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

Estimation of counted quantum phase

Z. Hradil

Published Mar 1, 1995• 30 citations
Publisher

Abstract

The estimation of phase shift in realistic experiments is addressed here. Provided that the phase concept is not ideal, the phase shift should always be inferred from the performed measurement. Particulary, two different estimations are suggested. The conditional probability is given by the experimentally observable dependence of the measured probability on the phase shift. As an explicit example, the accuracy of the phase measurement on the Mach-Zehnder interferometer is evaluated using different methods for comparison.

DOI
10.1103/physreva.51.1870

Related papers

The Phase-sensitivity of a Mach-Zehnder Interferometer for Coherent Light

Jong-Tae Shin, Heonoh Kim, Goo-Dong Park +1 more

We have studied the sensitivity of four different phase shift measurement schemes with a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. The input light is considered to be in a coherent state and the detectors are assumed to be ideal with the quantum efficiency of unity. It is shown by direct calculation of the operators corresponding to the measurement schemes that the uncertainty of the phase-shift measurement is limited to the classical one $\frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}$ (m is the average number of the photons in the input state) regardless of the phase-shift measurement schemes.

Journal of the Optical Society of Korea•Mar 1, 1999•10 citations

Bayesian estimation of quantum optical phase by photon counting

David Rimmer, William J. Fitzgerald

Single photon count distributions at the outputs of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer are highly dependent on the phase difference between the two arms of the apparatus, so photocount records can be used to estimate an unknown optical phase. Experimental results have shown that phase information can be inferred from the data even at low mean input intensities of ⪅10 photons. Here we consider the optimal Bayesian parameter estimate for the model used by a previous frequentist analysis. In the limit of high input intensity the observation is well-modelled as an intensity measurement of a classical wave in Gaussian measurement noise, however in the low intensity regime this simple model does not apply. It seems that no generally valid closed-form estimator for this problem exists without making the Gaussian approximation. Moreover the 2π radian ambiguity in phase estimates presents a problem in defining cost functions to compare estimator performance, and we consider two reasonable alternatives. We present a numerical study of the experiment along with a novel numerical approach to this problem which out-performs the existing estimators and with a squared error that approaches the Cramer-Rao lower bound previously derived in the literature, in the limit where that bound is valid.

Proceedings of SPIE, the International Society for Optical Engineering/Proceedings of SPIE•May 25, 2004•0 citations

Fidelity of quantum interferometers

Thomas B. Bahder, Paul A. Lopata

For a generic interferometer, the conditional probability density distribution $p(\ensuremath{\phi}\ensuremath{\mid}m)$, for the phase $\ensuremath{\phi}$ given measurement outcome $m$ will generally have multiple peaks. Therefore, the phase sensitivity of an interferometer cannot be adequately characterized by the standard deviation, such as $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}\ensuremath{\phi}\ensuremath{\sim}1∕\sqrt{N}$ (the standard limit), or $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}\ensuremath{\phi}\ensuremath{\sim}1∕N$ (the Heisenberg limit). We propose an alternative measure of phase sensitivity---the fidelity of an interferometer---defined as the Shannon mutual information between the phase shift $\ensuremath{\phi}$ and the measurement outcomes $m$. As an example application of interferometer fidelity, we consider a generic optical Mach-Zehnder interferometer, used as a sensor of a classical field. For the case where there exists no a priori information on the phase shift, we find the surprising result that maximally entangled state input leads to a lower fidelity than Fock state input, for the same photon number.

arXiv:quant-ph/0602123•Physical Review A•Nov 15, 2006•16 citations

Phase estimation with nonunitary interferometers: Information as a metric

Thomas B. Bahder

Determining the phase in one arm of a quantum interferometer is discussed taking into account the three nonideal aspects in real experiments: nondeterministic state preparation, nonunitary state evolution due to losses during state propagation, and imperfect state detection. A general expression is written for the probability of a measurement outcome taking into account these three nonideal aspects. As an example of applying the formalism, the classical Fisher information and fidelity (Shannon mutual information between phase and measurements) are computed for few-photon Fock and N00N states input into a lossy Mach-Zehnder interferometer. These three nonideal aspects lead to qualitative differences in phase estimation, such as a decrease in fidelity and Fisher information that depends on the true value of the phase.

arXiv:1012.5293•Physical Review A•May 2, 2011•8 citations

Adaptive quantum estimation of phase shifts

Daniela Denot, Thorsten C. Bschorr, Matthias Freyberger

We discuss an adaptive interferometric approach to quantum estimation of phase shifts. In a first step we find optimized two-mode input states for a generalized Mach-Zehnder interferometer. These two states show a small phase variance at the so-called Heisenberg limit. It turns out that they can be generated by entangling a coherent state and a squeezed vacuum at a beam splitter. Moreover, the interferometric setup allows us to describe an adaptive estimation scheme for arbitrary phase shifts if we assume a fixed mean photon number as a quantum resource.

Physical Review A•Jan 30, 2006•8 citations

Phase sensitivity of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer

Luca Pezzè, Augusto Smerzi

The best performance of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer is achieved with the input state $\ensuremath{\mid}{N}_{T}∕2+1⟩\ensuremath{\mid}{N}_{T}∕2\ensuremath{-}1⟩+\ensuremath{\mid}{N}_{T}∕2\ensuremath{-}1⟩\ensuremath{\mid}{N}_{T}∕2+1⟩$, ${N}_{T}$ being the total number of atoms or photons. This gives (i) a phase-shift error confidence ${C}_{68%}=2.67∕{N}_{T}$ with (ii) a single interferometric measurement. Different input quantum states can achieve the Heisenberg scaling $\ensuremath{\sim}1∕{N}_{T}$ but with higher prefactors and at the price of a statistical analysis of two or more independent measurements.

arXiv:quant-ph/0511059•Physical Review A•Jan 3, 2006•77 citations
The estimation of phase shift in realistic experiments is addressed here. Provided that the phase concept is not ideal, the phase shift should always be inferred from the performed measurement. Particulary, two different estimations are suggested. The conditional probability is given by the experimentally observable dependence of the measured probability on the phase shift. As an explicit example, the accuracy of the phase measurement on the Mach-Zehnder interferometer is evaluated using different methods for comparison.
We have studied the sensitivity of four different phase shift measurement schemes with a Mach-Zehnder interferometer. The input light is considered to be in a coherent state and the detectors are assumed to be ideal with the quantum efficiency of unity. It is shown by direct calculation of the operators corresponding to the measurement schemes that the uncertainty of the phase-shift measurement is limited to the classical one 1m\frac{1}{\sqrt{m}}m​1​ (m is the average number of the photons in the input state) regardless of the phase-shift measurement schemes.
Single photon count distributions at the outputs of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer are highly dependent on the phase difference between the two arms of the apparatus, so photocount records can be used to estimate an unknown optical phase. Experimental results have shown that phase information can be inferred from the data even at low mean input intensities of ⪅10 photons. Here we consider the optimal Bayesian parameter estimate for the model used by a previous frequentist analysis. In the limit of high input intensity the observation is well-modelled as an intensity measurement of a classical wave in Gaussian measurement noise, however in the low intensity regime this simple model does not apply. It seems that no generally valid closed-form estimator for this problem exists without making the Gaussian approximation. Moreover the 2π radian ambiguity in phase estimates presents a problem in defining cost functions to compare estimator performance, and we consider two reasonable alternatives. We present a numerical study of the experiment along with a novel numerical approach to this problem which out-performs the existing estimators and with a squared error that approaches the Cramer-Rao lower bound previously derived in the literature, in the limit where that bound is valid.
For a generic interferometer, the conditional probability density distribution $p(\ensuremath{\phi}\ensuremath{\mid}m)$, for the phase $\ensuremath{\phi}$ given measurement outcome mmm will generally have multiple peaks. Therefore, the phase sensitivity of an interferometer cannot be adequately characterized by the standard deviation, such as $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}\ensuremath{\phi}\ensuremath{\sim}1∕\sqrt{N}$ (the standard limit), or $\mathrm{\ensuremath{\Delta}}\ensuremath{\phi}\ensuremath{\sim}1∕N$ (the Heisenberg limit). We propose an alternative measure of phase sensitivity---the fidelity of an interferometer---defined as the Shannon mutual information between the phase shift $\ensuremath{\phi}$ and the measurement outcomes mmm. As an example application of interferometer fidelity, we consider a generic optical Mach-Zehnder interferometer, used as a sensor of a classical field. For the case where there exists no a priori information on the phase shift, we find the surprising result that maximally entangled state input leads to a lower fidelity than Fock state input, for the same photon number.
Determining the phase in one arm of a quantum interferometer is discussed taking into account the three nonideal aspects in real experiments: nondeterministic state preparation, nonunitary state evolution due to losses during state propagation, and imperfect state detection. A general expression is written for the probability of a measurement outcome taking into account these three nonideal aspects. As an example of applying the formalism, the classical Fisher information and fidelity (Shannon mutual information between phase and measurements) are computed for few-photon Fock and N00N states input into a lossy Mach-Zehnder interferometer. These three nonideal aspects lead to qualitative differences in phase estimation, such as a decrease in fidelity and Fisher information that depends on the true value of the phase.
We discuss an adaptive interferometric approach to quantum estimation of phase shifts. In a first step we find optimized two-mode input states for a generalized Mach-Zehnder interferometer. These two states show a small phase variance at the so-called Heisenberg limit. It turns out that they can be generated by entangling a coherent state and a squeezed vacuum at a beam splitter. Moreover, the interferometric setup allows us to describe an adaptive estimation scheme for arbitrary phase shifts if we assume a fixed mean photon number as a quantum resource.
The best performance of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer is achieved with the input state $\ensuremath{\mid}{N}_{T}∕2+1⟩\ensuremath{\mid}{N}_{T}∕2\ensuremath{-}1⟩+\ensuremath{\mid}{N}_{T}∕2\ensuremath{-}1⟩\ensuremath{\mid}{N}_{T}∕2+1⟩$, NT{N}_{T}NT​ being the total number of atoms or photons. This gives (i) a phase-shift error confidence ${C}_{68%}=2.67∕{N}_{T}$ with (ii) a single interferometric measurement. Different input quantum states can achieve the Heisenberg scaling $\ensuremath{\sim}1∕{N}_{T}$ but with higher prefactors and at the price of a statistical analysis of two or more independent measurements.