Quick Navigation

Overview Topics Abstract Importance Paper Tools References Reactions Discussion Publication

Topics

Trapped Ion Quantum Computing

Sub-shot-noise interferometry with two-mode quantum states

arXiv
Authors: Quentin Marolleau, Charlie Leprince, Victor Gondret, Denis Boiron, Christoph I Westbrook

Year

2023

Paper ID

56276

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

77

Citations

N/A

Abstract

We study the feasibility of sub-shot-noise interferometry with imperfect detectors, starting from twin-Fock states and two mode squeezed vacuum states. We derive analytical expressions for the corresponding phase uncertainty. We find that one can achieve phase shift measurements below the standard quantum limit, as long as the losses are smaller than a given threshold, and that the measured phase is close enough to an optimal value. We provide our analytical formulae in a Python package, accessible online.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Trapped-Ion Quantum Computing research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2023 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • We study the feasibility of sub-shot-noise interferometry with imperfect detectors, starting from twin-Fock states and two mode squeezed vacuum states.

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.

Become a member Sign in
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share Cite This Paper Copy URL Compare Copy DOI Add to Reading List Category Correction Request

References & Citation Signals

[1] DOI https://doi.org/arXiv:2307.16479 [2] arXiv https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.16479 [3] Publisher https://arxiv.org/abs/2307.16479

Local Citation Graph (Related-Paper Links)

Current Paper #56276

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.