Paper detail

Deriving tight error-trade-off relations for approximate joint measurements of incompatible quantum observables

The quantification of the "measurement uncertainty" aspect of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle---that is, the study of trade-offs between accuracy and disturbance, or between accuracies in an approximate joint measurement on two incompatible observables---has regained a lot of interest recently. Several approaches have been proposed and debated. In this paper we consider Ozawa's definitions for inaccuracies (as root-mean-square errors) in approximate joint measurements, and study how these are constrained in different cases, whether one specifies certain properties of the approximations---namely their standard deviations and/or their bias---or not. Extending our previous work [C. Branciard, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 110, 6742 (2013)], we derive new error-trade-off relations, which we prove to be tight for pure states. We show explicitly how all previously known relations for Ozawa's inaccuracies follow from ours. While our relations are in general not tight for mixed states, we show how these can be strengthened and how tight relations can still be obtained in that case.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.