Quick Navigation

Topics

Open Quantum Systems Decoherence Quantum Foundations

Noise and disturbance in quantum measurements: an information-theoretic approach

arXiv
Authors: Francesco Buscemi, Michael J. W. Hall, Masanao Ozawa, Mark M. Wilde

Year

2013

Paper ID

31261

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

73

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We introduce information-theoretic definitions for noise and disturbance in quantum measurements and prove a state-independent noise-disturbance tradeoff relation that these quantities have to satisfy in any conceivable setup. Contrary to previous approaches, the information-theoretic quantities we define are invariant under relabelling of outcomes, and allow for the possibility of using quantum or classical operations to `correct' for the disturbance. We also show how our bound implies strong tradeoff relations for mean square deviations.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Foundations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2013 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • We introduce information-theoretic definitions for noise and disturbance in quantum measurements and prove a state-independent noise-disturbance tradeoff relation that these...

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

References & Citation Signals

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #31261 #69040 Collective Emission in LH2 Asse... #69036 CARVE-Q: Quantum-Proposed, Clas... #69035 A Modular Approach to Succinct ... #69031 Amplitude-dependent quantum hyd...

External citation index: OpenAlex citation signal

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.