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:2605.23232

Interference of local-measurement histories

Parveen Kumar, Igor V. Gornyi, Yuval Gefen

quant-phcond-mat.mes-hallcond-mat.str-elSubmitted May 22, 2026• Announced May 25, 2026• 0 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

The evolution of a quantum system comprises two fundamental processes--continuous unitary dynamics and stochastic measurement-induced jumps. The latter are often viewed as a source of decoherence. Can two histories of such an evolution, made up of local measurements, interfere with each other? Here, we answer this question in the affirmative. A manifestation of this interference is the generation of entanglement between two parts of the system that are individually coupled to distinct detectors. Specifically, we develop a protocol in which two alternative local measurement processes act on a pair of qubits, and show how interference of histories is generated under coherent control, leading to entanglement. Furthermore, we find that averaging over the detectors' readouts still results in an entangled (albeit not maximally entangled) state. Our results extend the notion of quantum interference beyond unitary evolution to genuinely measurement-driven dynamics, and identify limits on the generation of quantum correlations using interference of measurement histories.

Comments
10 pages (7+3), 2 figures

Related papers

Measurement-induced entanglement transitions in the quantum Ising chain: From infinite to zero clicks

Xhek Turkeshi, Alberto Biella, Rosario Fazio +2 more

Recent years have witnessed major progress in the understanding of monitored quantum dynamics, an open quantum setting where the environment is a measurement apparatus that probes the system locally. For the resulting quantum trajectory, unitary evolution and local measurements have competing tendencies in the building of quantum correlations: while the coherent interactions in the former increase the entanglement, the resolving nature of the local measurement collapses the state of the system. Here, the authors study the interplay of monitoring and system dynamics by focusing on the monitored quantum Ising chain as the measurement strength is varied, going from the regime of weak detection, corresponding to the limit of infinite small jumps, to the case of post-selected no-jump case. A sharp transition is found between a logarithmic law phase to an area law phase for the entanglement entropy, which occurs at the same value of the measurement rate in the two limiting situations.

arXiv:2103.09138•Physical review. B./Physical review. B•Jun 30, 2021•263 citations

How to control decoherence and entanglement in quantum complex systems?

V. M. Akulin, Gershon Kurizki, Daniel A. Lidar

Theory and experiment have not fully resolved the apparent dichotomy , which has agonized physics for the past eighty years: on the one hand, the description of microsystems by quantum mechanics and, on the other, the description of macrosystems by classical dynamics or statistical mechanics. Derivations of the time-irreversible Liouville equation for an open quantum system, based on projecting out its environment, have narrowed the gap between the quantum and classical descriptions. Yet our `classical' intuition continues to be confronted by quantum-mechanical results like the Einstein--Podolsky--Rosen paradox that challenges the classical notion of locality, or the quantum Zeno effect which suggests that the isolation of a system is not the only way to preserve its quantum state. There are two key concepts in any discussion of such issues. The first, which is responsible for the most salient nonclassical properties, is entanglement , that is partial or complete correlation or, more generally, inseparability of the elements comprising a quantum ensemble . Even after their interaction has ceased, this inseparability, originating from their past interaction, can affect the state of one element when another element is subject to a nonunitary action, such as its measurement, tracing- out, or thermalization. The second key concept is decoherence of open quantum systems, which is the consequence of their entanglement with their environment, a `meter' or a thermal `reservoir', followed by the tracing-out of the latter. Despite new insights into entanglement and decoherence, there are still no complete, unequivocal answers to the fundamental questions of the transition from quantal to classical behaviour: how do irreversibility and classicality emerge from unitarity as systems and their environments become increasingly complex ? At what stage does system--meter entanglement give rise to a classical readout of the meter? Is there an upper limit on the size or complexity of systems displaying entanglement? Major developments have opened new vistas into controlled entanglement , which is the resource of quantum information processing. However, these developments have mainly focused on ensembles of simple two- and three-level systems that are thoroughly isolated from their environments. Treatments of coherence in quantum computing have mostly assumed that only a single or a few the elements of the quantum ensemble may simultaneously undergo an uncontrolled intervention---a quantum error. Decoherence-control protocols for more general types of errors are still incomplete. In order to resolve the outstanding issues of the quantum--classical transition, and study the control of entanglement and decoherence without the foregoing restrictions, we must venture into the domain of Quantum Complex Systems (QUACS), either consisting of a large number of inseparable elements or having many coupled degrees of freedom. Our conviction is that fundamental understanding and manipulation of entanglement within QUACS or their entanglement with the environment or a meter, call for the creation of a new conceptual framework or paradigm, that would encompass phenomena common to cold atoms in laser fields, large molecules, Josephson junctions, quantum gases and solids, with the view of employing these systems for quantum information processing and computing. Progress within this paradigm should allow us to answer the questions: does entanglement play an essential role in the evolution of large collections of complex systems? What are the size and complexity limits of systems and ensembles still controllable by an external intervention? What are the most appropriate decoherence protection schemes and control algorithms? This special issue addresses the challenge of understanding in depth and manipulating the basic quantum properties of optical, atomic, molecular and condensed-matter QUACS, and large ensembles thereof. In view of the interdisciplinary character of this issue, we find it expedient to look at the presented articles not only according to the physical objects they describe, but also from a unifying standpoint. Several unifying themes may be discerned: memory effects in dephasing and relaxation; protection of quantum information by its distribution throughout the ensemble; control of decoherence and entanglement by time-dependent interventions or measurements; manifestations of entanglement in scattering off statistical ensembles; measurment-induced dynamics. The concerted discussion of the topics outlined above should help us advance the new paradigm that addresses our abilities to diagnose and manipulate the entangled states of complex quantum objects and their robustness against decoherence. These abilities are required for quantum information (QI) applications in matter--wave interferometry in molecular, semiconducting or superconducting systems. On the fundamental level, this book may help establish the notion of dynamical information exchange between quantum systems and chart in detail the route from unitarity to classicality. Further developments within the outlined paradigm should yield novel, advantageous QI processing schemes and high-sensitivity interferometers, owing to decoherence suppression and effective control of many degrees of freedom. In the long run, these strategies may prove to be the first step towards the (hitherto unattempted) use of entanglement in nanotechnology, metrology and chemistry, with potentially remarkable novel applications.

Journal of Physics B Atomic Molecular and Optical Physics•Apr 18, 2007•2 citations

Noisy quantum measurement of solid state qubits

Alexander N. Korotkov

The quantum evolution of an individual solid-state qubit during the process of its continuous measurement can be described by the recently developed Bayesian formalism. In contrast to the conventional ensemble-averaged formalism, it takes into account the measurement record (in a way similar to the standard Bayesian analysis) and therefore is able to consider individual realizations of the measurement process. The formalism provides testable experimental predictions and can be used for the analysis of a quantum feedback control of solid-state qubits. The Bayesian formalism can be also applied to the continuous measurement of entangled qubits; in particular, it shows how to create a fully entangled pair of qubits without their direct interaction, just by measuring them with an equally coupled detector.

Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE•May 9, 2003•0 citations

Dynamics of Two Qubits: Decoherence and an Entanglement Optimization Protocol

Cesar Rodriguez, Anil Shaji, E. C. G. Sudarshan

The evolution of two qubits coupled by a general nonlocal interaction is studied in two distinct regimes. In the first regime the purity of the individual qubits is interchanged through the entanglement shared by the two. We illustrate how this can be a mechanism for decoherence. In the second regime, the interaction entangles two initially pure qubits. The dynamical maps for the reduced unitary evolution of both initially simply separable and not-simply-separable states are found. We outline a protocol for optimizing the entanglement generation subject to constraints.

arXiv:quant-ph/0504051•Apr 8, 2005•10 citations

Two-photon interferometry illuminates quantum measurements

Art Hobson

The quantum measurement problem still finds no consensus. Nonlocal interferometry provides an unprecedented experimental probe by entangling two photons in the "measurement state" (MS). The experiments show that each photon "measures" the other; the resulting entanglement decoheres both photons; decoherence collapses both photons to unpredictable but definite outcomes; and the two-photon MS continues evolving coherently. Thus, contrary to common opinion, when a two-part system is in the MS, the outcomes actually observed at both subsystems are definite. Although standard quantum physics postulates definite outcomes, two-photon interferometry verifies them to be not only consistent with, but actually a prediction of, the other principles. Nonlocality is the key to understanding this. As a consequence of nonlocality, the states we actually observe are the local states. These actually-observed local states collapse, while the global MS, which can be "observed" only after the fact by collecting coincidence data from both subsystems, continues its unitary evolution. This conclusion implies a refined understanding of the eigenstate principle: Following a measurement, the actually-observed local state instantly jumps into the observed eigenstate. Various experts' objections are rebutted.

arXiv:1301.1673•Jan 8, 2013•0 citations

Two-photon interferometry and quantum state collapse

Art Hobson

The quantum measurement problem still finds no consensus. Nonlocal interferometry provides an unprecedented experimental probe by entangling two photons in the ``measurement state'' (MS). The experiments show that each photon measures the other; the resulting entanglement decoheres both photons; decoherence collapses both photons to unpredictable but definite outcomes; and the two-photon MS continues evolving coherently. Thus, when a two-part system is in the MS, the outcomes actually observed at both subsystems are definite. Although standard quantum physics postulates definite outcomes, two-photon interferometry verifies them to be not only consistent with, but also actually a prediction of, the other principles. Nonlocality is the key to understanding this. As a consequence of nonlocality, the states we actually observe are the local states. These actually observed local states collapse, whereas the global MS, which can be ``observed'' only after the fact by collecting coincidence data from both subsystems, continues its unitary evolution. This conclusion implies a refined understanding of the eigenstate principle: Following a measurement, the actually observed local state instantly jumps into the observed eigenstate. We also discuss and rebut objections to this.

Physical Review A•Aug 8, 2013•18 citations
The evolution of a quantum system comprises two fundamental processes--continuous unitary dynamics and stochastic measurement-induced jumps. The latter are often viewed as a source of decoherence. Can two histories of such an evolution, made up of local measurements, interfere with each other? Here, we answer this question in the affirmative. A manifestation of this interference is the generation of entanglement between two parts of the system that are individually coupled to distinct detectors. Specifically, we develop a protocol in which two alternative local measurement processes act on a pair of qubits, and show how interference of histories is generated under coherent control, leading to entanglement. Furthermore, we find that averaging over the detectors' readouts still results in an entangled (albeit not maximally entangled) state. Our results extend the notion of quantum interference beyond unitary evolution to genuinely measurement-driven dynamics, and identify limits on the generation of quantum correlations using interference of measurement histories.
Recent years have witnessed major progress in the understanding of monitored quantum dynamics, an open quantum setting where the environment is a measurement apparatus that probes the system locally. For the resulting quantum trajectory, unitary evolution and local measurements have competing tendencies in the building of quantum correlations: while the coherent interactions in the former increase the entanglement, the resolving nature of the local measurement collapses the state of the system. Here, the authors study the interplay of monitoring and system dynamics by focusing on the monitored quantum Ising chain as the measurement strength is varied, going from the regime of weak detection, corresponding to the limit of infinite small jumps, to the case of post-selected no-jump case. A sharp transition is found between a logarithmic law phase to an area law phase for the entanglement entropy, which occurs at the same value of the measurement rate in the two limiting situations.
Theory and experiment have not fully resolved the apparent dichotomy , which has agonized physics for the past eighty years: on the one hand, the description of microsystems by quantum mechanics and, on the other, the description of macrosystems by classical dynamics or statistical mechanics. Derivations of the time-irreversible Liouville equation for an open quantum system, based on projecting out its environment, have narrowed the gap between the quantum and classical descriptions. Yet our `classical' intuition continues to be confronted by quantum-mechanical results like the Einstein--Podolsky--Rosen paradox that challenges the classical notion of locality, or the quantum Zeno effect which suggests that the isolation of a system is not the only way to preserve its quantum state. There are two key concepts in any discussion of such issues. The first, which is responsible for the most salient nonclassical properties, is entanglement , that is partial or complete correlation or, more generally, inseparability of the elements comprising a quantum ensemble . Even after their interaction has ceased, this inseparability, originating from their past interaction, can affect the state of one element when another element is subject to a nonunitary action, such as its measurement, tracing- out, or thermalization. The second key concept is decoherence of open quantum systems, which is the consequence of their entanglement with their environment, a `meter' or a thermal `reservoir', followed by the tracing-out of the latter. Despite new insights into entanglement and decoherence, there are still no complete, unequivocal answers to the fundamental questions of the transition from quantal to classical behaviour: how do irreversibility and classicality emerge from unitarity as systems and their environments become increasingly complex ? At what stage does system--meter entanglement give rise to a classical readout of the meter? Is there an upper limit on the size or complexity of systems displaying entanglement? Major developments have opened new vistas into controlled entanglement , which is the resource of quantum information processing. However, these developments have mainly focused on ensembles of simple two- and three-level systems that are thoroughly isolated from their environments. Treatments of coherence in quantum computing have mostly assumed that only a single or a few the elements of the quantum ensemble may simultaneously undergo an uncontrolled intervention---a quantum error. Decoherence-control protocols for more general types of errors are still incomplete. In order to resolve the outstanding issues of the quantum--classical transition, and study the control of entanglement and decoherence without the foregoing restrictions, we must venture into the domain of Quantum Complex Systems (QUACS), either consisting of a large number of inseparable elements or having many coupled degrees of freedom. Our conviction is that fundamental understanding and manipulation of entanglement within QUACS or their entanglement with the environment or a meter, call for the creation of a new conceptual framework or paradigm, that would encompass phenomena common to cold atoms in laser fields, large molecules, Josephson junctions, quantum gases and solids, with the view of employing these systems for quantum information processing and computing. Progress within this paradigm should allow us to answer the questions: does entanglement play an essential role in the evolution of large collections of complex systems? What are the size and complexity limits of systems and ensembles still controllable by an external intervention? What are the most appropriate decoherence protection schemes and control algorithms? This special issue addresses the challenge of understanding in depth and manipulating the basic quantum properties of optical, atomic, molecular and condensed-matter QUACS, and large ensembles thereof. In view of the interdisciplinary character of this issue, we find it expedient to look at the presented articles not only according to the physical objects they describe, but also from a unifying standpoint. Several unifying themes may be discerned: memory effects in dephasing and relaxation; protection of quantum information by its distribution throughout the ensemble; control of decoherence and entanglement by time-dependent interventions or measurements; manifestations of entanglement in scattering off statistical ensembles; measurment-induced dynamics. The concerted discussion of the topics outlined above should help us advance the new paradigm that addresses our abilities to diagnose and manipulate the entangled states of complex quantum objects and their robustness against decoherence. These abilities are required for quantum information (QI) applications in matter--wave interferometry in molecular, semiconducting or superconducting systems. On the fundamental level, this book may help establish the notion of dynamical information exchange between quantum systems and chart in detail the route from unitarity to classicality. Further developments within the outlined paradigm should yield novel, advantageous QI processing schemes and high-sensitivity interferometers, owing to decoherence suppression and effective control of many degrees of freedom. In the long run, these strategies may prove to be the first step towards the (hitherto unattempted) use of entanglement in nanotechnology, metrology and chemistry, with potentially remarkable novel applications.
The quantum evolution of an individual solid-state qubit during the process of its continuous measurement can be described by the recently developed Bayesian formalism. In contrast to the conventional ensemble-averaged formalism, it takes into account the measurement record (in a way similar to the standard Bayesian analysis) and therefore is able to consider individual realizations of the measurement process. The formalism provides testable experimental predictions and can be used for the analysis of a quantum feedback control of solid-state qubits. The Bayesian formalism can be also applied to the continuous measurement of entangled qubits; in particular, it shows how to create a fully entangled pair of qubits without their direct interaction, just by measuring them with an equally coupled detector.
The evolution of two qubits coupled by a general nonlocal interaction is studied in two distinct regimes. In the first regime the purity of the individual qubits is interchanged through the entanglement shared by the two. We illustrate how this can be a mechanism for decoherence. In the second regime, the interaction entangles two initially pure qubits. The dynamical maps for the reduced unitary evolution of both initially simply separable and not-simply-separable states are found. We outline a protocol for optimizing the entanglement generation subject to constraints.
The quantum measurement problem still finds no consensus. Nonlocal interferometry provides an unprecedented experimental probe by entangling two photons in the "measurement state" (MS). The experiments show that each photon "measures" the other; the resulting entanglement decoheres both photons; decoherence collapses both photons to unpredictable but definite outcomes; and the two-photon MS continues evolving coherently. Thus, contrary to common opinion, when a two-part system is in the MS, the outcomes actually observed at both subsystems are definite. Although standard quantum physics postulates definite outcomes, two-photon interferometry verifies them to be not only consistent with, but actually a prediction of, the other principles. Nonlocality is the key to understanding this. As a consequence of nonlocality, the states we actually observe are the local states. These actually-observed local states collapse, while the global MS, which can be "observed" only after the fact by collecting coincidence data from both subsystems, continues its unitary evolution. This conclusion implies a refined understanding of the eigenstate principle: Following a measurement, the actually-observed local state instantly jumps into the observed eigenstate. Various experts' objections are rebutted.
The quantum measurement problem still finds no consensus. Nonlocal interferometry provides an unprecedented experimental probe by entangling two photons in the ``measurement state'' (MS). The experiments show that each photon measures the other; the resulting entanglement decoheres both photons; decoherence collapses both photons to unpredictable but definite outcomes; and the two-photon MS continues evolving coherently. Thus, when a two-part system is in the MS, the outcomes actually observed at both subsystems are definite. Although standard quantum physics postulates definite outcomes, two-photon interferometry verifies them to be not only consistent with, but also actually a prediction of, the other principles. Nonlocality is the key to understanding this. As a consequence of nonlocality, the states we actually observe are the local states. These actually observed local states collapse, whereas the global MS, which can be ``observed'' only after the fact by collecting coincidence data from both subsystems, continues its unitary evolution. This conclusion implies a refined understanding of the eigenstate principle: Following a measurement, the actually observed local state instantly jumps into the observed eigenstate. We also discuss and rebut objections to this.