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

Physical Review A

Relations between parameters of a decoherent system and Fisher information

B. Roy Frieden

Published Aug 12, 2002• 10 citations
Publisher

Abstract

Fisher information (FI) is normally developed and applied within the context of classical mathematical statistics. Here we show that it alternatively arises as physical properties of a generally decoherent system. Two kinds of Fisher information are treated: the classical FI $I[p]$ and the FI channel capacity 〈I〉. These are shown to be linearly related to the partition function Z, the coherence function $\ensuremath{\rho}{(x,x}^{\ensuremath{'}}),$ the two-point coherence function $\ensuremath{\tau}(\ensuremath{\Delta}x),$ the entropy of fluctuation $H(\ensuremath{\Delta}x),$ and the cross entropy ${H}_{\mathrm{KL}}(\ensuremath{\rho}{/r}_{\ensuremath{\Delta}})$ between the system probability density function $\ensuremath{\rho}(x,x)$ and its shifted version $\ensuremath{\rho}(x+\ensuremath{\Delta}x,x+\ensuremath{\Delta}x).$

DOI
10.1103/physreva.66.022107

Related papers

Fisher information, disorder, and the equilibrium distributions of physics

B. Roy Frieden

Consider an isolated statistical system specified by a coordinate x and its probability density p(x). A functional of p(x) called ``Fisher information'' can be used to measure the degree of disorder of the system due to the spread in p(x). Fisher information may be minimized, subject to a physical constraint, to attain a temporal equilibrium solution p(x). When the constraint is linear in the mean kinetic energy of the system, the equilibrium solution p(x) often obeys the correct differential equation for the system. In this way, the Schr\"odinger (energy) wave equation, Klein-Gordon equation, Helmholtz wave equation, diffusion equation, Boltzmann law, and Maxwell-Boltzmann law may be derived from one classical principle of disorder. The convergence rate for Fisher information is about that for alternative use of maximum entropy (in problems where both have the same equilibrium solution). This suggests that Fisher information defines an arrow of time. The arrow points in the direction of decreasing accuracy for the determination of the mean, or ideal, value of a parameter.

Physical Review A•Apr 1, 1990•197 citations

INTRODUCTION TO QUANTUM FISHER INFORMATION

D�nes Petz, C. GHINEA

The subject of this paper is a mathematical transition from the Fisher information of classical statistics to the matrix formalism of quantum theory. If the monotonicity is the main requirement, then there are several quantum versions parametrized by a function. In physical applications the minimal is the most popular. There is a one-to-one correspondence between Fisher informations (called also monotone metrics) and abstract covariances. The skew information and the chi-square-divergence are treated here as particular cases.

arXiv:1008.2417•Jan 1, 2011•152 citations

Fisher's Information and Probability Dictated by Physics and Not Vice Versa?

Francesco R. Ruggeri

Given a coin, one has two complementary pieces of information and a corresponding probability of .5 and .5. Similar considerations apply to a die. As a result, one may get the impression that there exists a unique probability distribution in a probabilistic system and that this single probability scheme is linked to the constrained maximization of Shannon’s entropy or Fisher’s information. We argue however, that there may be different probability schemes in the same problem associated with different pieces of information which are relevant to the physics which occurs in the system. Thus, we argue that it is the physics which selects the probability distribution to be examined. For example, one may loosely think in terms of a detailed probability scheme versus a kind-of coarse grained one in the same system. For example, for a quantum free particle, P(x)=1 i.e there is the same probability for a particle to be at any x point. This, however, is based on velocity, i.e. the relationship between dx and dt. There is another piece of information in the system, namely mo which together with v yields momentum (either relativistic or nonrelativistic) .This need not be measured using a clock (which velocity requires), but by the impact of an impulse on a target. Thus, nonrelativistically p=m1v1=m2v2 give the same impulse, but have different velocities. Quantum mechanics shows that a free particle is governed by exp(ipx) which contains two unnormalized probability distributions cos(px) and sin(px). These are key for impulse interactions (i.e. the physics of interactions such as with a 2-slit apparatus etc), yet exp(ipx)/sqrt(L) maps into the “coarse-grained” P(x)=exp(ipx)exp(-ipx) / L = constant. P(x) is one probability scheme in the problem and exp(ipx) another (for a free particle). Each answers some physical questions, but one needs to know which probability to use (i.e. what information is relevant) to a particular situation. P(x) is relevant to motion in space not involving interactions. exp(ipx) is relevant to interactions (even with a magnetic vector potential causing no magnetic field) or with a 2-slit apparatus. Furthermore, in a quantum bound state, one has W*(x)W(x) = P(x) (W(x)=wavefunction =Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx)) and a*(p)a(p).=P(p). Each probability scheme corresponds to the analysis of a different kind of measurement, but various schemes may also be linked. Thus one may have to start with one to create the others. For example, exp(ipx) is the base for creating W(x)=Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx), which ultimately yields P(x)=W*(x)W(x). As a result, we argue that if probability exists in a system, it is not necessarily the case that there is a unique probability distribution. There may be various probability schemes linked with different information and different measurements/interactions. Thus, physics leads one to focus on a specific probability scheme. As a result, we argue that one must be careful when discussing pure statistical quantities and their extremization, because these quantities, like Shannon’s entropy and Fisher’ s information, contain a classical probability distribution, but they do not indicate which distribution to use in the case that a system has more than one. . As a result, the analysis of a system requires knowledge of the physics (interactions) occurring.We argue against thinking in terms of physics following directly from statistical considerations. The constrained extremization of one statistical quantity may yield a probability distribution related to one piece of information, but not to another. Furthermore, Shannon’s entropy and Fisher’s information pertain to classical probability 0<=P(x)<1 and Integral P(x)dx =1. The wavefunction, exp(ipx)/sqrt(L), is comprised of two probability distributions and ADD and MULTIPLIES statistically (i.e. OR and AND ) situations, but is involved in relative average calculations because it is not normalized. It is also different because it allows for positive and negative values. These are properties which do not follow from statistics using a classical P(x).

•Mar 18, 2023•0 citations

Why is Quantum Mechanics Sometimes Formulated Using Fisher Information? Part II

Francesco R. Ruggeri

In (1), a variational approach is applied to Fisher’s information (with constraints) to obtain a differential equation in P(x)=probability to be at x. It is suggested the equation may be simplified using P(x)=W(x)W(x) where W(x) is real. The result is the nonrelativistic Schrodinger equation with mass=1. As a first observation, we note that Fisher’s information, which is a purely statistical quantity, should not necessarily yield a nonrelativistic equation which is an approximation of relativistic results. In particular, we argue that Fisher’s information is used to find <pp> not necessarily 1/2m <pp>, but this is a minor point. A more important issue, we argue, is the meaning of P(x) in a bound system. A classical bound system is sometimes said to have a P(x)=C/v(x) i.e. P(x)dx is proportional to dt, the amount of time a particle spends in each equally sized dx. In the high energy limit, the envelope of a quantum bound probability P(x)=W(x)W(x) (W(x)=wavefunction) is said to roughly match C/v(x), yet this density does not follow from the extremization of Fisher’s information (together with two general constraints which yield E and V(x)=potential). This begs the question: What is P(x)? If one considers a particle moving at constant speed (i.e constant momentum) then P(x)=constant because each dx point carries the same probability. Classically a particle placed in a box with infinite potential walls would have a P(x) =constant and p and -p motion would be separated in time. Thus if P(x) is to have meaning in a box, one must conclude that the probabilities associated with p and -p are not constant, but rather functions of x. This then leads to the notion of a complex new kind of probability (which maps to P(x)=constant) for a free particle i.e. W(x) =cos(px) + i sin(px) so that the modulus W*(x)W(x)=P(x)= 1. These ideas seem to go beyond the notion of Fisher information. What then is the role of Fisher information? We argue it is related to two very specific moments of the distribution cos(px) or rather W(x) = Sum over p a(p)cos(px) with a(p)=a(-p), namely and <pp>. In classical physics there exists p and pp at each x point (but one is the square of the other), but with distributions <p does not equal to <pp> in general. Both and <pp> are linked to physical concepts which exist in Newtonian mechanics, namely impulse and work. With the presence of cos(px) one has a combination of Newtonian mechanics and a statistical distribution. We argue that the role of Fisher’s information is to allow one to transform from to <pp>. In particular, -idW/dx appears in Fisher’s information (and is linked to ), but the specific role of a variation is to transform it into <pp> which appears in a conservation of energy equation. We argue that this is why Fisher’s information may be used to derive the Schrodinger equation.

•Mar 6, 2023•0 citations

Physics from Fisher Information

B. Roy Frieden

This book defines and develops a unifying principle of physics, that of 'extreme physical information'. The information in question is, perhaps surprisingly, not Shannon or Boltzmann entropy but, rather, Fisher information, a simple concept little known to physicists. Both statistical and physical properties of Fisher information are developed. This information is shown to be a physical measure of disorder, sharing with entropy the property of monotonic change with time. The information concept is applied 'phenomenally' to derive most known physics, from statistical mechanics and thermodynamics to quantum mechanics, the Einstein field equations, and quantum gravity. Many new physical relations and concepts are developed, including new definitions of disorder, time and temperature. The information principle is based upon a new theory of measurement, one which incorporates the observer into the phenomenon that he/she observes. The 'request' for data creates the law that, ultimately, gives rise to the data. The observer creates his or her local reality.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Dec 10, 1998•589 citations

Fisher Information of Wavefunctions: Classical and Quantum

Luo Shun-Long

A parametric quantum mechanical wavefunction naturally induces parametric probability distributions by taking absolute square, and we can consider its classical Fisher information. On the other hand, it also induces parametric rank-one projections which may be viewed as density operators, and we can talk about its quantum Fisher information. Among many versions of quantum Fisher information, there are two prominent ones. The first, defined via a quantum score function, was introduced by Helstrom in 1967 and is well known. The second, defined via the square root of the density operator, has its origin in the skew information introduced by Wigner and Yanase in 1963 and remains relatively unnoticed. This study is devoted to investigating the relationships between the classical Fisher information and these two versions of quantum Fisher information for wavefunctions. It is shown that the two versions of quantum Fisher information differ by a factor 2 and that they dominate the classical Fisher information. The non-coincidence of these two versions of quantum Fisher information may be interpreted as a manifestation of quantum discord. We further calculate the difference between the Helstrom quantum Fisher information and the classical Fisher information, and show that it is precisely the instantaneous phase fluctuation of the wavefunctions.

Chinese Physics Letters•Nov 29, 2006•23 citations
Fisher information (FI) is normally developed and applied within the context of classical mathematical statistics. Here we show that it alternatively arises as physical properties of a generally decoherent system. Two kinds of Fisher information are treated: the classical FI I[p]I[p]I[p] and the FI channel capacity 〈I〉. These are shown to be linearly related to the partition function Z, the coherence function \ensuremathρ(x,x\ensuremath′),\ensuremath{\rho}{(x,x}^{\ensuremath{'}}),\ensuremathρ(x,x\ensuremath′), the two-point coherence function \ensuremathτ(\ensuremathΔx),\ensuremath{\tau}(\ensuremath{\Delta}x),\ensuremathτ(\ensuremathΔx), the entropy of fluctuation H(\ensuremathΔx),H(\ensuremath{\Delta}x),H(\ensuremathΔx), and the cross entropy HKL(\ensuremathρ/r\ensuremathΔ){H}_{\mathrm{KL}}(\ensuremath{\rho}{/r}_{\ensuremath{\Delta}})HKL​(\ensuremathρ/r\ensuremathΔ​) between the system probability density function \ensuremathρ(x,x)\ensuremath{\rho}(x,x)\ensuremathρ(x,x) and its shifted version \ensuremathρ(x+\ensuremathΔx,x+\ensuremathΔx).\ensuremath{\rho}(x+\ensuremath{\Delta}x,x+\ensuremath{\Delta}x).\ensuremathρ(x+\ensuremathΔx,x+\ensuremathΔx).
Consider an isolated statistical system specified by a coordinate x and its probability density p(x). A functional of p(x) called ``Fisher information'' can be used to measure the degree of disorder of the system due to the spread in p(x). Fisher information may be minimized, subject to a physical constraint, to attain a temporal equilibrium solution p(x). When the constraint is linear in the mean kinetic energy of the system, the equilibrium solution p(x) often obeys the correct differential equation for the system. In this way, the Schr\"odinger (energy) wave equation, Klein-Gordon equation, Helmholtz wave equation, diffusion equation, Boltzmann law, and Maxwell-Boltzmann law may be derived from one classical principle of disorder. The convergence rate for Fisher information is about that for alternative use of maximum entropy (in problems where both have the same equilibrium solution). This suggests that Fisher information defines an arrow of time. The arrow points in the direction of decreasing accuracy for the determination of the mean, or ideal, value of a parameter.
The subject of this paper is a mathematical transition from the Fisher information of classical statistics to the matrix formalism of quantum theory. If the monotonicity is the main requirement, then there are several quantum versions parametrized by a function. In physical applications the minimal is the most popular. There is a one-to-one correspondence between Fisher informations (called also monotone metrics) and abstract covariances. The skew information and the chi-square-divergence are treated here as particular cases.
Given a coin, one has two complementary pieces of information and a corresponding probability of .5 and .5. Similar considerations apply to a die. As a result, one may get the impression that there exists a unique probability distribution in a probabilistic system and that this single probability scheme is linked to the constrained maximization of Shannon’s entropy or Fisher’s information. We argue however, that there may be different probability schemes in the same problem associated with different pieces of information which are relevant to the physics which occurs in the system. Thus, we argue that it is the physics which selects the probability distribution to be examined. For example, one may loosely think in terms of a detailed probability scheme versus a kind-of coarse grained one in the same system. For example, for a quantum free particle, P(x)=1 i.e there is the same probability for a particle to be at any x point. This, however, is based on velocity, i.e. the relationship between dx and dt. There is another piece of information in the system, namely mo which together with v yields momentum (either relativistic or nonrelativistic) .This need not be measured using a clock (which velocity requires), but by the impact of an impulse on a target. Thus, nonrelativistically p=m1v1=m2v2 give the same impulse, but have different velocities. Quantum mechanics shows that a free particle is governed by exp(ipx) which contains two unnormalized probability distributions cos(px) and sin(px). These are key for impulse interactions (i.e. the physics of interactions such as with a 2-slit apparatus etc), yet exp(ipx)/sqrt(L) maps into the “coarse-grained” P(x)=exp(ipx)exp(-ipx) / L = constant. P(x) is one probability scheme in the problem and exp(ipx) another (for a free particle). Each answers some physical questions, but one needs to know which probability to use (i.e. what information is relevant) to a particular situation. P(x) is relevant to motion in space not involving interactions. exp(ipx) is relevant to interactions (even with a magnetic vector potential causing no magnetic field) or with a 2-slit apparatus. Furthermore, in a quantum bound state, one has W*(x)W(x) = P(x) (W(x)=wavefunction =Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx)) and a*(p)a(p).=P(p). Each probability scheme corresponds to the analysis of a different kind of measurement, but various schemes may also be linked. Thus one may have to start with one to create the others. For example, exp(ipx) is the base for creating W(x)=Sum over p a(p)exp(ipx), which ultimately yields P(x)=W*(x)W(x). As a result, we argue that if probability exists in a system, it is not necessarily the case that there is a unique probability distribution. There may be various probability schemes linked with different information and different measurements/interactions. Thus, physics leads one to focus on a specific probability scheme. As a result, we argue that one must be careful when discussing pure statistical quantities and their extremization, because these quantities, like Shannon’s entropy and Fisher’ s information, contain a classical probability distribution, but they do not indicate which distribution to use in the case that a system has more than one. . As a result, the analysis of a system requires knowledge of the physics (interactions) occurring.We argue against thinking in terms of physics following directly from statistical considerations. The constrained extremization of one statistical quantity may yield a probability distribution related to one piece of information, but not to another. Furthermore, Shannon’s entropy and Fisher’s information pertain to classical probability 0<=P(x)<1 and Integral P(x)dx =1. The wavefunction, exp(ipx)/sqrt(L), is comprised of two probability distributions and ADD and MULTIPLIES statistically (i.e. OR and AND ) situations, but is involved in relative average calculations because it is not normalized. It is also different because it allows for positive and negative values. These are properties which do not follow from statistics using a classical P(x).
In (1), a variational approach is applied to Fisher’s information (with constraints) to obtain a differential equation in P(x)=probability to be at x. It is suggested the equation may be simplified using P(x)=W(x)W(x) where W(x) is real. The result is the nonrelativistic Schrodinger equation with mass=1. As a first observation, we note that Fisher’s information, which is a purely statistical quantity, should not necessarily yield a nonrelativistic equation which is an approximation of relativistic results. In particular, we argue that Fisher’s information is used to find <pp> not necessarily 1/2m <pp>, but this is a minor point. A more important issue, we argue, is the meaning of P(x) in a bound system. A classical bound system is sometimes said to have a P(x)=C/v(x) i.e. P(x)dx is proportional to dt, the amount of time a particle spends in each equally sized dx. In the high energy limit, the envelope of a quantum bound probability P(x)=W(x)W(x) (W(x)=wavefunction) is said to roughly match C/v(x), yet this density does not follow from the extremization of Fisher’s information (together with two general constraints which yield E and V(x)=potential). This begs the question: What is P(x)? If one considers a particle moving at constant speed (i.e constant momentum) then P(x)=constant because each dx point carries the same probability. Classically a particle placed in a box with infinite potential walls would have a P(x) =constant and p and -p motion would be separated in time. Thus if P(x) is to have meaning in a box, one must conclude that the probabilities associated with p and -p are not constant, but rather functions of x. This then leads to the notion of a complex new kind of probability (which maps to P(x)=constant) for a free particle i.e. W(x) =cos(px) + i sin(px) so that the modulus W*(x)W(x)=P(x)= 1. These ideas seem to go beyond the notion of Fisher information. What then is the role of Fisher information? We argue it is related to two very specific moments of the distribution cos(px) or rather W(x) = Sum over p a(p)cos(px) with a(p)=a(-p), namely and <pp>. In classical physics there exists p and pp at each x point (but one is the square of the other), but with distributions <p does not equal to <pp> in general. Both and <pp> are linked to physical concepts which exist in Newtonian mechanics, namely impulse and work. With the presence of cos(px) one has a combination of Newtonian mechanics and a statistical distribution. We argue that the role of Fisher’s information is to allow one to transform from to <pp>. In particular, -idW/dx appears in Fisher’s information (and is linked to ), but the specific role of a variation is to transform it into <pp> which appears in a conservation of energy equation. We argue that this is why Fisher’s information may be used to derive the Schrodinger equation.
This book defines and develops a unifying principle of physics, that of 'extreme physical information'. The information in question is, perhaps surprisingly, not Shannon or Boltzmann entropy but, rather, Fisher information, a simple concept little known to physicists. Both statistical and physical properties of Fisher information are developed. This information is shown to be a physical measure of disorder, sharing with entropy the property of monotonic change with time. The information concept is applied 'phenomenally' to derive most known physics, from statistical mechanics and thermodynamics to quantum mechanics, the Einstein field equations, and quantum gravity. Many new physical relations and concepts are developed, including new definitions of disorder, time and temperature. The information principle is based upon a new theory of measurement, one which incorporates the observer into the phenomenon that he/she observes. The 'request' for data creates the law that, ultimately, gives rise to the data. The observer creates his or her local reality.
A parametric quantum mechanical wavefunction naturally induces parametric probability distributions by taking absolute square, and we can consider its classical Fisher information. On the other hand, it also induces parametric rank-one projections which may be viewed as density operators, and we can talk about its quantum Fisher information. Among many versions of quantum Fisher information, there are two prominent ones. The first, defined via a quantum score function, was introduced by Helstrom in 1967 and is well known. The second, defined via the square root of the density operator, has its origin in the skew information introduced by Wigner and Yanase in 1963 and remains relatively unnoticed. This study is devoted to investigating the relationships between the classical Fisher information and these two versions of quantum Fisher information for wavefunctions. It is shown that the two versions of quantum Fisher information differ by a factor 2 and that they dominate the classical Fisher information. The non-coincidence of these two versions of quantum Fisher information may be interpreted as a manifestation of quantum discord. We further calculate the difference between the Helstrom quantum Fisher information and the classical Fisher information, and show that it is precisely the instantaneous phase fluctuation of the wavefunctions.