Quick Navigation
Topics
Quantum Algorithms
Unbiased Estimation of Conditional Covariance for Quantum Optomechanics
arXiv
Authors: Katsuta Sakai, Nobuyuki Matsumoto
Year
2026
Paper ID
72311
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
120
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Continuous measurements can prepare macroscopic mechanical oscillators in conditional quantum states, but their covariance is difficult to verify. The conventional retrodictive estimator assumes a forward--backward covariance symmetry and can be biased, because physical dynamics such as feedback damping reduces the observability of the state from future records. Here, we derive an exact linear-Gaussian estimator from causal, retrodictive, and smoothed trajectories. For a milligram-scale mirror, it agrees with a Riccati prediction based on parameters fixed independently, while the conventional estimate exhibits a large bias in the covariance-space metric, dM sim 5. Our method paves the way toward unbiased testing of macroscopic entanglement within a calibrated linear-Gaussian model, which will be applicable to tabletop mirrors as well as gravitational-wave kg-scale test masses.
Why This Paper Matters
- It adds a 2026 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Continuous measurements can prepare macroscopic mechanical oscillators in conditional quantum states, but their covariance is difficult to verify.
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.