4.6 Article

Efficient tools for quantum metrology with uncorrelated noise

Journal

NEW JOURNAL OF PHYSICS
Volume 15, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

IOP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1088/1367-2630/15/7/073043

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Polish NCBiR under the ERA-NET CHIST-ERA project QUASAR
  2. Foundation for Polish Science TEAM project
  3. EU European Regional Development Fund
  4. FP7 IP project Q-ESSENCE

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Quantum metrology offers enhanced performance in experiments on topics such as gravitational wave-detection, magnetometry or atomic clock frequency calibration. The enhancement, however, requires a delicate tuning of relevant quantum features, such as entanglement or squeezing. For any practical application, the inevitable impact of decoherence needs to be taken into account in order to correctly quantify the ultimate attainable gain in precision. We compare the applicability and the effectiveness of various methods of calculating the ultimate precision bounds resulting from the presence of decoherence. This allows us to place a number of seemingly unrelated concepts into a common framework and arrive at an explicit hierarchy of quantum metrological methods in terms of the tightness of the bounds they provide. In particular, we show a way to extend the techniques originally proposed in Demkowicz-Dobrzanski et al (2012 Nature Commun. 3 1063), so that they can be efficiently applied not only in the asymptotic but also in the finite number of particles regime. As a result, we obtain a simple and direct method, yielding bounds that interpolate between the quantum enhanced scaling characteristic for a small number of particles and the asymptotic regime, where quantum enhancement amounts to a constant factor improvement. Methods are applied to numerous models, including noisy phase and frequency estimation, as well as the estimation of the decoherence strength itself.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available