Loading in 2 Seconds...

Quantum limits on linear amplifiers What’s the problem?

Loading in 2 Seconds...

- By
**katen** - Follow User

- 86 Views
- Uploaded on

Download Presentation
## PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Quantum limits on linear amplifiers What’s the problem? ' - katen

**An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation**

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

Quantum limits on linear amplifiers

- What’s the problem?
- Quantum limits on noise in phase-preserving linear amplifiers. The whole story
- Completely positive maps and physical ancilla states
- Immaculate linear amplifiers. The bad news
- Immaculate linear amplifiers. The good news
- Carlton M. Caves
- Center for Quantum Information and Control, University of New Mexico
- Centre for Engineered Quantum Systems, University of Queensland
- http://info.phys.unm.edu/~caves
- Co-workers: Z. Jiang, S. Pandey, J. Combes; M. Piani

Center for Quantum Information and Control

Phase-preserving linear amplifiers

Ball-and-stick (lollipop) diagram.

Phase-preserving linear amplifiers

added-noise operator

output

noise

input

noise

added

noise

gain

Zero-point noise

Refer

noise

to input

Added noise number

C. M. Caves, PRD 26, 1817 (1982).

C. M. Caves, J. Combes, Z. Jiang, and S. Pandey, PRA 86, 063802 (2012).

Noise temperature

Ideal phase-preserving linear amplifier

The noise is Gaussian. Circles are drawn at half the standard deviation of the Gaussian.

A perfect linear amplifier, which only has the (blue) amplified input noise, is not physical.

Phase-preserving linear amplifiers

Microwave-frequency amplifiers using superconducting technology are approaching quantum limits and are being used as linear detectors in photon-coherence experiments. This requires more than second moments of amplifier noise.

What about nonGaussian added noise?

What about higher moments of added noise?

THE PROBLEM

What are the quantum limits on the entire distribution of added noise?

NonGaussian amplification of initial coherent state

Which of these are legitimate linear amplifiers?

II. Quantum limits on noise in phase-preserving linear amplifiers. The whole story

Per-gyr falcon

Jornada del Muerto

New Mexico

Harris hawk

Near Bosque del Apache

New Mexico

What is a phase-preserving linear amplifier?

Immaculate amplification of input coherent state

Smearing probability distribution. Smears out the amplified coherent state and includes amplified input noise and added noise.

For coherent-state input, it is the P function of the output.

THE PROBLEM

What are the restrictions on the smearing probability distribution that ensure that the amplifier map is physical (completely positive)?

This is hopeless.

If your problem involves a straightforward determination of when a class of linear operators is positive,

FIND YOURSELF A NEW PROBLEM.

But we have no way to get from this to general statements about the smearing distribution because the joint unitary and ancilla state are too general.

Attacking the problem. Tack 3, the last tack

THE PROBLEM TRANSFORMED

Given that the amplifier map must be physical (completely positive), what are the quantum restrictions on the ancillary mode’s initial “state” σ?

Attacking the problem. Tack 3, the last tack

THE ANSWER

Any phase-preserving linear amplifier is equivalent to a two-mode squeezing paramp with the smearing function being a rescaled Q function of a physical initial state σ of the ancillary mode.

phase-preserving linear amplifiers

The problem of characterizing an amplifier’s performance, in absolute terms and relative to quantum limits, becomes a species of “indirect quantum-state tomography” on the effective, but imaginary ancillary-mode state σ.

Moment constraints vs. indirect quantum-state tomography to reconstruct σ?

CW version?

To End

To Immaculate

- physical ancilla states

Western diamondback rattlesnake

My front yard, Sandia Heights

When does the ancilla state have to be physical?

Z. Jiang, M. Piani, and C. M. Caves, arXiv:1203.4585 [quant-ph].

(orthogonal) Schmidt operators

Why does the ancilla state for a linear amplifier have to be physical?

To End

IV. Immaculate linear amplifiers. The bad news

On top of Sheepshead Peak, Truchas Peak in background

Sangre de Cristo Range

Northern New Mexico

Original idea (Ralph and Lund): When presented with an input coherent state, a nondeterministic linear amplifier amplifies immaculately with probability p and punts with probability 1 – p.

T. C. Ralph and A. P. Lund, in QCMC, edited by A. Lvovsky (AIP, 2009), p. 155.

.

This is an immaculate linear amplifier, more perfect than perfect; it doesn’t even have the amplified input noise.

If the probability of working is independent of input and the amplifier is described by a phase-preserving linear-amplifier map when it does work, then the success probability is zero, unless when it works, it is a standard linear amplifier, with the standard amount of noise.

Probabilistic, approximate, phase-insensitive,

immaculate linear amplifier

Probabilistic, approximate, phase-insensitive,

immaculate linear amplifier

Phase-insensitive immaculate amplifiers don’t do the job of linear amplification as well as deterministic linear amplifiers or, indeed, even as well as doing nothing. Perhaps, by dropping the requirement of phase insensitivity, they can find a home as probabilistic, phase-sensitive amplifiers.

Phase-sensitive immaculate amplification of M coherent states on a circle

I’m going to hand you one of two quantum states. You need to decide which one I handed you.

If you get it right, I will give you a one-week, all-expenses-paid vacation in Canberra.

If you get it wrong, I will give you a two-week, all-expenses-paid vacation in Canberra.

To avoid spending two weeks in Canberra, you will minimize your error probability.

Unambiguous state discrimination

I’m going to hand you one of two quantum states. You need to decide which one I handed you.

If you get it right, I will give you a six-month, all-expenses-paid trip around the world to any destinations of your choosing.

If you get it wrong, I will pull out my gun and shoot you dead on the spot.

Reality check: We must be in the United States.

I’ll let you opt out after you’ve examined the state.

You perform the USD measurement, which never gets it wrong, but has an extra outcome where you make no decision.

Phase-sensitive immaculate amplification of M coherent states on a circle

For coherent states this far apart, you could do perfect immaculate amplification with arbitrarily large gain and with a working probability of 1/2. You could get higher working probabilities for states further apart.

Ideal phase-preserving linear amplifier

Models

- ● Parametric amplifier with ancillary mode in vacuum
- ● Simultaneous measurement of x and p followed by creation
- of amplified state
- ● Negative-mass (inverted-oscillator) ancillary mode in vacuum
- ● Master equation

E. Arthurs and J. L. Kelly, Jr., Bell Syst. Tech. J. 44, 725 (1965).

R. J. Glauber, in New Techniques and Ideas in Quantum Measurement Theory, edited by D. M. Greenberger (NY Acad Sci, 1986), p. 336.

C. W. Gardiner and P. Zoller, Quantum Noise, 3rd Ed. (Springer, 2004).

● Op-amp: another kind of linear amplifier

A. A. Clerk et al., Rev. Mod. Phys. 82, 1155 (2010).

Download Presentation

Connecting to Server..