Paper detail

Modeling the Eberhard inequality based tests

Last year the first experimental tests closing the detection loophole (also referred to as the fair sampling loophole) were performed by two experimental groups \cite{Zeilinger}, \cite{Kwiat}. To violate Bell-type inequalities (the Eberhard inequality in the first test and the Clauser-Horne inequality in the second test), one has to optimize a number of parameters involved in the experiment (angles of polarization beam splitters and quantum state parameters). Although these are technicalities, their optimal determination plays an important role in approaching statistically significant violations of the inequalities. In this paper we study this problem for the Eberhard inequality in very detail by using the advanced method of numerical optimization, the Nelder-Mead method. First of all, we improve the the results of optimization for the original Eberhard model \cite{Eberhard} and the Gustina et al. work \cite{Zeilinger} ("Vienna-13 experiment") by using the model of this experiment presented in Kofler et al. \cite{Zeilinger1}. We also take into account the well known fact that detectors can have different efficiencies and perform the corresponding optimization. In previous studies the objective function had the meaning of the mathematical expectation. However, it is also useful to investigate the possible level of variability of the results, expressed in terms of standard deviation. In this paper we consider the optimization of parameters for the Eberhard inequality using coefficient of variation taking into account possible random fluctuations in the setup of angles during the experiment.

preprint2014arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.