Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Uncertainty relations via conditional expectation and variance

Shiting Ma, Peng Zhou, Haoyu Chen, and Dong Wang*

  • *Contact author: dwang@ahu.edu.cn

APS Open Sci. 1, 000158 – Published 1 October, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/959j-v71v

Abstract

The uncertainty principle constitutes a cornerstone of quantum mechanics. However, its conventional formulations do not adequately describe uncertainty in scenarios involving conditional measurement. In this work, we propose uncertainty relations based on conditional variance and conditional expectation. We define the conditional expectation operator E(Â|B̂), its dual operator E(B̂|Â), and a corresponding conditional covariance term Rcorr. We demonstrate that even for noncommuting observables  and B̂, their conditional expectation operators can possess a nonvanishing commutator. This leads to a strengthened uncertainty relation applicable to both pure and mixed states. In addition to the standard term arising from the noncommutativity of the observables themselves, our relation incorporates three distinct contributions: one from the noncommutativity of the conditional expectations, one from quantum coherence, and one from the conditional covariance. These contributions collectively yield a significantly tighter lower bound. Numerical simulations verify the generality and enhanced tightness of the proposed relation. Our results provide a refined theoretical tool for the joint estimation of multiple observables in composite quantum systems, with potential applications in quantum precision metrology and secure quantum key distribution.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (36)

  1. W. Heisenberg, Über den anschaulichen Inhalt der quantentheoretischen Kinematik und Mechanik, Z. Phys. 43, 172 (1927).
  2. E. H. Kennard, Zur Quantenmechanik einfacher Bewegungstypen, Z. Phys. 44, 326 (1927).
  3. H. P. Robertson, The uncertainty principle, Phys. Rev. 34, 163 (1929).
  4. L. Skála, Internal structure of the Heisenberg and Robertson-Schrödinger uncertainty relations: Multidimensional generalization, Phys. Rev. A 88, 042118 (2013).
  5. L. Maccone and A. K. Pati, Stronger uncertainty relations for all incompatible observables, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113, 260401 (2014).
  6. S. Luo, Heisenberg uncertainty relation for mixed states, Phys. Rev. A 72, 042110 (2005).
  7. J.-L. Li and C.-F. Qiao, Equivalence theorem of uncertainty relations, J. Phys. A: Math. Theor. 50, 03LT01 (2017).
  8. J.-L. Li and C.-F. Qiao, Reformulating the quantum uncertainty relation, Sci. Rep. 5, 12708 (2015).
  9. M. I. Shirokov, Interpretation of uncertainty relations for three or more observables, arXiv:quant-ph/0404165.
  10. M. Arav, F. J. Hall, and Z. Li, A Cauchy–Schwarz inequality for triples of vectors, Math. Inequal. Appl. 11, 629 (2008).
  11. C. Lupu and D. Schwarz, Another look at some new Cauchy–Schwarz type inner product inequalities, Appl. Math. Comput. 231, 463 (2014).
  12. Y. Xiao, N. Jing, B. Yu, S.-M. Fei, and X. Li-Jost, Near-optimal variance-based uncertainty relations, Front. Phys. 10, 846330 (2022).
  13. X.-F. Song, Y.-F. Ren, S. Liu, X.-H. Chen, and Y. Turek, Stronger sum uncertainty relations for non-Hermitian operators, Phys. Rev. A 111, 012221 (2025).
  14. X. Zheng, S.-Q. Ma, G.-F. Zhang, H. Fan, and W.-M. Liu, Unified and exact framework for variance-based uncertainty relations, Sci. Rep. 10, 150 (2020).
  15. P. Marian and T. A. Marian, Einstein-Podolsky-Rosen uncertainty limits for bipartite multimode states, Phys. Rev. A 103, 062224 (2021).
  16. J. Xu, X. Zheng, A.-L. Ji, and G.-F. Zhang, Dynamics investigation of the quantum-control-assisted multipartite uncertainty relation in Heisenberg model with Dzyaloshinski-Moriya interaction, Phys. Scr. 98, 065106 (2023).
  17. M. Y. Abd-Rabbou and C.-F. Qiao, Strengthening the uncertainty and the reverse uncertainty relation limits, Quantum Inf. Process. 24, 387 (2025).
  18. G. Kimura, A. Mayumi, H. Ohno, J. Lee, and D. Chruściński, Beyond Robertson–Schrödinger: a general uncertainty relation unveiling hidden noncommutative trade-offs, npj Quantum. Inf. (2026), doi: 10.1038/s41534-026-01374-0.
  19. G. Kimura, A. Mayumi, and H. Yamashita, Tight generalization of Robertson-type uncertainty relations, arXiv:2505.19861v2.
  20. M.-J. Zhao, L. Zhang, and S.-M. Fei, Standard symmetrized variance with applications to coherence, uncertainty, and entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 106, 012417 (2022).
  21. S. Sazim, S. Adhikari, A. K. Pati, and P. Agrawal, Mutual uncertainty, conditional uncertainty, and strong subadditivity, Phys. Rev. A 98, 032123 (2018).
  22. G. Gour, A. Grudka, M. Horodecki, W. Kłobus, J. Łodyga, and V. Narasimhachar, Conditional uncertainty principle, Phys. Rev. A 97, 042130 (2018).
  23. A. S. Holevo, The standard statistical model of quantum mechanics, in Statistical Structure of Quantum Theory, Lecture Notes in Physics Monographs Vol. 67 (Springer, Berlin, 2001), pp. 1–32.
  24. J. Oppenheim and S. Wehner, The uncertainty principle determines the nonlocality of quantum mechanics, Science 330, 1072 (2010).
  25. K. Pearson, Mathematical contributions to the theory of evolution—On a form of spurious correlation which may arise when indices are used in the measurement of organs, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. 60, 489 (1897).
  26. F. Bloch, Nuclear induction, Phys. Rev. 70, 460 (1946).
  27. G. Vidal and R. Tarrach, Robustness of entanglement, Phys. Rev. A 59, 141 (1999).
  28. C. Napoli, T. R. Bromley, M. Cianciaruso, M. Piani, N. Johnston, and G. Adesso, Robustness of coherence: An operational and observable measure of quantum coherence, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 150502 (2016).
  29. H.-P. Breuer, E.-M. Laine, and J. Piilo, Measure for the degree of non-Markovian behavior of quantum processes in open systems, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 210401 (2009).
  30. Á. Rivas, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Entanglement and non-Markovianity of quantum evolutions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 050403 (2010).
  31. H.-P. Breuer, E.-M. Laine, J. Piilo, and B. Vacchini, Non-Markovian dynamics in open quantum systems, Rev. Mod. Phys. 88, 021002 (2016).
  32. J. I. Cirac, P. Zoller, H. J. Kimble, and H. Mabuchi, Quantum state transfer and entanglement distribution among distant nodes in a quantum network, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3221 (1997).
  33. S. Wehner, D. Elkouss, and R. Hanson, Quantum internet: A vision for the road ahead, Science 362, eaam9288 (2018).
  34. H. J. Kimble, The quantum internet, Nature (London) 453, 1023 (2008).
  35. V. Giovannetti, S. Lloyd, and L. Maccone, Quantum metrology, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 010401 (2006).
  36. E. M. Kessler, P. Kómár, M. Bishof, L. Jiang, A. S. Sørensen, J. Ye, and M. D. Lukin, Heisenberg-limited atom clocks based on entangled qubits, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 190403 (2014).

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation