Lax pair ($`L,M`$ ) by using a pair of matrices ($`\mathrm{\Sigma },A`$), where $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is a c-no. diagonal matrix and the matrix $`A(x,t)`$ is a potential function of the eigenvalue problem and consists of the dynamical fields, $`q_k(x,t)`$ and $`q_k^{}(x,t)`$ only,

$`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{2n}{}}}e_{kk}e_{2n+12n+1}`$
$`A(x,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(q_k(x,t)e_{2k12n+1}`$ (8)
$`+`$ $`q_k^{}(x,t)e_{2k2n+1}q_k^{}(x,t)e_{2n+12k1}q_k(x,t)e_{2n+12k})`$
where, $`e_{kj}`$ is an ($`2n+1\times 2n+1`$) dimensional matrix whose only $`(kj)`$th element is unity, the rest elements being zero. By using the properties of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`A`$
viz,

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }A+A\mathrm{\Sigma }=0,\mathrm{\Sigma }^2=1$$

we write the Lax matrices in a simplified form,

$`L`$ $`=`$ $`i\lambda \mathrm{\Sigma }+A`$
$`M`$ $`=`$ $`ϵ(A_{xx}+2i\lambda \mathrm{\Sigma }A_x(AA_xA_xA)2i\lambda \mathrm{\Sigma }A^2+2A^3+4\lambda ^2A4i\lambda ^3\mathrm{\Sigma })`$
The Lax pairs given by (2) is also valid upto an additive constant, since a constant commutes with all other matrices. We assume the constant to be zero for simplicity. The consistency of the Lax equations (6, 7) gives the nonlinear evolution equation for the matrix $`A`$,

$$A_t+ϵ(A_{xxx}3(A_xA^2+3A^2A_x))=0$$
(10)
which is nothing but the matrix form of the equation (5). Although the existence of a Lax pair is itself a sign of the integrability of (5) vis. a. vis. (1), it remains to show that the system also possess infinite number of conserved quantities and admit $`N`$-soliton solutions.

## 3 Conserved quantities

In order to obtain the conserved quantities first we derive the associated Riccati equations. To this aim we write the Lax equation (6) in the component form. For the first $`2n`$ components of $`\mathrm{\Psi }`$, the equation (6) can be written in the form

$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{2k1x}`$ $`=`$ $`i\lambda \mathrm{\Psi }_{2k1}+q_k\mathrm{\Psi }_{2n+1}`$
$`\mathrm{\Psi }_{2kx}`$ $`=`$ $`i\lambda \mathrm{\Psi }_{2k1}+q_k^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{2n+1}`$ (11)
for $`k=1,2,\mathrm{},n`$. But the ($`2n+1`$)-th component has a different form

$$\mathrm{\Psi }_{2n+1x}=i\lambda \mathrm{\Psi }_{2n+1}\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}(q_k^{}\mathrm{\Psi }_{2k1}+q_k\mathrm{\Psi }_{2k})$$
(12)
Following now a similar procedure as in  we write,

$$\mathrm{\Gamma }_k=\frac{\mathrm{\Psi }_k}{\mathrm{\Psi }_{2n+1}}$$
(13)
for $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}2n`$. By using (3, 12, 13) we may obtain a set of first order differential equations,

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k1}`$ $`+`$ $`2i\lambda \mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k1}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(q_k^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2j1}+q_k\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k1}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2j})q_k=0`$ (14)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k}`$ $`+`$ $`2i\lambda \mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(q_k\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2j1}+q_k^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2j})q_k^{}=0`$ (15)
which are known as the Riccati equations. The solution of the equations are related to the conserved quantities ($`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}`$) in the following way

$$ln\alpha _{2n+12n+1}(\lambda )=ln\mathrm{\Psi }_ni\lambda x|_{x\pm \mathrm{}}=_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}𝑑x\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}(q_k\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k1}+q_k^{}\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k})$$
(16)
We will see in the section 4 that $`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}`$ is the diagonal element of the scattering matrix and it is time independent.

In order to solve Riccati equations (14) and (15) we assume $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k1}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k}`$ in the form

$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k1}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}C_p^{2k1}(x)\lambda ^p`$ (17)
$`\mathrm{\Gamma }_{2k}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{p=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}}C_p^{2k}(x)\lambda ^p`$ (18)
Substituting (17,18 ) in (14) we get

$`C_0^{2k1}`$ $`=`$ $`0,C_1^{2k1}={\displaystyle \frac{q_k}{2i}}`$ (19)
$`2iC_{p+2}^{2k1}`$ $`=`$ $`(C_{p+1}^{2k1})_x+{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{p+1}{}}}(C_{pm+1}^{2k1}C_m^{2l1}q_l^{}+C_{pm+1}^{2k1}C_m^{2l}q_l)`$ (20)
similarly substituting (17,18) in (15) we get

$`C_0^{2k}`$ $`=`$ $`0,C_1^{2k}={\displaystyle \frac{q_k}{2i}}`$ (21)
$`2iC_{p+2}^{2k}`$ $`=`$ $`(C_{p+1}^{2k})_x+{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{n}{}}}{\displaystyle \underset{m=0}{\overset{p+1}{}}}(C_{pm+1}^{2k}C_m^{2l1}q_l^{}+C_{pm+1}^{2k}C_m^{2l}q_l)`$ (22)
Now the infinite number of Hamiltonians (conserved quantities) may explicitly be determined in terms of the $`q_k,q_k^{}`$ and their derivatives by expanding $`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}`$ in the form

$$ln(\alpha _{2n+12n+1})=n\underset{l=0}{\overset{\mathrm{}}{}}\frac{(1)^l}{(2i)^{2l+1}}H_l\lambda ^1$$
(23)
The first few conserved quantities are given by

$`H_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle 𝑑x\underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}q_k^{}q_k}`$ (24)
$`H_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle }dx(2{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}|q_k|^2)^2{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}q_{kx}^{}q_{kx})`$ (25)
$`H_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{n}}{\displaystyle }dx[{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}q_{kxx}^{}q_{kxx}+2({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}|q_k|^2)^3({\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}(|q_k|^2)_x)^2`$ (26)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}|q_k|^2{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}q_{kx}^{}q_{kx}{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{n}{}}}q_k^{}q_{kx}{\displaystyle \underset{l=1}{\overset{n}{}}}q_{lx}^{}q_{lx}`$
Notice that the hamiltonians with odd indices only survive. The even indexed hamiltonians become trivial. It is easy to see using the equation of motion that $`H_1,H_3,H_5`$ are indeed the constants of motion. If we choose the field $`q`$, a scalar field then we are able to show that $`H_1,H_3,H_5`$ reduce to the conserved quantities for the scalar Sasa-Satsuma equation .

## 4 Gelfand-Levitan-Marchenko equations

We now generalise the inverse scattering method for the ($`2n+1\times 2n+1`$) dimensional Lax operators (2). The generalization however, is a nontrivial one and crucially depends on the scattering data matrix. we have broadly followed the treatment of Manakov, developed in the context of $`3\times 3`$ Lax operators .

In order to formulate the scattering problem we assume that the family of Jost functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{(k=1,2,\mathrm{}2n+1)}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{(k=1,2,\mathrm{}2n+1)}`$ of (6) satisfy the following boundary conditions for real values of $`\lambda `$,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^{(k)}|_x\mathrm{}e_ke^{i\lambda x}$$
(27)
for $`k=1,2\mathrm{}2n`$, but the $`(2n+1)`$-th component satisfies a different boundary condition

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^{(2n+1)}|_x\mathrm{}e_{2n+1}e^{i\lambda x}$$
(28)
Similarly, other set of Jost functions satisfy the boundary conditions,

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{(k)}|_x\mathrm{}e_ke^{i\lambda x}$$
(29)
for $`k=1,2\mathrm{}2n`$ and the $`(2n+1)`$-th component satisfies,

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{(2n+1)}|_x\mathrm{}e_{2n+1}e^{i\lambda x}.$$
(30)
In the equations (27-30) $`e_k`$’s are the basis vectors in an $`(2n+1)`$-dimensional vector space. Note that the set of jost functions (27-30) also satisfy the orthogonality condition, That is,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^{(k)}\mathrm{\Phi }^{(j)}=\mathrm{\Psi }^{(k)}\mathrm{\Psi }^{(j)}=\delta _{kj}$$
(31)
for $`k,j=1,2,\mathrm{}2n+1`$. Since vectors $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{(k)}`$ form a complete set of solutions of (6) hence,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^{(k)}(x,\lambda )=\underset{j=1}{\overset{2n+1}{}}\alpha _{kj}(\lambda )\mathrm{\Psi }^{(j)}(x,\lambda )$$
(32)
where $`\alpha _{kj}(\lambda )`$ is the $`(kj)^{th}`$ element of scattering data matrix (det\[$`\alpha _{kj}`$\]=1). Using (31) and (32), $`\alpha _{kj}`$ is expressed in the form

$$\alpha _{kj}(\lambda )=\mathrm{\Psi }^{(j)}(x,\lambda )\mathrm{\Phi }^{(k)}(x,\lambda )$$
(33)
It is interesting to see that using the unitary property of \[$`\alpha _{kj}`$\] we can write $`\alpha _{kj}^{}`$ as the cofactor of the elements of the matrix \[$`\alpha _{kj}`$\], that is,

$$\alpha _{2n+1k}^{}=(1)^{2n+1+k}det[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{2n+1k}]$$
(34)
where \[$`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{2n+1k}`$\] is an ($`2n\times 2n`$) dimensional matrix, constructed from the matrix $`[\alpha _{kj}]_{2n+12n+1}`$ with ($`2n+1`$)-th row and $`k`$-th column being omitted. Now by using (32) and (34) we obtain the following useful relations among the jost functions,

$$\frac{1}{\alpha _{2n+12n+1}^{}(\lambda )}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2n}{}}(Adj[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{2n+12n+1}])_{kj}\mathrm{\Phi }^{(j)}e^{i\lambda x}=\mathrm{\Psi }^ke^{i\lambda x}\frac{\alpha _{2n+1k}^{}(\lambda )}{\alpha _{2n+12n+1}^{}(\lambda )}\mathrm{\Psi }^{2n+1}e^{i\lambda x}$$
(35)
for $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}2n`$. The $`(2n+1)`$-th jost function satisfy another relation,

$$\frac{1}{\alpha _{2n+12n+1}}\mathrm{\Phi }^{(2n+1)}e^{i\lambda x}=\mathrm{\Psi }^{(2n+1)}e^{i\lambda x}+\frac{1}{\alpha _{2n+12n+1}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{2n}{}}\alpha _{2n+1j}\mathrm{\Psi }^je^{i\lambda x}$$
(36)
Notice that in deriving (35, 36) we have used the following property of scattering matrix,

$$\alpha _{2n+1k}^{}\delta _{ij}=\underset{l=1}{\overset{2n}{}}[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{2n+1k}]_{il}(Adj[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{2n+1k}])_{lj}$$
(37)
In order to obtain the complete analytic behaviour of the jost functions vis a vis scattering data the domain of $`\lambda `$ is extended to complex plane. It can be shown that the functions $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{(k)}e^{i\lambda x}`$ for $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}2n`$ and $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{(2n+1)}e^{i\lambda x}`$ are analytically continued into the upper half-plane ($`Im\lambda 0`$) whereas $`\mathrm{\Psi }^{(k)}e^{i\lambda x}`$ for $`k=1,2,\mathrm{}2n`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{(2n+1)}e^{i\lambda x}`$ are analytically continued into the lower half-plane. Consequently the scattering element, $`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}^{}(\lambda )`$ and all elements of the matrix \[$`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{2n+12n+1}(\lambda )`$\] are analytic in the upper half-plane and $`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}(\lambda )`$ and all elements of the matrix \[$`\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{2n+12n+1}^{}(\lambda )`$\] are analytic in the lower half-plane. It is important to note that the bound states of the eigenvalue equation (6) correspond to zeros of $`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}(\lambda )`$ in the lower half-plane. We assume that the bound states are located at $`\lambda _j^{}`$ ($`Im\lambda 0`$ ) for $`j=1,2,\mathrm{}N`$, where the jost function $`\mathrm{\Phi }^{(2n+1)}`$ becomes,

$$\mathrm{\Phi }^{(2n+1)}(x,\lambda _j^{})=\underset{m=1}{\overset{2n}{}}C_{2n+1m}^{(j)}\mathrm{\Psi }^{(m)}(x,\lambda _j^{})$$
(38)
In (38), $`C_{2n+1m}^{(j)}`$ represent the value of the scattering parameter $`\alpha _{2n+1m}`$ at the position of the $`j^{th}`$ pole.

The time dependence of the scattering data may be easily obtained from the asymptotic limit of (7), which gives the following time dependence of the scattering data.

$$\alpha _{2n+1k}(t)=\alpha _{2n+1k}(0)e^{8iϵ\lambda _j^3t}$$
(39)
$$\alpha _{2n+12n+1}(t)=\alpha _{2n+12n+1}(0),$$
(40)
$$C_{2n+1k}^{(j)}(t)=C_{2n+1k}^{(j)}(0)e^{8iϵ\lambda _j^3t}$$
(41)
$$C_{2n+12n+1}^{(j)}(t)=C_{2n+12n+1}^{(j)}(0)$$
(42)
In order to derive the GLM equation we consider an integral representation of the Jost functions

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{(j)}(x,\lambda )=e_je^{i\lambda x}+_x^{\mathrm{}}𝑑y𝐊^{(j)}(x,y)e^{i\lambda y}$$
(43)
with $`j=1,2,\mathrm{}2n`$, while the $`(2n+1)^{th}`$ Jost function is considered as

$$\mathrm{\Psi }^{(2n+1)}(x,\lambda )=e_{2n+1}e^{i\lambda x}+_x^{\mathrm{}}𝑑y𝐊^{(2n+1)}(x,y)e^{i\lambda y}.$$
(44)
where, the kernels $`𝐊^{(j)}`$ and $`𝐊^{(2n+1)}`$ are $`(2n+1)`$ dimensional column vectors, which may be written explicitly in the component form as

$$𝐊^{(j)}(\tau ,y)=\underset{m=1}{\overset{2n}{}}K_m^{(j)}(\tau ,y)e_m$$
(45)
$$𝐊^{(2n+1)}(x,y)=\underset{m=1}{\overset{2n+1}{}}K_m^{(n+1)}(x,y)e_m$$
(46)
Multiplying (36) with $`\frac{1}{2\pi }_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}e^{i\lambda y}𝑑\lambda `$, ($`y>x`$) and using (43,44,38) togather with the analytic properties of the associated scattering data we obtain the desired GLM equation for the kernet $`k^{(2n+1)}`$

$$𝐊^{(2n+1)}(x,y)+\underset{p=1}{\overset{2n}{}}e_pF_p(x+y)+\underset{p=1}{\overset{2n}{}}_x^{\mathrm{}}𝑑sk^{(p)}(x,s)F_p(s+y)=0$$
(47)
where,

$$F_p(x+y)=i\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{C_{2n+1p}^{(j)}(t)e^{i\lambda _j^{}(x+y)}}{\alpha _{2n+12n+1}^{}(\lambda _j^{})}+_{\mathrm{}}^{\mathrm{}}\frac{d\lambda }{2\pi }\frac{\alpha _{2n+1p}(\lambda )}{\alpha _{2n+12n+1}(\lambda )}e^{i\lambda (x+y)}$$
(48)
The $`^{}`$ over $`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}`$ denotes derivative with respect to $`\lambda `$.

The other integral equations for kernel $`K^p`$ is obtained from (36) in a way similar to that (47) and the resultant equations are

$$𝐊^{(p)}(x,y)+e_{2n+1}F_i^{}(x+y)+_x^{\mathrm{}}𝑑sk^{(2n+1)}(x,s)F_i^{}(s+y)=0$$
(49)
for $`p=1,2,\mathrm{}2n`$ In deriving (49) we have used the identity,

$$C_{2n+1m}^{}=\alpha _{2n+1m}^{}(\lambda _j)=\underset{i=1}{\overset{2n}{}}[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{2n+1m}(\lambda _j)]_{ki}(Adj[\stackrel{~}{\alpha }_{2n+1m}(\lambda _j)])_{il}$$
(50)
The set of equations (47,49) may be called generalized GLM equations. Substituting (46,49) in (47) we get the GLM equation for the $`p`$-th component of of the kernel $`k^{(2n+1)}`$,which is given by,

$`K_p^{(2n+1)}(x,z)+F_p(x+z)+{\displaystyle \underset{m=1}{\overset{n}{}}}({\displaystyle _x^{\mathrm{}}}dsK_p^{(2n+1)}(x,s)`$
$`+`$ $`{\displaystyle _x^{\mathrm{}}}dyF_{2m1}(y+z)F_{2m1}^{}(y+s){\displaystyle _x^{\mathrm{}}}dyF_{2m}^{}(y+z)F_{2m}(y+s))=0`$
## 5 N-soliton Solution

To obtain a closed form solution of the GLM equation (LABEL:GLM) we assume ($`\alpha _{2n+1p}(\lambda )=0`$). This is justified because our primary interest is to obtain the soliton solutions, which is obtained for the reflectionless potential. We also note that, substituting (44) in (6)we get a relation between the Kernels of the integral equations (LABEL:GLM) and the ’potential’ of the eigenvalue equation (6),

$$q_{2i1}(x)=2K_{2i1}^{(2n+1)}(x,x)$$
(52)
$$q_{2i}^{}(x)=2K_{2i}^{(2n+1)}(x,x)$$
(53)
for $`i=1,2,\mathrm{}n`$. To obtain the general $`N`$-soliton solution diagonal element of the scattering matrix, $`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}(\lambda )`$ is cosidered to have $`N`$-pairs of zeros located symmetrically about the imaginary axes in the lower-half plane. That is,

$$\alpha _{nn}(\lambda _j^{})=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{(\lambda \lambda _j^{})(\lambda +\lambda _j)}{(\lambda \lambda _j)(\lambda +\lambda _j^{})}$$
(54)
Note that unlike the CNLSE, where a zero corresponds to a single soliton, in the CSSE a pair of zeros corresponds to a single soliton. Finally we solve the set of GLM equations, by assuming that kernel of the integral equations are of the form,

$$K_p^{(2n+1)}(x,z)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}R_{pj}(x,t)e^{\lambda _j^{}x}+S_{pj}(x,t)e^{\lambda _jx}$$
(55)
and we obtain the $`N`$-soliton solution of (5) for the $`k^{th}`$ component of the field,

$$q_k(z,\tau )=2\underset{j=1}{\overset{2N}{}}(\text{B}\text{C}^1)_{kj}e^{i\lambda _j^{}x}$$
(56)
B and C in (56) are respectively $`2n\times 2N`$ and $`2N\times 2N`$ matrices whose elements $`b_{kj},c_{kj}`$ are given by,

$$b_{kj}=\left\{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{p_{kj}e^{i\lambda _j^{}x}1jN}{0N+1j2N}\right\}$$
(57)
and

$`c_{lm}=\{{\displaystyle \genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\frac{{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{2n}{}}}p_{km}p_{kj+N}e^{i(2\lambda _{j+N}^{}+\lambda _l^{}+\lambda _m^{})x}}{(\lambda _l^{}+\lambda _{j+N}^{})(\lambda _m^{}+\lambda _{j+N}^{})}\delta _{lm}1mN,}{{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}\frac{{\displaystyle \underset{k=1}{\overset{2n}{}}}p_{km}p_{kj}e^{i(2\lambda _j^{}+\lambda _l^{}+\lambda _m^{})x}}{(\lambda _l^{}+\lambda _j^{})(\lambda _m^{}+\lambda _j^{})}\delta _{lm}N+1m2N,}}`$ (58)
where,

$$p_{kj}=i\frac{C_{2n+1k}^{(j)}(t)}{\alpha {}_{}{}^{}{}_{2n+12n+1}{}^{}(\lambda _j^{})}$$
(59)
with the constraints

$`\lambda _{j+N}`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda _j^{}`$ (60)
$`p_{kj+N}`$ $`=`$ $`p_{kj}^{}`$ (61)
for $`j=1,\mathrm{},N`$. The $`N`$\- soliton solution for the equation (1) is obtained from (57) by using the inverse variable transformations (2,3,4).

## 6 One soliton solution

The one soliton solution for (5) is obtained by choosing $`N=1`$ in (56). It implies from (54), that $`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}(\lambda _j)`$ has a pair of zeros located symmetrically about the imaginary line in the lower half-plane. We assign them as ($`\lambda _1,\lambda _1^{}`$), where $`\lambda _1=(\xi +i\eta )/2`$ with $`\xi ,\eta >0`$. By reinstating the transformations (2,3,4) in (56) we obtain the $`k`$-th component of one soliton solution for (1), which is given as,

$$E_k(z,\tau )=\frac{2\eta p_{k1}e^{iB}(e^A+ce^A)}{\sqrt{{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2n}{}}}p_{j1}}(|c|^1e^{2A}+|c|e^{2A}+2|c|)}$$
(62)
where

$`A=`$ $`=`$ $`\eta \tau \eta ϵ(\eta ^23\xi ^2+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12ϵ^2}})z\gamma `$ (63)
$`B`$ $`=`$ $`\xi \tau +\xi ϵ(\xi ^23\eta ^2{\displaystyle \frac{1}{12ϵ^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{108ϵ^3\xi }})z+\delta `$ (64)
$`c`$ $`=`$ $`1i{\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{\xi }}`$ (65)
$`e^{\gamma +i\delta }`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{|{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2n}{}}}p_{j1}|}{\eta c^{}}}`$ (66)
Notice that each component of the soliton solution (62) is defined completely by a set of four parameters viz, $`\eta `$,$`\xi `$, $`p_{k1}`$, and $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2n}{}}}p_{j1}`$. It represents an envelope wave moving with a group velocity, $`ϵ(\eta ^23\xi ^2+\frac{1}{12ϵ^2})`$ undergoing internal oscillation. Interestingly the group velocity depends on both real part ($`\eta `$) and imaginary part ($`\xi `$) of $`\lambda _1`$. If we specialize to the scalar limit of the CHNLS equation the solution (62) reduces to the one soliton solution of the Sasa-Satsuma equation (see Eqs 42. in ). In order to investigate the shape of the pulse we take the derivative of $`|E_k|^2`$ with respect to $`\tau `$. This gives the following conditions for maxima of $`|E_k|^2`$,

$$e^{2A}=|c|^22\pm \sqrt{(|c|^22)^2|c|^2}=0$$
(67)
It is clear from (67) that for $`|c|`$, such that $`1|c|2`$ the solution has a single peak. Interestingly however, for $`|c|>2`$, there are two values (real) for $`e^{2A}`$, that is (62) has two maxima. This corresponds to two peaks. As $`|c|`$ increases further the two peaks gradually shifts apart from each other. Finally at $`|c|\mathrm{}`$, that is, when the two zeros of $`\alpha _{2n+12n+1}`$ merge on the imaginary line in the lower half-plane the solution (62) then reduces to,

$$E_k(z,\tau )=\frac{\eta p_{k1}}{\sqrt{{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{2n}{}}}p_{j1}}}sech(\eta \tau ϵ\eta ^3z+\frac{1}{12ϵ}z)e^{i(\frac{\tau }{6ϵ}\frac{1}{108ϵ^2}z)}$$
(68)
It is important to note that the phase factor arises in (68) is purely from the variable transformations (2,3, 4). The solution (68) represents an wave moving with a group velocity, $`(ϵ\eta ^2+\frac{1}{12ϵ})`$. Unlike the earlier case (62), the group velocity depends only on the real part $`\eta `$ of $`\lambda _1`$. This is the solution reported in . It is important to note that the shape of the solitons remains invariant with respect to space and time for all values of $`|c|`$. The two class of solutions obtained for 1SS may be extended straightforwardly for $`N`$\- soliton solutions.

## 7 Conclusion

In this paper we have studied the CHNLS equation by applying a generalized inverse scattering method developed to solve the $`(2n+1\times 2n+1)`$ dimensional linear problem associated with (5) vis a vis (1). We have shown the integrability of the system by showing the existence of infinite number of conserved quantities. The $`N`$-soliton solutions for the system have been obtained by solving a set of generalized GLM equation. We have shown two different class of solutions by considering the zero’s of the diagonal element of the scattering data on the imaginary line and a pair of zero’s lying symmetrically about the imaginary line in the lower-half plane. By a suitably defined parameter we have shown how the double-peak soliton reduces to the single peak soliton. The results, we have obtaind predicts that CHNLS equation allows dispersionless propagation of the ultrashort optical soliton in the shape of single hump pulse or double hump pulse. This may have interesting consequences in the propagation of optical solitons through nonlinear fiber.

Acknowledgements

Author is grateful to Prof. Avinash Khare, Dr. Sasanka Ghosh and Dr. Kalyan Kundu for fruitful discussion and helpful comments.


format: text

text:
# Bures volume of the set of mixed quantum states

## I Introduction

Modern applications of quantum mechanics renewed interest in the properties of the set of density matrices of finite size. Its geometry depends on the metric used PS96 ; ZSlo01 . However, the simplest possible choices exhibit some drawbacks: the trace metric, defined by the trace distance

$$D_{\mathrm{Tr}}(\rho ,\sigma )=\rho \sigma _1:=\mathrm{Tr}|\rho \sigma |=\mathrm{Tr}\sqrt{(\rho \sigma )^2},$$
(1)
is monotone Ru94 , but not Riemannian, while the Hilbert–Schmidt metric, induced by the Hilbert–Schmidt scalar product, $`A|B=\mathrm{Tr}A^{}B`$ and related to the H–S distance,

$$D_{\mathrm{HS}}(\rho ,\sigma )=\rho \sigma _2:=\sqrt{\mathrm{Tr}[(\rho \sigma )^2]},$$
(2)
is Riemannian but not monotone Oz01 . This fact provides an additional motivation to investigate other possible metrics and distances in the space of mixed quantum states.

Nowadays it is widely accepted that the Bures metric Bu69 ; Uh76 , is distinguished by its rather special properties: it is a Riemannian, monotone metric, which is Fisher–adjusted PS96 : in the subspace of diagonal matrices it induces the statistical distance BC94 . Moreover, it is also Fubini–Study–adjusted, since it agrees with this metric at the space of pure states Uh95 . The Bures distance between any two mixed states is a function of their fidelity Uh76 ; Jo94  and various properties of this distance are a subject of considerable interest (see Uh92 ; Hu92 ; Di93 ; Hu93 ; Uh94 ; Di95 ; Uh95 ; Di99 ).

A given distance between density matrices induces a certain measure in this space. The probability measure in the space of mixed quantum states induced by the Bures metric was defined by Hall Ha98 . He demonstrated that the eigenvectors of a random state of size $`N`$ generated according to this measure are distributed according to the Haar measure on $`U(N)`$, derived an explicit expression for the joint probability density for eigenvalues of a random state generated according to this measure and found for $`N=2`$ the normalization constant $`C_N`$ for the joint probability density of the eigenvalues. Further Bures–Hall normalization constants $`C_3`$ and $`C_4`$ were calculated by Slater Sl99b , but the problem of finding the constants $`C_N`$ for arbitrary $`N`$ remained unsolved.

The aim of this work is to compute the volume of the set $`_N`$ of all density matrices of size $`N`$ and the hyperarea of its boundary according to the Bures measure. This work is complementary to our parallel paper ZS03 , in which the volume was computed according to the Hilbert-Schmidt measure, but the notation and the structure of both papers are not exactly the same. In this work we treat in parallel two different cases: of complex density matrices, and its particular subset, of real density matrices. Both cases are labeled by the ’repulsion exponent’ $`\beta =2`$ for the complex case and $`\beta =1`$ for the real case.

The paper is organized as follows. In section II the Bures distance is defined and its remarkable properties are reviewed. In section III we derive the Bures measure and express the volume and the surface of the space of mixed states as a function of the Hall normalization constants. Key results of the paper are presented in section IV, in which we compute the normalization constants $`C_N`$ for arbitrary $`N`$, see (63), and calculate explicitly the Bures volume of $`_N`$, see Eq. (64). In section V we perform a similar analysis of the space of real density matrices. A concise presentation of the results obtained is provided by Eq. (88), from which one may read out the volume of the sets of complex and real density matrices, the surface of their boundaries and their ’edges’.

## II Bures metric

We shall start the discussion considering the set of pure states $`|\psi `$ belonging to an $`N`$–dimensional Hilbert space $`_N`$. This set has the structure of a complex projective space, $`P^{N1}`$, and there exists a distinguished, unitarily invariant measure, which corresponds to the geodesic distance on this manifold. It is called Fubini–Study distance Fu903 ; St05 ,

$$D_{\mathrm{FS}}(|\phi _A,|\phi _B)=\mathrm{arccos}(2\kappa 1)=2\mathrm{a}\mathrm{r}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{c}\mathrm{o}\mathrm{s}(\sqrt{\kappa }),$$
(3)
where $`\kappa =|\phi _A|\phi _B|^2`$ denotes the transition probability. This quantity was generalized for an arbitrary pair of mixed quantum states by Uhlmann Uh76

$$F(\rho _A,\rho _B)=\left[\text{Tr}\left(\sqrt{\rho _A}\rho _B\sqrt{\rho _A}\right)^{1/2}\right]^2=\sqrt{\rho _A}\sqrt{\rho _B}_1^2$$
(4)
and its remarkable proprieties were studied by Jozsa Jo94  who called it fidelity 111Although this was the original definition of Jozsa, some authors use this name for $`\sqrt{F}`$.. It is a symmetric, non-negative, continuous, concave function of both states and is unitarily invariant. For any pair of pure states the fidelity reduces to their overlap, $`F=\mathrm{Tr}\rho _A\rho _B=|\psi _A|\psi _B|^2=\kappa `$. Hence a function of fidelity, called Bures length Uh95  or angle NC00 ,

$$D_A(\rho _A,\rho _B):=\mathrm{arccos}\sqrt{F(\rho _A,\rho _B)}=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{arccos}\left(2F(\rho _A,\rho _B)1\right),$$
(5)
coincides for any pair of pure states with their Fubini–Study distance (3).

Fidelity may also be defined Jo94  as the maximal overlap between the purifications of two mixed states, $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_A|\mathrm{\Phi }_B|^2`$, where $`|\mathrm{\Phi }_i_{N^2}=_N_N`$ and both mixed states are obtained by partial tracing over the auxiliary subsystem E, $`\rho _i=\mathrm{Tr}_E|\mathrm{\Phi }_i\mathrm{\Phi }_i|`$. Fidelity allows one to characterize the ”closeness” of a pair of mixed states: it is equal to unity only if both states do coincide. Another function of fidelity,

$$D_B(\rho _A,\rho _B)=\left(22\sqrt{F(\rho _A,\rho _B)}\right)^{1/2}=\sqrt{22\mathrm{T}\mathrm{r}\sqrt{\sqrt{\rho _A}\rho _B\sqrt{\rho _A}}}$$
(6)
satisfies all axioms of a distance and is called Bures distance Bu69 . Hence Bures metric is Fubini–Study adjusted, since for pure states it induces the same geometry. Several relevant papers on this subject are due to Uhlmann Uh76 ; Uh92 ; Uh95 , who showed that the topological metric of Bures is Riemannian. Hübner provided a detailed analysis of the $`N=2`$ Hu92  and $`N=3`$ case Hu93 , while Dittmann analyzed differential geometric properties of the Bures metric Di93 . Relations of the Bures metric to information theory can be seen in papers by Fuchs and Caves FC95 , Vedral and Plenio VP98  while the closely related fidelity is often used in the comprehensive book by Nielsen and Chang NC00 . It was shown by Braunstein and Caves BC94  that for neighbouring density matrices the Bures distance is proportional to the statistical distance introduced by Wootters Wo81  in the context of measurements which optimally resolve neighbouring quantum states.

For diagonal matrices, $`\rho _A=\mathrm{diag}(\stackrel{}{a})`$ and $`\rho _B=\mathrm{diag}(\stackrel{}{b})`$, the expression for the Bures distance simplifies and becomes a function of the Bhattacharyya coefficient Bh43 , $`B(\stackrel{}{a},\stackrel{}{b})`$,

$$D_B^2(\rho _A,\rho _B)=22\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\sqrt{a_ib_i}=22B(\stackrel{}{a},\stackrel{}{b}).$$
(7)
This is the Euclidean distance between two points on a unit circle, the corresponding vectors form the angle $`\theta `$ such that $`\mathrm{cos}\theta =\stackrel{}{a}\stackrel{}{b}`$. The geodesic distance along the circle $`\vartheta =2\mathrm{arccos}(1D_B^2/2)=2D_A`$, is called in this case the statistical distance, since it provides a measure of distinguishability between both probability distributions by statistical sampling. Another function is called the Hellinger distance LV87

$$D_H(\stackrel{}{a},\stackrel{}{b})=\sqrt{\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}(\sqrt{a_i}\sqrt{b_i})^2}=\sqrt{22B(\stackrel{}{a},\stackrel{}{b})}.$$
(8)
It is clear that for any two diagonal density matrices their fidelity reduces to the squared Bhattacharyya coefficient, $`F(\rho ,\sigma )=B^2(\stackrel{}{a},\stackrel{}{b})`$, while the Bures distance between both states coincides with the Hellinger distance between both vectors of eigenvalues, $`D_B(\rho ,\sigma )=D_H(\stackrel{}{a},\stackrel{}{b})`$.

Let us write the Bures distance for infinitesimally closed diagonal states defined by the vectors $`\stackrel{}{a}`$ and $`\stackrel{}{a}^{}=\stackrel{}{a}+\mathrm{d}\stackrel{}{a}`$,

$$\mathrm{d}s_B^2=(D_B(\rho _A,\rho _A^{}))^2=22\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}a_i\sqrt{1+\frac{\mathrm{d}a_i}{a_i}}.$$
(9)
Since $`_{i=1}^Na_i=1`$ and $`_{i=1}^N\mathrm{d}a_i=0`$, so computing the Bures line element d$`s_B^2`$ we need to expand the square root up to the second order, and obtain

$$\mathrm{d}s_B^2=\frac{1}{4}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}a_i\mathrm{d}a_i}{a_i}=\mathrm{Tr}\left(\mathrm{d}\sqrt{\rho }\right)^2$$
(10)
– precisely the metric on a sphere, or also, the statistical metric on the simplex, also called Fisher-Rao metric Fi25 . Hence the Bures metric is Fisher–adjusted – restricted to the simplex of diagonal matrices it agrees with this metric. For $`N=2`$ the simplex of diagonal matrices is one-dimensional, and from the point of view of Bures metric it forms a semicircle.

It is instructive to compare the geometry induced by the Bures (6) and the Hilbert-Schmidt metric (2). Any $`N=2`$ density matrix $`\rho `$ may be expressed in the Bloch representation

$$\rho =\frac{1}{2}\left(𝕀+\stackrel{}{\tau }\stackrel{}{\sigma }\right)$$
(11)
where $`\stackrel{}{\sigma }`$ denotes a vector of three Pauli matrices, $`\{\sigma _x,\sigma _y,\sigma _z\}`$, while the Bloch vector $`\stackrel{}{\tau }=\{x,y,z\}`$ belongs to $`^3`$. With respect to the HS metric the set of mixed states $`_2`$ forms the Bloch ball $`B^3`$ with the set of all pure states at its boundary, called Bloch sphere. The H–S distance between any mixed states of a qubit is proportional to the Euclidean distance inside the ball, so the H–S metric induces the flat geometry in $`_2`$. The radius of the Bloch ball depends on the normalization of the Bloch vector, and is equal to unity while using the definition (11).

Working in a Cartesian coordinate system we may rewrite (11) as

$$\rho =\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1+z& xiy\\ x+iy& 1z\end{array}\right),x^2+y^2+z^21$$
(12)
Setting $`\rho _A=\rho `$, $`\rho _B=\rho +\mathrm{d}\rho `$ in the expression for the Bures distance (6) and expanding to second order we obtain one–fourth times the round metric on the 3-sphere,

$$\mathrm{d}s_B^2=\frac{1}{4}\left(dx^2+dy^2+dz^2+\frac{(xdx+ydy+zdz)^2}{1x^2y^2z^2}\right).$$
(13)
Uhlmann noticed this fact in Uh92  and suggested embedding of the three dimensional space of the $`N=2`$ mixed states in $`^4`$. The transformation

$$\rho (x,y,z)\frac{1}{2}\left(x,y,z,u:=\sqrt{1x^2y^2z^2}\right)$$
(14)
blows up the $`3`$-ball into the Uhlmann hyper-hemisphere of $`𝐒^3`$ of radius $`R_2=1/2`$. The maximally mixed state $`\rho _{}`$, mapped into a hyper-pole, is equally distant from all pure states located at the hyper-equator \- see Fig. 1. The hyper-equator is equivalent to an ordinary two dimensional sphere and hence isometric to $`P^1`$. The comparison between both metrics is very transparent for real density matrices: the space of all rebits, which in the HS-metric has the structure of the $`2`$-ball, in the Bures metric has the from of a hemisphere of $`𝐒^2`$.

Since the radius $`R_B`$ of the Uhlmann hemisphere is equal to $`1/2`$ we obtain immediately the Bures volume $`V`$ and the Bures area $`S`$ for $`N=2`$

$$V_2^{(2)}=\text{vol}_B\left(_2\right)=\frac{1}{2}S_3R_B^3=\frac{\pi ^2}{8},S_2^{(2)}=\text{vol}_B\left(_2\right)=S_2R_B^2=\pi ,$$
(15)
where $`S_k`$ denotes the volume of the unit sphere $`𝐒^k`$. This result was obtained by Caves Ca02 , who also expressed the Bures volume of the set of mixed states in form of an integral. In the further sections of our work we are going to compute such integrals to derive an explicit result for the Bures volume for an arbitrary matrix size $`N`$.

The last property of the Bures metric, we are going to review, concerns monotonicity. In the classical case of commuting diagonal density matrices, one studies the space of probability vectors $`\stackrel{}{a}=\{a_1,\mathrm{}a_N\}`$, where $`a_i0`$ and $`_{i=1}^Na_i=1`$. This space is isomorphic with an $`N1`$ dimensional simplex $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{N1}`$. A discrete dynamics in this space, $`\stackrel{}{a}^{}=T\stackrel{}{a}`$, is given by an arbitrary stochastic matrix $`T`$ of size $`N`$. This matrix contains non–negative entries, $`T_{ij}0`$, and the stochasticity condition, $`_{j=1}^NT_{ji}=1`$ for $`i=1,\mathrm{},N`$ assures that the output vector $`\stackrel{}{a}^{}`$ is normalized. A distance in the space $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{N1}`$ of $`N`$–dimensional probability vectors is called monotone, if it does not increase under the action of any stochastic matrix $`T`$,

$$D_{\mathrm{mon}}(\stackrel{}{a},\stackrel{}{b})D_{\mathrm{mon}}(T\stackrel{}{a},T\stackrel{}{b}).$$
(16)
If a geodesic distance in the probability simplex is monotone, the corresponding Riemannian metric is called monotone. Chentsov showed Ce82  that every monotone Riemannian distance in this space is a function of the Fisher statistical distance Fi25 , or the Bhattacharyya coefficient $`B`$ defined in (7).

The quantum case is more complicated. Any discrete dynamics may be described by a quantum operation, $`\mathrm{\Phi }:_N_N`$, which is trace preserving, Tr$`\mathrm{\Phi }(\rho )=\mathrm{Tr}\rho =1`$, and completely positive. Positivity means that $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\rho )0`$, i.e. $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ sends positive operators into positive operators. From a physical point of view it is necessary to assure that an operation is well defined on the system coupled to an ancilla - an auxiliary system which describes the environment. Hence one requires that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is completely positive, which means that any extension of the map by an identity operator, $`\mathrm{\Phi }𝕀`$, is positive OP93 . Completely positive trace preserving maps play the role of stochastic matrices $`T`$ in the quantum case, and are thus called stochastic maps. In full analogy to (16) any distance $`D`$ in the space of mixed quantum states $`^{(N)}`$ is called monotone if it does not grow under the action of a stochastic map,

$$D_{\mathrm{mon}}(\rho ,\sigma )D_{\mathrm{mon}}(\mathrm{\Phi }(\rho ),\mathrm{\Phi }(\sigma )).$$
(17)
If a monotone distance is geodesic the corresponding metric on $`_N`$ is called monotone.

In contrast to the classical case, there exist infinitely many monotone Riemannian metrics on the space of mixed quantum states. However, as shown by Morozova and Chentsov MC90  and Petz and Sudár PS96 , they may be characterized by a symmetric function $`c(x,y)`$. In general, the length of a vector (matrix) $`B_{ij}`$ may be position dependent; at a diagonal point $`A=\mathrm{diag}(a_1,a_2,\mathrm{},a_N)`$ the squared length of $`B`$ is given by PS96

$$B_A^2=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{B_{jj}}{a_j}+2\underset{j<k=1}{\overset{N}{}}c(a_j,a_k)|B_{jk}|^2.$$
(18)
For a diagonal matrix $`B`$ the second term vanishes and the first term gives back the unique statistical metric on the simplex. The off–diagonal elements, which enter the second term in (18), allow for more freedom in the choice of a monotone Riemannian metric. The Morozova-Chentsov function satisfies $`c(sx,sy)=s^1c(x,y)`$. The symmetry of this two–argument function $`c`$ enables to express it by a function of a single parameter, $`c(x,y)=f(x/y)/y`$, such that $`f(1/t)=f(t)/t`$.

A function $`f`$ is called operator monotone, if for any matrices $`G`$, $`H`$ the relation $`0GH`$ implies $`0f(G)f(H)`$. Here $`GH`$ denotes that their difference is semi positive, $`HG0`$. Taking for $`G`$ and $`H`$ real numbers we see that operator monotonicity implies that $`f`$ maps $`_+_+`$ and is concave. The result of Morozova and Chentsov MC90 , completed and extended by Petz and Sudár Pe96 ; PS96 , states that every monotone metric may be written in the form (18) up a proportionality constant. Conversely, this equation determines a monotone Riemannian metric, if the function $`f(t)=1/c(t,1)`$ is: a) operator monotone, and b) self–transposed, $`f(1/t)=f(t)/t`$. Such functions $`f`$ are called Morozova–Chentsov functions. Comparison of different metrics is meaningful under a certain normalization. Usually one requires: c) $`f(1)=1`$, since for diagonal matrices such a metric agrees with the statistical (Fisher) metric, and is called Fisher–adjusted. There exists infinitely many functions $`f`$ satisfying all three conditions a)–c), and leading to Fisher–adjusted metrics PS96 . Let us mention three examples here:

$$f_{\mathrm{min}}(t)=\frac{2t}{t+1},f_{\mathrm{KM}}(t)=\frac{t1}{\mathrm{ln}t},f_{\mathrm{max}}(t)=\frac{1+t}{2}$$
(19)
containing both extremal cases and the intermediate Kubo-Mori (Bogolioubov) metric used in quantum statistical mechanics BAR86  and distinguished by the fact that both affine connections with respect to this metric are mutually dual GS01 . These functions, plotted in Fig. 2, correspond to

$$c_{\mathrm{min}}(x,y)=\frac{x+y}{2xy},c_{\mathrm{KM}}(x,y)=\frac{\mathrm{ln}x\mathrm{ln}y}{xy},c_{\mathrm{max}}(x,y)=\frac{2}{x+y},$$
(20)
so the inverse, $`1/c`$, is equal to the harmonic, logarithmic and arithmetic mean, respectively. It is known that among all normalised, self-transposed, operator monotone functions $`f`$ there is a minimal and a maximal one KA80 . They are distinguished above by the appropriate labels. The maximal concave function $`f_{\mathrm{max}}(t)`$, the straight line $`t/2+1/2`$, induces the Bures metric and the Bures distance PS96 ; LR99 .

If $`f(0)=1/2`$ the metric induces the natural Riemannian metric on the subspace $`P^{N1}`$ of pure states and is called Fubini-Study adjusted Uh95 ; PS96 . The Bures metric is the only monotone metric which is simultaneously Fisher–adjusted and Fubini–Study–adjusted. This property, valid for any matrix size $`N`$, is easiest to discuss for $`N=2`$. All metrics defined by (18) are rotationally invariant, i.e. the uniform angular distribution (of eigenvectors of the density matrix) is independent of the radial distribution (of its eigenvalues). In the one–qubit case the metric depends only on the radius $`r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2+z^2}`$ in the unit Bloch ball, and may be divided into the radial and the normal (tangential) components Pe96 ,

$$\mathrm{d}s^2=\frac{1}{1r^2}\mathrm{d}r^2+\frac{1}{1+r}g\left(\frac{1r}{1+r}\right)\mathrm{d}n^2\mathrm{with}g(t)=\frac{1}{f(t)}$$
(21)
The radial component is independent of the function $`f`$. It is easy to see that the value of $`f(t)`$ at $`t=0`$ determines the metric at the subspace of pure states, $`r=1`$. If $`f(0)=0`$, then the metric diverges at the manifold of pure states, which is the case for $`f_{\mathrm{KM}}`$ and $`f_{\mathrm{min}}`$.

The relation between the Morozova-Chentsov function and the metric $`g=1/f`$ shows that the larger the (normalized) function $`f`$, the smaller the metric and the corresponding distance. The Bures metric given by the maximal function $`f_{\mathrm{max}}(t)`$, is therefore the minimal Fisher–adjusted, monotone Riemannian metric. These properties single out the Bures metric and provide an additional motivation to study the geometry it induces in the set of mixed quantum states.

## III Bures measure

### III.1 Infinitesimal distance

We are going to compute the Bures distance (6) between two infinitesimally close density matrices of size $`N`$. Let us set $`\rho _A=\rho ,\rho _B=\rho +\delta \rho `$:

$$\sqrt{\rho _A^{1/2}\rho _B\rho _A^{1/2}}=\rho +X+Y$$
(22)
where the matrix $`X`$ is of order $`1`$ in $`\delta \rho `$, while $`Y`$ is of order $`2`$. Squaring this equation we obtain to first and second order

$$\rho ^{1/2}\delta \rho \rho ^{1/2}=X\rho +\rho X,X^2=Y\rho +\rho Y$$
(23)
or in the basis in which $`\rho `$ is diagonal with eigenvalues $`\rho _\nu >0`$

$$X_{\nu \mu }=\delta \rho _{\nu \mu }\frac{\rho _\nu ^{1/2}\rho _\mu ^{1/2}}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu },Y_{\nu \mu }=(X^2)_{\nu \mu }\frac{1}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }.$$
(24)
Since $`\mathrm{Tr}\rho =1`$, hence $`\mathrm{Tr}\delta \rho =0`$ and $`\mathrm{Tr}X=\mathrm{Tr}\delta \rho /2=0`$, while

$$\mathrm{Tr}Y=\underset{\nu \mu }{}\frac{1}{2\rho _\nu }|X_{\nu \mu }|^2=\underset{\nu \mu }{}\frac{1}{4}\frac{|\delta \rho _{\nu \mu }|^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }.$$
(25)
Thus we arrive at the result of Hübner Hu92  for the Bures metric

$$(\mathrm{d}s)_B^2=(D(\rho ,\rho +\delta \rho ))^2=\frac{1}{2}\underset{\nu \mu }{}\frac{|\delta \rho _{\nu \mu }|^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }.$$
(26)
Note, that if $`\rho _\nu =0`$ and $`\rho _\mu =0`$, $`\delta \rho _{\nu \mu }`$ does not appear and therefore terms where the denominator vanishes have to be excluded.

### III.2 The volume

Let us rewrite the metric (26) distinguishing the diagonal elements

$$(\mathrm{d}s)_B^2=\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{|\delta \rho _{\nu \nu }|^2}{4\rho _\nu }+\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{|\delta \rho _{\nu \mu }|^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }.$$
(27)
For diagonal matrices the second term vanishes and the above expression reduces to (10). Since $`\mathrm{Tr}\rho =1`$ so $`_{\nu =1}^N\delta \rho _{\nu \nu }=0`$ and not all $`\delta \rho _{\nu \nu }`$ are independent. Eliminating $`\delta \rho _{NN}`$ we obtain

$$\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{(\delta \rho _{\nu \nu })^2}{\rho _\nu }=\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N1}{}}\frac{(\delta \rho _{\nu \nu })^2}{\rho _\nu }+(\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N1}{}}\delta \rho _{\nu \nu })^2\frac{1}{\rho _N}.$$
(28)
The metric (28) in the $`(N1)`$–dimensional subspace is of the form $`g_{ik}=(\delta _{ik}/\rho _i+1/\rho _N)`$ with determinant $`detg=(\rho _1+\rho _2+\mathrm{}+\rho _N)/(\rho _1\rho _2\mathrm{}\rho _N)=1/det\rho `$ using $`\mathrm{Tr}\rho =1`$. Thus the volume element gains a factor $`\sqrt{\mathrm{det}g}=(det\rho )^{1/2}`$:

$$\mathrm{d}V_B=\frac{1}{2^{N^21}}(det\rho )^{1/2}\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N1}{}}\mathrm{d}\rho _{\nu \nu }\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\left(\sqrt{2}\mathrm{dRe}(\rho _{\nu \mu })\sqrt{2}\mathrm{dIm}(\rho _{\nu \mu })\right).$$
(29)
The total volume of the set $`_N`$ is given by:

$$V_B=2^{1N^2}D\rho \frac{\delta (\mathrm{Tr}\rho 1)}{det\rho ^{1/2}}\theta (\rho )\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }$$
(30)
with $`\theta (\rho )=\theta (\rho _1)\mathrm{}\theta (\rho _N)`$ a step function that restricts integration to nonnegative $`\rho `$. We introduced the volume element

$$D\rho =\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N}{}}\mathrm{d}\rho _{\nu \nu }\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\left(\sqrt{2}\mathrm{dRe}(\rho _{\nu \mu })\sqrt{2}\mathrm{dIm}(\rho _{\nu \mu })\right).$$
(31)
which differs from the usual definition by a factor $`2^{N(N1)/2}`$. It follows from the metric for unrestricted Hermitian matrices:

$$(\mathrm{d}s)^2=\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N}{}}(\delta \rho _{\nu \nu })^2+2\underset{\nu <\mu }{}|\delta \rho _{\nu \mu }|^2.$$
(32)
Above we considered the case of Hermitian density matrices ($`\beta =2`$). In the case of real density matrices ($`\beta =1`$) there are no imaginary parts $`\mathrm{Im}\rho _{\nu \mu }`$.

### III.3 Radial coordinates

Let us diagonalize the matrices $`\rho `$

$$\rho =U\mathrm{\Lambda }U^1\mathrm{or}\rho =O\mathrm{\Lambda }O^1$$
(33)
with $`U`$ unitary for $`\beta =2`$, $`O`$ orthogonal for $`\beta =1`$, $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=\mathrm{diag}(\rho _1,\rho _2,\mathrm{},\rho _N)`$. Then we have

$$\mathrm{d}\rho =U[\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Lambda }+U^1\mathrm{d}U\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }U^1\mathrm{d}U]U^1\mathrm{or}\mathrm{d}\rho =O[\mathrm{d}\mathrm{\Lambda }+O^1\mathrm{d}O\mathrm{\Lambda }\mathrm{\Lambda }O^1\mathrm{d}O]O^1.$$
(34)
Let us first rewrite the Bures metric in a basis independent way,

$$(\mathrm{d}s)_B^2=\frac{1}{2}_0^{\mathrm{}}dt\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{d}\rho \mathrm{e}^{\rho t}\mathrm{d}\rho \mathrm{e}^{\rho t}).$$
(35)
This means it contains left and right multiplications with $`\rho `$. Inserting now the expressions for d$`\rho `$ we see that again we can go to the representation where $`\rho `$ is diagonal and obtain metrics in the cases of complex density matrices,

$$(\mathrm{d}s)^2=\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{(\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu )^2}{4\rho _\nu }+\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }|(U^1\mathrm{d}U)_{\nu \mu }|^2,$$
(36)
and real density matrices

$$(\mathrm{d}s)^2=\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{(\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu )^2}{4\rho _\nu }+\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }|(O^1\mathrm{d}O)_{\nu \mu }|^2.$$
(37)
In both cases the Bures measure has the following product form

$$\mathrm{d}V_B^{(\beta )}=\mathrm{d}\mu ^{(\beta )}(\rho _1,\rho _2,\mathrm{},\rho _N)\times \mathrm{d}\nu _\beta .$$
(38)
The first factor depends only on the eigenvalues $`\rho _i`$, while the latter, determining the distribution of the eigenvectors of the density matrix, is the unique, unitarily invariant, Haar measure on $`U(N)`$ for $`\beta =2`$ or on $`O(N)`$ for $`\beta =1`$. In the general case of complex density matrices, ($`\beta =2)`$, the Bures measure in the simplex of eigenvalues reads

$$P_B(\mathrm{\Lambda })=P_B(\rho _1,\rho _2,\mathrm{},\rho _N)=C_N\frac{\delta (\rho _1+\rho _2+\mathrm{}+\rho _N1)}{\sqrt{\rho _1\rho _2\mathrm{}\rho _N}}\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu },$$
(39)
where the normalization constant $`C_N`$ assures that the integral of $`P`$ over all eigenvalues equals to unity. The measure was derived by Hall Ha98 , and was later analyzed in BS01 ; ZS01 . To compute the area of the surface of the set of complex density matrices, and to find the volume of the set of real density matrices we will need a family of generalized constants $`C_N(\alpha ,\beta )`$ defined by

$$\frac{1}{C_N(\alpha ,\beta )}=_0^{\mathrm{}}\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu }{\rho _\nu ^{1/2}}\delta (\rho _1+\mathrm{}+\rho _N1)\left[\underset{\nu <\mu }{\overset{1\mathrm{}N}{}}\frac{(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\right]^{\beta /2}\underset{\kappa =1}{\overset{N}{}}\rho _\kappa ^{\alpha 1}.$$
(40)
The standard Hall constants entering (39) become a special case of this definition, $`C_N=C_N(1,2)`$. They will be needed to compute the Bures volume of $`_N`$.

Integrating the Bures measure over the eigenvectors distributed according to the Haar measure on $`U(N)`$ or $`O(N)`$ we obtain

$$dV_B^{(\beta )}=2^{1N[1+(N1)\beta /2]}det\rho ^{1/2}\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N1}{}}\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu \underset{\nu <\mu }{}\left[\frac{2(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\right]^{\beta /2}V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N).$$
(41)
where $`V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N)`$ denotes the volume of the flag manifold, $`Fl_N^{}=U(N)/U(1)^N`$ or $`Fl_N^{}=O(N)/O(1)^N`$ for $`\beta =2,1`$. Although these volumes

$$V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(N)=\mathrm{Vol}\left(Fl_N^{}\right)=\frac{(2\pi )^{N(N1)/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(N)}\mathrm{and}V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(1)}(N)=\mathrm{Vol}\left(Fl_N^{}\right)=\frac{(2\pi )^{N(N1)/4}\pi ^{N/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2/2)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(N/2)}$$
(42)
were computed by Hua several years ago Hu63 , we provide their short derivation in ZS03  and show that various results for the volumes of the unitary groups and flag manifolds present in the literature Fu01 ; BST02 ; TS02 ; Ca02  are due to different choice of normalization. Formally we may write the volumes in the form:

$$V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N)=\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}(2\pi )^{(j1)\beta /2}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta /2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(j\beta /2)},$$
(43)
which shows that it is the product of the volumes of projective spaces with increasing dimension $`j1`$, real for $`\beta =1`$, complex for $`\beta =2`$, and the radius rescaled by a factor $`\sqrt{2}`$ coming from the factor $`2^{\beta N(N1)/4}`$ – see appendix of ZS03 .

Since the unitary or orthogonal rotations produce all permutations, in (41) we have to restrict to a certain order of eigenvalues, $`\rho _1<\rho _2<\mathrm{}<\rho _N`$. In order to lift this condition we need to divide the result by the number of permutations, equal to $`N!`$,

$$V_B^{(\beta )}=2^{1N[1+(N1)\beta /2]}_0^{\mathrm{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho _1\mathrm{}\mathrm{d}\rho _N}{det\rho ^{1/2}}\delta (\mathrm{Tr}\rho 1)\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\left[\frac{2(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\right]^{\beta /2}\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N)}{N!}.$$
(44)
### III.4 The surface

The surface consists of the N pieces with one eigenvalue $`=0`$. To calculate the metric on the surface (with $`\rho _1=0`$) we put first $`\mathrm{d}\rho _1=0`$ and then $`\rho _1=0`$ (remember that terms with vanishing denominator have to be excluded):

$$(\mathrm{d}s)^2=\underset{\nu =2}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{(\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu )^2}{4\rho _\nu }+\underset{\nu <\mu }{\overset{2\mathrm{}N}{}}\frac{(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }|(U^1\mathrm{d}U)_{\nu \mu }|^2+\underset{\mu =2}{\overset{N}{}}\rho _\mu |(U^1\mathrm{d}U)_{1\mu }|^2.$$
(45)
Then with the same reasoning as above the surface element is given by

$$\mathrm{d}S=2^{1(N1)(1+N\beta /2)}\underset{\nu =2}{\overset{N1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu }{\rho _\nu ^{1/2}}\left[\underset{\nu <\mu }{\overset{2\mathrm{}N}{}}\frac{2(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\underset{\kappa =2}{\overset{N}{}}2\rho _\kappa \right]^{\beta /2}V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N)$$
(46)
and the total surface:

$$S_N^{(\beta )}=S_{N,1}^{(\beta )}=2^{1(N1)(1+N\beta /2)}\underset{\nu =2}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu }{\rho _\nu ^{1/2}}\frac{\delta (\rho _2+\mathrm{}+\rho _N1)}{(N1)!}\left[\underset{\nu <\mu }{\overset{2\mathrm{}N}{}}\frac{2(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\underset{\kappa =2}{\overset{N}{}}2\rho _\kappa \right]^{\beta /2}V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N),$$
(47)
where we have taken into account all permutations of the $`N1`$ non–zero eigenvalues.

### III.5 The edges and hyperedges

There are $`N(N1)/2`$ edges which correspond to two vanishing eigenvalues. Hence there are $`(N2)!`$ different permutations of positive, generically different eigenvalues which form the edges. To calculate the metric on the edges we put first $`\mathrm{d}\rho _1=\mathrm{d}\rho _2=0`$ and then $`\rho _1=\rho _2=0`$:

$$(\mathrm{d}s)^2=\underset{\nu =3}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{(\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu )^2}{4\rho _\nu }+\underset{\nu <\mu }{\overset{3\mathrm{}N}{}}\frac{(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }|(U^1\mathrm{d}U)_{\nu \mu }|^2+\underset{\mu =3}{\overset{N}{}}\rho _\mu (|(U^1\mathrm{d}U)_{1\mu }|^2+|(U^1\mathrm{d}U)_{2\mu }|^2).$$
(48)
We see that there do not appear terms $`(U^1\mathrm{d}U)_{\nu \mu }`$ with $`\nu ,\mu =1,2`$. Thus the corresponding coset space which has to be integrated over is the flag manifold $`U(N)/[U(2)\times U(1)^{N2}]`$ for $`\beta =2`$ or $`O(N)/[O(2)\times O(1)^{N2}]`$ for $`\beta =1`$. Since their volume is equal to the ratio Vol$`(Fl_N)/\mathrm{Vol}(Fl_2)`$, the edge element is then given by

$$\mathrm{d}S_{N,2}^{(\beta )}=2^{d_2}\underset{\nu =3}{\overset{N1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu }{\rho _\nu ^{1/2}}\left[\underset{\nu <\mu }{\overset{3\mathrm{}N}{}}\frac{2(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\underset{\kappa =3}{\overset{N}{}}(2\rho _\kappa )^2\right]^{\beta /2}\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N)}{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(2)}$$
(49)
with the dimension $`d_n`$

$$d_n=(Nn)(1+(N+n1)\beta /2)1.$$
(50)
The total area of the edges is

$$S_{N,2}^{(\beta )}=2^{d_2}_0^{\mathrm{}}\underset{\nu =3}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu }{\rho _\nu ^{1/2}}\frac{\delta (\rho _3+\mathrm{}+\rho _N1)}{(N2)!}\left[\underset{\nu <\mu }{\overset{3\mathrm{}N}{}}\frac{2(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\underset{\kappa =3}{\overset{N}{}}(2\rho _\kappa )^2\right]^{\beta /2}\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N)}{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(2)}.$$
(51)
It is straightforward to generalize this to hyperedges: the manifold of states of rank $`Nn`$ with $`n=0,1,\mathrm{}N1`$ has the volume

$$S_{N,n}^{(\beta )}=2^{d_n}_0^{\mathrm{}}\underset{\nu =n+1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu }{\rho _\nu ^{1/2}}\frac{\delta (\rho _{n+1}+\mathrm{}+\rho _N1)}{(Nn)!}\left[\underset{\nu <\mu }{\overset{n+1\mathrm{}N}{}}\frac{2(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\underset{\kappa =n+1}{\overset{N}{}}(2\rho _\kappa )^n\right]^{\beta /2}\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N)}{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(n)}.$$
(52)
## IV Bures volume

### IV.1 Normalization constants

The above formulae for the volumes of manifolds of states of rank $`Nn`$ may be expressed in a compact way with use of the generalized Hall constants (40)

$$S_{N,n}^{(\beta )}=\frac{2^{d_n+(Nn)(N+n1)\beta /4}}{(Nn)!C_{Nn}(1+n\beta /2,\beta )}\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(N)}{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(\beta )}(n)}.$$
(53)
We are going to compute the constants $`C_N(\alpha ,\beta )`$ for integer $`\alpha ,\beta `$ and then continue analytically to general positive $`\alpha `$ and $`\beta `$. Let us go to variables $`\rho _i=t_i^2`$. Then the integral (40) is an integral over the full sphere $`R^2=t_1^2+t_2^2+\mathrm{}+t_N^2=1`$ with an homogeneous function in R of order $`\beta N(N1)/2+2N(\alpha 1)`$ as integrand. The radial integral may be replaced by a $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ function, which amounts to replacing $`\delta (R^21)`$ by $`\mathrm{e}^{R^2}`$. The result is the same up to a factor. Afterwards we may go back to the variables $`\rho _i`$ and obtain

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }[N(2\alpha +(N1)\beta /21)/2]}{C_N(\alpha ,\beta )}=_0^{\mathrm{}}\underset{\nu =1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}\rho _\nu }{\rho _\nu ^{1/2}}\mathrm{e}^{(\rho _1+\mathrm{}+\rho _N)}\left[\underset{\nu <\mu }{\overset{1\mathrm{}N}{}}\frac{(\rho _\nu \rho _\mu )^2}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }\right]^{\beta /2}\underset{\kappa =1}{\overset{N}{}}\rho _\kappa ^{\alpha 1}.$$
(54)
In the next step we want to eliminate the denominators in (54). In this section we discuss the case $`\beta =2`$ of complex density matrices,

$$\frac{1}{(\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _N)^{1/2}}\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{1}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }=\mathrm{e}^{{\scriptscriptstyle \rho _iX_{ii}^2}_{i<j}|X_{ij}|^2(\rho _i+\rho _j)}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}X_{ii}}{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{i<j}{}\frac{\mathrm{d}\mathrm{Re}X_{ij}\mathrm{d}\mathrm{Im}X_{ij}}{\pi }$$
(55)
Using the volume element $`DX`$ of a Hermitian Matrix X (31) we may rewrite this as

$$\frac{1}{(\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _N)^{1/2}}\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{1}{\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu }=\pi ^{N^2/2}2^{N(N1)/2}DX\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}\rho X^2}.$$
(56)
This expression is basis independent and provides a way to describe the Bures probability distribution in a random matrix description. With this we may write for $`\beta =2`$

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N^2/2+N(\alpha 1))}{C_N(\alpha ,2)}=\pi ^{N^2/2}2^{N(N1)/2}\frac{N!}{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(N)}D\rho \theta (\rho )det\rho ^{\alpha 1}DX\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}\rho (1+X^2)}.$$
(57)
Now we use a formula which is an extension of the Ingham-Siegel integral Fy02

$$\left[det\left(\frac{\delta }{\delta \rho }+ϵ\right)\right]^N\delta (\rho )=A_N\theta (\rho )\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}ϵ\rho }$$
(58)
valid for a positive Hermitian matrix $`ϵ`$ and with a constant $`A_N`$. Let us derive this formula:

$$\left[det\left(\frac{\delta }{\delta \rho }+ϵ\right)\right]^N\delta (\rho )=\pi ^{N^2}d\psi _1\mathrm{}d\psi _N\mathrm{e}^{[\psi _1^{}(\delta /\delta \rho +ϵ)\psi _1+\mathrm{}+\psi _N^{}(\delta /\delta \rho +ϵ)\psi _N]}\delta (\rho )$$
(59)
with $`N`$-dimensional complex vectors $`\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _N`$. The translation operator shifts the argument $`\rho `$ of the $`\delta `$–function by the matrix $`\psi _1\psi _1^{}+\mathrm{}+\psi _N\psi _N^{}`$. Then the integration can be done and yields

$$\left[det\left(\frac{\delta }{\delta \rho }+ϵ\right)\right]^N\delta (\rho )=\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}ϵ\rho }\pi ^{N^2}d\psi _1\mathrm{}d\psi _N\delta (\rho (\psi _1\psi _1^{}+\mathrm{}+\psi _N\psi _N^{})).$$

For $`\rho >0`$ we may rescale $`\psi \sqrt{\rho }\psi `$. The Jacobian cancels out and the result is equation (58). The constant $`A_N`$ can be calculated from integrating this equation (58) over $`\rho `$. With partial integration we find

$$\frac{2^{N(N1)/2}}{detϵ^N}=A_ND\rho \theta (\rho )\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}ϵ\rho }.$$

This is valid for any Hermitian matrix $`ϵ>0`$. The coefficient $`A_N`$ is independent of the matrix $`ϵ`$. To calculate $`A_N`$ we put $`ϵ=𝕀`$. The integral can again be done using the Laguerre ensemble:

$$\frac{1}{A_N}=\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(N)}{2^{N(N1)/2}N!}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+j)\mathrm{\Gamma }(j)=\pi ^{N(N1)/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(N).$$
(60)
### IV.2 Main results

Using equations (57, 58, 60) we may write

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N^2/2+N(\alpha 1))}{C_N(\alpha ,2)}=\frac{\pi ^{N^2/2}2^{N(N1)/2}}{A_N}\frac{N!}{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(N)}D\rho DAdet\rho ^{\alpha 1}\left[det\left(\frac{\delta }{\delta \rho }+1+A^2\right)\right]^N\delta (\rho ).$$
(61)
For $`\alpha =1`$ we obtain immediately by partial integration:

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N^2/2)}{C_N(1,2)}=\frac{\pi ^{N^2/2}N!}{A_NV_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(N)}\frac{DA}{det(1+A^2)^N}=\frac{\pi ^{N^2/2}}{A_N}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}a_i}{(1+a_i^2)^N}\underset{i<j}{}(a_ia_j)^2.$$
(62)
The last integral may be calculated in the complex plane and yields: $`(2\pi )^NN!2^{N^2}`$, such that the Bures–Hall constants are given by

$$C_N=C_N(1,2)=\frac{2^{N^2N}\mathrm{\Gamma }(N^2/2)}{\pi ^{N/2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(1)\mathrm{}\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+1)}.$$
(63)
This coincides with the known values for the Bures–Hall constants, $`C_2=2/\pi `$, $`C_3=35/\pi `$ and $`C_4=2^{11}35/\pi ^2`$ and confirms some conjectures of Slater concerning $`C_5`$ and $`C_6`$ Sl99b . The Bures volume of the set of complex density matrices of size $`N`$ is now given by

$$V_N^{(2)}=\frac{2^{1N(N+1)/2}}{C_N(1,2)}\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(N)}{N!}=2^{1N^2}\frac{\pi ^{N^2/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N^2/2)}$$
(64)
and for $`N=2`$ reduces to (15). Note that the factor $`2^{1N^2}`$ enters from the beginning in the definition. It disappears, if we increase d$`s`$ (27) by a factor of $`2`$. The Bures volume is exactly equal to the $`(N^21)`$-dimensional volume of an $`(N^21)`$ dimensional hemisphere with radius $`1/2`$. Equations (63) and (64) constitute the central results of this work.

### IV.3 Area of surface and edges

For the surface and the edges of the Bures manifold we need $`\alpha 1`$. Scaling $`\rho ϵ^{1/2}\rho ϵ^{1/2}`$ for $`ϵ`$ any Hermitian matrix $`>0`$ shows that the integral (61) can be obtained from

$$D\rho det\rho ^{\alpha 1}\left[det\left(\frac{\delta }{\delta \rho }+ϵ\right)\right]^N\delta (\rho )=B_Ndetϵ^{1N\alpha }$$
(65)
with $`B_N`$ independent of $`ϵ`$. To compute $`B_N`$ we put $`ϵ=𝕀`$ and go back using equation (58). This again leads to an integral over the Laguerre ensemble and we obtain:

$$B_N=A_N\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(N)}{N!}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+j)\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +j1)=2^{N(N1)/2}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +j1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(j)}.$$
(66)
Such an integral appeared already for the H–S metric ZS03 . Thus we have

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }[N^2/2+N(\alpha 1)]}{C_N(\alpha ,2)}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^{N^2/2}N!}{A_NV_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(N)}}{\displaystyle \frac{DX}{det(1+X^2)^{N+\alpha 1}}}`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +j1)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}x_i}{(1+x_i^2)^{N1+\alpha }}}{\displaystyle \underset{j<k}{}}(x_jx_k)^2.`$ (67)
Thus the ensemble is reduced to a kind of the Lorentz ensemble. The last integral can be found in the book by Mehta Me91 , (page 350) following from the Selberg’s integral:

$$J(1,1,N+\alpha 1,N+\alpha 1,1,N)=\pi ^N2^{N^2+N2N(\alpha 1)}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+j)\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+2\alpha 1j)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N+\alpha j)^2}.$$
(68)
As a result we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N^2/2+N(\alpha 1))}{C_N(\alpha ,2)}}=\pi ^{N/2}2^{N^2+N2N(\alpha 1)}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+j)\mathrm{\Gamma }(2\alpha 2+j)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\alpha +j1)}}.`$ (69)
From equation (53) we obtain for the volumes of submanifolds of rank $`Nn`$ of the space of complex density matrices

$$S_{N,n}^{(2)}=\frac{2^{d_n+(Nn)(N+n1)/2}}{C_{Nn}(1+n,2)(Nn)!}\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(N)}{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(2)}(n)}.$$
(70)
The result is rather simple 222An error in this formula which appeared in print, J. Phys. A 36, 10083-10100 (2003), is corrected here. We are thankful to P. Slater for drawing our attention to this issue.

$$S_{N,n}^{(2)}=2^{d_n}\frac{\pi ^{(d_n+1)/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }[(d_n+1)/2]}\underset{j=0}{\overset{Nn1}{}}\frac{j!(j+2n)!}{[(j+n)!]^2}$$
(71)
and reduces to (64) for $`n=0`$. Here $`d_n=N^2n^21`$ denotes the dimensionality of each submanifold. Observe that the above prefactor equals to the volume of a $`d_n`$–dimensional hyper-hemisphere with radius $`1/2`$. The above results allows us to find the ratio between the surface and the volume,

$$\gamma _B=\frac{S_{N,1}^{(2)}}{S_{N,0}^{(2)}}=\frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi }}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N^2/2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N^2/21/2)}N.$$
(72)
It behaves as $`N^2`$ and in the limit of large matrix size it grows proportionally to the dimensionality $`N^21`$ of the space of mixed states. Note that such a ratio for the hemispheres of dimensionality $`N^2`$ is proportional to $`N`$. For pure states $`n=N1`$ we obtain the volume

$$S_{N,N1}^{(2)}=\mathrm{Vol}(P^{N1})=\frac{\pi ^{N1}}{(N1)!},$$
(73)
which is equal to the volume of a $`2(N1)`$ dimensional real ball of radius $`1`$ and this equals the volume of a $`(N1)`$–dimensional complex projective space, which is a correct consequence of the Bures metric for pure states. By the way, up to a scale factor this is the same for the Hilbert-Schmidt metric ZS03 . Differences come only for mixed states.

## V Real density matrices & Lorentz type ensemble

To compute the volume of the set of real density matrices we need to find the generalized Hall constants (40) for $`\beta =1`$. To do so we write

$$\frac{1}{(\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _N)^{1/2}}\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{1}{(\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu )^{1/2}}=\mathrm{e}^{{\scriptscriptstyle \rho _iX_{ii}^2}_{i<j}X_{ij}^2(\rho _i+\rho _j)}\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{d}X_{ii}}{\sqrt{\pi }}\underset{i<j}{}\frac{\mathrm{d}X_{ij}}{\sqrt{\pi }}$$
(74)
Let us introduce the volume element of a real symmetric matrix $`X`$ with the metric

$$(\mathrm{d}s)^2=\mathrm{Tr}(\mathrm{d}X)^2=\underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}(\mathrm{d}X_{ii})^2+2\underset{i<j}{}\mathrm{d}X_{ij}^2,$$
(75)
$$DX=\underset{i}{}\mathrm{d}X_{ii}\underset{j<k}{}(\mathrm{d}X_{jk}\sqrt{2}).$$
(76)
Then we have

$$\frac{1}{(\rho _1\mathrm{}\rho _N)^{1/2}}\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{1}{(\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu )^{1/2}}=\pi ^{N(N+1)/4}2^{N(N1)/4}DX\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}\rho X^2}.$$
(77)
With this we may write the formula for $`\beta =1`$

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N(\alpha 1/2+(N1)/2))}{C_N(\alpha ,1)}=(2\pi )^{N(N+1)/4}2^{N/2}_0^{\mathrm{}}d\rho _1\mathrm{}d\rho _N\underset{\nu <\mu }{}|\rho _\nu \rho _\mu |^1det\rho ^{\alpha 1}DA\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}(\rho (1+A^2)}.$$
(78)
Now with $`ϵ`$ a real symmetric positive matrix we want to calculate for real symmetric $`\rho `$:

$`\left[det\left({\displaystyle \frac{\delta }{\delta \rho }}+ϵ\right)\right]^{N/2}\delta (\rho )=\pi ^{N^2/2}{\displaystyle d\psi _1\mathrm{}d\psi _N\mathrm{e}^{[\psi _1^{}(\delta /\delta \rho +ϵ)\psi _1+\mathrm{}+\psi _N^{}(\delta /\delta \rho +ϵ)\psi _N]}\delta (\rho )}`$
$`=\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}ϵ\rho }\pi ^{N^2}{\displaystyle d\psi _1\mathrm{}d\psi _N\delta (\rho (\psi _1\psi _1^{}+\mathrm{}+\psi _N\psi _N^{}))},`$ (79)
with real vectors $`\psi _1,\mathrm{},\psi _N`$. For $`\rho >0`$ we may rescale $`\psi \sqrt{\rho }\psi `$, then the volume element is $`det\rho ^{N/2}`$ and the $`\delta `$-function $`det\rho ^{(N+1)/2}`$. This implies

$$\left[det\left(\frac{\delta }{\delta \rho }+ϵ\right)\right]^{N/2}\delta (\rho )=K_N\theta (\rho )\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}ϵ\rho }det\rho ^{1/2}$$
(80)
with $`K_N`$ a constant independent of $`ϵ`$. With partial integration we find

$$\frac{2^{N(N1)/4}}{detϵ^{N/2}}=K_ND\rho \theta (\rho )\mathrm{e}^{\mathrm{Tr}ϵ\rho }det\rho ^{1/2}.$$

To calculate $`K_N`$ we put $`ϵ=𝕀`$ and find again with the help of the Laguerre ensemble Me91  (page 354)

$$\frac{1}{K_N}=\frac{V_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(1)}(N)}{2^{N(N1)/4}N!}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+j\beta /2)\mathrm{\Gamma }[1/2+(j1)\beta /2]}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\beta /2)}.$$
(81)
To obtain the generalized normalization constants for $`\beta =1`$ and arbitrary $`\alpha `$ we may write

$$\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left[N\left(2\alpha 1+(N1)/2\right)/2\right]}{C_N(\alpha ,1)}=\frac{(2\pi )^{N(N1)/4}2^{N/2}N!}{K_NV_{\mathrm{Flag}}^{(1)}(N)}D\rho DXdet\rho ^{\alpha 1/2}\left[det\left(\frac{\delta }{\delta \rho }+1+X^2\right)\right]^{N/2}\delta (\rho ).$$
(82)
Scaling $`\rho ϵ^{1/2}\rho ϵ^{1/2}`$ for $`ϵ`$ any real symmetric matrix $`>0`$ shows the identity

$$D\rho det\rho ^{\alpha 1}\left[det\left(\frac{\delta }{\delta \rho }+ϵ\right)\right]^{N/2}\delta (\rho )=L_Ndetϵ^{(1N2\alpha )/2}$$
(83)
with $`L_N`$ a constant independent of the matrix $`ϵ`$. To compute $`L_N`$ we put $`ϵ=𝕀`$ and go back. Again we obtain an integral over the Laguerre ensemble with the result:

$$L_N=2^{N(N1)/4}\underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }[\alpha +(j1)/2]}{\mathrm{\Gamma }[1/2+(j1)/2]}.$$
(84)
This formula is very similar to (66) for the constant $`B_N`$ in the complex case. In fact it is not difficult to rewrite both results in one expression as a function of $`\beta `$. This allows us to write down an equation, which is valid as well in the complex or in the real case, for $`\beta =2`$ and $`\beta =1`$, respectively,

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }[N(2\alpha 1+(N1)\beta /2)/2]}{C_N(\alpha ,\beta )}}={\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }[\alpha +(j1)\beta /2]}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1/2)}}{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^+\mathrm{}}{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{d}x_i}{(1+x_i^2)^{(N1)\beta /2+\alpha }}}{\displaystyle \underset{j<k}{}}|x_jx_k|^\beta .`$ (85)
As result we have a Lorentz type ensemble. The last integral can be found in the book by Mehta (page 350) with $`\gamma =(N1)\beta /2+\alpha `$:

$$J(1,1,\gamma ,\gamma ,\beta /2,N)=\pi ^N2^{N((N1)\beta /2+22\gamma )}\underset{j=0}{\overset{N1}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }[1+(j+1)\beta /2]\mathrm{\Gamma }[2\gamma (N+j1)\beta /21]}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\beta /2)[\mathrm{\Gamma }(\gamma j\beta /2)]^2}.$$
(86)
Inserting this into equ.(85) we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }\left[N\left(2\alpha 1+(N1)\beta /2\right)/2\right]}{C_N(\alpha ,\beta )}}={\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^{N/2}}{2^{N((N1)\beta /2+2(\alpha 1))}}}{\displaystyle \underset{j=1}{\overset{N}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+j\beta /2)\mathrm{\Gamma }[(Nj)\beta /2+2\alpha 1]}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(1+\beta /2)\mathrm{\Gamma }[(Nj)\beta /2+\alpha ]}}.`$ (87)
From the above equality expression we may read out the explicit form of the generalized Hall constants $`C_N(\alpha ,\beta )`$. They allow us to obtain a fairly general expression for the Bures volume of the submanifold of the states of rank $`Nn`$ of the set of complex ($`\beta =2`$) or real ($`\beta =1`$) density matrices

$$S_{N,n}^{(\beta )}=2^{d_n}\frac{\pi ^{(d_n+1)/2}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }((d_n+1)/2)}\underset{j=1}{\overset{Nn}{}}\frac{\mathrm{\Gamma }(j\beta /2)\mathrm{\Gamma }[1+(2n+j1)\beta /2]}{\mathrm{\Gamma }[(n+j)\beta /2]\mathrm{\Gamma }[1+(n+j1)\beta /2]}$$
(88)
where $`d_n=(Nn)[1+(N+n1)\beta /2]1`$ represents the dimensionality of the manifold. In a sense, this formula may be considered as a brief summary of the paper: for $`n=0`$ the last factor simply equals unity and (88) gives the Bures volume of the entire space of density matrices, equal to that of a $`d_0`$-dimensional hyper–hemisphere with radius $`1/2`$. In the case $`n=1`$ we obtain the volume of the surface of this set, while for $`n=N1`$ we get the volume of the set of pure states

$$S_{N,N1}^{(\beta )}=\frac{\pi ^{(N1)\beta /2}\mathrm{\Gamma }(\beta /2)}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(N\beta /2)},$$
(89)
which for $`\beta =1(2)`$ gives correctly the volume of the real (complex) projective space of dimension $`N1`$. This result can be seen directly from equations (52,43). In the case of a real projective space the volume is equal to that of a hemisphere of dimension $`N1`$ and radius $`1`$: $`\pi ^{N/2}/\mathrm{\Gamma }(N/2)`$. The final formulas are probably correctly continued to general positive $`\beta `$, though we have strictly proven them only for $`\beta =1,2`$.

## VI Concluding remarks

In this work we have computed the volume of the set of complex (real) density matrices with respect to the Bures measure. Interestingly, this volume is equal to that of a hyper-hemisphere of radius $`1/2`$ and the same dimensionality. However, this fact does not mean that the geometry of the set of complex density matrices induced by the Bures metric is identical with the geometry of a hemisphere of dimensionality $`N^21`$ embedded in $`^{N^2}`$. This is the case for $`N=2`$, for which the set $`_2`$ is isomorphic with the Uhlmann hemisphere $`\frac{1}{2}𝐒^3`$, of a constant constant positive curvature, embedded in $`^4`$.

On the other hand, in the general case, $`N3`$, the curvature of the set $`_2`$ induced by the Bures metric is not constant. To explain this fact, rigorously analyzed by Dittmann Di99b , consider the set of pure states for $`N=3`$. This manifold forms a complex projective space, $`P^2`$, and contains, on one hand, the sphere $`𝐒^2=P^1`$ and on the other, the real projective space $`P^2`$. The latter is equivalent to a hemisphere, (with all antipodal points identified), so it has a different geodesic length and curvature different than $`P^1`$. Hence the set of mixed states for $`N>2`$ analyzed with respect to the Bures metric, which preserves the geometry of the manifold of pure states, cannot have a constant curvature. Note that the Hilbert–Schmidt distance induces a flat geometry of the space of mixed states, (i.e. with the curvature equal to zero), for an arbitrary dimensionality $`N`$.

The Bures measure, related to statistical distance, Fisher information and Jeffreys’ prior, is often used to define and compute the probability that a random density matrix satisfies a certain condition. For instance such an approach was applied to find the probability that a random state acting on a given composed Hilbert space is separable Sl99 ; Sl02 ; Sl03 . In this work we computed the Bures-Hall normalization constants, which may be useful to extend such calculations for higher–dimensional problems.

Results presented in this work may also be considered as a contribution to the theory of random matrices. A closest work in this field is due to Eynard and Kristjansen EK95 , who analyzed the O(n) model on a random lattice. We introduced a different class of ensembles of random matrices defined by the joint probability density of eigenvalues

$$P^{(\beta )}(\rho _1,\rho _2,\mathrm{},\rho _N)=C_N(1,\beta )\frac{\delta (\rho _1+\rho _2+\mathrm{}+\rho _N1)}{\sqrt{\rho _1\rho _2\mathrm{}\rho _N}}\underset{\nu <\mu }{}\frac{|\rho _\nu \rho _\mu |^\beta }{(\rho _\nu +\rho _\mu )^{\beta /2}},$$
(90)
with normalization constants computed in (87), which for $`\beta =2`$ and $`\beta =1`$ gives the Bures measure on the set of complex and real density matrices, respectively. The density of eigenvalues for these ensembles will be studied in a forthcoming publication SZ04 . It might be also instructive to analyze a family of such ensembles by allowing the parameter $`\beta `$ to admit arbitrary real values. In the limit $`\beta 0`$ this distribution tends to the Dirichlet distribution of order $`1/2`$. It describes the distribution of squared components of a real random vector, i.e. a column (or a row) of a random ortogonal matrix generated according to the Haar measure on $`O(N)`$ Zy99 ; ZS01 .

It is a pleasure to thank P. Slater for inspiring correspondence and many helpful remarks. We are also grateful to U. Ambresch, I. Bengtsson and W. Słomczyński for fruitful discussions. Financial support by Komitet Badań Naukowych in Warsaw under the grant 2P03B-072 19 and the Sonderforschungsbereich /Transregio 12 der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft is gratefully acknowledged.