Quick Navigation

Topics

Quantum Simulation

Minimum Number of Copies in the Measurement of Multi-Photon Entanglement

arXiv
Authors: Yiping Lu, Qing Zhao

Year

2015

Paper ID

8035

Status

Preprint

Abstract Read

~2 min

Abstract Words

112

Citations

N/A

Abstract

Multi-photon entanglement has been successfully made by experimental groups. As the increase of photon number, several problems are encountered, say, greater number of copies, longer time, the error of fidelity and so on. In this paper, we present a new scheme based on Lagrange multiplier and feedback to save the measure copies in multi-photon experiment and five percent of measuring time, also guarantee the acceptable error of fidelity. All the results have been supported by the data of eight photon experiment. Furthermore, same approach is applied in the simulation for ten photon entanglement, and 22.45 percent of copies are saved, optimized copy distribution gives better estimation of fidelity than the average copy distribution.

Why This Paper Matters

  • This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
  • It adds a 2015 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
  • Multi-photon entanglement has been successfully made by experimental groups.

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 #8035 #69599 Tensor network compression usin... #69594 A Collective-Spin Derivation of... #69593 Local correlations in long-rang... #69592 Direct/adaptive-mixture phase-g...

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.