We show how to quantify the optimal tradeoff between the amount of information retrieved by a quantum measurement in estimating an unknown spin coherent state and the disturbance on the state itself, and how to derive the corresponding minimum-disturbing measurement.
Quantum measurement unavoidably disturbs the state of a quantum system if any information about the system is extracted. Recently, the concept of reversing quantum measurement has been introduced and has attracted much attention. Numerous efforts have thus been devoted to understanding the fundamental relation of the amount of information obtained by measurement to either state disturbance or reversibility. Here, we experimentally prove the trade-off relations in quantum measurement with respect to both state disturbance and reversibility. By demonstrating the quantitative bound of the trade-off relations, we realize an optimal measurement for estimating quantum systems with minimum disturbance and maximum reversibility. Our results offer fundamental insights on quantum measurement and practical guidelines for implementing various quantum information protocols.
Information-theoretic definitions for the noise associated with a quantum measurement and the corresponding disturbance to the state of the system have recently been introduced [F. Buscemi et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 050401 (2014)]. These definitions are invariant under relabeling of measurement outcomes, and lend themselves readily to the formulation of state-independent uncertainty relations both for the joint estimate of observables (noise-noise relations) and the noise-disturbance tradeoff. Here we derive such relations for incompatible qubit observables, which we prove to be tight in the case of joint estimates, and present progress towards fully characterizing the noise-disturbance tradeoff. In doing so, we show that the set of obtainable noise-noise values for such observables is convex, whereas the conjectured form for the set of obtainable noise-disturbance values is not. Furthermore, projective measurements are not optimal with respect to the joint-measurement noise or noise-disturbance tradeoffs. Interestingly, it seems that four-outcome measurements are needed in the former case, whereas three-outcome measurements are optimal in the latter.