Arxiv:2010.13851V2 [Quant-Ph] 7 May 2021 Ieteerywr Nteﬁl.Bnuat[ Bondurant Summa- ﬁeld

arXiv:2010.13851v2 [quant-ph] 7 May 2021 ieteerywr ntefil.Bnuat[ Bondurant summa- field. briefly the now in We work early infancy. the its rize in is amplifiers tum ierapiescnadls os hnlna amplifiers linear than noise non- less [ such add that signal can known as amplifiers is such it linear signal situations, not input some is In genuine the output of amplitude. A the property which some in in logic. device linear a and is switching, electronics, amplifier nonlinear classical rectification, in for used e.g., widely are non- amplifiers genuinely technologies, linear quantum in common not are linear a with treated be can they theory. treated so be and may imperfections nonlinearities as residual where regimes ear [ oscillators and mechanical mea- circuits microwave quantized the for become workhorse surement have amplifiers quantum-limited Such u iiso wthn n lsia oi [ logic classical of and switching theory quan- on systematic elucidate limits a help tum addition, could amplifiers In nonlinear quantum quantum noise. the the account formulate into of to takes nature that possible theory is consistent it a if technology, quantum useful oeetsae,uigacnetal ipe approach of simpler discrimination conceptually sat- a binary that using for receiver states, a limit coherent of Helstrom construction the allows additive urates no This with amplifier noise. phase-insensitive nonlinear a [ experi- nonlinear mentally dark-matter axion the [ ment in e.g., science, damental [ transduction signal one i.e., called noise are of quanta, number amount of minimum units the half adding to close h uptsga slnal eae oteiptsignal, input the [ to understood related well linearly is are signal which noise output for The devices the amplifiers, unitarity. linear quantum of in of theory, requirement properties quantum the from from arises particular otherwise, or linear tion, 11 ept hspoie h nlsso olna quan- nonlinear of analysis the promise, this Despite hl mlfir htoeaei o-ierregime non-linear a in operate that amplifiers While h udmna hscllmto inlamplifica- signal on limit physical fundamental The .Ti ugssta olna mlfir a ea be may amplifiers nonlinear that suggests This ]. 9 .Atog ayo hs mlfir r funda- are amplifiers these of many Although ]. anlmt hnue ncnucinwt os ierdete noi linear vacuum noisy operator. a of normal with half-quantum the conjunction o of a in class measurements used only a when add introduce limit, We and gain operator understood. normal well any not are analogues tum olna mlfir uha h rnitraeuiutu i ubiquitous are transistor the as such amplifiers Nonlinear .INTRODUCTION I. 1 eklyCne o unu nomto n optto,B Computation, and Information Quantum for Center Berkeley unu iiso os o ls fnnieramplifiers nonlinear of class a for noise on limits Quantum 10 7 3 , eateto hmsr,Uiest fClfri,Berkel California, of University Chemistry, of Department 1 2 ,te r yial prtdi lin- in operated typically are they ], 8 eateto hsc,Uiest fClfri,Berkeley California, of University Physics, of Department – eryM Epstein, M. Jeffrey 6 n o h dacmn ffun- of advancement the for and ] 5 .Te loso rms for promise show also They ]. .Lna mlfir htcome that amplifiers Linear ]. 4 iet optn,75HizAeu,Bree,C 41,US 94710, CA Berkeley, Avenue, Heinz 775 Computing, Rigetti nvriyo ooaoBudr ole,Clrd 00,U 80309, Colorado Boulder, Boulder, Colorado of University 5 eateto lcrcl optradEeg Engineering Energy and Computer Electrical, of Department quantum-limited ,2 1, 13 12 proposed ] ]. .Brit Whaley, Birgitta K. Dtd a 1 2021) 11, May (Dated: . in o olna mlfir pcfi opoo counting rela- photon input-output to specific [ proposed approach, amplifiers have concrete nonlinear for authors more tions a of In number They a amplifiers. amplifier. relations linear nonlinear input-output a for approximate of specific that added derived than the also less that be found could and noise amplifiers nonlinear by added ihterajit.Frteeapiesteaddnoise added the amplifiers commute these that For (operators adjoint). their operator with normal Sec- any In amplify amplifiers. linear tion quantum phase-preserving of beta snnieri h edmdsit linear schemati- a illustrated into as modes modes, Fig. field in field the cally the in of observ- nonlinear quadrature some is transduce that may able amplifiers be- non- quantum example, or For transduction linear system systems. of different same in kind the observables tween a in observables as nonlinear different viewed that between be realization Our may the by amplification amplifiers. guided nonlinear quantum is of presentation notions basic the attention. little received has n ookr [ coworkers and hnteerirpooa yDlnr[ Dolinar by proposal earlier the than I.1 h ragedntsannierapie ihinput with amplifier nonlinear relation a denotes output triangle The 1. FIG. hwta ntehg-anlmt esrmn of measurement a limit, high-gain the in that show trta snnierin nonlinear is that ator h nenlmode internal The niecetlna esrmn .Tesmls nontrivial simplest The by followed is Λ. amplifier case measurement this linear of inefficient an application via implemented be 16 h ups fti ril st ytmtclydevelop systematically to is article this of purpose The nSection In , 17 III f ,3 1, .S a hserywr nnnieramplification nonlinear on work early this far So ]. edvlpacaso w-oeapiesthat amplifiers two-mode of class a develop we , tr,teeapiesipeetideal implement amplifiers these ctors, = Nonlinear Amplifier lsia ehooy u hi quan- their but technology, classical n g n ohaCombes Joshua and a olna mlfir htamplify that amplifiers nonlinear f † a 1 II hc mlmnsapoo ubrdetector. number photon a implements which , . ea h upt ntelarge- the In output. the at se a ebifl eiwteetbihdtheory established the review briefly we , 15 out y A970 USA 94720, CA ey, ree,C 42,USA 94720, CA erkeley, A970 USA 94720, CA , b ,drvdgnrlbud ntenoise the on bounds general derived ], in = fteapie sntdepicted. not is amplifier the of gf a Detector in Linear in + SA Λ and/or , b in A where , ,5 4, a in † and , ≡ f in 14 sanra oper- normal a is g .Kouznetsov ]. stegi.We gain. the is Nonlinear Detector f f in may - 2 at the output can be less than a half-quantum of vacuum where bin is an internal mode of the device. Unitarity fluctuations, independent of gain. Moreover these ampli- of this transformation is equivalent to the condition that fiers can facilitate measurement of the normal operator aout satisfies the bosonic commutation relation, which with a noisy linear detector, as illustrated in Fig. 1. Since constrains the coefficients τi [2]. Moreover since aout is the class of normal operators includes both Hermitian linearly related to the input operators, this is a linear and unitary operators, this constitutes a practical route transformation on the input operators ain and bin. to ideal measurements of a broad range of operators. We The most widely-studied linear amplifiers are the present explicit Hamiltonians generating these amplifiers; phase-preserving linear amplifiers, for which the added such interactions generalize the von Neumann model of noise is independent of the phase of the input signal [1, 2]. measurement. We illustrate the general formalism with These are a special case of Eq. (1) with examples, including a photon number resolving detector 2 † built from a nonlinear amplifier, which show an improve- aout = gain + g 1bin, (2) ment of measurement efficiency over linear amplification − p † 2 † techniques. where g > 1 is the amplitude gain, L = g 1bin is In Section IV we introduce a class of three-mode non- the added noise operator arising from the coupling− to the p linear amplifiers that also amplify normal operators. In internal mode bin. Eq.(2) can be realized via a paramet- these amplifiers the amplified output signal is encoded ric interaction generating the two-mode squeeze operator into a system of two meters, which is similar to the fa- S(r) = exp[r(ab a†b†)], where the squeezing parameter mous model of Arthurs and Kelly [18]. This realization of r is related to the− gain by g = cosh r [4]. Typically one the normal operator nonlinear amplifier provides a fur- assumes the initial states in modes a and b are uncorre- ther improvement in the noise properties over the two lated. If bin = 0, as is the case when the b mode starts mode realization. in vacuum,h thei output contains an amplified version of In Section V we discuss single mode nonlinear ampli- the input: aout = g ain [2]. fiers. These amplifiers enable measurement of any func- The noiseh of ani amplifierh i is defined to be the symmet- tion of a field quadrature of that mode. Such amplifiers rically ordered second moment of the operator carrying also require some single mode squeezing. The added noise the signal in these amplifiers is O(e−r), where r is the squeezing 2 2 2 2 2 factor, so the noise may be exponentially decreased by ∆aout = g ∆ain + (g 1) ∆bin , (3) h| | i h| | i − h| | i increasing the squeezing. We conclude with a summary 2 and discussion of some open questions in Section VI. where for some operator O, ∆O := O O and O := 1 † † − h i | | 2 (OO + O O). The first term of Eq. (3) represents the amplified noise intrinsic to the signal and the second term II. PHASE-PRESERVING LINEAR represents the noise added by the amplifier. Applying the AMPLIFICATION uncertainty principle to the added noise operator gives [2] ∆L 2 1 [L,L†] = 1 (g2 1) , (4) Real measurement devices are inherently noisy. It is h| | i≥ 2 |h i| 2 − thus common to amplify signals prior to measurement. A which implies that for non-trivial gain, i.e., for g > 1, quantum amplifier works by transforming some combina- the added noise on the bosonic mode is bounded below tion of the “input” mode operators unitarily to “output” by 1/2 in units of number quanta. Note also that the mode operators in a way that facilitates more precise added noise is independent of the input signal, but does measurements by subsequent noisy detection. In this depend on the gain. section we briefly review the theory of quantum linear The symmetric variance of a written in terms of amplifiers, established in the work of Haus and Mullen 2 1 2 2 quadratures, is ∆a = 2 [ (∆x) + (∆p) ]. Thus [1], generalized and refined by Caves [2]. Readers seek- we may write Eq.h| (2)| ini termsh of Hermitiani h quadraturei ing a detailed general introduction to this subject are components xout and pout that are related to the modal encouraged to consult references [1–5]. annihilation operator by aout = (xout + ipout)/√2 and Consider a signal carried in a single bosonic mode ain, obey [xout,pout] = i. The added noise with respect to † obeying [ain,ain] = 1. In the Heisenberg picture, the these quadrature components is † 1 amplifier acts to transform ain into aout = U ainU. The 2 2 2 2 2 simplest amplifiers are the linear amplifiers with input- (∆xout) = g (∆xin) + (g 1) (∆xb,in) (5a) h i h i − h i output relations (∆p )2 = g2 (∆p )2 + (g2 1) (∆p )2 , (5b) h out i h in i − h b,in i † † aout = τ0ain + τ1ain + τ2bin + τ3bin, (1) and the added noise is termed phase-insensitive if 2 2 (∆xb,in) = (∆pb,in) . h One ofi theh main usesi of quantum amplification is in measurement. A general quantum measurement 1 We work in a frame in which fast oscillations at the carrier fre- is represented by a positive operator valued measure iω t quency e± c are removed for all modes. (POVM) whose elements correspond to measurement 3 outcomes [19]. In practice, there is often a distinction Therefore, when bin = 0 we can transduce the expec- between the desired ideal POVM and the one that repre- tation value of a nonlinearh i operator into that of a linear sents the noisy measurement performed in the lab. This operator. noisy measurement may be represented by a “smeared” The noise on the output signal may be characterized version of the ideal POVM elements. It is possible, how- by the symmetrically ordered second moment of aout, ever, to approach the ideal measurement by applying an 2 2 2 2 appropriate amplifier to the system before use of the ∆aout = g ∆fin + ∆bin . (9) h| | i h| | i h| | i noisy detector [20, 21]. In particular, for the case of a phase-preserving linear amplifier, a noisy heterodyne Notice that the added noise is gain independent, in measurement can be purified to an ideal measurement in contrast to the gain dependence of the noise evident the large gain limit [1, 2] as shown in detail by [20]. In in Eq. (3). Moreover, if we assume that the internal the following section we shall establish a similar result mode b is prepared in the vacuum state, then the added for nonlinear amplifiers. noise is equal to exactly one half quantum of vacuum noise: ∆b 2 = 1 2. Now by decomposing f into real h| | i 2 in and imaginary parts, i.e. fin = (fR + ifI )/√2 with III. TWO-MODE NONLINEAR AMPLIFIERS [fR,fI ] = 0, we can then determine the noise in the x and p quadratures of aout:

In this section we show how to transduce a signal car- 2 2 2 2 (∆xout) = g (∆fR) + (∆xb,in) (10a) ried by an operator which may be nonlinear in the input h i h i h i (∆p )2 = g2 (∆f )2 + (∆p )2 . (10b) creation and/or annihilation operators into a linear ob- h out i h I i h b,in i servable, at the cost of adding exactly a half quantum of We see that the real and imaginary parts of f are en- vacuum noise. in coded in orthogonal quadratures of a and are amplified We consider the class of amplifiers with input-output out equally. This is directly analogous to Eq. (5) for the lin- relation ear amplifier. If the added noise on the two quadratures is symmetric at the input, it will also be symmetric at the a = gf + b , (6) out in in output. However, a crucial difference from the linear amplifier is that now the added noise is gain-independent, where fin is a normal operator on the Hilbert space of mode a, g is the gain, and b is an internal mode. Such in both quadratures. Finally, Eq. (10) highlights the fact an amplifier is reasonable to study when mode a is used that in order to measure the signal encoded in a normal to carry a signal encoded in the statistics of the operator operator fin, since both fR and fI are required, it is nec- f, which we refer to as the signal operator. The normal- essary to measure both output quadratures. This can be accomplished via heterodyne measurement. ity of the signal operator ensures that aout inherits the canonical commutation relation directly from b . An important special case of Eqs. (8) and (9) is when in the signal operator f is Hermitian. In this case no signal Equation (6) is deceptively simple. Recall that a nor- is carried in the p quadrature of a and the signal mal operator is one that commutes with its adjoint, out out and noise of the output quadrature x are given by f,f † = 0, and to which the spectral theorem applies out [22]. For example, when f has a discrete spectrum we xout = √2g fin , (11a) have h i h i (∆x )2 =2g2 (∆f )2 + (∆x )2 , (11b) h out i h in i h b,in i f = f e e where f C, (7) i | iih i| i ∈ i respectively. As before, the added noise is independent X of gain. When the bin mode is prepared in vacuum the 2 1 3 and ei ej = δi,j . Thus a measurement of a normal op- added noise is equal to ∆xb,in = 2 . Equation (11) eratorh can| i be constructed from projective measurements shows that in this case oneh can measurei the expectation of Ei = ei ei [23, 24]. Although Eq. (7) has a discrete value of the signal operator fin by performing a homo- spectrum,| ih the| results in this manuscript also hold when dyne measurement of the outputh ix quadrature. Note that f has a continuous spectrum. Whenever fin cannot be squeezing the internal mode bin at the input will result written as linear combination of a and a† , we say that in reduced noise ∆x2 = 1 e−2r for r > 0, where r is in in h b,ini 2 the amplifier is nonlinear. Thus the nonlinear amplifier the squeezing parameter from the single-mode squeezing in Eq. (6) includes amplification of normal operators such operator S(r, φ) = exp[r(b2e−2iφ b†2e2iφ)] [25]. † † − as a4 a†4, unitary operators such as e−iχa a aa, and Her- − † mitian operators such as the parity operator ( 1)a a. − Just as for the linear amplifier, when b = 0 the 2 h ini The noise on the mode is conventionally specified in units of amplified signal is contained in the first moment of the number quanta. output operator, 3 The added noise on the quadrature is given here in dimensionless units, which translate to ~/ω for electromagnetic modes and to a = g f . (8) ~/mω for an oscillator with mass. h outi h ini 4

In order to demonstrate the utility of this kind of am- where p is the momentum operator on the internal mode plifier, we consider the task of estimating the expectation b. In practice, p may be replaced with any quadrature of a Hermitian operator fin in a given input state. We ap- operator. We shall refer to the unitary generated by HI ply the amplifier described by Eq. (6) with mode b in vac- as V . In Appendix A2 we show that V induces the cor- uum and then perform a homodyne measurement whose rect input-output relation for the b mode. Performing outcome enables estimation of the expectation value. We a SWAP operation between a and b modes after imple- then define the estimator menting V , we arrive at Eq. (6). One of the interesting things about the Hamiltonian f = E[x ]/√2g, (12) h ini out constructions of Eqs. (14) and (16) is that they are more general than the input-output relation given in Eq. (6), where the hat denotes an estimator and E[.] denotes an d because here f need not be a modal operator. For ex- expectation over measurement trials. This estimator is ample, the f appearing in Eq. (14) could be a qubit op- E unbiased: fbin = fin . The variance of the estimator erator such as f = 0 1 1 0 , which is normal but quantifies itsh precision:i h i | ih | − | ih | non-Hermitian. In this case, Eq. (9) still applies, with d a b . For the Hermitian example of Eq. (16) there 1 out ↔ out Var fin = Var [fin]+ , (13) are a few instances already recognised and experimentally h i 4g2 implemented in the literature. Thus the “longitudinal in- where Var [O]= Od2 O 2 is the variance of a projec- teraction” of references [27–29] can be viewed as a non- tive measurementh ofi the − h operatori O. Thus, in the large linear amplifier for which f = σz, and the x quadrature is gain limit g , this strategy using nonlinear amplifi- used instead of p. The corresponding interaction Hamil- † cation followed→ ∞by linear (homodyne) detection will yield tonian is proportional to σz(b + b ), and thus Eq. (11) an estimator with the same variance as a perfect projec- applies. The same is true of the standard optomechanical interaction Hamiltonian a†a(b + b†). In this case in- tive measurement of fin. Furthermore, as noted above, if the internal mode b is prepared in a squeezed vacuum put amplitude fluctuations in mode a get amplified into state, the added noise may be further reduced at finite output quadrature fluctuations [30]. This amplification gain. action has been experimentally implemented in Ref. [31].

A. Hamiltonian and Unitary realization B. Use with noisy linear measurements

In order to aid the realization of amplifiers with the We now show that preamplification by a nonlinear am- properties described above, we now turn our attention plifier followed by a noisy linear measurement, can result to constructing a physical interaction that gives rise to in an ideal (i.e., a projective) measurement of the normal the input-output relation in Eq. (6). We introduce an operator fin in the large gain limit, as depicted in Fig. 1. internal mode b and consider the interaction Linear measurements in the optical and microwave do- mains are typically destructive. For this reason, we focus H = iκ(f †b fb†), (14) 4 I − − on determining the POVM elements . We noted previously that in the large gain limit, the where κ is a coupling constant, and f and b are opera- first and second moments of the amplified signal for Her- tors defined at the input. Realizing a large gain in such mitian f match the statistics of an ideal projective mea- a Hamiltonian could be achieved by introducing a pump surement of f. This suggests that these types of ampli- mode in a high-amplitude coherent state, which is thus fiers are intimately related to the von Neumann measure- approximately classical. The unitary generated by this ment model. Indeed, Eq. (16) is the classic von Neumann Hamiltonian is U = exp( iH t) (we set ~ = 1 through- I measurement model (see Chap. VI, Sec. 3 in Ref. [32]5). out), which results in the following− input–output relation Note that in this section we take the amplifier unitaries on the b mode, from Sec. IIIA, i.e., without making a CV SWAP be- † tween the two modes, which means that the output sig- bout = U binU = gfin + bin, (15) nal is in the b mode and thus the linear measurement is with gain g = κt. For a detailed derivation of Eq. (15), performed on that mode. see Appendix A1. To bring Eq. (15) into the form of In the case when fin is normal, it is transduced with Eq. (6), we assume that b is an oscillator mode and per- gain into mode b. When this amplification is followed by form a continuous-variable (CV) SWAP gate between modes a and b after the action of U. The CV SWAP exchanges the full Hilbert space of the two modes [26]. We now turn our attention to the specific case in which 4 Moreover, these also lead to the canonical Kraus operators, which f is Hermitian. In this situation Eq. (14) becomes can be taken as the square root of the POVM elements. 5 h ∂ Specifically “For this we choose the particular form 2πi q ∂r ” which is Hint = ~xp in modernized notation. HI = √2κfp, (16) 5 a noisy heterodyne measurement of mode b, it results in function centered at x =0 an effective POVM on mode a with elements 2 2 e−x /2ǫ † φ = dx φ(x) x where φ(x)= , (22) Eβ = 0b U MβU 0b , (17) | ib | ib (πǫ2)1/4 h | | i Z where β is the complex measurement outcome and U here the position variance of this wavefunction is Var[x]= is the unitary generated by Eq. (14), which depends on 1 2 2 ǫ . In this case, preamplification followed by a homo- the amplifier gain g = κt. In Reference [20] it is shown dyne measurement results in an effective measurement of that inefficient heterodyne detection corresponds to the f with POVM elements POVM † 1 2 −|γ−β|2/σ2 Ex(σ,g,ǫ)= φ b V MxV φ b Mβ = d γe γ γ , (18) h | | i π2σ2 | ih | g (x f )2 Z = exp g2 − i i i . 2 2 2 2 2 π(σ + ǫ ) − σ + ǫ | ih | where γ is a coherent state, σ = (1 η)/η, and η is the i | i − X (23) detector efficiency. This may be interpreted as a Gaus- p sian smearing of the perfect heterodyne POVM element 2 [21]. Using the spectral representation of fin, see Eq. (7), The case of ǫ = 1 corresponds to the probe being pre- detailed calculations that are given in Appendix B1 lead pared in vacuum. Then as the probe wave function be- to the POVM6 comes squeezed in the position quadrature, the contri- bution from ǫ2 = e−2r becomes negligible as the squeez- 2 2 g 2 β fi ing parameter r increases from zero. Once again, in the Eβ(σ, g)= 2 exp g | 2− | ei ei . π(σ + 1) "− σ +1 # | i h | large-gain limit, the POVM elements approach an ideal i projective measurement of f , when the outcomes x are X (19) in properly coarse-grained into decision regions. † Equation (19) describes complex valued outcomes β that For the case of fin = a a, the implementation of an are normally distributed about the discrete eigenvalues effective projective measurement of fin via this approach of combining preamplification with a noisy measurement fi of fin. The complex plane may be tiled with decision has been realized in an optomechanical system [31]. Fig- regions Ri fi, and the outcome β associated to the ∋ ure 4 of Ref. [31] shows that as the gain increases the ef- label i for which β Ri (see Chapter 2 of Ref. [33]). In the limit g , the∈ function inside the sum in Eq. (19) fective measurement of the photon number, via an ineffi- → ∞ cient homodyne measurement, approaches the ideal limit. limits to δ(β fi), so in this limit the decision regions turn the POVM− into a projective measurement of f: For the case of fin = σz, the improvement of measurement quality has been observed in two experiments using 2 superconducting qubits coupled to microwave cavities. lim d β Eβ(σ, g)= ei ei . (20) g→∞ In these experiments, the longitudinal interaction [27] is Ri | ih | Z used to implement an amplifier that allows higher SNR Furthermore, outside of this limit, the signal-to-noise ra- (see Fig. 2 (b) of Ref. [28]) or lower average measurement tio (SNR) increases with gain. For example if the primary error (see Fig. 3 of Ref. [29]) for qubit readout relative to mode is prepared in an eigenstate ei , then the signal- the usual dispersive measurement accomplished via noisy 2 | i 2 to-noise ratio is SNR = fi / (σ + 1)/g , and thus for heterodyne detection. any g > 1 the SNR will| then| be correspondingly larger than the g = 1 value. p Now consider the case when fin is Hermitian and di- C. Example: Quadratic amplifiers agonal in the orthonormal basis i . We apply the amplifier unitary V that is generated| byi the Hamiltonian in Suppose that we are interested in estimating second Eq. (16), and then perform an inefficient or noisy homo- moments of a, i.e. the quantities a2 , a†a , and a†2 . dyne measurement on mode b with POVM elements One way to obtain an estimate of this signal is to cal-

1 2 2 culate higher order moments of a from the outcomes of M = dy e−(y−x) /σ y y , (21) x √πσ | ih | linear measurements, and from this data to infer the sec- Z ond moments. Such techniques can be inefficient, since where y is a quadrature eigenstate and σ2 = (1 η)/4η bounding errors on the estimates of second moments re- [20, 21|].i Mode b is prepared in a Gaussian position− wave quires the computation of fourth moments (see for example [34]). An alternative is to use a nonlinear amplifier followed by a linear detector. We now consider the fam- ily of such amplifiers for which the signal operator fin 6 † This result is for the case where fin has a discrete spectrum. To is quadratic in a and a , and analyze the effective mea- obtain the continuous spectrum case one replaces the sum over surements resulting from following these amplifiers with i with an integral. linear measurements. 6

Quadratic ampliﬁers are described by signal operators input photon number is transduced into output photon of the general form7 number. The primary diﬀerence between our nonlinear

2 † †2 number amplifier and these other proposals is that our fin = αa + βa a + γa + δ11, (24) signal is stored in a field quadrature. This permits a number resolving measurement to be implemented where α,β,γ,δ C and normality of f is enforced (see in using linear detectors, which is easier to implement than Appendix C) by∈ asserting α 2 = γ 2, αβ∗ = βγ∗, and with existing number resolving detectors. Recently an δ is unconstrained. Notice| in| Eq. (|24| ) we have dropped input-output relation a = gn ψ ψ + b was the ‘in’ designation on the modal operators for notational out 0 0 in proposed in Ref. [39]. This differs from⊗ | ourih input-output| compactness. Thus, as shown in the previous section, relation Eq. (6) by the further inclusion of a projector these amplifiers, used in conjunction with linear detec- ψ ψ onto a third system with Hilbert space . tors, can measure operators quadratic in the field modes 0 0 c | Weih now| compare the statistical efficiency of estimatingH with half a quantum of added noise. We now examine two simple cases of the quadratic am- the mean photon number of a signal using our nonlinear amplifiers to what can be achieved using linear ampli- plifiers given in Eq. (24). These are the signal operators fiers. Suppose that instead of a nonlinear amplifier and a 1 2 †2 † 1 linear detector as considered in the previous subsection, f± = 2 (a + a )+ a a + 2 11. (25) ± we have a phase-preserving linear amplifier, see Eq. (2), It is easy to verify that the signal operator f+ corresponds together with a linear detector. We consider the linear to x2. Then Eq. (11) tells us that the operator x2 is amplifier to be applied to the mode a with the internal transduced into the xout quadrature, which implies that mode b in vacuum, followed by a heterodyne measure- the nth moment of fin is transduced into the nth moment ment of mode a, resulting in the outcome α C. We 2 ∈ xout. Because x is Hermitian, the added noise may again define the estimator for the mean photon number as be suppressed by squeezing the internal mode b of the α 2 amplifier as discussed above. Similarly, the f− signal nˆ = | | 1. (27) operator is seen to correspond to p2, and hence p2 is g2 − transduced into x by the f amplifier. out − Computing the mean and variance ofn ˆ yields (see Ap- Photon number amplifiers have applications in mi- pendix D for the derivation) crowave and optical photon number detection. To obtain † a photon number amplifier fn from Eq. (24), we choose E [ˆn]= a a (28a) f f = a†a. In the optical domain, significant exper- n in Var [ˆn] = Var a†a + a†a +1. (28b) imental≡ progress has been made on number resolving detectors and their ultimate limitations [35, 36]. Neverthe- Here Var a†a is the variance of a projective measure- less, they remain costly and inefficient. In the microwave ment of the photon number operator. Comparing the domain, much theoretical [37] and experimental [38] ef- variance in Eq. (28b) to Eq. (13), we see that for g > 1/2 fort has gone into developing number resolving detectors the scheme of nonlinear amplification with f = a†a fol- for itinerant microwave photons. For this reason we in- lowed by homodyne detection provides a clear improve- vestigate this amplifier in more detail below. ment for number measurement over this entirely linear If one assumes a Fock state n in the input mode a | i in scheme. and vacuum or squeezed vacuum in the bin mode, then from Eq. (11) we have IV. THREE-MODE NONLINEAR AMPLIFIERS x = √2gn and ∆x 2 = 1 or 1 e−2r, (26) h outi h| out| i 2 2 which implies a signal-to-noise ratio SNR = In this section we consider a special class of three-mode 2 xout / ∆xout of 2gn for the vacuum input nonlinear amplifiers that amplify normal operators, and andh 2iergnh|for a squeezed| i input. Thus with this amplifier that have improved noise properties relative to their two and a linearp detector, one can measure the photon num- mode counterparts in Section III. Detailed calculations ber in a single shot when g 1.8 This number amplifier for the results below can be found in Appendix E. is related to but distinct from≫ earlier work [16, 17] that In this setup we wish to measure or to amplify a normal has proposed photon number amplifiers with input- operator f on system a. To do so we couple the real and † † imaginary parts of the normal operator f to two indepen- output relations of the form aoutaout ga ain, i.e., ∝ in dent probe systems or “meters” and then subsequently measure both meter systems to simultaneously reveal information about fR and fI . Inspired by the model of 7 One might expect the anti-normally ordered term aa† to appear Arthurs and Kelly [18], we consider the Hamiltonian in Eq. (24), using the commutation relations one can see that † † aa = a a + 11 which re-scales the β term and adds the δ term. Hm = κ(fRpb + fI pc) (29) 8 Making the gain more nonlinear in the photon number could † M be even more advantageous, e.g., with fM = (a a) , the SNR where p is the momentum operator for the i’th internal M i becomes SNR = 2gn when bin is in vacuum. mode. The unitary transformation generated by Hm is 7 denoted by W . This unitary amplifies (or transduces) the Eq. (33) can be written as real and imaginary parts of f into the position quadra- 2 2 tures of the two meters in modes b and c, respectively. g β fk E (σ,g,ǫ)= exp g2 | − | e e . This is apparent from the input-output relations for the β π(σ2 + ǫ2) − σ2 + ǫ2 | kih k| k position operator of both meters X (34)

out in out in xb = gfR + xb , and xc = gfI + xc , (30) Now we relate the meter variances to the initial squeezing, ǫ2 = e−2r. This implies that for r> 0, the POVM in where g = κt as before. The corresponding noise in the Eq. (34) has less noise than the POVM in Eq. (19). Nev- position quadratures at the output is ertheless, in the high-gain limit, both of these POVMs limit to the ideal measurement of the normal operator f. (∆xout)2 = g2 (∆f )2 + (∆xin)2 (31a) h b i h R i h b i (∆xout)2 = g2 (∆f )2 + (∆xin)2 . (31b) V. SINGLE MODE NONLINEAR AMPLIFIER h c i h I i h c i These expressions resemble Eq. (10), the noise in those In a single mode, a linear transformation from the in- expressions is either unequally correlated (perhaps due put annihilation operator to the output operator has the to squeezing) between the two quadratures or equal to form the minimal value of 1 in both quadratures. In contrast, 2 † here we can start with the two auxiliary modes in un- aout = µain + νain, (35) correlated squeezed states. This allows us to generate a where µ = cosh r and ν = e2iφ sinh r; c.f. Eq. (1). reduction of the added noise in both meters, specifically − in 2 1 −2r A device that implements this transformation is known (∆xi ) = 2 e for i [b,c]. Thus the total added noiseh cani approach zero as∈ r . as a single-mode linear amplifier. The transformation in → ∞ Eq. (35) is enacted by a single-mode squeezing operator We now show that when supplemented with linear de- [25]. In some situations this is known as phase sensitive tectors, this two meter measurement results in a POVM amplification because the gain and noise both depend that measures the normal operator f. Since there are two on the squeezing angle φ, i.e. on which quadratures are meters in this setup, the heterodyne detection by a single squeezed and antisqueezed [2]. In microwave quantum meter in Sec. III is now replaced with two meters that optics, phase sensitive amplifiers are used to turn het- output the measurements of two noisy homodyne detec- erodyne measurements into homodyne measurements by tors. We prepare the two meters in uncorrelated Gaus- selectively amplifying a desired quadrature. It is well sian states, see Eq. (22). To derive the expressions below, known that phase-sensitive amplifiers can also be used to we have assumed equally noisy homodyne detectors, as improve the quality of inefficient homodyne measurement characterized by σ2, and the position wave functions of when used as a preamplifier, see e.g. Refs [2, 7, 21, 40– meters φ and φ have the same variance. b c 42] and [43–45]9. This is also explained in detail by In this situation the coupled amplification and homo- Dall’Arno et al. [20]. dyne measurements result in a POVM on the Hilbert Our goal in this section is to develop single-mode non- space of mode a: Ha linear amplifiers. Such amplifiers could be used to, e.g., coherently transduce f that is non-linear in ain into a † Exb,xc = φb, φc W Mxb Mxc W φb, φc (32) linear quadrature such as p for quantum control pur- h | | i out g2 poses, or to allow perfect measurements of f with a linear = 2 2 detector. Because the analysis is necessarily phase sensi- π(σ + ǫ )× iθ k tive, we define a rotated mode aθ = ae and a rotated X R 2 I 2 † (xb f ) + (xc f ) quadrature x = (a + a )/√2. For a single mode, we exp g2 − k − k e e . θ θ θ − σ2 + ǫ2 | kih k| propose nonlinear amplifier input-output relations of the (33) form

† aout = γfin(xθ)+˜µaθ +˜νaθ, (36) Here xb and xc are the outcomes of the two independent 2 noisy homodyne measurements and ǫ /2 is the variance where f is any well behaved function of the rotated of the position wave function of the meters. Clearly the iϕ iθ iθ quadrature xθ, and γ = ge ,µ ˜ = µe ,ν ˜ = νe . two measurement outcomes of this POVM are peaked When the signal operator f is nonlinear in xθ, a device around the real and imaginary eigenvalues values of the normal operator f. To facilitate a direct comparison of this POVM to the POVM in Eq. (19), we change variables and define a 9 In these references the noise channel preceding measurement can single complex outcome from the two real outcomes, β = be composed with the measurement operators to give an effective R I noisy POVM that is purified by pre-amplification. xb + ixc. Recognizing fk = fk + ifk, we then see that 8 that implements this transformation is called a nonlin- measurement. Finally, we have shown that these non- ear amplifier. It has been shown that the unitarity con- linear amplifiers, when coupled with noisy linear mea- straint is enforced by ensuring that µ˜ 2 ν˜ 2 = 1 and surements, can nevertheless achieve perfect measurement Re[˜µγ∗ ν˜∗γ] = 0 [46]. These input-output| | − | | relations of normal operators in the large-gain limit. This may may be− realized via Hamiltonian evolution [46] or via find application in fault tolerant measurements of stabi- measurement-based approaches [47]. lizers and logical operators in bosonic codes with trans- The amplifier described above contains a phase redun- lation [48] and rotation [49] symmetries. dancy. To simplify the analysis, we specialize to θ = 0, There are several key insights gained from these re- ϕ = π/2, φ = π/2, which gives the input-output rela- sults. We take the point of view that amplification or tion − transduction is a perspective through which one can analyze any quantum channel, rather than a property of a † aout = igfin(xin) + cosh rain + sinh rain. (37) particular class of channels. Moreover is fruitful to think of amplification in terms of transduction, i.e., translat- If we measure the quadrature xout, we obtain no informa- ing a signal stored in one physical quantity to a signal r tion about the signal operator: xout = e xin. If, however, stored in another. An example of this is the transduc- we look at the pout quadrature, then we find tion of photon number into a quadrature. Another observation is that preservation of the commutation relations −r pout = √2gfin(xin)+ e pin . (38) from input to output is equivalent to the existence of a unitary operation that implements our nonlinear am- Examining the second moment of pout in the large gain plifiers. If the signal operator is normal, then the com- limit yields mutation relations are enforced entirely by the internal mode. As noted in Sec. IIIA, the unitary realization 2 (∆p )2 2g2 ∆f (x ) + O(ge−r), (39) given in this work does not require the signal operator h out i≈ in in fin to be bosonic. It could alternatively be a spin oper- −r −2r 2 since e and e both tend to zero as r increases (see ator such as σz or Jz . Lastly, our work elevates normal Appendix F for more details). Thus in the limit that operators to the status of observables by providing an r , these amplifiers can i) transduce fin(xin) into explicit measurement models for them. The measure- the→ linear ∞ quadrature p, and ii) allow perfect measurement models that we have introduced generalize the von ments of fin(xin) with a linear detector, without adding Neumann [32] model for Hermitian operators, and the 2 noise. The simplest nontrivial case is fin(x)= x , which Arthurs-Kelly model [18] for simultaneous position and would allow measurement of x2 without obtaining any momentum measurements. Thus the class of operators information about sgn(x). that defines projection-valued measurements is now seen to coincide with the class that can be measured using the coupling to a single (or two) oscillator modes equipped VI. CONCLUSIONS with linear measurement devices. There are many open questions remaining. In the cur- Dramatic improvement in linear amplifier performance rent work we have only explored two specific kinds of non- has significantly advanced quantum technology by facil- linear input–output relation. However, there are many itating precise measurements of microwave circuits and other classes of nonlinear amplifiers that are also concep- quantum mechanical oscillators. In this work, we have in- tually simple. For example, in a single mode one could troduced classes of non-linear amplifiers that have better sensibly consider a Kerr nonlinearity to be a nonlinear noise properties than linear amplifiers. A critical aspect amplifier [50, 51]. For multiple modes the possibilities of the analysis and results obtained here is their illumi- are endless. For example, Bondurant [13] constructs the igc†c iφ nation of the beneficial role of nonlinear amplification in input-output relation aout = [ae + be ]/√2, where the quantum theory of measurement. We hope that im- a,b, and c are bosonic operators. This can be easily gen- † plementation of detectors based on these principles will eralized to aout = (afin(c,c ) + b)/√2, where fin is a enable our “grubby, classical hands” [2] to access more unitary operator. of the pristine quantum realm. Perhaps the most important topic for future work on There are four main achievements of this work. First, nonlinear amplifiers is to analyze common experimental we have introduced a large class of nonlinear amplifiers nonlinearities and determine what measurements they that have negligible added noise. Second, we have pro- can enable. We note that many amplifiers in the mi- vided a unitary interaction model for normal operators, crowave domain are operated in a linearized regime [52, extending von Neumann’s measurement model for Her- 53]. It is interesting to analyze such devices in the nonlin- mitian operators. Third, we have demonstrated that ear regime [54], as well as other nonlinear Hamiltonians, these nonlinear amplifiers, when coupled with linear mea- to see what signal operators the devices are capable of surement devices, can achieve better statistical efficiency measuring outside their linear mode of operation. at estimating signals stored in nonlinear mode observ- Acknowledgments: The authors acknowledge helpful ables than is achievable with linear amplification and discussions with Carl Caves, Leigh Martin, C. Jess 9

Riedel, and John Teufel. JE was supported by the Na- by the Australian Research Council through a Discovery tional Defense Science and Engineering Graduate (ND- Early Career Researcher Award (DE160100356) and by SEG) fellowship and by UC Berkeley via startup fund- the University of Colorado Boulder. ing for Prof. Kranthi Mandadapu. JC was supported

[1] H. A. Haus and J. A. Mullen, “Quantum noise in linear press spontaneous switching in ultralow power optical amplifiers,” Physical Review 128, 2407 (1962). bistability,” Applied Physics Letters 98, 193109 (2011); [2] C. M. Caves, “Quantum limits on noise in linear ampli- “Nonlinear interferometry approach to photonic sequen- fiers,” Physical Review D 26, 1817 (1982). tial logic,” Applied Physics Letters 99, 153103 (2011). [3] A. A. Clerk, M. H. Devoret, S. M. Girvin, F. Marquardt, [13] R. S. Bondurant, “Quantum noise properties of a nonlin- and R. J. Schoelkopf, “Introduction to quantum noise, ear amplifier,” Physical Review Letters 71, 1709 (1993). measurement, and amplification,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, [14] S. J. Dolinar, “An optimum receiver for the binary co- 1155 (2010). herent state quantum channel,” Research Laboratory of [4] C. M. Caves, J. Combes, Z. Jiang, and S. Pandey, Electronics, MIT, Quarterly Progress Report 11, 115 “Quantum limits on phase-preserving linear amplifiers,” (1973). Phys. Rev. A 86, 063802 (2012). [15] D. Kouznetsov Kallistratova and C. F. Cotera, “How [5] J. Aumentado, “Superconducting parametric amplifiers: to characterize the nonlinear amplifier?” in 3rd In- The state of the art in josephson parametric amplifiers,” ternational Workshop on Squeezed States and Uncer- IEEE Microwave Magazine 21, 45 (2020). tainty Relations, edited by Han and K. et al. (1994); [6] B. Yurke, P. G. Kaminsky, R. E. Miller, E. A. Whittaker, D. Kouznetsov-Kallistratova and R. Ortega-Martinez, A. D. Smith, A. H. Silver, and R. W. Simon, “Observa- “The cummings-tavis model as a nonlinear quantum am- tion of 4.2-k equilibrium-noise squeezing via a josephson- plifier,” Quantum and Semiclassical Optics: Journal of parametric amplifier,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 60, 764 (1988); the European Optical Society Part B 7, 517 (1995); T. Yamamoto, K. Inomata, M. Watanabe, K. Matsuba, D. Kouznetsov, R. Ortega-Mart´ınez, and D. Rohrlich, T. Miyazaki, W. D. Oliver, Y. Nakamura, and J. S. Tsai, “Quantum noise limits for nonlinear, phase-invariant am- “Flux-driven josephson parametric amplifier,” Applied plifiers,” Phys. Rev. A 52, 1665 (1995); D. Kouznetsov Physics Letters 93, 042510 (2008); J. D. Teufel, T. Don- and D. Rohrlich, “Noise of a Nonlinear Quantum Am- ner, M. A. Castellanos-Beltran, J. W. Harlow, and K. W. plifier,” in Coherence and Quantum Optics VII, edited Lehnert, “Nanomechanical motion measured with an im- by J. H. Eberly, L. Mandel, and E. Wolf (Springer US, precision below that at the standard quantum limit,” Boston, MA, 1996) pp. 631–632; D. R. D. Kouznetsov, Nature Nanotechnology 4, 820 EP (2009); N. Bergeal, “Quantum noise in the mapping of phase space,” Optics F. Schackert, M. Metcalfe, R. Vijay, V. E. Manucharyan, and Spectroscopy 83, 909 (1997). L. Frunzio, D. E. Prober, R. J. Schoelkopf, S. M. Girvin, [16] H. P. Yuen, “Amplification of quantum states and noise- and M. H. Devoret, “Phase-preserving amplification near less photon amplifiers,” Physics Letters A 113, 405 the quantum limit with a josephson ring modulator,” (1986); “Generation, detection, and application of high- Nature 465, 64 EP (2010); C. Macklin, K. O’Brien, intensity photon-number-eigenstate fields,” Phys. Rev. D. Hover, M. E. Schwartz, V. Bolkhovsky, X. Zhang, Lett. 56, 2176 (1986); G. M. D’Ariano, “Ideal Pho- W. D. Oliver, and I. Siddiqi, “A near–quantum-limited ton Number Amplifier and Duplicator,” in Workshop josephson traveling-wave parametric amplifier,” Science on Squeezed States and Uncertainty Relations, edited by 350, 307 (2015); M. Simoen, C. W. S. Chang, P. Krantz, Han and K. et al. (NASA CP-3135, 1992) p. 311; “Hamil- J. Bylander, W. Wustmann, V. Shumeiko, P. Delsing, tonians for the photon-number-phase amplifiers,” Phys. and C. M. Wilson, “Characterization of a multimode Rev. A 45, 3224 (1992); S.-T. Ho and H. P. Yuen, coplanar waveguide parametric amplifier,” Journal of Ap- “Scheme for realizing a photon number amplifier,” Opt. plied Physics 118, 154501 (2015). Lett. 19, 61 (1994); G. M. D’Ariano, M. F. Sacchi, and [7] H.-K. Lau and A. A. Clerk, “High-fidelity bosonic quan- H. P. Yuen, “On the correspondence between classical tum state transfer using imperfect transducers and inter- and quantum measurements on a bosonic field,” Interna- ference,” npj Quantum Information 5, 31 (2019). tional Journal of Modern Physics B 13, 3069 (1999). [8] E. Zeuthen, A. Schliesser, A. S. Sørensen, and J. M. Tay- [17] T. B. Propp and S. J. van Enk, “On nonlinear amplifi- lor, “Figures of merit for quantum transducers,” Quan- cation: improved quantum limits for photon counting,” tum Science and Technology 5, 034009 (2020). Opt. Express 27, 23454 (2019). [9] D. Kinion and J. Clarke, “Superconducting quantum in- [18] E. Arthurs and J. L. Kelly, “On the simultaneous mea- terference device as a near-quantum-limited amplifier for surement of a pair of conjugate observables,” The Bell the axion dark-matter experiment,” Applied Physics Let- System Technical Journal 44, 725 (1965). ters 98, 202503 (2011). [19] M. A. Nielsen and I. Chuang, “Quantum computation [10] B. A. Kochetov and A. Fedorov, “Higher-order nonlinear and quantum information,” (2002). effects in a josephson parametric amplifier,” Phys. Rev. [20] M. Dall’Arno, G. M. D’Ariano, and M. F. Sacchi, “Pu- B 92, 224304 (2015). rification of noisy quantum measurements,” Phys. Rev. [11] C.-H. Chen, “Signal-to-noise ratios in logarithmic ampli- A 82, 042315 (2010). fiers,” Proceedings of the IEEE 57, 1667 (1969). [21] C. M. Caves, “Reframing SU(1,1) Interferometry,” Ad- [12] H. Mabuchi, “Coherent-feedback control strategy to sup- vanced Quantum Technologies n/a, 1900138 (2020). 10

[22] S. J. Bernau, “The spectral theorem for normal op- R. McDermott, “High-fidelity qubit measurement with erators,” Journal of the London Mathematical Society, a microwave-photon counter,” Phys. Rev. A 90, 062307 Journal of the London Mathematical Society s1-40, 478 (2014); B. Fan, G. Johansson, J. Combes, G. J. Mil- (1965); “The spectral theorem for unbounded normal burn, and T. M. Stace, “Nonabsorbing high-efficiency operators.” Pacific J. Math. 19, 391 (1966). counter for itinerant microwave photons,” Phys. Rev. [23] A. Duncan and M. Janssen, “(never) mind your p’s and B 90, 035132 (2014); M. Schöndorf, L. C. G. Govia, q’s: Von neumann versus jordan on the foundations of M. G. Vavilov, R. McDermott, and F. K. Wilhelm, “Op- quantum theory,” The European Physical Journal H 38, timizing microwave photodetection: input–output the- 175 (2013). ory,” Quantum Science and Technology 3, 024009 (2018); [24] B. W. Roberts, “Observables, disassembled,” Studies in A. L. Grimsmo, B. Royer, J. M. Kreikebaum, Y. Ye, History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in His- K. O’Brien, I. Siddiqi, and A. Blais, “Quantum meta- tory and Philosophy of Modern Physics 63, 150 (2018). material for nondestructive microwave photon counting,” [25] C. M. Caves and B. L. Schumaker, “New formalism for arXiv:2005.06483 [quant-ph] (2020). two-photon quantum optics. I. quadrature phases and [38] S. Kono, K. Koshino, Y. Tabuchi, A. Noguchi, and squeezed states,” Phys. Rev. A 31, 3068 (1985). Y. Nakamura, “Quantum non-demolition detection of an [26] X. Wang, “Continuous-variable and hybrid quantum itinerant microwave photon,” Nature Physics 14, 546 gates,” Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General (2018); A. Opremcak, I. V. Pechenezhskiy, C. Howing- 34, 9577 (2001). ton, B. G. Christensen, M. A. Beck, E. Leonard, J. Sut- [27] N. Didier, J. Bourassa, and A. Blais, “Fast quantum tle, C. Wilen, K. N. Nesterov, G. J. Ribeill, T. Thor- nondemolition readout by parametric modulation of lon- beck, F. Schlenker, M. G. Vavilov, B. L. T. Plourde, gitudinal qubit-oscillator interaction,” Phys. Rev. Lett. and R. McDermott, “Measurement of a superconduct- 115, 203601 (2015). ing qubit with a microwave photon counter,” Science [28] S. Touzard, A. Kou, N. E. Frattini, V. V. Sivak, S. Puri, 361, 1239 (2018); J.-C. Besse, S. Gasparinetti, M. C. A. Grimm, L. Frunzio, S. Shankar, and M. H. Devoret, Collodo, T. Walter, P. Kurpiers, M. Pechal, C. Eich- “Gated conditional displacement readout of supercon- ler, and A. Wallraff, “Single-shot quantum nondemo- ducting qubits,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 080502 (2019). lition detection of individual itinerant microwave pho- [29] J. Ikonen, J. Goetz, J. Ilves, A. Keränen, A. M. Gun- tons,” Phys. Rev. X 8, 021003 (2018); R. Lescanne, yho, M. Partanen, K. Y. Tan, D. Hazra, L. Grönberg, S. Deléglise, E. Albertinale, U. Réglade, T. Capelle, V. Vesterinen, S. Simbierowicz, J. Hassel, and E. Ivanov, T. Jacqmin, Z. Leghtas, and E. Flurin, “Irre- M. Möttönen, “Qubit measurement by multichannel versible qubit-photon coupling for the detection of itiner- driving,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 080503 (2019). ant microwave photons,” Phys. Rev. X 10, 021038 (2020). [30] K. Jacobs, P. Tombesi, M. J. Collett, and D. F. Walls, [39] S. Biswas and S. J. van Enk, “Heisenberg picture of pho- “Quantum-nondemolition measurement of photon num- todetection,” Phys. Rev. A 102, 033705 (2020). ber using radiation pressure,” Phys. Rev. A 49, 1961 [40] C. F. Ockeloen-Korppi, E. Damskägg, J.-M. (1994); C. Laflamme and A. A. Clerk, “Quantum-limited Pirkkalainen, T. T. Heikkilä, F. Massel, and M. A. amplification with a nonlinear cavity detector,” Phys. Sillanpää, “Noiseless quantum measurement and squeez- Rev. A 83, 033803 (2011). ing of microwave fields utilizing mechanical vibrations,” [31] J. B. Clark, F. Lecocq, R. W. Simmonds, J. Aumen- Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, 103601 (2017). tado, and J. D. Teufel, “Observation of strong radiation [41] E. Knyazev, K. Y. Spasibko, M. V. Chekhova, and F. Y. pressure forces from squeezed light on a mechanical os- Khalili, “Quantum tomography enhanced through para- cillator,” Nature Physics 12, 683 (2016). metric amplification,” New Journal of Physics 20, 013005 [32] J. Von Neumann, Mathematical foundations of quan- (2018). tum mechanics: New edition (Princeton university press, [42] Y. Bai, G. Venugopalan, K. Kuns, C. Wipf, 2018). A. Markowitz, A. R. Wade, Y. Chen, and R. X. Adhikari, [33] H. L. Van Trees, Detection, estimation, and modulation “Phase-sensitive optomechanical amplifier for quantum theory, part I: detection, estimation, and linear modula- noise reduction in laser interferometers,” Phys. Rev. A tion theory (John Wiley & Sons, 2004). 102, 023507 (2020). [34] D. Bozyigit, C. Lang, L. Steffen, J. M. Fink, C. Eich- [43] C. S. Jacobsen, L. S. Madsen, V. C. Usenko, R. Filip, and ler, M. Baur, R. Bianchetti, P. J. Leek, S. Filipp, M. P. U. L. Andersen, “Complete elimination of information da Silva, A. Blais, and A. Wallraff, “Antibunching leakage in continuous-variable quantum communication of microwave-frequency photons observed in correlation channels,” npj Quantum Information 4, 32 (2018). measurements using linear detectors,” Nature Physics 7, [44] I. Derkach, V. C. Usenko, and R. Filip, “Squeezing- 154 (2011). enhanced quantum key distribution over atmospheric [35] S. M. Young, M. Sarovar, and F. Léonard, “General channels,” New Journal of Physics 22, 053006 (2020). modeling framework for quantum photodetectors,” Phys. [45] K. Noh, S. M. Girvin, and L. Jiang, “Encoding an oscilla- Rev. A 98, 063835 (2018). tor into many oscillators,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 080503 [36] L.-P. Yang and Z. Jacob, “Single-photon pulse induced (2020). giant response in n > 100 qubit system,” npj Quantum [46] S. D. Siena, A. D. Lisi, and F. Illuminati, “Quadrature- Information 6, 76 (2020). dependent bogoliubov transformations and multiphoton [37] F. Helmer, M. Mariantoni, E. Solano, and F. Mar- squeezed states,” Phys. Rev. A 64, 063803 (2001); Y.Wu quardt, “Quantum nondemolition photon detection in and R. Côté, “Quadrature-dependent bogoliubov trans- circuit qed and the quantum zeno effect,” Phys. Rev. A formations and multiphoton squeezed states,” Phys. Rev. 79, 052115 (2009); L. C. G. Govia, E. J. Pritchett, C. Xu, A 66, 025801 (2002); F. Dell’Anno, S. D. Siena, and B. L. T. Plourde, M. G. Vavilov, F. K. Wilhelm, and F. Illuminati, “Structure of multiphoton quantum optics. 11

i. canonical formalism and homodyne squeezed states,” pect of the improvement of quantum-noise characteris- Phys. Rev. A 69, 033812 (2004); M. Brunelli and tics caused by unitary transformation with a nonlinear O. Houhou, “Linear and quadratic reservoir engineer- optical medium,” Phys. Rev. A 51, 1702 (1995). ing of non-gaussian states,” Phys. Rev. A 100, 013831 [52] S. Boutin, D. M. Toyli, A. V. Venkatramani, A. W. Ed- (2019). dins, I. Siddiqi, and A. Blais, “Effect of higher-order [47] S. Konno, A. Sakaguchi, W. Asavanant, H. Ogawa, nonlinearities on amplification and squeezing in joseph- M. Kobayashi, P. Marek, R. Filip, J.-i. Yoshikawa, and son parametric amplifiers,” Phys. Rev. Applied 8, 054030 A. Furusawa, “Nonlinear squeezing for measurement- (2017). based non-gaussian operations in time domain,” [53] V. Sivak, N. Frattini, V. Joshi, A. Lingenfelter, arXiv:2011.14576 [quant-ph] (2020). S. Shankar, and M. Devoret, “Kerr-free three-wave mix- [48] D. Gottesman, A. Kitaev, and J. Preskill, “Encoding a ing in superconducting quantum circuits,” Phys. Rev. qubit in an oscillator,” Phys. Rev. A 64, 012310 (2001). Applied 11, 054060 (2019). [49] A. L. Grimsmo, J. Combes, and B. Q. Baragiola, “Quan- [54] C. Liu, T.-C. Chien, M. Hatridge, and D. Pekker, “Opti- tum computing with rotation-symmetric bosonic codes,” mizing josephson-ring-modulator-based josephson para- Phys. Rev. X 10, 011058 (2020). metric amplifiers via full hamiltonian control,” Phys. [50] M. Kitagawa and Y. Yamamoto, “Number-phase Rev. A 101, 042323 (2020). minimum-uncertainty state with reduced number uncertainty in a kerr nonlinear interferometer,” Phys. Rev. A 34, 3974 (1986). [51] M. Sasaki, T. S. Usuda, and O. Hirota, “Physical as-

Appendix A: Unitary realization

To realize our nonlinear ampliﬁers we consider the interaction Hamiltonian between the system of interest, with Hilbert space , and a one-dimensional pointer system described by the Hilbert space = L2(R). Ha Hb

1. f is normal

† † † For some normal operator f on mode a we take the interaction Hamiltonian HI = iκ(f b fb ), where [b,b ] = 1. This generates a unitary U(t) = exp( iH t), that we order via the Zassenhaus formula− − − I 2 2 ( † †) † † − g −fb†,f †b † † g † U(t)= e−iHI t = e− f b−fb κt = egfb e−gf be 2 [ ] = egfb e−gf be− 2 f f , (A1) we have also deﬁned g = κt. The series terminates because f †b, fb† = f †f and both f and f † commute with − − f †f. The auxiliary mode operator b evolves as follows: 2 2 † − g f †f −gfb† gf †b gfb† gfb† −gf †b − g f †f bout = U (t)bU(t)= e 2 e e b,e + e b e e 2 (A2)

2 2 g † † † h † i † g † = e− 2 f f e−gfb egf b b,egfb e−gf be− 2 f f + b (A3)

2 2 g † † † h † i † g † = e− 2 f f e−gfb egf bgfegfb e−gf be− 2 f f + b (A4) = gf + b (A5)

Then if a SWAP operation is performed between the a and b modes the input-output relation is exactly Eq. (6).

2. f is Hermitian

Taking the coupling Hamiltonian H = √2κf p , with p the momentum operator i~∂ on . This is interesting a b b − x Hb because it is the von Neumann model of measurement, which realizes measurement of a self-adjoint operator fa via an interaction between the system and a 1D pointer system. We take xb to be the position operator on the pointer −iHt/~ Hilbert space b and deﬁne V = e . We will makeH use of the following identity for two operators X and Y that commute with the commutator C := [X, Y ], then

esX Ye−sX = Y + s[X, Y ] . (A6) 12

To compute the input-output relations in our application we identify X = ifa pb, Y = ½ xb and s = gt = √2κt. Thus ⊗ ⊗

[X, Y ]= i[f p , ½ x ]= f I = C (A7a) a ⊗ b ⊗ b a ⊗ [C,X]= i[f I,f p ]=0 (A7b) a ⊗ a ⊗ b

[C, Y ] = [f I, ½ x ]=0. (A7c) a ⊗ ⊗ b Then we ﬁnd

out † xb = V xbV = xb + √2gfa. (A8)

† Since H commutes with pb, so we have V pbV = pb. It is easy to ﬁnd input-output relation for the annihilation operator:

out † 1 † 1 a = V abV = V (xb + ipb)V = (xb + √2gfa + ipb)) = ab + gfa. (A9) b √2 √2

Appendix B: Puriﬁed POVM

The purpose of this section is to show that the combination of a nonlinear ampliﬁer and linear measurement results in an ideal measurement of the operator fin in the large gain limit.

1. fin is normal and the linear measurement is heterodyne

An ideal heterodyne measurement with complex outcomes γ is described by the POVM elements

1 E′ = γ γ , (B1) β π | ih | where γ labels the complex outcome and γ is a coherent state. Consider preparing a mode b in the vacuum state 0b , performing the unitary transformation U| generatedi by the Hamiltonian Eq. (14) to the joint system, and performing| i ideal heterodyne measurement on the b mode. The POVM element associated with the outcome γ is

2 gfb† − g f †f Note that this is an operator on the a mode. Above we used Eq. (A1) to ﬁnd U 0b = e 0b e 2 and the spectral theorem representation of f see Eq. (7). | i | i Consider a noisy heterodyne measurement, see Dall’Arno et al. [20], given by the POVM elements

1 2 2 1 2 2 1 η M = d2γe−|γ−β| /σ E′ = d2γe−|γ−β| /σ γ γ , where σ2 := σ2(η)= − , (B5) β πσ2 γ π2σ2 | ih | η Z Z where η is the eﬃciency of the heterodyne detection. Exploiting linearity, we have the eﬀective POVM elements 13

g2 φ f 2 E = exp g2 | − i| e e . (B11) φ π(1 + σ2) − 1+ σ2 | ii h i| i " # X We can check that the POVM elements resolve the identity

2 ηg 2 2 M = e−ηg |φ−fi| e e . (B13) φ π | ii h i| i X Both Gaussian functions in Eq. (B11) and Eq. (B13) limit to delta functions in the large gain limit.

2. fin is Hermitian and the linear measurement is homodyne

We model a noisy homodyne measurement by the POVM elements

1 2 2 M = dy e−(y−x) /σ y y , (B14) x √πσ | ih | Z which is the case for ineﬃcient quadrature detection [20, 21]. We now consider using the nonlinear ampliﬁer unitary V for Hermitian fin [generated by Eq. (16)] and measuring mode a using the noisy homodyne POVM in Eq. (21). ∞ Additionally mode b starts in a state φ b = −∞ dx φ(x) x b with Gaussian wave function centered at x = 0, i.e. 2 2 2 1/4 | i | i φ(x) = exp[ x /2ǫ ]/(πǫ ) . R The corresponding− POVM elements are

1 2 2 E = φ V †M V φ = φ V † 11 dy e−(y−x) /σ y y V φ (B15) x h |b x | ib h |b ⊗ √πσ | ih | | ib Z 1 2 2 = φ V † i i dy e−(y−x) /σ y y V φ (B16) h |b | ih |⊗ √πσ | ih | | ib i ! X Z 1 2 2 = dy e−(y−x) /σ φ V † y y V φ i i (B17) √πσ h |b | i h | | ib | i h | i X Z 1 2 2 = dy e−(y−x) /σ y gf φ 2 i i . (B18) √πσ | h − i| ib | | i h | i X Z 14

2 Note that y gfi φ b is simply the overlap between a position eigenstate and a Gaussian so y gfi φ b = 2 h2 − | i | h − | i | e−(y−gfi) /ǫ /√πǫ2. Using this we integrate the resulting Gaussian convolution

2 2 2 2 2 1 1 −(y−x) /σ −(y−gfi) /ǫ 1 (x gfi) Ex = dy e e i i = exp − i i . (B19) √πσ √ 2 | ih | 2 2 − (σ2 + ǫ2) | ih | i πǫ i π(σ + ǫ ) X Z X Changing variables to x′ = x/g the POVM becomes p

′ 2 g 2 (x fi) Ex′ = exp g − i i , (B20) 2 2 − σ2 + ǫ2 | ih | i π(σ + ǫ ) X 2 1−η p and σ = 4η where η is the homodyne detection eﬃciency. This converges to a projective measurement of f in the same sense as described in the previous subsection. We can check that the POVM resolves the identity:

′ 2 ′ ′ g 2 (x fi) dx Ex′ = dx exp g − i i = i i = 11. (B21) 2 2 − σ2 + ǫ2 | ih | | ih | i π(σ + ǫ ) i Z X Z X p Appendix C: Commutation constraints on two mode quadratic ampliﬁers

A generic quadratic operator has the form

2 † †2 fin = αa + βa a + γa + δ11 (C1) where α,β,γ,δ C. To enforce normality, we require ∈ † ∗ 2 † ∗ 2 †2 ∗ † †2 ∗ † 2 ∗ †2 † ∗ †2 2 0= fin,fin = αβ a ,a a + αα a ,a + βα a a,a + βγ a a,a + γβ a ,a a + γγ a ,a h i = 2(αβ∗ βγ∗)a2 + 2(αα∗ γγ∗) aa† + a†a + 2(βα∗ γβ∗)a†2 (C2) − − − which results in the conditions α 2 = γ 2, αβ∗ = βγ∗, βα∗ = γβ ∗, and δ is unconstrained. The last two conditions are simply complex conjugates of| | each| other,| so are redundant.

Appendix D: Statistical Eﬃciency of the two mode example

The heterodyne measurement is given by the POVM E and the probability of obtaining the outcome α is Pr(α ρ): α | 1 1 E = α α , Pr(α ρ)= α ρ α . (D1) α π | ih | | π h | | i The expectation of the heterodyne outcome after ampliﬁcation is:

E [(α∗)nαm]= Am(A†)n = (ga + g2 1b†)m(ga† + g2 1b)n . (D2) − − D p p E In particular if the b mode is in vacuum:

E α 2 = g2 a†a + g2 and E α 4 = g4 a2(a†)2 . (D3) | | | | h i h i 2 |α| † In the main text we deﬁned the estimator (denoted by the hat)n ˆ = 2 1, with mean a a and variance g − 4 2 α α 2 2 Var [ˆn]= E nˆ2 E [ˆn]2 = E | | 2| | +1 a†a = a2(a†)2 2 a†a a†a 1 (D4) − g4 − g2 − − − − 2 = (a†a)2 +3a†a +2 2 a†a a†a 1 (D5) − − − † † = Var a a + a a + 1 (D6) where Var a†a is the variance of a projective measurement of the operator a †a. 15

Appendix E: An Arthurs-Kelly like model

Arthurs and Kelly introduced a model for simultaneous measurements of position and momentum [18]. The model coupled the position and momentum of a single system to two independent probe systems or “meters” and then a subsequent measurement of those meter systems revealed information about both position and momentum. We generalize this model to provide a diﬀerent measurement model for a normal operator that relies on two probe systems and subsequent position measurements. Thus the simultaneous measurements of position and momentum of a single meter in our model (heterodyne detection) gets replaced with two meters and two homodyne detectors.

1. Hamiltonian and input-output relations

We have three modes now a b c, the normal operator f = (fR + ifI )/√2 is on mode a and xj ,pj for i, j b,c are the position andH momentum⊗ H ⊗ H operators on such that [x ,p ]= iδ . The interaction Hamiltonian is ∈ Hj j k j,k H = κ(f p I + f I p ). (E1) m R ⊗ a ⊗ c I ⊗ b ⊗ c Because [p ,p ] = [f,p ] = [f,p ] = 0 and [f ,f ] = 0 the corresponding unitary W = exp[ iH t] can be written as b c b c R I − m W = exp[ iκt(f p + f p )] = e−igfRpb e−igfI pc = e−igfI pc e−igfRpb , (E2) − R b I c where g = κt as before. The input-output relations for the meters are

out † in in out † in in xb = W xb W = gfR + xb and xc = W xc W = gfI + xc , (E3)

in As [fR, xb ] = 0 etc. it is easy to compute the expected noise at the output.

2. Use with measurements: the eﬀective POVM

The position wave functions φ (x) of the meter states, φ = ∞ dxφ(x) x , are a Gaussian centered at x =0 i | ii −∞ | ii R 1 2 2 −x /(2ǫi ) φi(x)= 2 1/4 e . (E4) (πǫi )

The ideal position (homodyne) measurement on the meters b and c is described by the projector P = y ,y y ,y yb,yc | b cih b c| where xi yi = yi yi . To describe ineﬃcient detection we use the POVM Myb,yc = 11a Myb Myc where Mx is the noisy homodyne| i POVM| i is given in Eq. (21). The POVM operator for the eﬀective measurement⊗ ⊗ on is Ha

E = φ , φ W †M W φ , φ = φ , φ W †(11 M M )W φ , φ , (E5) yb,yc h b c| yb,yc | b ci h b c| a ⊗ yb ⊗ yc | b ci technically we should include the measure i.e. dybdycEyb,yc . Our goal is for Eq. (E5) to measure the normal operator f. First note that as [fR,fI ] = 0 this implies the operators can be simultaneously diagonalized

R I fk + ifk fR + ifI f = fk ek ek = ek ek = (E6) | ih | √2 | ih | √2 Xk Xk = ˜fR + i˜fI e e = f˜ + if˜ (E7) k k | kih k| R I Xk

Using this fact with the orthogonality of the eigenvectors of f, i.e., e e ′ = δ ′ , and the completeness of the h k| k i k,k 16 eigenvectors, i.e. e e = I , we ﬁnd k | kih k| a 1 P 1 ′ 2 2 ′ 2 2 E = dy′ dy′ e−(yb−yb) /σb e−(yc−yc) /σc y′ e−igfRpb φ 2 y′ e−igfI pc φ 2 (E8) yb,yc √πσ √πσ b c | h b| | bi | | h c| | ci | b c Z Z 1 1 ′ 2 2 ′ 2 2 ′ ′ −(yb−yb) /σb −(yc−yc) /σc = dyb dyce e √πσb √πσc ′ × Xk,k Z Z R I ′ −igf pb 2 ′ −igf pc 2 e e y e k φ e ′ e ′ y e k′ φ (E9) | kih k|⊗|h b| | bi | × | k ih k |⊗|h c| | ci | 1 1 ′ 2 2 ′ 2 2 R I ′ ′ −(yb−yb) /σb −(yc−yc) /σc ′ −igfk pb 2 ′ −igfk pc 2 = dyb dyce e yb e φb yc e φc ek ek . √πσb √πσc | h | | i | |h | | i | | ih | k X Z Z :=K (E10) | {z } Let’s simplify the term labeled K. We use the form of the position wave function and x e−ipiχ = x χ we ﬁnd ih | ih − | ′ R 2 2 ′ I 2 2 −(yb−gfk ) /ǫb −(yc−gfk) /ǫc 2 ′ R 2 2 ′ I 2 e e K = dxb φ(xb) yb gfk xb dxc φ(xc) yc gfk xc = . (E11) | | | − | | | | | − | | πǫ2 πǫ2 Z Z b c

This lets us write the POVM as p p

−(y′ −gfR)2/ǫ2 −(y′ −gfI )2/ǫ2 ′ 2 2 b k ′ 2 2 c k 1 ′ −(y −yb) /σ e 1 ′ −(y −yc) /σ e Ey ,y = dy e b b dy e c c ek ek . (E12) b c √πσ b 2 √πσ c 2 b πǫb c πǫc | ih | Xk Z Z Performing both Gaussian integrals we obtain p p

R 2 2 2 I 2 2 2 e−(yb−gfk ) /(ǫb +σb ) e−(yc−gfk ) /(ǫc+σc ) Ey ,y = ek ek . (E13) b c 2 2 2 2 π(ǫb + σb ) π(ǫc + σc ) | ih | Xk p p Finally we change variables (and the measure) toy ˘b = yb/g andy ˘c = yc/g the POVM becomes

2 R 2 I 2 g 2 (˘yb fk ) 2 (˘yc fk) Ey˘ ,y˘ = exp g − exp g − ek ek (E14) b c 2 2 2 2 ǫ2 + σ2 ǫ2 + σ2 π (ǫb + σb )(ǫc + σc ) − b b − c c | ih | Xk 2 p 2 2 2 2 2 Assuming equal squeezing (ǫ = ǫb = ǫc) and homodyne noise (σ = σb = σc ) we obtain g2 (˘y fR)2 +(˘y fI )2 E = exp g2 b − k c − k e e (E15) y˘b,y˘c π(σ2 + ǫ2) − σ2 + ǫ2 | kih k| Xk ˜R ˜I By parameterizing φ =y ˘b + iy˘c and fk = fk + ifk, i.e. the parameterization in Eq. (E7), g2 φ f 2 E = exp g2 | − k| e e (E16) φ π(σ2 + ǫ2) − σ2 + ǫ2 | kih k| Xk

This is a valid POVM because it is manifestly positive and it is complete: dφEφ = 11a. The complex measurement outcome φ is centered around the complex eigenvalues of f. R

Appendix F: Single mode example

† In the main text we proposed nonlinear ampliﬁer input-output relations of the form aout = γfin(xθ)+˜µaθ +˜νaθ. Using a parametrization similar to Ref. [46] we have

iϕ iθ γ = ge aθ = ae µ = cosh r µ˜ = µeiθ ν = e2iφ sinh r ν˜ = νeiθ. − 17

The commutation relations to be preserved from input to output when Re[˜µγ∗ ν˜∗γ] = 0. This becomes − 0 = Re[˜µγ∗ ν˜∗γ]= g cosh r cos(θ ϕ)+ g sinh r cos(θ ϕ 2φ) = cosh r cos(θ ϕ) + sinh r cos(θ ϕ 2φ), − − − − − − − note the sign here is different from previous works [46] because we have a different convention for the sign of the squeeze coefficients, specifically ν. Nevertheless the condition is satisfied if cos(θ ϕ) = 0 and cos(θ ϕ 2φ) = 0. Now lets set θ = 0 so that cos( ϕ) = cos(ϕ) = 0 and cos( ϕ 2φ) = cos(ϕ +2−φ) = 0. Thus ϕ = −π/2− is a valid solution for the first equation. We− choose the ϕ = π/2 solution.− − This means cos( π/2+2φ)= sin(2± φ) = 0 which in turn means we can take φ = 0. Summarizing we have − −

θ = 0 (rotated quadrature angle), ϕ = π/2 (gain phase), φ = π/2 (squeezing angle). (F1) − † Using these parameters we obtain Eq. (37) in the main text: aout = igf(x) + cosh ra + sinh ra . It is easy to verify that aout preserves the commutation relations

† † aout,aout = ig (sinh r + cosh r)[f(x),a] + (cosh r + sinh r) f(x),a + 1 (F2) h i = ig(sinh r + cosh r) [f(x),a]+ f(x),a† + 1 (F3) = √2ig(sinh r + coshr)[f(x), x]+1 (F4) =1 (F5)

The output quadrature

† (aout + aout) † † r † r xout = = (cosh rain + sinh ra + cosh ra + sinh rain)= e (ain + a )/√2= e xin. (F6) √2 in in in

The orthogonal output quadrature, i.e. p = i(a a† )/√2, is out − out − out

i † † † −r pout = − igf(xin)+ cosh rain + sinh ra + igf(xin) cosh ra sinh ra = √2gf(xin)+ e pin. (F7) √2 in − in − in Now we work out the symmetrically ordered noise

∆p 2 =2g2 f(x )2 + √2ge−r f(x )p + p f(x ) + e−2r p2 h| out| i h in i h in in in in i h ini 2g2 f(x ) 2 + √2ge−r ( f(x ) p + p f(x ) )+ e−2r p 2 (F8) − h in i h in ih ini h inih in i h ini h2 2 −r i −2r 2 =2g ∆f(xin) + √2ge ( f(xin)pin + pinf(xin) ( f(xin) pin + pin f(xin) )) + e ∆pin h| | i h i− h ih i h ih i h| |(F9)i

In the large squeezing limit we obtain the results stated in the main text.