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

arXiv:quant-ph/0611080 · New Journal of Physics

Optimal, reliable estimation of quantum states

Robin Blume-Kohout

Published Apr 20, 2010• 396 citations
arXivHTMLPDF

Abstract

Accurately inferring the state of a quantum device from the results of measurements is a crucial task in building quantum information processing hardware. The predominant state estimation procedure, maximum likelihood estimation (MLE), generally reports an estimate with zero eigenvalues. These cannot be justified. Furthermore, the MLE estimate is incompatible with error bars, so conclusions drawn from it are suspect. I propose an alternative procedure, Bayesian mean estimation (BME). BME never yields zero eigenvalues, its eigenvalues provide a bound on their own uncertainties, and under certain circumstances it is provably the most accurate procedure possible. I show how to implement BME numerically, and how to obtain natural error bars that are compatible with the estimate. Finally, I briefly discuss the differences between Bayesian and frequentist estimation techniques.

DOI
10.1088/1367-2630/12/4/043034

Related papers

Quantum state estimation when qubits are lost: a no-data-left-behind approach

Brian P. Williams, Pavel Lougovski

We present an approach to Bayesian mean estimation of quantum states using hyperspherical parametrization and an experiment-specific likelihood which allows utilization of all available data, even when qubits are lost. With this method, we report the first closed-form Bayesian mean estimate (BME) for the ideal single qubit. Due to computational constraints, we utilize numerical sampling to determine the BME for a photonic two-qubit experiment in which our novel analysis reduces burdens associated with experimental asymmetries and inefficiencies. This method can be applied to quantum states of any dimension and experimental complexity.

arXiv:1610.03714•New Journal of Physics•Apr 6, 2017•23 citations

A Bayesian analysis of classical shadows

Joseph M. Lukens, Kody J. H. Law, Ryan S. Bennink

Abstract The method of classical shadows proposed by Huang, Kueng, and Preskill heralds remarkable opportunities for quantum estimation with limited measurements. Yet its relationship to established quantum tomographic approaches, particularly those based on likelihood models, remains unclear. In this article, we investigate classical shadows through the lens of Bayesian mean estimation (BME). In direct tests on numerical data, BME is found to attain significantly lower error on average, but classical shadows prove remarkably more accurate in specific situations—such as high-fidelity ground truth states—which are improbable in a fully uniform Hilbert space. We then introduce an observable-oriented pseudo-likelihood that successfully emulates the dimension-independence and state-specific optimality of classical shadows, but within a Bayesian framework that ensures only physical states. Our research reveals how classical shadows effect important departures from conventional thinking in quantum state estimation, as well as the utility of Bayesian methods for uncovering and formalizing statistical assumptions.

arXiv:2012.08997•npj Quantum Information•Jul 16, 2021•36 citations

Maximum likelihood quantum state tomography is inadmissible

Christopher Ferrie, Robin Blume-Kohout

Maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) is the most common approach to quantum state tomography. In this letter, we investigate whether it is also optimal in any sense. We show that MLE is an inadmissible estimator for most of the commonly used metrics of accuracy, i.e., some other estimator is more accurate for every true state. MLE is inadmissible for fidelity, mean squared error (squared Hilbert-Schmidt distance), and relative entropy. We prove that almost any estimator that can report both pure states and mixed states is inadmissible. This includes MLE, compressed sensing (nuclear-norm regularized) estimators, and constrained least squares. We provide simple examples to illustrate why reporting pure states is suboptimal even when the true state is itself pure, and why "hedging" away from pure states generically improves performance.

arXiv:1808.01072•Aug 3, 2018•9 citations

Asymptotic Efficiency and Finite Sample Performance of Frequentist Quantum State Estimation

Raj Chakrabarti, Anisha Ghosh

We undertake a detailed study of the performance of maximum likelihood (ML) estimators of the density matrix of finite-dimensional quantum systems, in order to interrogate generic properties of frequentist quantum state estimation. Existing literature on frequentist quantum estimation has not rigorously examined the finite sample performance of the estimators and associated methods of hypothesis testing. While ML is usually preferred on the basis of its asymptotic properties - it achieves the Cramer-Rao (CR) lower bound - the finite sample properties are often less than optimal. We compare the asymptotic and finite-sample properties of the ML estimators and test statistics for two different choices of measurement bases: the average case optimal or mutually unbiased bases (MUB) and a representative set of suboptimal bases, for spin-1/2 and spin-1 systems. We show that, in both cases, the standard errors of the ML estimators sometimes do not contain the true value of the parameter, which can render inference based on the asymptotic properties of the ML unreliable for experimentally realistic sample sizes. The results indicate that in order to fully exploit the information geometry of quantum states and achieve smaller reconstruction errors, the use of Bayesian state reconstruction methods - which, unlike frequentist methods, do not rely on asymptotic properties - is desirable, since the estimation error is typically lower due to the incorporation of prior knowledge.

arXiv:0904.1628•Apr 10, 2009•2 citations

Optimal error regions for quantum state estimation

Jiangwei Shang, Hui Khoon Ng, Arun Sehrawat +2 more

An estimator is a state that represents one's best guess of the actual state of the quantum system for the given data. Such estimators are points in the state space. To be statistically meaningful, they have to be endowed with error regions, the generalization of error bars beyond one dimension. As opposed to standard ad hoc constructions of error regions, we introduce the maximum-likelihood region—the region of largest likelihood among all regions of the same size—as the natural counterpart of the popular maximum-likelihood estimator. Here, the size of a region is its prior probability. A related concept is the smallest credible region—the smallest region with pre-chosen posterior probability. In both cases, the optimal error region has constant likelihood on its boundary. This surprisingly simple characterization permits concise reporting of the error regions, even in high-dimensional problems. For illustration, we identify optimal error regions for single-qubit and two-qubit states from computer-generated data that simulate incomplete tomography with few measured copies.

arXiv:1302.4081•New Journal of Physics•Dec 13, 2013•58 citations

Quantum state tomography of a single qubit: comparison of methods

Roman Schmied

The tomographic reconstruction of the state of a quantum-mechanical system is an essential component in the development of quantum technologies. We present an overview of different tomographic methods for determining the quantum-mechanical density matrix of a single qubit: (scaled) direct inversion, maximum likelihood estimation (MLE), minimum Fisher information distance and Bayesian mean estimation (BME). We discuss the different prior densities in the space of density matrices, on which both MLE and BME depend, as well as ways of including experimental errors and of estimating tomography errors. As a measure of the accuracy of these methods, we average the trace distance between a given density matrix and the tomographic density matrices it can give rise to through experimental measurements. We find that the BME provides the most accurate estimate of the density matrix, and suggest using either the pure-state prior, if the system is known to be in a rather pure state, or the Bures prior if any state is possible. The MLE is found to be slightly less accurate. We comment on the extrapolation of these results to larger systems.

arXiv:1407.4759•Journal of Modern Optics•Feb 7, 2016•59 citations
Accurately inferring the state of a quantum device from the results of measurements is a crucial task in building quantum information processing hardware. The predominant state estimation procedure, maximum likelihood estimation (MLE), generally reports an estimate with zero eigenvalues. These cannot be justified. Furthermore, the MLE estimate is incompatible with error bars, so conclusions drawn from it are suspect. I propose an alternative procedure, Bayesian mean estimation (BME). BME never yields zero eigenvalues, its eigenvalues provide a bound on their own uncertainties, and under certain circumstances it is provably the most accurate procedure possible. I show how to implement BME numerically, and how to obtain natural error bars that are compatible with the estimate. Finally, I briefly discuss the differences between Bayesian and frequentist estimation techniques.
We present an approach to Bayesian mean estimation of quantum states using hyperspherical parametrization and an experiment-specific likelihood which allows utilization of all available data, even when qubits are lost. With this method, we report the first closed-form Bayesian mean estimate (BME) for the ideal single qubit. Due to computational constraints, we utilize numerical sampling to determine the BME for a photonic two-qubit experiment in which our novel analysis reduces burdens associated with experimental asymmetries and inefficiencies. This method can be applied to quantum states of any dimension and experimental complexity.
Abstract The method of classical shadows proposed by Huang, Kueng, and Preskill heralds remarkable opportunities for quantum estimation with limited measurements. Yet its relationship to established quantum tomographic approaches, particularly those based on likelihood models, remains unclear. In this article, we investigate classical shadows through the lens of Bayesian mean estimation (BME). In direct tests on numerical data, BME is found to attain significantly lower error on average, but classical shadows prove remarkably more accurate in specific situations—such as high-fidelity ground truth states—which are improbable in a fully uniform Hilbert space. We then introduce an observable-oriented pseudo-likelihood that successfully emulates the dimension-independence and state-specific optimality of classical shadows, but within a Bayesian framework that ensures only physical states. Our research reveals how classical shadows effect important departures from conventional thinking in quantum state estimation, as well as the utility of Bayesian methods for uncovering and formalizing statistical assumptions.
Maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) is the most common approach to quantum state tomography. In this letter, we investigate whether it is also optimal in any sense. We show that MLE is an inadmissible estimator for most of the commonly used metrics of accuracy, i.e., some other estimator is more accurate for every true state. MLE is inadmissible for fidelity, mean squared error (squared Hilbert-Schmidt distance), and relative entropy. We prove that almost any estimator that can report both pure states and mixed states is inadmissible. This includes MLE, compressed sensing (nuclear-norm regularized) estimators, and constrained least squares. We provide simple examples to illustrate why reporting pure states is suboptimal even when the true state is itself pure, and why "hedging" away from pure states generically improves performance.
We undertake a detailed study of the performance of maximum likelihood (ML) estimators of the density matrix of finite-dimensional quantum systems, in order to interrogate generic properties of frequentist quantum state estimation. Existing literature on frequentist quantum estimation has not rigorously examined the finite sample performance of the estimators and associated methods of hypothesis testing. While ML is usually preferred on the basis of its asymptotic properties - it achieves the Cramer-Rao (CR) lower bound - the finite sample properties are often less than optimal. We compare the asymptotic and finite-sample properties of the ML estimators and test statistics for two different choices of measurement bases: the average case optimal or mutually unbiased bases (MUB) and a representative set of suboptimal bases, for spin-1/2 and spin-1 systems. We show that, in both cases, the standard errors of the ML estimators sometimes do not contain the true value of the parameter, which can render inference based on the asymptotic properties of the ML unreliable for experimentally realistic sample sizes. The results indicate that in order to fully exploit the information geometry of quantum states and achieve smaller reconstruction errors, the use of Bayesian state reconstruction methods - which, unlike frequentist methods, do not rely on asymptotic properties - is desirable, since the estimation error is typically lower due to the incorporation of prior knowledge.
An estimator is a state that represents one's best guess of the actual state of the quantum system for the given data. Such estimators are points in the state space. To be statistically meaningful, they have to be endowed with error regions, the generalization of error bars beyond one dimension. As opposed to standard ad hoc constructions of error regions, we introduce the maximum-likelihood region—the region of largest likelihood among all regions of the same size—as the natural counterpart of the popular maximum-likelihood estimator. Here, the size of a region is its prior probability. A related concept is the smallest credible region—the smallest region with pre-chosen posterior probability. In both cases, the optimal error region has constant likelihood on its boundary. This surprisingly simple characterization permits concise reporting of the error regions, even in high-dimensional problems. For illustration, we identify optimal error regions for single-qubit and two-qubit states from computer-generated data that simulate incomplete tomography with few measured copies.
The tomographic reconstruction of the state of a quantum-mechanical system is an essential component in the development of quantum technologies. We present an overview of different tomographic methods for determining the quantum-mechanical density matrix of a single qubit: (scaled) direct inversion, maximum likelihood estimation (MLE), minimum Fisher information distance and Bayesian mean estimation (BME). We discuss the different prior densities in the space of density matrices, on which both MLE and BME depend, as well as ways of including experimental errors and of estimating tomography errors. As a measure of the accuracy of these methods, we average the trace distance between a given density matrix and the tomographic density matrices it can give rise to through experimental measurements. We find that the BME provides the most accurate estimate of the density matrix, and suggest using either the pure-state prior, if the system is known to be in a rather pure state, or the Bures prior if any state is possible. The MLE is found to be slightly less accurate. We comment on the extrapolation of these results to larger systems.