Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Log inSign up
Challenges
Datasets
Workspaces
Papers
Discussions
Leaderboard
Blog
Job Board
Q3AS

© 2026 Aqora Quantum S.A.S.

TermsPrivacyLegal Notice

arXiv:1102.4407

"Contextual weak values" of quantum measurements with positive measurement operators are not limited to the traditional weak value

Stephen Parrott

Published Feb 22, 2011• 3 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

A recent Letter in Physical Review Letters, "Contextual Values of Observables in Quantum Measurements", by J. Dressel, S. Agarwal, and A. N. Jordan (abbreviated DAJ below), introduces the concept of "contextual values" and claims that they lead to "a natural definition of a general conditioned average that converges uniquely to the quantum weak value in the minimal disturbance limit". However, they do not define "minimal disturbance limit". The present paper is in part the saga of my search for a definition of "minimal disturbance limit" under which this claim could be proved. The search finally ended in what is probably a definitive counterexample to the claim.

DOI
10.48550/arxiv.1102.4407

Related papers

Counterexample to "Sufficient Conditions for uniqueness of the Weak Value" by J. Dressel and A. N. Jordan, arXiv:1106.1871v1

Stephen Parrott

The abstract of "Contextual Values of Observables in Quantum Measurements" by J. Dressel, S. Agarwal, and A. N. Jordan [Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 240401 (2010)] (called DAJ below), states: "We introduce contextual values as a generalization of the eigenvalues of an observable that takes into account both the system observable and a general measurement procedure. This technique leads to a natural definition of a general conditioned average that converges uniquely to the quantum weak value in the minimal disturbance limit." A counterexample to the claim of the last sentence was presented in Version 1. Subsequently Dressel and Jordan placed in the arXiv the paper of the title (called DJ below) which attempts to prove the claim of DAJ quoted above under stronger hypotheses than given in DAJ, hypotheses which the counterexample does not satisfy. The present work (Version 6) presents a new counterexample to this revised claim of DJ. A brief introduction to "contextual values" is included. Also included is a critical analysis of DJ.

arXiv:1105.4188•May 20, 2011•3 citations

Contextual Values of Observables in Quantum Measurements

Justin Dressel, Shantanu Agarwal, Andrew N. Jordan

We introduce contextual values as a generalization of the eigenvalues of an observable that takes into account both the system observable and a general measurement procedure. This technique leads to a natural definition of a general conditioned average that converges uniquely to the quantum weak value in the minimal disturbance limit. As such, we address the controversy in the literature regarding the theoretical consistency of the quantum weak value by providing a more general theoretical framework and giving several examples of how that framework relates to existing experimental and theoretical results.

arXiv:0911.4474•Physical Review Letters•Jun 15, 2010•111 citations

Proof gap in "Sufficient conditions for uniqueness of the Weak Value" by J. Dressel and A. N. Jordan, J. Phys. A 45 (2012) 015304

Stephen Parrott

The article of the title attempts to prove a "General theorem" (GT) giving sufficient conditions under which a previously introduced "general conditioned average" "converges uniquely to the quantum weak value in the minimal disturbance limit." The "general conditioned average" is obtained from a positive operator valued measure (POVM) depending on a small "weakness" parameter g. We point out that unstated assumptions in the presentation of the "sufficient conditions" make them appear much more general than they actually are. Indeed, the stated "sufficient conditions" strengthened by these unstated assumptions seem very close to an assumption that the POVM operators be linear polynomials in g. Moreover, there appears to be a critical error or gap in the attempted proof, even assuming a linear POVM. A counterexample to the proof of the GT (though not to its conclusion) is given. Nevertheless, I conjecture that the conclusion is actually true for linear POVM's whose contextual values are chosen by the article's "pseudoinverse prescription".

arXiv:1202.5604•Feb 25, 2012•2 citations

Weak values as interference phenomena

Justin Dressel

Weak values arise experimentally as conditioned averages of weak (noisy) observable measurements that minimally disturb an initial quantum state, and also as dynamical variables for reduced quantum state evolution even in the absence of measurement. These averages can exceed the eigenvalue range of the observable ostensibly being estimated, which has prompted considerable debate regarding their interpretation. Classical conditioned averages of noisy signals only show such anomalies if the quantity being measured is also disturbed prior to conditioning. This fact has recently been rediscovered, along with the question whether anomalous weak values are merely classical disturbance effects. Here we carefully review the role of the weak value as both a conditioned observable estimation and a dynamical variable, and clarify why classical disturbance models will be insufficient to explain the weak value unless they can also simulate other quantum interference phenomena.

arXiv:1410.0943•Physical Review A•Mar 18, 2015•127 citations

Sufficient conditions for uniqueness of the weak value

Justin Dressel, Andrew N. Jordan

We review and clarify the sufficient conditions for uniquely defining the generalized weak value as the weak limit of a conditioned average using the contextual values formalism introduced in Dressel, Agarwal and Jordan (2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 240401 ). We also respond to criticism of our work by Parrott (arXiv:1105.4188v1) concerning a proposed counter-example to the uniqueness of the definition of the generalized weak value. The counter-example does not satisfy our prescription in the case of an underspecified measurement context. We show that when the contextual values formalism is properly applied to this example, a natural interpretation of the measurement emerges and the unique definition in the weak limit holds. We also prove a theorem regarding the uniqueness of the definition under our sufficient conditions for the general case. Finally, a second proposed counter-example by Parrott (arXiv:1105.4188v6) is shown not to satisfy the sufficiency conditions for the provided theorem.

arXiv:1106.1871•Journal of Physics A Mathematical and Theoretical•Dec 1, 2011•22 citations

Disturbance in weak measurements and the difference between quantum and classical weak values

Asger C. Ipsen

The role of measurement-induced disturbance in weak measurements is of central importance for the interpretation of the weak value. Uncontrolled disturbance can interfere with the postselection process and make the weak value dependent on the details of the measurement process. Here we develop the concept of a generalized weak measurement for classical and quantum mechanics. The two cases appear remarkably similar, but we point out some important differences. A priori it is not clear what the correct notion of disturbance should be in the context of weak measurements. We consider three different notions and get three different results: (1) For a ``strong'' definition of disturbance, we find that weak measurements are disturbing. (2) For a weaker definition we find that a general class of weak measurements is nondisturbing, but that one gets weak values which depend on the measurement process. (3) Finally, with respect to an operational definition of the ``degree of disturbance,'' we find that the AAV weak measurements are the least disturbing, but that the disturbance is always nonzero.

arXiv:1409.3538•Physical Review A•Jun 16, 2015•19 citations
A recent Letter in Physical Review Letters, "Contextual Values of Observables in Quantum Measurements", by J. Dressel, S. Agarwal, and A. N. Jordan (abbreviated DAJ below), introduces the concept of "contextual values" and claims that they lead to "a natural definition of a general conditioned average that converges uniquely to the quantum weak value in the minimal disturbance limit". However, they do not define "minimal disturbance limit". The present paper is in part the saga of my search for a definition of "minimal disturbance limit" under which this claim could be proved. The search finally ended in what is probably a definitive counterexample to the claim.
The abstract of "Contextual Values of Observables in Quantum Measurements" by J. Dressel, S. Agarwal, and A. N. Jordan [Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 240401 (2010)] (called DAJ below), states: "We introduce contextual values as a generalization of the eigenvalues of an observable that takes into account both the system observable and a general measurement procedure. This technique leads to a natural definition of a general conditioned average that converges uniquely to the quantum weak value in the minimal disturbance limit." A counterexample to the claim of the last sentence was presented in Version 1. Subsequently Dressel and Jordan placed in the arXiv the paper of the title (called DJ below) which attempts to prove the claim of DAJ quoted above under stronger hypotheses than given in DAJ, hypotheses which the counterexample does not satisfy. The present work (Version 6) presents a new counterexample to this revised claim of DJ. A brief introduction to "contextual values" is included. Also included is a critical analysis of DJ.
We introduce contextual values as a generalization of the eigenvalues of an observable that takes into account both the system observable and a general measurement procedure. This technique leads to a natural definition of a general conditioned average that converges uniquely to the quantum weak value in the minimal disturbance limit. As such, we address the controversy in the literature regarding the theoretical consistency of the quantum weak value by providing a more general theoretical framework and giving several examples of how that framework relates to existing experimental and theoretical results.
The article of the title attempts to prove a "General theorem" (GT) giving sufficient conditions under which a previously introduced "general conditioned average" "converges uniquely to the quantum weak value in the minimal disturbance limit." The "general conditioned average" is obtained from a positive operator valued measure (POVM) depending on a small "weakness" parameter g. We point out that unstated assumptions in the presentation of the "sufficient conditions" make them appear much more general than they actually are. Indeed, the stated "sufficient conditions" strengthened by these unstated assumptions seem very close to an assumption that the POVM operators be linear polynomials in g. Moreover, there appears to be a critical error or gap in the attempted proof, even assuming a linear POVM. A counterexample to the proof of the GT (though not to its conclusion) is given. Nevertheless, I conjecture that the conclusion is actually true for linear POVM's whose contextual values are chosen by the article's "pseudoinverse prescription".
Weak values arise experimentally as conditioned averages of weak (noisy) observable measurements that minimally disturb an initial quantum state, and also as dynamical variables for reduced quantum state evolution even in the absence of measurement. These averages can exceed the eigenvalue range of the observable ostensibly being estimated, which has prompted considerable debate regarding their interpretation. Classical conditioned averages of noisy signals only show such anomalies if the quantity being measured is also disturbed prior to conditioning. This fact has recently been rediscovered, along with the question whether anomalous weak values are merely classical disturbance effects. Here we carefully review the role of the weak value as both a conditioned observable estimation and a dynamical variable, and clarify why classical disturbance models will be insufficient to explain the weak value unless they can also simulate other quantum interference phenomena.
We review and clarify the sufficient conditions for uniquely defining the generalized weak value as the weak limit of a conditioned average using the contextual values formalism introduced in Dressel, Agarwal and Jordan (2010 Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 240401 ). We also respond to criticism of our work by Parrott (arXiv:1105.4188v1) concerning a proposed counter-example to the uniqueness of the definition of the generalized weak value. The counter-example does not satisfy our prescription in the case of an underspecified measurement context. We show that when the contextual values formalism is properly applied to this example, a natural interpretation of the measurement emerges and the unique definition in the weak limit holds. We also prove a theorem regarding the uniqueness of the definition under our sufficient conditions for the general case. Finally, a second proposed counter-example by Parrott (arXiv:1105.4188v6) is shown not to satisfy the sufficiency conditions for the provided theorem.
The role of measurement-induced disturbance in weak measurements is of central importance for the interpretation of the weak value. Uncontrolled disturbance can interfere with the postselection process and make the weak value dependent on the details of the measurement process. Here we develop the concept of a generalized weak measurement for classical and quantum mechanics. The two cases appear remarkably similar, but we point out some important differences. A priori it is not clear what the correct notion of disturbance should be in the context of weak measurements. We consider three different notions and get three different results: (1) For a ``strong'' definition of disturbance, we find that weak measurements are disturbing. (2) For a weaker definition we find that a general class of weak measurements is nondisturbing, but that one gets weak values which depend on the measurement process. (3) Finally, with respect to an operational definition of the ``degree of disturbance,'' we find that the AAV weak measurements are the least disturbing, but that the disturbance is always nonzero.