Journal of the Optical Society of America B

Bounds to precision for quantum interferometry with Gaussian states and operations

Carlo Sparaciari, Stefano Olivares, Matteo G. A. Paris

Published Jun 5, 2015• 60 citations

Abstract

We address high-precision measurements by active and passive interferometric schemes based on Gaussian states and operations. In particular, we look for the best states to be injected into their ports according to the quantum Cramer–Rao bound, i.e., maximizing the quantum Fisher information over all the involved parameters, given a constraint on the overall mean number of photons entering into the interferometer. We found that for passive interferometers involving only beam splitters, the optimal input leading to Heisenberg scaling is a pair of identical squeezed-coherent states with at most one-third of the total energy employed in squeezing. For active interferometers involving optical amplifiers, input coherent signals are enough to achieve Heisenberg scaling, given an optimal value of the amplification gain. For passive schemes our results clarify the role of squeezing in improving both the reference phase and the signal phase of an interferometer.

DOI: 10.1364/josab.32.001354

Related papers

Gaussian-state interferometry with passive and active elements

Carlo Sparaciari, Stefano Olivares, Matteo G. A. Paris

We address the precision of optical interferometers fed by quantum and semiclassical Gaussian states involving passive and/or active elements, such as beam splitters, photodetectors, and optical parametric amplifiers. We first address the ultimate bounds to precision by discussing the behavior of the quantum Fisher information. We then consider photodetection at the output and calculate the sensitivity of the interferometers taking into account the nonunit quantum efficiency of the detectors. Our results show that in the ideal case of photon number detectors with unit quantum efficiency the best configuration is the symmetric one, namely, a passive (active) interferometer with a passive (active) detection stage: in this case one may achieve Heisenberg scaling of sensitivity by suitably optimizing over Gaussian states at the input. On the other hand, in the realistic case of detectors with nonunit quantum efficiency, the performances of the passive scheme are unavoidably degraded, whereas detectors involving optical parametric amplifiers allow us to fully compensate for the presence of loss in the detection stage, thus restoring the Heisenberg scaling.

arXiv:1510.07716Physical Review AFeb 5, 201697 citations

Optimal Quantum-Enhanced Interferometry Using a Laser Power Source

Matthias D. Lang, Carlton M. Caves

We consider an interferometer powered by laser light (a coherent state) into one input port and ask the following question: what is the best state to inject into the second input port, given a constraint on the mean number of photons this state can carry, in order to optimize the interferometer's phase sensitivity? This question is the practical question for high-sensitivity interferometry. We answer the question by considering the quantum Cramér-Rao bound for such a setup. The answer is squeezed vacuum.

arXiv:1306.2677Physical Review LettersOct 22, 2013181 citations

Optimal Mach-Zehnder phase sensitivity with Gaussian states

Stefan Ataman

We address in this work the phase sensitivity of a Mach-Zehnder interferometer with Gaussian input states. A squeezed-coherent plus squeezed vacuum input state allows us to unambiguously determine the optimal phase-matching conditions in order to maximize the quantum Fisher information. Realistic detection schemes are described and their performance compared with respect to the quantum Cram\'er-Rao bound. The core of this paper discusses in detail the most general Gaussian input state, without any a priori parameter restrictions. Prioritizing the maximization of various terms in the quantum Fisher information has the consequence of imposing the input phase-matching conditions. We discuss in detail when each scenario yields an optimal performance. Realistic detection scenarios are also considered and their performance compared to the theoretical optimum. The impact of the beam splitter types employed on the optimum phase-matching conditions is also discussed. We find a number of potentially interesting advantages of these states over the coherent plus squeezed vacuum input case.

arXiv:1912.04018Physical Review ADec 13, 201938 citations

Precision of Parameter Estimation in Quantum Metrology

Chenglong You

The fundamental precision limit of an interferometer is crucial since it bounds the best possible sensitivity one could achieve using such a device. This thesis will focus on several different interferometers and try to give the ultimate precision bounds by carefully counting all the resources used in the interferometers. The thesis begins with the basics of the quantum state of light. The fundamentals of quantum metrology are also reviewed and discussed. More specifically, the terminology of classical and quantum Cram\'er-Rao bound and classical and quantum Fisher information are introduced. Chapter 3 discusses the conclusive precision bounds in two-mode interferometer such as Mach-Zehnder interferometer (MZI) and SU(1,1) interferometer. I revisit the quantum Fisher information approach of these two interferometers and show the discrepancy of phase sensitivity on the physically same setup. Then I establish fundamental precision estimation bounds for such device, due to the reason that many works of literature fail to accurately count the resources and knowledge of phase-to-be-estimated used in the interferometers. The analysis suggests that for a MZI, one can never do better than SNL in phase sensitivity, when an input to one of the two ports is the vacuum. If one does not allow the detector to use any external phase reference or power resource, then the precision is limited by the SNL. For a SU(1,1) interferometer, firstly, when one of the input states is restricted to be a vacuum state, I showed that by using either the phase-averaging method or the quantum Fisher information matrix method, different phase configurations of the SU(1,1) interferometer result in the same QFI. Secondly, I compared the results of the phase-averaging method and the quantum Fisher information matrix method, and then I argued that for an SU(1,1) interferometer, phase averaging or quantum Fisher information matrix method is generally required, and they are equivalent. Finally, I used the quantum Fisher information matrix method to calculate the precision limit for other common input states, such as two coherent state inputs or coherent state with squeezed vacuum inputs. In chapter 4, I will consider a passive multi-mode interferometer for multiparameter phase estimation. It was suggested that optical networks with relatively inexpensive overhead---single photon Fock states, passive optical elements, and single photon detection---can show significant improvements over classical strategies for single-parameter estimation, when the number of modes in the network is small. In this chapter, I analytically compute the quantum Cramer-Rao bound to show these

Civil War Book ReviewMar 18, 20190 citations

Quantum limit of precision for phase estimation in squeezing-enhanced interferometry with a single-mode readout

Dmitri B. Horoshko, Fedor Jelezko

We consider an optical interferometer with coherent light in one input and a squeezed vacuum in another. Such an interferometer is known to beat the standard quantum limit of sensitivity to the difference of phase shifts in its arms. We find the ultimate limit of precision for such an interferometer by calculating the quantum Fisher information of the mixed quantum state in one of the interferometer's outputs about the difference phase. We show that, in the vicinity of the black fringe, this information is asymptotically close to the quantum Fisher information about this phase for the two-mode readout. We conclude that the single-mode readout is optimal for phase estimation in squeezing-enhanced interferometry and allows for the Heisenberg scaling of precision. We also show that the optimal local measurement in the vicinity of the black fringe consists of amplifying the output field in a phase-sensitive way and measuring its photon number.

quant-pharXiv:2603.07556Mar 10, 20260 citations

Phase estimation of phase shifts in two arms for an SU(1,1) interferometer with coherent and squeezed vacuum states

Qian-Kun Gong, Dong Li, Chun-Hua Yuan +2 more

We theoretically present the quantum Cramér-Rao bounds (QCRB) of an SU(1,1) interferometer for Gaussian states input with and without the internal photonic losses. The phase shifts in the single arm and in the double arms are studied and the corresponding analytical expressions of quantum Fisher information with Gaussian input states are presented. Different from the traditional Mach-Zehnder interferometer, the QCRB of single arm case is slightly higher or lower than that of double arms case depending on the input states. With a fixed mean photon number and for pure Gaussian state input, the optimal sensitivity is achieved with a squeezed vacuum input in one mode and the vacuum input in the other. We compare the QCRB with the standard quantum limit and Heisenberg limit. In the case of small internal losses the QCRB can beat the standard quantum limit.

arXiv:1608.00389Chinese Physics BAug 1, 201726 citations