Arxiv:Quant-Ph/0606221V2 25 May 2007
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Sub Shot-Noise interferometric phase sensitivity with Beryllium ions Schr¨odinger Cat States Luca Pezz´eand Augusto Smerzi CNR-INFM BEC Center and Dipartimento di Fisica - Universit`a di Trento, I-38050 Povo, Italy Interferometry with NOON quantum states can provide unbiased phase estimation with a sensi- tivity scaling as ∆θ ∼ 1/NT given a prior knowledge that the true phase shift θ lies in the interval p −π ≤ θ ≤ π. The protocol requires a total of NT = 2 − 1 particles (unequally) distributed among p independent measurements and overcomes basic difficulties present in previously proposed approaches. We demonstrate the possibility to obtain a phase sensitivity beating the classical shot- noise limit using published probabilities retrieved experimentally for the creation of Schr¨odinger cat quantum states containing up to N = 6 beryllium ions. Introduction. Interferometry plays a central role in arbitrary phase. It is widely believed that interferometry the development of basic science and new technologies. with the state Eq.(3) can estimate unknown phase shifts Its main goal is to estimate phase shifts generated by the with sensitivity at the Heisenberg limit Eq.(2)[13]. This interaction of the interferometer with some external per- claim is often accompanied by a simple example. The turbation in domains spanning from micro-scales, as in phase shift, induced by an external classical perturbing iJˆzθ the measurement of Casimir forces, to cosmic-scales, as field, is created by the unitary operator Uˆθ = e− , in the detection of gravitational waves. The precise esti- where the generator of the unknown phase translation mation of phases is limited by two quite different sources θ is the two-mode relative number of particles opera- of noise. Classical noise can be created by micro-seismic tor, Jˆz = (Nˆa Nˆb)/2. The projection of the new state geological activities, temperature fluctuations, poor de- − i(θN+φ) ΨN (θ) = Uˆθ ΨN = ( N, 0 + e 0,N )/√2 over tection efficiencies which, in principle, can be arbitrarily the| initiali one| givesi | i | i reduced. A second source of uncertainty is provided by 2 2 the laws of Quantum Mechanics, and cannot be reduced ΨN ΨN (θ) = cos (Nθ/2). (4) |h | i| beyond the limits imposed by Heisenberg uncertainty re- Orthogonality, Ψ Ψ (θ) = 0, is first reached at θ = lations and the Cramer-Rao lower bound [1]. Interferom- N N π/N, which wouldh | suggesti that the smallest measur- etry with uncorrelated particles allows phase estimations able± phase shift is of the order of 1/N as well. There with sensitivity bounded by the standard quantum limit is a problem, though: in interferometry the incremental (shot-noise) [2] phase shift, albeit supposedly small, is unknown and the 1 phase estimation based on the projective measurement ∆Θ = , (1) sn 1/2 Eq.(4) is ambiguous. Indeed, Ψ Ψ (θ) = 0 when N N N T θ = (2n + 1)π/N, with n =0, 1h, 2,...,N| i1. Orthogo- ± − where NT is the total (or average) number of particles nality alone is not sufficient to determine n, with unpleas- employed in the interferometric process. Yet, this is not ant consequences when trying to estimate the unknown the ultimate limit imposed by Quantum Mechanics. value of θ with an arbitrary large number of particles and In the last few years, it has become clear that quantum complete prior ignorance. The 2π/N oscillation period of entanglement has the potential to revolutionize interfer- Eq.(4) is typical in quantum enhanced technology with arXiv:quant-ph/0606221v2 25 May 2007 ometry by allowing phase estimations with sensitivities state Eq.(3). For instance, the multipeak structure of up to the Heisenberg limit [1, 3] Eq.(4) is present (even if not generally discussed) when measuring the mean value of the parity operator of one 1 of the output modes obtained after the state (3) has been ∆ΘHL = . (2) NT shifted in phase and passed through a 50/50 beam splitter [14, 15]. In this Letter we propose i) a measurement strat- Pioneering works along this direction were initiated in egy for the unambiguous estimation of phase shifts with the early 80s [4], inaugurating a large body of litera- uncertainty 1/N by using the state Eq.(3), within ii) ture proposing new quantum states and strategies for sub T a rigorous Bayesian∼ analysis of the measurement results shot-noise performances [5, 6]. Quite recently, several ef- which can be implemented experimentally incorporating forts have been directed to the experimental realization decoherence and classical noise and iii) maximum priori of NOON states [7, 8, 9] (often called Schr¨odinger cats ignorance about the phase shift: π θ π (but we will [10, 11, 12] in the context of trapped ions): also consider the case of an arbitrary− ≤ smaller≤ prior). The 1 iφ protocol requires p independent interferometric measure- ΨN = N, 0 + e 0,N . (3) ments performed with NOON states having a different | i √2 | i | i p 1 number of particles, N =1, 2, 4, ..., 2 − . The sensitivity The state N, 0 contains N particles in mode a and 0 par- is calculated as a function of the total number of particles ticles in mode| bi(vice versa the state 0,N ), while φ is an used in the process, N =2p 1. | i T − 2 0.4 0.4 iθJˆ A C by applying the operator e− z . The final state, ob- 0.3 0.3 tained after a further application of UˆN , is projected over 0.2 0.2 N . Quantum Mechanics provides the probability to | ↑i 0.1 0.1 have N at the output (which will be denoted as a | ↑i 0 0 “yes” result), given the unknown phase shift θ and the 3 1.5 number of particles, N, of the cat state: P (yes N,θ) = B D ˆ | ˆ iθJz ˆ 2 2 Nθ 2 1 N UN e− UN N = cos 2 . Notice that phase distribution |h↑ | | ↓i| this probability is identical to Eq.(4). The probability 1 0.5 to obtain a “no” result is, obviously, P (no N,θ)=1 | − 0 0 P (yes N,θ). A single interferometric experiment consists −1 −0.5 0 0.5 1 −1−0.5 0 0.5 1 | φ / π φ / π of p independent measurements. We collect a number py of “yes” and pn = p py of “no” results with probability P (p ,p N ,θ), N −being the total number of particles p y n| T T FIG. 1: Phase probability distribution Eq.(6) with p = 1, used in the p measurements. According to the Bayes the- NT = 15 (A), and Eq.(9) with p = 4, NT = 15 (B). In orem [6, 19], we have Pp(φ NT ,py,pn)P (NT ,py,pn) = P (p ,p N , φ)P (φ), where| P (φ) is fixed by the prior both cases, the total number of particles is the same, but the p y n| T distribution of B gives a phase sensitivity at the Heisenberg knowledge and P (NT ,py,pn) provides the normalization 2 k limit. In C we plot the terms cos (2 φ/2) of Eq.(9). The solid of Pp(φ NT ,py,pn), which is a phase probability distri- blue line is for k = 0, the dashed red line for k = 1 and the bution.| We have dot-dashed green line for k = 2. By multiplying these three distributions, as in Eq.(9), all peaks, except the one centered py +pn around the true value of the phase shift, θ = 0, are washed P (φ N ,p ,p ) P (φ N , r ), (5) p | T y n ≈ | j j out to give the phase distribution D (NT = 7 and p = 3). jY=1 where N = py +pn N and r yes (no) if, in the T j=1 j j ≡ From the experimental point of view, the demonstra- j th measurement,P done with Nj particles, we obtain − tion of the Heisenberg limit Eq.(2) requires the creation a “yes” (“no”) result. Equation(5) contains all the avail- of Schr¨odinger cat states with a minimum of N = 8 parti- able information needed to estimate θ. We can choose, as cles, which is within the reach of the present state-of-the- estimator Θest, the maximum of the phase distribution, art. Cat states with up to 6 ions [12] and 5 photons [9] and, as uncertainty ∆Θ, the 68%-confidence interval [6], have been recently reported. As far as realistic techno- namely the phase interval containing 68.27% probabil- Θest+∆Θ logical applications are concerned, however, Heisenberg ity given by dφ Pp(φ NT ,py,pn)=0.6827. In Θest ∆Θ | limited interferometry with NOON states Eq.(3) would the following,R for− analytical simplicity, we will consider, likely never overcome the performances of classical in- unless explicitly specified, the case in which the mea- terferometry Eq.(1), where the typical number of parti- surement results are only “yes”: py = p, pn = 0. That cles NT can be several orders of magnitude larger. We happens with certainty at θ = 0. The extension to an ar- therefore extend the previous protocol to reach sub shot- bitrary value of θ, where both “yes” and “no” are acces- p noise sensitivity ∆Θssn/∆Θsn 1/√2 1, which can sible, will be discussed in [20], also including decoherence ∼ − be implemented experimentally with an arbitrarily large effects. number of particles. We address the possibility to reach 1/NT periodicity of the Bayesian phase distribu- over 3 db sub shot-noise in realistic ion and photon ex- tion. Let us first analyze the interferometric experiment periments within the current technology [8, 9, 10, 11, 12], with a state ΨNT of NT particles and a single measure- both in presence of a strong priori constraint and in the ment: p = 1.| Thei phase distribution becomes more general case of a complete prior ignorance.