DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:Quant-Ph/0412078V1 10 Dec 2004 Lt Eemnto Fteps-Esrmn Tt.When State

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:Quant-Ph/0412078V1 10 Dec 2004 Lt Eemnto Fteps-Esrmn Tt.When State Quantum-Enhanced Measurements: A B Beating the Standard Quantum Limit Vittorio Giovannetti1, Seth Lloyd2, Lorenzo Maccone3 ∆ x ∆ x ∆ p 1 NEST-INFM & Scuola Normale Superiore, Piazza dei Cavalieri 7, I-56126, Pisa, Italy. p x x 2 MIT, Research Laboratory of Electronics and Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, 77 Massachusetts Ave., Cambridge, MA 02139, USA. CD 3 QUIT - Quantum Information Theory Group, Dip. di Fisica “A. Volta”, Universit`adi Pavia, via A. Bassi 6 I-27100, Pavia, Italy. One sentence summary: To attain the limits to measurement preci- sion imposed by quantum mechanics, ‘quantum tricks’ are often required. p p x x Abstract: Quantum mechanics, through the Heisen- Figure 1: The Heisenberg uncertainty relation. In quan- berg uncertainty principle, imposes limits to the pre- tum mechanics the outcomes x1, x2, etc. of the measurements cision of measurement. Conventional measurement of a physical quantity x are statistical variables; that is, they techniques typically fail to reach these limits. Con- are randomly distributed according to a probability determined ventional bounds to the precision of measurements by the state of the system. A measure of the “sharpness” of a such as the shot noise limit or the standard quan- measurement is given by the spread ∆x of the outcomes: An tum limit are not as fundamental as the Heisenberg example is given in (A), where the outcomes (tiny triangles) are limits, and can be beaten using quantum strategies distributed according to a Gaussian probability with standard that employ ‘quantum tricks’ such as squeezing and deviation ∆x. The Heisenberg uncertainty relation states that entanglement. when simultaneously measuring incompatible observables such as position x and momentum p the product of the spreads is lower bounded: ∆x ∆p ≥ ~/2, where ~ is the Planck constant. Measurement is a physical process, and the accuracy to The same is true when measuring one of the observables (say which measurements can be performed is governed by the x) on a set of particles prepared with a spread ∆p on the other laws of physics. In particular, the behavior of systems at observable. [In the general case when we are measuring two small scales is governed by the laws of quantum mechan- observables A and B, the lower bound is given by the expecta- ics, which place limits on the accuracy to which measure- tion value of the commutator between the quantum operators ments can be performed. These limits to accuracy take associated to A and B.] In (B) we see a coherent state (de- two forms. First, the Heisenberg uncertainty relation [1] picted through its Wigner function): it has the same spreads in imposes an intrinsic uncertainty in the values of measure- position and momentum ∆x = ∆p. In (C) and (D), squeezed ment results of complementary observables such as posi- states are shown: they have reduced fluctuations in one of the tion and momentum, or the different components of the two incompatible observables [i.e. x for (C) and p for (D)] at angular momentum of a rotating object (Fig. 1). Second, arXiv:quant-ph/0412078v1 10 Dec 2004 the expense of increased fluctuations in the other. The Heisen- every measurement apparatus is itself a quantum system: berg relation states that the red areas in the plots (given by the as a result, the uncertainty relations together with other product ∆x∆p) must have a surface larger than ~/2. In quan- quantum constraints on the speed of evolution (such as tum optics, the observables x and p are replaced by the in-phase the Margolus-Levitin theorem [2]) impose limits on how and out-of-phase amplitudes of the electromagnetic field, i.e. by accurately we can measure quantities given the amount of its “quadratures”. The Heisenberg principle is so called only physical resources, e.g. energy, at hand to perform the for historical reasons: it is not a principle in modern quantum measurement. mechanics, since it is a consequence of the measurement pos- One important consequence of the physical nature of tulate [1]. Moreover, Heisenberg’s formulation of a dynamical measurement is the so-called ‘quantum back action’: the disturbance necessarily induced on a system by a measurement extraction of information from a system can give rise to was experimentally proven wrong [3]: it is possible to devise ex- a feedback effect in which the system configuration after periments where the disturbance is totally negligible, but where the measurement is determined by the measurement out- the Heisenberg relations are still valid. They are enforced by come. For example, the most extreme case (the so-called the complementarity of quantum mechanics. von Neumann or projective measurement) produces a com- plete determination of the post-measurement state. When 1 performing successive measurements, quantum back ac- known physical laws. A caveat is in order: this review tion can be detrimental, as earlier measurements can nega- cannot be in any way be viewed as complete because the tively influence successive ones. A common strategy to get improvement of interferometry and measurements through around the negative effect of back action and of Heisen- non-classical light is at the heart of modern quantum op- berg uncertainty is to design an experimental apparatus tics. Many more ideas and experiments have been devised that monitors only one out of a set of incompatible observ- than can be possibly reported here. ables: ‘less is more’ [4]. This strategy— called quantum non-demolition measurement [4, 5, 6, 7]— is not as simple C as it sounds: one has to account for the system’s interac- ϕ tion with the external environment, which tends to extract and disperse information, and for the system dynamics, B' D which can combine the measured observable with incom- patible ones. Another strategy to get around the Heisen- berg uncertainty is to employ a quantum state in which A the uncertainty in the observable to be monitored is very A' small (at the cost of a very large uncertainty in the comple- mentary observable). The research on quantum-enhanced B measurements was spawned by the invention of such tech- niques [4, 8, 9] and by the birth of more rigorous treatments of quantum measurements [10]. Figure 2: Mach-Zehnder interferometer. The light field en- Most standard measurement techniques do not account ters the apparatus through the input ports A and B of the for these quantum subtleties, so that their precision is lim- first beam splitter and leaves it through the output ports C ited by otherwise avoidable sources of errors. Typical ex- and D of the second beam splitter. By measuring the inten- amples are the environment induced noise from vacuum sities (photon number per second) of the output beams one fluctuations (the so-called shot noise) that affects the mea- can recover the phase difference ϕ between the two internal surement of the electromagnetic field amplitude, and the optical paths A’ and B’. Formally, the input-output rela- dynamically-induced noise in the position measurement of tion of the apparatus is completely characterized by assign- a free mass (the so-called standard quantum limit [11]). ing the transformations of the annihilation operators a, b, c These sources of imprecision are not as fundamental as the and d associated to the fields at A, B, C and D, respectively. ′ iϕ ′ ′ iϕ ′ unavoidable Heisenberg uncertainty relations, as they orig- These are c (a + ie b )/√2 and d (ia + e b )/√2 with a′ (a≡+ ib)/√2 and b′ (ia + b≡)/√2 the annihila- inate only from a non-optimal choice of measurement strat- ≡ ≡ egy. However, the shot-noise and standard quantum limits tion operators associated to the internal paths A’ and B’, set important benchmarks for the quality of a measure- respectively. ment, and they provide an interesting challenge to devise quantum strategies that can defeat them. It is intrigu- ing that almost thirty years after its introduction [11], the Interferometry: beating the shot noise limit standard quantum limit has not yet been beaten experi- mentally in a repeated measurement of a test mass. In the In this section we focus on the issues arising in ultra- meantime, a paradigm shift has occurred: quantum me- precise interferometric measurements. A prototypical ap- chanics, which used to be just the object of investigation, paratus is the Mach-Zehnder interferometer (Fig. 2). It is now viewed as a tool, a source of exotic and funky effects acts in the following way. A light beam impinges on a that can be used to our benefit. In measurement and else- semi-transparent mirror (i.e. a beam splitter), which di- where, we are witnessing the birth of quantum technology. vides it into a reflected and a transmitted part. These two We describe some of the techniques that have been re- components travel along different paths and then are re- cently developed to overcome the limitations of classical combined by a second beam splitter. Information on the measurement strategies. We start with a brief overview of phase difference ϕ between the two optical paths of the in- some techniques to beat the shot noise limit in interfer- terferometer can be extracted by monitoring the two out- ometry. In the process, we provide a simple example that put beams, typically by measuring their intensity (i.e. the explains the idea behind many quantum-enhanced mea- photon number). To see how this works, suppose that a surement strategies. We then give an overlook on some classical coherent beam with N average photons enters the of the most promising quantum-technology proposals and interferometer through the input A. If there is no phase analyze the standard quantum limit on repeated position difference ϕ, all the photons will exit the apparatus at out- measurements.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Quantum Non-Demolition Measurements
    Quantum non-demolition measurements: Concepts, theory and practice Unnikrishnan. C. S. Tata Institute of Fundamental Research, Homi Bhabha Road, Mumbai 400005, India Abstract This is a limited overview of quantum non-demolition (QND) mea- surements, with brief discussions of illustrative examples meant to clar- ify the essential features. In a QND measurement, the predictability of a subsequent value of a precisely measured observable is maintained and any random back-action from uncertainty introduced into a non- commuting observable is avoided. The fundamental ideas, relevant theory and the conditions and scope for applicability are discussed with some examples. Precision measurements have indeed gained from developing QND measurements. Some implementations in quantum optics, gravitational wave detectors and spin-magnetometry are dis- cussed. Heisenberg Uncertainty, Standard quantum limit, Quantum non-demolition, Back-action evasion, Squeezing, Gravitational Waves. 1 Introduction Precision measurements on physical systems are limited by various sources of noise. Of these, limits imposed by thermal noise and quantum noise are arXiv:1811.09613v1 [quant-ph] 22 Nov 2018 fundamental and unavoidable. There are metrological methods developed to circumvent these limitations in specific situations of measurement. Though the thermal noise can be reduced by cryogenic techniques and some band- limiting strategies, quantum noise dictated by the uncertainty relations is universal and cannot be reduced. However, since it applies to the product of the
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Mechanics As a Limiting Case of Classical Mechanics
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE Quantum Mechanics As A Limiting Case provided by CERN Document Server of Classical Mechanics Partha Ghose S. N. Bose National Centre for Basic Sciences Block JD, Sector III, Salt Lake, Calcutta 700 091, India In spite of its popularity, it has not been possible to vindicate the conven- tional wisdom that classical mechanics is a limiting case of quantum mechan- ics. The purpose of the present paper is to offer an alternative point of view in which quantum mechanics emerges as a limiting case of classical mechanics in which the classical system is decoupled from its environment. PACS no. 03.65.Bz 1 I. INTRODUCTION One of the most puzzling aspects of quantum mechanics is the quantum measurement problem which lies at the heart of all its interpretations. With- out a measuring device that functions classically, there are no ‘events’ in quantum mechanics which postulates that the wave function contains com- plete information of the system concerned and evolves linearly and unitarily in accordance with the Schr¨odinger equation. The system cannot be said to ‘possess’ physical properties like position and momentum irrespective of the context in which such properties are measured. The language of quantum mechanics is not that of realism. According to Bohr the classicality of a measuring device is fundamental and cannot be derived from quantum theory. In other words, the process of measurement cannot be analyzed within quantum theory itself. A simi- lar conclusion also follows from von Neumann’s approach [1].
    [Show full text]
  • The Uncertainty Principle (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Page 1 of 14
    The Uncertainty Principle (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Page 1 of 14 Open access to the SEP is made possible by a world-wide funding initiative. Please Read How You Can Help Keep the Encyclopedia Free The Uncertainty Principle First published Mon Oct 8, 2001; substantive revision Mon Jul 3, 2006 Quantum mechanics is generally regarded as the physical theory that is our best candidate for a fundamental and universal description of the physical world. The conceptual framework employed by this theory differs drastically from that of classical physics. Indeed, the transition from classical to quantum physics marks a genuine revolution in our understanding of the physical world. One striking aspect of the difference between classical and quantum physics is that whereas classical mechanics presupposes that exact simultaneous values can be assigned to all physical quantities, quantum mechanics denies this possibility, the prime example being the position and momentum of a particle. According to quantum mechanics, the more precisely the position (momentum) of a particle is given, the less precisely can one say what its momentum (position) is. This is (a simplistic and preliminary formulation of) the quantum mechanical uncertainty principle for position and momentum. The uncertainty principle played an important role in many discussions on the philosophical implications of quantum mechanics, in particular in discussions on the consistency of the so-called Copenhagen interpretation, the interpretation endorsed by the founding fathers Heisenberg and Bohr. This should not suggest that the uncertainty principle is the only aspect of the conceptual difference between classical and quantum physics: the implications of quantum mechanics for notions as (non)-locality, entanglement and identity play no less havoc with classical intuitions.
    [Show full text]
  • Decoherence and the Transition from Quantum to Classical—Revisited
    Decoherence and the Transition from Quantum to Classical—Revisited Wojciech H. Zurek This paper has a somewhat unusual origin and, as a consequence, an unusual struc- ture. It is built on the principle embraced by families who outgrow their dwellings and decide to add a few rooms to their existing structures instead of starting from scratch. These additions usually “show,” but the whole can still be quite pleasing to the eye, combining the old and the new in a functional way. What follows is such a “remodeling” of the paper I wrote a dozen years ago for Physics Today (1991). The old text (with some modifications) is interwoven with the new text, but the additions are set off in boxes throughout this article and serve as a commentary on new developments as they relate to the original. The references appear together at the end. In 1991, the study of decoherence was still a rather new subject, but already at that time, I had developed a feeling that most implications about the system’s “immersion” in the environment had been discovered in the preceding 10 years, so a review was in order. While writing it, I had, however, come to suspect that the small gaps in the land- scape of the border territory between the quantum and the classical were actually not that small after all and that they presented excellent opportunities for further advances. Indeed, I am surprised and gratified by how much the field has evolved over the last decade. The role of decoherence was recognized by a wide spectrum of practicing physicists as well as, beyond physics proper, by material scientists and philosophers.
    [Show full text]
  • Advancing Quantum Information Science: National Challenges and Opportunities
    ADVANCING QUANTUM INFORMATION SCIENCE: NATIONAL CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES A JOINT REPORT OF THE Committee on Science and Committee on Homeland and National Security OF THE NATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL Produced by the Interagency Working Group on Quantum Information Science of the Subcommittee on Physical Sciences July 2016 Advancing Quantum Information Science: National Challenges and Opportunities EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT NATIONAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY COUNCIL WASHINGTON, D.C. 20502 July 22, 2016 Dear Colleagues: I am pleased to provide to you this report on Advancing Quantum Information Science: National Challenges and Opportunities. Recent advances in quantum information science (QIS) have increased interest and motivated new activity both domestically and internationally, making this report particularly timely. The document has been produced by an Interagency Working Group (IWG) on Quantum Information Science under the Subcommittee on Physical Sciences (PSSC) of the National Science and Technology Council. The report represents a coordinated effort across the numerous agencies and Executive Office of the President components participating in the IWG on QIS, and was informed by interactions with industry, academia, and other stakeholders. It is presented as a joint report of the PSSC’s parent group, the Committee on Science, and of the parallel Committee on Homeland and National Security. Quantum information science offers tremendous promise for both qualitative and quantitative leaps forward in information acquisition, processing, and transmission by exploiting quantum- mechanical phenomena. The field has seen rapid progress and growing attention in recent years, with ramifications across a broad range of fundamental sciences and for both near-term and long- term applications.
    [Show full text]
  • Generation of Spin Squeezed States Via Quantum Non-Demolition Measurements
    Breaking Quantum Limits with Collective Cavity-QED: Generation of Spin Squeezed States via Quantum Non-Demolition Measurements by Zilong Chen B.S., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2004 M.S., University of Colorado at Boulder, 2009 A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Colorado in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Physics 2013 This thesis entitled: Breaking Quantum Limits with Collective Cavity-QED: Generation of Spin Squeezed States via Quantum Non-Demolition Measurements written by Zilong Chen has been approved for the Department of Physics James K. Thompson Jun Ye Date The final copy of this thesis has been examined by the signatories, and we find that both the content and the form meet acceptable presentation standards of scholarly work in the above mentioned discipline. iii Chen, Zilong (Ph.D., Physics) Breaking Quantum Limits with Collective Cavity-QED: Generation of Spin Squeezed States via Quantum Non-Demolition Measurements Thesis directed by Prof. James K. Thompson Large ensembles of uncorrelated atoms are extensively used as precise sensors of time, rota- tion, and gravity, and for tests of fundamental physics. The quantum nature of the sensors imposes a limit on their ultimate precision. Larger ensembles of N atoms can be used to average the quan- p tum noise as 1= N, a scaling known as the standard quantum limit. However, the ensemble size may be limited by technical constraints and/or atom-atom collisions { a fundamental distinction from photon-based sensors. Learning to prepare entangled states of large ensembles with noise properties below the standard quantum limit will be key to extending both the precision and/or bandwidth of atomic sensors.
    [Show full text]
  • DECOHERENCE, CHAOS, QUANTUM–CLASSICAL CORRESPONDENCE and the ARROW of TIME∗ Wojciech H
    Vol. 29 (1998) ACTA PHYSICA POLONICA B No 12 DECOHERENCE, CHAOS, QUANTUM–CLASSICAL CORRESPONDENCE AND THE ARROW OF TIME∗ Wojciech H. Zurek Theoretical Astrophysics, T-6, Mail Stop B288, LANL Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545 (Received December 3, 1998) The environment — external or internal degrees of freedom coupled to the object of interest — can, in effect, monitor some of its observables. As a result, the eigenstates of these observables decohere and behave like classical states. Continuous destruction of superpositions leads to the effec- tive environment-induced superselection (einselection), which is beginning to be recognized as a key step in the transition from quantum to classical. We investigate it here in the context of quantum chaos. I show that the evolution of a chaotic macroscopic system is not just difficult to predict (requiring accuracy exponentially increasing with time) but quickly ceases to be deterministic in principle as a result of the Heisenberg uncertainty (which limits the available resolution). This happens after a time t~ which is only logarithmic in the Planck constant. For example, various compo- nents of the solar system are chaotic, with the Lyapunov timescales ranging from a bit more then a month (Hyperion) to millions of years (planetary system as a whole). On the timescale t~ the initial minimum uncertainty wavepackets corresponding to celestial bodies would be smeared over dis- tances of the order of radii of their orbits into “Schrödinger cat-like” states, and the very concept of a “trajectory” would cease to apply. In reality, such paradoxical states are eliminated by decoherence which helps restore quantum–classical correspondence.
    [Show full text]
  • QUANTUM REALITY and SQUEEZED STATES of LIGHT by ILYA LYUBOMIRSKY B.E.E
    QUANTUM REALITY AND SQUEEZED STATES OF LIGHT by ILYA LYUBOMIRSKY B.E.E. University of Maryland, College Park June 1991 Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degrees of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING AND COMPUTER SCIENCE at the MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY February 1994 ) Massachusetts Institute of Technology 1994 All rights reserved Signature of Author Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science February 1994 Certified by Professor Hermann A. Haus i- 00 I, . Thesis Supervisor Accepted by " J"-":~-'' '- Frederic R. Morgenthaler Clhairman, Departmental Committee on Graduate Students QUANTUM REALITY AND SQUEEZED STATES OF LIGHT by Ilya Lyubomirsky Submitted to the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science November 1993 in partial fulfillment for the requirements for the degree of Master of Science ABSTRACT The limitations of the quantum postulates are examined using the self consistent quantum formalism of nonlinear optics. An optics analog of the EPR paradox is presented. This Gedankenexperiment uses squeezed vacuum states of light to test Bell's inequality. The generation of squeezed states in the nonlinear Sagnac ring interferometer is reviewed. A new variant of this system, which employs the Sagnac ring as the reflector in a laser resonator, is presented. A unique squeezed state, which we call modulated vacuum, results. It is shown that the phase uncertainty of the pump inside the laser cavity does not inhibit the squeezing action. The discussion on squeezed states is applied to Bell's inequality. The conditions for violation of Bell's inequality with squeezed vacuum are derived. It is shown that Bell's inequality is violated in the limit of small photon number.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Limit for Laser Interferometric Gravitational-Wave Detectors from Optical Dissipation
    PHYSICAL REVIEW X 9, 011053 (2019) Quantum Limit for Laser Interferometric Gravitational-Wave Detectors from Optical Dissipation Haixing Miao,1 Nicolas D. Smith,2 and Matthew Evans3 1School of Physics and Astronomy, and Institute for Gravitational Wave Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, United Kingdom 2California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California 91125, USA 3Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA (Received 2 August 2018; revised manuscript received 1 January 2019; published 26 March 2019) We derive a quantum limit to the sensitivity of laser interferometric gravitational-wave detectors from optical-loss-induced dissipation, analogous to the sensitivity limit from the mechanical dissipation. It applies universally to different interferometer configurations and cannot be surpassed unless the optical properties of the interferometer are improved. This result provides an answer to the long-standing question of how far we can push the detector sensitivity given the state-of-the-art optics. DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevX.9.011053 Subject Areas: Gravitation, Optics, Quantum Physics I. INTRODUCTION together with a squeezed light source, a passive filter cavity can be used for producing the frequency-dependent squeez- Advanced gravitational-wave (GW) detectors are long- ing [9–11]. The general scheme is illustrated in Fig. 1. baseline interferometers with suspended mirrors which act The quantum Cram´er-Rao bound (QCRB) [12,13] is as test masses for probing spacetime dynamics. Quantum a sensitivity limit that, unlike the SQL, is inviolable. In noise, arising from quantum fluctuations of the optical the context of GW detection with laser interferometers, field, is one of the sources of noise that limits the sensitivity the QCRB is also called the energetic or fundamental of such instruments.
    [Show full text]
  • Testing Generalised Uncertainty Principles Through Quantum Noise
    New J. Phys. 22 (2020) 093073 https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/abb43c PAPER Testing generalised uncertainty principles through quantum OPEN ACCESS noise RECEIVED 27 May 2020 Parth Girdhar∗ and Andrew C Doherty REVISED 25 August 2020 Centre for Engineered Quantum Systems, School of Physics, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia ∗ Author to whom any correspondence should be addressed. ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION 1 September 2020 E-mail: [email protected] PUBLISHED Keywords: quantum gravity, optomechanics, LIGO, Planck scale, generalised uncertainty principle, radiation pressure noise 23 September 2020 Abstract Original content from this work may be used Motivated by several approaches to quantum gravity, there is a considerable literature on under the terms of the Creative Commons generalised uncertainty principles particularly through modification of the canonical Attribution 4.0 licence. position–momentum commutation relations. Some of these modified relations are also consistent Any further distribution with general principles that may be supposed of any physical theory. Such modified commutators of this work must maintain attribution to have significant observable consequences. Here we study the noisy behaviour of an the author(s) and the title of the work, journal optomechanical system assuming a certain commonly studied modified commutator. From recent citation and DOI. observations of radiation pressure noise in tabletop optomechanical experiments as well as the position noise spectrum of advanced LIGO we derive bounds on the modified commutator. We find how such experiments can be adjusted to provide significant improvements in such bounds, potentially surpassing those from sub-atomic measurements. 1. Introduction Quantum mechanics and the general theory of relativity have both been successful at explaining most of our observations of the Universe, the former is an accurate framework for predictions of phenomena at the microscopic scale while the latter explains gravity at the macroscopic scale.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantum Limits in Optical Communications Konrad Banaszek, Senior Member, IEEE, Ludwig Kunz, Michał Jachura, and Marcin Jarzyna
    1 Quantum Limits in Optical Communications Konrad Banaszek, Senior Member, IEEE, Ludwig Kunz, Michał Jachura, and Marcin Jarzyna Abstract—This tutorial reviews the Holevo capacity limit as fluctuations below the shot noise level [13], [14]. In order to a universal tool to analyze the ultimate transmission rates in a identify the ultimate quantum limit of an optical communica- variety of optical communication scenarios, ranging from conven- tion link, one should carry out optimization over all physically tional optically amplified fiber links to free-space communication with power-limited optical signals. The canonical additive white permitted measurement strategies [15] and all ensembles of Gaussian noise model is used to describe the propagation of the input quantum states used to carry information under relevant optical signal. The Holevo limit exceeds substantially the standard physical constraints, such as a restriction on the average power Shannon limit when the power spectral density of noise acquired of the optical signal. Impressively, theoretical developments in the course of propagation is small compared to the energy of in quantum information science have provided tools to derive a single photon at the carrier frequency per unit time-bandwidth area. General results are illustrated with a discussion of efficient the ultimate quantum capacity limits in a closed analytical communication strategies in the photon-starved regime. form for common models of optical communication links. The basic tool is Holevo’s theorem [16], which provides a Index Terms—Communication channels; channel capacity; optical signal detection tight bound on the mutual information attainable for a given ensemble of input quantum states [17], [18], [19].
    [Show full text]
  • Beating the Standard Quantum Limit Under Ambient Conditions with Solid-State Spins
    Beating the Standard Quantum Limit under Ambient Conditions with Solid-State Spins 1,2,3 1,2,3 4 1,2,3 Tianyu Xie †, Zhiyuan Zhao †, Xi Kong , Wenchao Ma ‡ Mengqi Wang1,2,3, Xiangyu Ye2, Pei Yu2, Zhiping Yang2, Shaoyi Xu2 1,2,3 2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 Pengfei Wang , Ya Wang , Fazhan Shi ∗ & Jiangfeng Du ∗ 1Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at the Microscale, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China 2CAS Key Laboratory of Microscale Magnetic Resonance and Department of Modern Physics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China 3Synergetic Innovation Center of Quantum Information and Quantum Physics, University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei 230026, China 4National Laboratory of Solid State Microstructures and Department of Physics, Nanjing University, Nanjing 210093, China †These authors contributed equally to this work. Present address: Department of Chemistry, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, ‡ Cambridge, Massachusetts 02139, USA ∗E-mail: [email protected] ∗E-mail: [email protected] arXiv:2101.12048v1 [quant-ph] 28 Jan 2021 Precision measurement plays a crucial role in all fields of science. The use of entangled sensors in quantum metrology improves the precision limit from the standard quantum limit (SQL) to the Heisenberg limit (HL) [1,2]. To date, most experiments beating the SQL are performed on the sensors which are well isolated under extreme conditions [3–13]. However, it has not been realized in solid-state spin systems at ambient conditions, owing to its intrinsic complexity for the preparation and survival of pure and entangled quan- 1 tum states.
    [Show full text]