quantum metrology in realistic scenarios
DESCRIPTION
Quantum Metrology in Realistic Scenarios. PART I – Quantum Metrology with Uncorrelated Noise Rafal Demkowicz-Dobrzanski , JK , Madalin Guta – ” The elusive Heisenberg limit in quantum metrology ”, Nat. Commun . 3, 1063 (2012) . - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
QUANTUM METROLOGY IN REALISTIC SCENARIOSJanek Kolodynski
Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Poland
PART I – QUANTUM METROLOGY WITH UNCORRELATED NOISE• Rafal Demkowicz-Dobrzanski, JK, Madalin Guta –
”The elusive Heisenberg limit in quantum metrology”, Nat. Commun. 3, 1063 (2012).
• JK, Rafal Demkowicz-Dobrzanski –”Efficient tools for quantum metrology with uncorrelated noise”, New J. Phys. 15,
073043 (2013).
PART II – BEATING THE SHOT NOISE LIMIT DESPITE THE UNCORRELATED NOISE
• Rafael Chaves, Jonatan Bohr Brask, Marcin Markiewicz, JK, Antonio Acin –”Noisy metrology beyond the Standard Quantum Limit”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111,
120401 (2013).
(CLASSICAL) QUANTUM METROLOGYATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY: “PHASE” ESTIMATION
estimator
shot noise
N two-level atoms (qubits) in a separable state
unitary rotation
output state(separable)
uncorrelated measurement – POVM:
Quantum Fisher Information(measurement independent)
independent processes
Classical Fisher Information
always saturablein the limit N → ∞
withunbiased
• QFI of a pure state :
• QFI of a mixed state :
Evaluation requires eigen-decomposition of the density matrix, which size grows exponentially, e.g. d=2N for N qubits.
• Geometric interpretation – QFI is a local quantity
The necessity of the asymptotic limit of repetitions N → ∞ is a consequence of locality.
• Purification-based definition of the QFI
QUANTUM FISHER INFORMATION
– Symmetric Logarithmic Derivative
Two PDFs :
Two q. states :
[Escher et al, Nat. Phys. 7(5), 406 (2011)] –
[Fujiwara & Imai, J. Phys. A 41(25), 255304 (2008)] –
unitary rotation
Heisenberg limit
GHZ state
output state
• A source of uncorrelated decoherence acting independently on each atom will “decorrelate” the atoms, so that we may attain the ultimate precision in the N → ∞ limit with k = 1, but at the price of scaling …
measurement on all probes: estimator:
• Atoms behave as a “single object” with N times greater phase change generated (same for the N00N state and photons).
• N → ∞ is not enough to achieve the ultimate precision. “Real” resources are kN and in theory we require k → ∞.
(IDEAL) QUANTUM METROLOGYATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY: “PHASE” ESTIMATION
repeating the procedure k times
distorted unitary rotation
constant factor improvement over shot noise
optimal pure state
mixed output state
measurement on all probes estimator
In practise need to optimize for particular model and N
OBSERVATIONS• Infinitesimal uncorrelated disturbance forces asymptotic
(classical) shot noise scaling.• The bound then “makes sense” for a single shot (k = 1).• Does this behaviour occur for decoherence of a generic type ?
The properties of the single use of a channel – – dictate the asymptotic ultimate scaling of precision.
with dephasing noise added:
achievable with k = 1 and spin-squeezed states
(REALISTIC) QUANTUM METROLOGY
complexity of computation grows exponentially with N
ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY: “PHASE” ESTIMATION
In order of their power and range of applicability:
o Classical Simulation (CS) methodo Stems from the possibility to locally simulate quantum channels via classical probabilistic mixtures:
o Optimal simulation corresponds to a simple, intuitive, geometric representation.o Proves that almost all (including full rank) channels asymptotically scale classically.o Allows to straightforwardly derive bounds (e.g. dephasing channel considered).
o Quantum Simulation (QS) methodo Generalizes the concept of local classical simulation, so that the parameter-dependent state does not
need to be diagonal:
o Proves asymptotic shot noise also for a wider class of channels (e.g. optical interferometer with loss).
o Channel Extension (CE) methodo Applies to even wider class of channels, and provides the tightest lower bounds on .
(e.g. amplitude damping channel)
o Efficiently calculable numerically by means of Semi-Definite Programming even for finite N !!!.
EFFICIENT TOOLS FOR DETERMINING DLOWER-BOUNDING
CLASSICAL/QUANTUM SIMULATION OF A CHANNEL
as a Markov chain:
CLASSICAL/QUANTUM SIMULATION OF A CHANNEL
as a Markov chain:
CLASSICAL/QUANTUM SIMULATION OF A CHANNEL
as a Markov chain:
CLASSICAL/QUANTUM SIMULATION OF A CHANNEL
as a Markov chain:
shot noise scaling !!!But how to verify if this construction is possible and what
is the optimal (“worse”) classical/quantum simulation giving the tightest lower bound on the ultimate
precision?
THE ”WORST” CLASSICAL SIMULATION
The ”worst” local classical simulation:
Does not work for -extremal channels, e.g unitaries .
We want to construct the ”local classical simulation” of the form:
Locality:Quantum Fisher Information at a given :
depends only on:
The set of quantum channels (CPTP maps) is convex
Depolarization Dephasing Lossy interferometer Spontaneous emission
CS CS CS N/ACS
N/AQS
QS QS QSCE
CE CE CE
GALLERY OF DECOHERENCE MODELS
inside the set of quantum channels
full rank
on the boundary,extremal
on the boundary, non-extremal,
not -extremal
on the boundary, non-extremal, but -extremal
CONSEQUENCES ON REALISTIC SCENARIOS“PHASE ESTIMATION” IN ATOMIC SPECTROSCOPY WITH DEPHASING (η = 0.9)
GHZ strategyS-S strategy
finite-N boundasymptotic bound
better than Heisenberg Limit
region
worse than classical region
input correlations dominated regionworth investing in GHZ states
e.g. N=3 [D. Leibfried et al, Science, 304 (2004)]
uncorrelated decoherence dominated regionworth investing in S-S states
e.g. N=105 !!!!!!![R. J. Sewell et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 253605 (2012)]
CONSEQUENCES ON REALISTIC SCENARIOSPERFORMANCE OF GEO600 GRAVITIONAL-WAVE INTERFEROMETER
[Demkowicz-Dobrzanski et al, Phys. Rev. A 88, 041802(R) (2013)]
coherent beam
squeezed vacuum
-
/ns
FREQUENCY ESTIMATION IN RAMSEY SPECTROSCOPY
two Kraus operators – non-full rank channel – SQL-bounding Methods apply for any t
Estimation of
Parallel dephasing:
“Ellipsoid” dephasing: four Kraus operators – full rank channel – SQL-bounding Methods apply for any t
t - extra free parameter
Transversal dephasing: four Kraus operators – full rank channel – SQL-bounding Methods apply, but… as t → 0 up to O(t2) – two Kraus operators SQL-bounding Methods fail !!!
RAMSEY SPECTROSCOPY - RESOURCES: Total time of the experiment , number of particles involved :
⁞ ⁞ ⁞ ⁞ ⁞ ⁞⁞
⁞ ⁞ ⁞⁞
PRECISION:
optimize over t
RAMSEY SPECTROSCOPY WITH TRANSVERSAL DEPHASING
[Chaves et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111, 120401 (2013)]
(a) Saturability with the GHZ states (b) Impact of parallel component
Beyond the shot noise !!!
(dotted) – parallel dephasing(dashed) – transversal dephasing without t-optimisation(solid) – transversal dephasing with t-optimisation
CONCLUSIONS• Classically, for separable input states, the ultimate precision is bound to shot noise
scaling 1/√N, which can be attained in a single experimental shot (k=1).
• For lossless unitary evolution highly entangled input states (GHZ, N00N) allow for ultimate precision that follows the Heisenberg scaling 1/N, but attaining this limit may in principle require infinite repetitions of the experiment (k→∞).
• The consequences of the dehorence acting independently on each particle:
• The Heisenberg scaling is lost and only a constant factor quantum enhancement over classical estimation strategies is allowed.
• (?) The optimal input states in the N → ∞ limit achieve the ultimate precision in a single shot (k=1) and are of a simpler form:spin-squeezed atomic - [Ulam-Orgikh, Kitagawa, Phys. Rev. A 64, 052106 (2001)] squeezed light states in GEO600 - [Demkowicz-Dobrzanski et al, Phys. Rev. A 88, 041802(R) (2013)].
• However, finding the optimal form of input states is still an issue. Classical scaling suggests local correlations:
Gaussian states – [Monras & Illuminati, Phys. Rev. A 81, 062326 (2010)]MPS states – [Jarzyna et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 240405 (2013)].
• We have formulated three methods: Classical Simulation, Quantum Simulation and Channel Extension; that may efficiently lower-bound the constant factor of the quantum asymptotic enhancement for a generic channel by properties of its single use form (Kraus operators).
• The geometrical CS method proves the cQ/√N for all full-rank channels and more (e.g. dephasing).
• The CE method may also be applied numerically for finite N as a semi-definite program.
• After allowing the form of channel to depend on N, what is achieved by the (exprimentally-motivated) single experimental-shot time period (t) optimisation, we establish a channel that, despite being full-rank for any finite t, achieves the ultimate super-classical 1/N5/6 asymptotic – the transversal dephasing.Application to atomic magnetometry: [Wasilewski et al, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104, 133601 (2010)].
CONCLUSIONS
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION