Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Foundations
Multiphoton Bell-type inequality: a tool to unearth nonlocality of continuous variable quantum optical systems
arXiv
Authors: Chandan Kumar, Gaurav Saxena, Arvind
Year
2020
Paper ID
21362
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
101
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We consider a multiphoton Bell-type inequality to study nonlocality in four-mode continuous variable systems, which goes beyond two-photon states and can be applied to mixed as well as states with fluctuating photon number. We apply the inequality to a wide variety of states such as pure and mixed Gaussian states (including squeezed thermal states) and non-Gaussian states. We consider beam splitters as a model for leakage and show that the inequality is able to detect nonclassicality of noisy Gaussian states as well. Finally, we investigate nonlocality in pair-coherent states and entangled coherent states, which are prominent examples of nonclassical, non-Gaussian states.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2020 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We consider a multiphoton Bell-type inequality to study nonlocality in four-mode continuous variable systems, which goes beyond two-photon states and can be applied to mixed as...
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.