We introduce information-theoretic definitions for noise and disturbance in quantum measurements and prove a state-independent noise-disturbance tradeoff relation that these quantities have to satisfy in any conceivable setup. Contrary to previous approaches, the information-theoretic quantities we define are invariant under the relabelling of outcomes and allow for the possibility of using quantum or classical operations to "correct" for the disturbance. We also show how our bound implies strong tradeoff relations for mean square deviations.
We introduce information-theoretic definitions for noise and disturbance in quantum measurements and prove a state-independent noise-disturbance tradeoff relation that these quantities have to satisfy in any conceivable setup. Contrary to previous approaches, the information-theoretic quantities we define are invariant under the relabelling of outcomes and allow for the possibility of using quantum or classical operations to "correct" for the disturbance. We also show how our bound implies strong tradeoff relations for mean square deviations.
Information-theoretic definitions for the noise associated with a quantum measurement and the corresponding disturbance to the state of the system have recently been introduced [F. Buscemi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 050401 (2014)]. These definitions are invariant under relabeling of measurement outcomes, and lend themselves readily to the formulation of state-independent uncertainty relations both for the joint estimate of observables (noise-noise relations) and the noise-disturbance tradeoff. Here we derive such relations for incompatible qubit observables, which we prove to be tight in the case of joint estimates, and present progress towards fully characterizing the noise-disturbance tradeoff. In doing so, we show that the set of obtainable noise-noise values for such observables is convex, whereas the conjectured form for the set of obtainable noise-disturbance values is not. Furthermore, projective measurements are not optimal with respect to the joint-measurement noise or noise-disturbance tradeoffs. Interestingly, it seems that four-outcome measurements are needed in the former case, whereas three-outcome measurements are optimal in the latter.
In the general theory of quantum measurement, one associates a positive-semidefinite operator on a d-dimensional Hilbert space to each of the n possible outcomes of an arbitrary measurement. In the special case of a projective measurement, these operators are pairwise Hilbert-Schmidt orthogonal, but when n>d, orthogonality is restricted by positivity. This restriction allows us to more precisely state the quantum adage: information gain of a system is always accompanied by unavoidable disturbance. Specifically, we investigate three properties of a measurement with L\"uders rule updating: its disturbance, a measure of how the expected postmeasurement state deviates from the input; its measurement strength, a measure of the intrinsic information producing capacity of the measurement; and its orthogonality, a measure of the degree to which the measurement operators differ from an orthonormal set. These quantities satisfy an information-disturbance tradeoff relation that highlights the additional role played by orthogonality. Finally, we assess several classes of measurements on these grounds and identify symmetric informationally complete quantum measurements as the unique quantum analogs of a perfectly informative and nondisturbing classical ideal measurement.
In the general theory of quantum measurement, one associates a positive semidefinite operator on a d-dimensional Hilbert space to each of the n possible outcomes of an arbitrary measurement. In the special case of a projective measurement, these operators are pairwise Hilbert--Schmidt orthogonal, but when n>d, orthogonality is restricted by positivity. This restriction has consequences which are not present from a classical perspective; in particular, we find it allows us to more precisely state the old quantum adage that it is impossible to extract information from a system without disturbance. Restricting attention throughout to the Luders state updating rule, we consider three properties of a measurement: its disturbance, a measure of how the expected post-measurement state deviates from the input state, its purity gain, a measure of the expected reduction of uncertainty resulting from measurement, and its orthogonality, a measure of the degree to which the measurement operators differ from an orthonormal set. We show that these quantities satisfy a simple algebraic relation amounting to an expression of an information-disturbance trade-off. Finally, we assess several classes of measurements on these grounds and identify symmetric informationally complete quantum measurements as the unique quantum analogs of a perfectly informative and nondisturbing classical ideal measurement.
The notions of error and disturbance appearing in quantum uncertainty relations are often quantified by the discrepancy of a physical quantity from its ideal value. However, these real and ideal values are not the outcomes of simultaneous measurements, and comparing the values of unmeasured observables is not necessarily meaningful according to quantum theory. To overcome these conceptual difficulties, we take a different approach and define error and disturbance in an operational manner. In particular, we formulate both in terms of the probability that one can successfully distinguish the actual measurement device from the relevant hypothetical ideal by any experimental test whatsoever. This definition itself does not rely on the formalism of quantum theory, avoiding many of the conceptual difficulties of usual definitions. We then derive new Heisenberg-type uncertainty relations for both joint measurability and the error-disturbance tradeoff for arbitrary observables of finite-dimensional systems, as well as for the case of position and momentum. Our relations may be directly applied in information processing settings, for example to infer that devices which can faithfully transmit information regarding one observable do not leak any information about conjugate observables to the environment. We also show that Englert's wave-particle duality relation [PRL 77, 2154 (1996)] can be viewed as an error-disturbance uncertainty relation.
The notions of error and disturbance appearing in quantum uncertainty relations are often quantified by the discrepancy of a physical quantity from its ideal value. However, these real and ideal values are not the outcomes of simultaneous measurements, and comparing the values of unmeasured observables is not necessarily meaningful according to quantum theory. To overcome these conceptual difficulties, we take a different approach and define error and disturbance in an operational manner. In particular, we formulate both in terms of the probability that one can successfully distinguish the actual measurement device from the relevant hypothetical ideal by any experimental test whatsoever. This definition itself does not rely on the formalism of quantum theory, avoiding many of the conceptual difficulties of usual definitions. We then derive new Heisenberg-type uncertainty relations for both joint measurability and the error-disturbance tradeoff for arbitrary observables of finite-dimensional systems, as well as for the case of position and momentum. Our relations may be directly applied in information processing settings, for example to infer that devices which can faithfully transmit information regarding one observable do not leak any information about conjugate observables to the environment. We also show that Englert's wave-particle duality relation [PRL 77, 2154 (1996)] can be viewed as an error-disturbance uncertainty relation.
Recent years have witnessed a controversy over Heisenberg's famous error-disturbance relation. Here the conflict is resolved by way of an analysis of the possible conceptualizations of measurement error and disturbance in quantum mechanics. Two approaches to adapting the classic notion of root-mean-square error to quantum measurements are discussed. One is based on the concept of a noise operator; its natural operational content is that of a mean deviation of the values of two observables measured jointly, and thus its applicability is limited to cases where such joint measurements are available. The second error measure quantifies the differences between two probability distributions obtained in separate runs of measurements and is of unrestricted applicability. We show that there are no nontrivial unconditional joint-measurement bounds for state-dependent errors in the conceptual framework discussed here, while Heisenberg-type measurement uncertainty relations for state-independent errors have been proven.