Quick Navigation
Topics
Entanglement Theory Quantum Correlations
Deriving tight error-trade-off relations for approximate joint measurements of incompatible quantum observables
arXiv
Authors: Cyril Branciard
Year
2013
Paper ID
31556
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
156
Citations
N/A
Abstract
The quantification of the "measurement uncertainty" aspect of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle---that is, the study of trade-offs between accuracy and disturbance, or between accuracies in an approximate joint measurement on two incompatible observables---has regained a lot of interest recently. Several approaches have been proposed and debated. In this paper we consider Ozawa's definitions for inaccuracies (as root-mean-square errors) in approximate joint measurements, and study how these are constrained in different cases, whether one specifies certain properties of the approximations---namely their standard deviations and/or their bias---or not. Extending our previous work [C. Branciard, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110, 6742 (2013)], we derive new error-trade-off relations, which we prove to be tight for pure states. We show explicitly how all previously known relations for Ozawa's inaccuracies follow from ours. While our relations are in general not tight for mixed states, we show how these can be strengthened and how tight relations can still be obtained in that case.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Entanglement Theory & Quantum Correlations research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2013 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- The quantification of the "measurement uncertainty" aspect of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle---that is, the study of trade-offs between accuracy and disturbance, or between...
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.