Scientific Results

Frequentist and Bayesian Quantum Phase Estimation

Year: 2018

Authors: Li Y., Pezze L., Gessner M., Ren ZH., Li WD., Smerzi A.

Autors Affiliation: [Li, Yan; Ren, Zhihong; Li, Weidong] Shanxi Univ, Inst Theoret Phys, Taiyuan 030006, Peoples R China and Shanxi Univ, Dept Phys, State Key Lab Quantum Opt & Quantum Opt Devices, Collaborat Innovat Ctr Extreme Opt, Taiyuan 030006, Peoples R China;
[Pezze, Luca; Gessner, Manuel; Smerzi, Augusto] CNR, INO, QSTAR, Largo Enrico Fermi 2, I-50125 Florence, Italy and LENS, Largo Enrico Fermi 2, I-50125 Florence, Italy.

Abstract: Frequentist and Bayesian phase estimation strategies lead to conceptually different results on the state of knowledge about the true value of an unknown parameter. We compare the two frameworks and their sensitivity bounds to the estimation of an interferometric phase shift limited by quantum noise, considering both the cases of a fixed and a fluctuating parameter. We point out that frequentist precision bounds, such as the Cramer-Rao bound, for instance, do not apply to Bayesian strategies and vice versa. In particular, we show that the Bayesian variance can overcome the frequentist Cramer-Rao bound, which appears to be a paradoxical result if the conceptual difference between the two approaches are overlooked. Similarly, bounds for fluctuating parameters make no statement about the estimation of a fixed parameter.

Journal/Review: ENTROPY

Volume: 20 (9)      Pages from: 628-1  to: 628-22

KeyWords: quantum metrology; Bayesian estimation; parameter estimation; signal parameter-estimation; bounds
DOI: 10.3390/e20090628

Citations: 2
data from “WEB OF SCIENCE” (of Thomson Reuters) are update at: 2019-08-18
References taken from IsiWeb of Knowledge: (subscribers only)
Connecting to view paper tab on IsiWeb: Click here
Connecting to view citations from IsiWeb: Click here

English