CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 315Quantum Information and CryptographyQuantum Computing Algorithms and ArchitectureQuantum optics and atomic interactions

Quantum phase estimation with lossy interferometers

Open access
Demkowicz-Dobrzanski, R., Dorner, U., Smith, B. J., Lundeen, J. S., Wasilewski, W., Banaszek, K., Walmsley, I. A.·2009·Physical Review A
DOI 10.1103/physreva.80.013825
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

We give a detailed discussion of optimal quantum states for optical two-mode interferometry in the presence of photon losses. We derive analytical formulae for the precision of phase estimation obtainable using quantum states of light with a definite photon number and prove that maximization of the precision is a convex optimization problem. The corresponding optimal precision, i.e., the lowest possible uncertainty, is shown to beat the standard quantum limit thus outperforming classical interferometry. Furthermore, we discuss more general inputs: states with indefinite photon number and states with photons distributed between distinguishable time bins. We prove that neither of these is helpful in improving phase estimation precision.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physreva.80.013825

Cites

32 of 32 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In the presence of decoherence, the optimal input states do not have an intuitive form and the maximization of the quantum Fisher information with rising N becomes hard even numerically.

    “In the presence of decoherence, the optimal input states do not have an intuitive form and the maximization of the QFI (with rising N) becomes hard even numerically202930.”

    From The elusive Heisenberg limit in quantum-enhanced metrology (2012) · cites this paper as [30]

  • From the point of view of metrology, the quantum Fisher information is bounded from above by the weighted sum of quantum Fisher informations for each total photon number sector.

    “From the point of view of metrology, the QFI is then bounded from above by the weighted sum of QFIs for each of these sectors30.”

    From The elusive Heisenberg limit in quantum-enhanced metrology (2012) · cites this paper as [30]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [8]B. L. Higgins, D. W. Berry, S. D. Bartlett, M. W. Mitchell, H. M. Wiseman, and G. J. Pryde, arXiv.org:0809.3308 (2008).
  2. [23]R. A. Fisher, Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 22 , 700 (1925).
  3. [28]L. Maccone and G. De Cillis, arXiv.org:0809.5039 (2008).

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Demkowicz-Dobrzanski, R., Dorner, U., Smith, B. J., Lundeen, J. S., Wasilewski, W., Banaszek, K., & Walmsley, I. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Centre for Quantum Technologies (SG)
  • University of Warsaw (PL)
  • Nicolaus Copernicus University (PL)
ORCID
Venue
Physical Review A
Publisher
American Physical Society (APS)
Published
2009-07-24
Volume
80
Issue
1
ISSN
  • 0556-2791 (ISSN-L)
  • 1050-2947
  • 1094-1622
DOI
10.1103/physreva.80.013825
OpenAlex
W1987408033
Cited by
315
References
32
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 16 · 2012: 16
FWCI
15.52
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
link.aps.org/licenses/aps-default-license (vor)
Locations
  • Physical Review A (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • National University of Singapore (submittedVersion)
  • NPARC (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EP/E036066/1)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Information and Cryptography
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Quantum Computing Algorithms and Architecture
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Atomic and Molecular Physics, and Optics › Quantum optics and atomic interactions
Keywords
quantum phase estimation, optical interferometry, photon loss, photon number states, convex optimization, standard quantum limit, time-bin entanglement, precision measurement

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review