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

Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE

Multiscale quantum optical networks

George Jaroszkiewicz

Published Apr 27, 2007• 1 citation
Publisher

Abstract

Quantum experiments are described in terms of time-dependent networks of quantum bits, each qubit representing an elementary information gateway. The emphasis is on the signal properties of apparatus rather than on systems under observation (SUOs), with the quantum states of the theory (the labstates) representing the observer's information about the state of their apparatus, rather than of any SUO. The formalism gives an efficient quantum register description related to the formalism of quantum computation. Experiments conventionally described by the PVM and POVM formalisms are treated in identical terms, the formalism providing an efficient modular approach to quantum optics experiments of arbitrary complexity.

DOI
10.1117/12.718979

Related papers

Quantized detector network POVMs and the Franson-Bell experiment

George Jaroszkiewicz

We present a generalized POVM formalism for the calculation of quantum optics networks of arbitrary complexity and apply it in a detailed analysis of the Franson-Bell experiment. Our analysis suggests that when it comes to observations of quantum processes, laboratory apparatus cannot always be used according to classical principles.

arXiv:0809.3466•Sep 19, 2008•2 citations

QUANTIZED DETECTOR REPRESENTATION OF QUANTUM OPTICAL NETWORKS

George Jaroszkiewicz, Jason Ridgway-Taylor

We present a unified and algorithmic approach to the calculation of final state amplitudes for quantum optical networks of arbitrary size and complexity. We discuss networks consisting of coupled Mach-Zender interferometers, experiments conventionally described by the POVM approach, and two-photon interference experiments.

International Journal of Modern Physics B•May 20, 2006•5 citations

Quantum mechanical description of linear optics

Johannes Skaar, Juan Carlos García-Escartín, Harald Landrø

Linear optical networks with any number of modes are described quantum mechanically. We reformulate the conventional formal description based on input–output operator relations and obtain an intuitive description based on the possible paths taken by the photons. The effect of a linear optical network on localized photons is treated within the same formalism. The potential and limitations of linear optics for application in quantum information processing are briefly discussed.

American Journal of Physics•Sep 22, 2004•48 citations

Bohr-Heisenberg Reality and System-free Quantum Mechanics

George Jaroszkiewicz, Jon Eakins

Motivated by Heisenberg's assertion that electron trajectories do not exist until they are observed, we present a new approach to quantum mechanics in which the concept of observer independent system under observation is eliminated. Instead, the focus is only on observers and apparatus, the former describing the latter in terms of labstates. These are quantum states over time-dependent Heisenberg nets, which are quantum registers of qubits representing information gateways accessible to the observers. We discuss the motivation for this approach and lay down the basic principles and mathematical notation.

arXiv:quant-ph/0606143•AIP conference proceedings•Jan 1, 2007•0 citations

Multimode and continuous-mode quantum optics

R. Loudon

Abstract The single-mode theory of Chapter 5 is inherently limited to the description of experiments that use time-independent light beams. The light is essentially nonergodic, in that its statistical fluctuations may be described by an ensemble, but these are not apparent in a time series of experiments made on the single member of the ensemble corresponding to a practical realization of the state. Identical measurements always give the same results and there are no time-dependent correlations of the kind considered in the classical theory of Chapter 3. Many of the nonclassical properties of light can be understood in terms of single-mode theory but other properties involve excitations of two or more modes. Practical observations of nonclassical effects are usually made on time-dependent light beams.

•Sep 7, 2000•1 citation

Computerization and Computer Algebra

George Jaroszkiewicz

Introduction The quantized detector network (QDN) formalism was designed from the outset to deal with detector networks of arbitrary complexity and rank. However, there is a price to be paid. A qubit register of rank r is a Hilbert space of dimension 2 r , so the dimensionality of quantized detector networks grows exponentially with rank. For example, a relatively small system of, say, 10 detectors involves a Hilbert space of dimension 2 10 = 1 , 024. Even such a relatively small system cannot be dealt with easily by manual calculation, because quantum mechanics (QM) involves entangled states. Labstates in QDN are far more complex (in the sense of having far more mathematical structure) than the corresponding states in a classical register of the same rank. Some of the mathematical entanglement and separability properties of quantum labstates are discussed in Chapters 22 and 23. The quantum entanglement structure of labstates poses a ubiquitous and serious problem, for both theorists and experimentalists. At this time, there is significant interest in quantum entanglement, particularly regarding its use in quantum computing, but theoretical understanding of entanglement is still surprisingly limited. On the experimental side, quantum computers with 2000 qubits are currently being developed (D-Wave Systems, 2016). There is scope here for the application of QDN to networks of rank going into the many thousands. For those sorts of systems under observation (SUOs), quantum entanglement makes calculations by hand far too laborious to be of any practical use. Fortunately, three factors come to our aid here, making the application of QDN to large-rank networks a potentially viable proposition. Modularization We saw in previous chapters that QDN deals with discrete aspects of observation, despite the fact that standard QM and relativistic quantum field theory (RQFT) deal with continuous degrees of freedom. This discreteness comes in three forms, referred to us as stages, nodes, and modules, and all of that is due to three inescapable physical facts. First, all real observations take time and involve discrete signals in finite numbers of detectors. Second, real apparatus is constructed from atoms, not continua. Third, these atoms form finite numbers of well-characterized modules, as discussed in the previous chapter. Contextuality A critically helpful fact here is that in any particular experiment, the contextual subspaces that the observer needs to deal with will usually be of significantly lower dimensions than that of the full quantum registers involved.

Cambridge University Press eBooks•Nov 28, 2017•0 citations
Quantum experiments are described in terms of time-dependent networks of quantum bits, each qubit representing an elementary information gateway. The emphasis is on the signal properties of apparatus rather than on systems under observation (SUOs), with the quantum states of the theory (the labstates) representing the observer's information about the state of their apparatus, rather than of any SUO. The formalism gives an efficient quantum register description related to the formalism of quantum computation. Experiments conventionally described by the PVM and POVM formalisms are treated in identical terms, the formalism providing an efficient modular approach to quantum optics experiments of arbitrary complexity.
Motivated by Heisenberg's assertion that electron trajectories do not exist until they are observed, we present a new approach to quantum mechanics in which the concept of observer independent system under observation is eliminated. Instead, the focus is only on observers and apparatus, the former describing the latter in terms of labstates. These are quantum states over time-dependent Heisenberg nets, which are quantum registers of qubits representing information gateways accessible to the observers. We discuss the motivation for this approach and lay down the basic principles and mathematical notation.
Abstract The single-mode theory of Chapter 5 is inherently limited to the description of experiments that use time-independent light beams. The light is essentially nonergodic, in that its statistical fluctuations may be described by an ensemble, but these are not apparent in a time series of experiments made on the single member of the ensemble corresponding to a practical realization of the state. Identical measurements always give the same results and there are no time-dependent correlations of the kind considered in the classical theory of Chapter 3. Many of the nonclassical properties of light can be understood in terms of single-mode theory but other properties involve excitations of two or more modes. Practical observations of nonclassical effects are usually made on time-dependent light beams.
Introduction The quantized detector network (QDN) formalism was designed from the outset to deal with detector networks of arbitrary complexity and rank. However, there is a price to be paid. A qubit register of rank r is a Hilbert space of dimension 2 r , so the dimensionality of quantized detector networks grows exponentially with rank. For example, a relatively small system of, say, 10 detectors involves a Hilbert space of dimension 2 10 = 1 , 024. Even such a relatively small system cannot be dealt with easily by manual calculation, because quantum mechanics (QM) involves entangled states. Labstates in QDN are far more complex (in the sense of having far more mathematical structure) than the corresponding states in a classical register of the same rank. Some of the mathematical entanglement and separability properties of quantum labstates are discussed in Chapters 22 and 23. The quantum entanglement structure of labstates poses a ubiquitous and serious problem, for both theorists and experimentalists. At this time, there is significant interest in quantum entanglement, particularly regarding its use in quantum computing, but theoretical understanding of entanglement is still surprisingly limited. On the experimental side, quantum computers with 2000 qubits are currently being developed (D-Wave Systems, 2016). There is scope here for the application of QDN to networks of rank going into the many thousands. For those sorts of systems under observation (SUOs), quantum entanglement makes calculations by hand far too laborious to be of any practical use. Fortunately, three factors come to our aid here, making the application of QDN to large-rank networks a potentially viable proposition. Modularization We saw in previous chapters that QDN deals with discrete aspects of observation, despite the fact that standard QM and relativistic quantum field theory (RQFT) deal with continuous degrees of freedom. This discreteness comes in three forms, referred to us as stages, nodes, and modules, and all of that is due to three inescapable physical facts. First, all real observations take time and involve discrete signals in finite numbers of detectors. Second, real apparatus is constructed from atoms, not continua. Third, these atoms form finite numbers of well-characterized modules, as discussed in the previous chapter. Contextuality A critically helpful fact here is that in any particular experiment, the contextual subspaces that the observer needs to deal with will usually be of significantly lower dimensions than that of the full quantum registers involved.