Quick Navigation

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing

On Quantum Reliability Characterizing Systematic Errors in Quantum Sensing

arXiv
Authors: Lian-Xiang Cui, Yi-Mu Du, C. P. Sun

Year

2024

Paper ID

37595

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

134

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Quantum sensing utilize quantum effects, such as entanglement and coherence, to measure physical signals. The performance of a sensing process is characterized by error which requires comparison to a true value. However, in practice, such a true value might be inaccessible. In this study, we utilize quantum reliability as a metric to evaluate quantum sensor's performance based solely on the apparatus itself, without any prior knowledge of true value. We derive a general relationship among reliability, sensitivity, and systematic error, and demonstrate this relationship using a typical quantum sensing process. That is to measure magnetic fields (as a signal) by a spin-1/2 particle and using the Stern-Gerlach apparatus to read out the signal information. Our findings illustrate the application of quantum reliability in quantum sensing, opening new perspectives for reliability analysis in quantum systems.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2024 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • Quantum sensing utilize quantum effects, such as entanglement and coherence, to measure physical signals.

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 #37595

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.