Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Machine Learning
Energetic Considerations in Quantum Target Ranging
arXiv
Authors: Athena Karsa, Stefano Pirandola
Year
2020
Paper ID
19500
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
107
Citations
N/A
Abstract
While quantum illumination (QI) can offer a quantum-enhancement in target detection, its potential for performing target ranging remains unclear. With its capabilities hinging on a joint-measurement between a returning signal and its retained idler, an unknown return time makes a QI-based protocol difficult to realise. This paper outlines a potential QI-based approach to quantum target ranging based on recent developments in multiple quantum hypothesis testing and quantum-enhanced channel position finding (CPF). Applying CPF to time bins, one finds an upper-bound on the error probability for quantum target ranging. However, using energetic considerations, we show that for such a scheme a quantum advantage may not physically be realised.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Machine Learning research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- While quantum illumination (QI) can offer a quantum-enhancement in target detection, its potential for performing target ranging remains unclear.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.