Paper detail

Violating Bell's inequality with an artificial atom and a cat state in a cavity

The `Schrödinger's cat' thought experiment highlights the counterintuitive facet of quantum theory that entanglement can exist between microscopic and macroscopic systems, producing a superposition of distinguishable states like the fictitious cat that is both alive and dead. The hallmark of entanglement is the detection of strong correlations between systems, for example by the violation of Bell's inequality. Using the CHSH variant of the Bell test, this violation has been observed with photons, atoms, solid state spins, and artificial atoms in superconducting circuits. For larger, more distinguishable states, the conflict between quantum predictions and our classical expectations is typically resolved due to the rapid onset of decoherence. To investigate this reconciliation, one can employ a superposition of coherent states in an oscillator, known as a cat state. In contrast to discrete systems, one can continuously vary the size of the prepared cat state and therefore its dependence on decoherence. Here we demonstrate and quantify entanglement between an artificial atom and a cat state in a cavity, which we call a `Bell-cat' state. We use a circuit QED architecture, high-fidelity measurements, and real-time feedback control to violate Bell's inequality without post-selection or corrections for measurement inefficiencies. Furthermore, we investigate the influence of decoherence by continuously varying the size of created Bell-cat states and characterize the entangled system by joint Wigner tomography. These techniques provide a toolset for quantum information processing with entangled qubits and resonators. While recent results have demonstrated a high level of control of such systems, this experiment demonstrates that information can be extracted efficiently and with high fidelity, a crucial requirement for quantum computing with resonators.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access14 authors1 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.

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.