2016
DOI: 10.1088/0031-8949/91/7/073001
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Quantum measurement and uncertainty relations in photon polarization

Abstract: Abstract. Recent theoretical and experimental studies have given raise to new aspects in quantum measurements and error-disturbance uncertainty relations. After a brief review of these issues, we present an experimental test of the error-disturbance uncertainty relations in photon polarization measurement. Using generalized, strengthvariable measurement of a single photon polarization state, we experimentally evaluate the error and disturbance in the measurement process and demonstrate the validity of recently… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 41 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This relation has been experimentally confirmed recently by using a state-preparation method [28][29][30][31][32], weak probe method [33][34][35][36], continuous-variable entangled states [37,38], and others [39,40]. Subsequently, Branciard [41,42], and Ozawa [43] have considered a rigorous relation reads…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…This relation has been experimentally confirmed recently by using a state-preparation method [28][29][30][31][32], weak probe method [33][34][35][36], continuous-variable entangled states [37,38], and others [39,40]. Subsequently, Branciard [41,42], and Ozawa [43] have considered a rigorous relation reads…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 82%
“…One finds [26] that this turns the (previously weak) measurement scheme preceding the joint measurement into a preparation of the eigenstates of one of the target observables, and one obtains a direct test procedure for measurement noise, and hence for calibration error. Some experimenters (e.g., [32,23]) noticed that the Lund-Wiseman formula for the noise quantities is independent of the strength parameter, and confirmed this experimentally by performing the measurements also in the strong (projective) limit; however, it would be interesting to see whether it is possible to use the data they collected to apply the much simpler, direct method proposed in [26] to determine the errors, namely, by way of an explicit error analysis.…”
Section: Indirect Tests Of Calibration Error Tradeoff Relations Using...mentioning
confidence: 88%
“…In particular, it allowed an efficient method for teleportation [21] and was the basis for cryptographic protocols [22][23][24][25].In this work we demonstrate the measurement of nonlocal variables in its original sense, the one which is closest to the standard von Neumann definition of measurement in quantum mechanics [26]. Note, that there exists an alternative scheme [27] alongside a particular proposal for its implementation [28,29], which, however, has the drawback of being a probabilistic measurement, i.e., even with ideal devices it might not provide an outcome.After performing and testing our measurement procedure we apply it to show the peculiar phenomenon of the failure of the product rule for two separate (and thus commuting) local variables which can take place only for pre-and postselected quantum systems [30][31][32]. There have been several demonstrations of the failure of the product rule for weak values, the outcomes of weak measurements [33][34][35] in the context of the Hardy paradox [30].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this work we demonstrate the measurement of nonlocal variables in its original sense, the one which is closest to the standard von Neumann definition of measurement in quantum mechanics [26]. Note, that there exists an alternative scheme [27] alongside a particular proposal for its implementation [28,29], which, however, has the drawback of being a probabilistic measurement, i.e., even with ideal devices it might not provide an outcome.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%