Should monogamy of entanglement be defined via equalities or inequalities?

This work focuses on the entanglement quantification. Specifically, we will go over the properties of entanglement that should be satisfied by a “good” entanglement measure. We will have a look at some of the propositions of the entanglement measures that have been made over the years. Then we will be ready to discuss the proposals of the mathematical representations of another property of entanglement, called monogamy. We will introduce some definitions of monogamous entanglement measures that were proposed and compare them. As an original observation of mine (see page 15, Proof 1), I will also prove that the inequalities (23) and (24) from [C. Lancien, S. Di Martino, M. Huber, M. Piani, G. Adesso and A. Winter Phys. Rev. Lett., 117:060501 (2016).] automatically show that the entanglement of formation and the regularised entropy of entanglement are monogamous entanglement measures in the sense of the definitions that was given in [G. Gour and G. Yu, Quantum 2, 81 (2018).].