Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Readout Measurement Hardware
Realistic prospects for testing a relativistic local quantum measurement inequality
arXiv
Authors: Riccardo Falcone, Claudio Conti
Year
2026
Paper ID
3767
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
92
Citations
N/A
Abstract
We investigate the experimental prospects for testing a relativistic local quantum measurement inequality that quantifies the trade-off between vacuum insensitivity and responsiveness to excitations for finite-size detectors. Building on the Reeh--Schlieder approximation for coherent states, we derive an explicit and practically applicable bound for arbitrary coherent states. To connect with realistic photodetection scenarios, we model the detection region as a square prism operating over a finite time window and consider a normally incident single-mode coherent state. Numerical results exhibit the expected qualitative behavior: suppressing dark counts necessarily tightens the achievable click probability.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Readout & Measurement Hardware research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- We investigate the experimental prospects for testing a relativistic local quantum measurement inequality that quantifies the trade-off between vacuum insensitivity and...
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.